Thread: Does anyone think different ?

[quote="nittygritty"]News Release
Charles Rangel, Congressman, 15th District


CONG. RANGEL CONDEMNS CHAVEZ'S ATTACK ON BUSH



WASHINGTON - I want to express my extreme displeasure with statements by the President of Venezuela attacking U.S. President George Bush in such a personal and disparaging way during his remarks at the United Nations General Assembly.

It should be clear to all heads of government that criticism of Bush Administration policies, either domestic or foreign, does not entitle them to attack the President personally.

George Bush is the President of the United States and represents the entire country. Any demeaning public attack against him is viewed by Republicans and Democrats, and all Americans, as an attack on all of us.

I feel that I must speak out now since the Venezuelan government has been instrumental in providing oil at discounted prices to people in low income communities who have suffered increases in rent as heating oil prices have risen sharply. By offering this benefit to people in need, Venezuela has won many friends in poor communities of New York and other states. I am surprised that American oil companies have not stepped up to provide that kind of assistance to the poor.

Venezuela's generosity to the poor, however, should not be interpreted as license to attack President Bush. Those who take issue with Bush Administration policies have no right to attack him personally. It was not helpful when President Bush referred to certain nations as an "axis of evil." Neither is it helpful for a head of state to use the sacred halls of the United Nations to insult President Bush.




This is a very good response .
Chavez made a personal attack to increase his own popularity in his socialist country , so his people would think that he is doing his job
I agree with Rangel - the dirty laundry should be washed at home and Chavez had no right to " slap " the president in the face .
My concern is - why Bush did not stand for himself and he did not put Chavez on his place ? Is he afraid of him or what ?
It looks like Chavez has something against Bush which gives him that power

You know Crockett and Hope, I'd jump in to this debate on the where's and why's of if the Bible and it's text is literal, but I will say this one thing about it. John saw things in his vision he could not describe in the way he was accosutomed to in his days.

John described many things he did have any other way to describe other than with the natural world.

What I will say, and why I say it is this. As a born-again, fundamental Christian, I am tired of people thinking we are all fanatics and extremists when it comes to our beliefs. I will to my end days defend what I believe in the face of supposed religious people and pop-theologans.

I believe as a fundamentalist in the literal word of the Bible being just that. The Bible is Gods word directly. The King James Version was interpreted with the utmost care and with extreme difficulty, I believe it to be accurate and with that, what it says as divine. This means that whatever the Book of Revelations says, then it is so, even if we may not ever fully be able to know how those prophecies will play out, and when.

We cannot in any way say we know for sure who satan incarnate will use to enact his plan. Satan is a spirit, but as the Bible has stated that people can be possesed by demons. So this is what many think will be with "the" Anti-Christ (which yes is a modern term for Satan incarnate).

We could all debate the little things, about times, about who, about how, but what really matters is how we can avoid the punishment mankind so deserves.

Yet here we are in a public forum about illegal immigration, so I will stop there.

We could all debate the little things, about times, about who, about how, but what really matters is how we can avoid the punishment mankind so deserves.

I agree. Revelation has always been the most controversial book of the bible and in the end, each person will take away from it what he/she wants. The important thing is not to let differences in interpretation divide us but to recognize that ultimately the message is that God will triumph. I often find this to be my only consolation when I think about the mess our President and his administration have made of things on many fronts, not just immigration.

Originally Posted by hope2006

Originally Posted by CrocketsGhost

Sorry, but you are wrong about Blavatsky. She was even on record as hailing Hitler as a Messiah (as were many other theosophists of the day).


Blavatsky - years of life 1831-1891
Hitler 1889-1945

He was only 2 years old when Blavatsky died - so Messiah ? any evidence

Contrary , Hitler loved the occult sciences - he read Blavatsky and interpreted the parts which he liked as related ho himself , as well as some other teachings and philosophies - that Nazi sign is in reality an ancient oriental symbol of wisdom and power , taken by him and transformed into an evil one
Like American Eagle - There is an eagle on the Mexican flag , double-headed eagle on old Russian flag etc .
Theosophy is mostly about symbolism , like numerology - not about the particular person , but discussing many similarities

Sorry, I was unclear. Blavatsky prophesied the coming of a new age messiah. She fairly clearly identified Hitler, and her Theosophist devotees such as Steiner specifically identified Hitler as Blavatsky's anticipated messiah.

Originally Posted by AmericanElizabeth

You know Crockett and Hope, I'd jump in to this debate on the where's and why's of if the Bible and it's text is literal, but I will say this one thing about it. John saw things in his vision he could not describe in the way he was accosutomed to in his days.

John described many things he did have any other way to describe other than with the natural world.

What I will say, and why I say it is this. As a born-again, fundamental Christian, I am tired of people thinking we are all fanatics and extremists when it comes to our beliefs. I will to my end days defend what I believe in the face of supposed religious people and pop-theologans.

I believe as a fundamentalist in the literal word of the Bible being just that. The Bible is Gods word directly. The King James Version was interpreted with the utmost care and with extreme difficulty, I believe it to be accurate and with that, what it says as divine. This means that whatever the Book of Revelations says, then it is so, even if we may not ever fully be able to know how those prophecies will play out, and when.

We cannot in any way say we know for sure who satan incarnate will use to enact his plan. Satan is a spirit, but as the Bible has stated that people can be possesed by demons. So this is what many think will be with "the" Anti-Christ (which yes is a modern term for Satan incarnate).

We could all debate the little things, about times, about who, about how, but what really matters is how we can avoid the punishment mankind so deserves.

Yet here we are in a public forum about illegal immigration, so I will stop there.

Well, that's another misconception, because ha-Satan is depicted in John's Revelation as the dragon that empowers the Beast, not as the Beast itself. As a matter of fact, there is no question that the two are spoken of as separate entities.

I do agree with you regarding the nature of scripture.

hope2006, Quote.
My concern is - why Bush did not stand for himself and he did not put Chavez on his place ? Is he afraid of him or what ?
It looks like Chavez has something against Bush which gives him that power
_________________

Could it be just that Bush spoke before Chavez and I would assume he had no idea what the man was going to say? To your question as to Is Bush afraid? No to give the man his due, I don't think we could call him a scaridy cat in any way. Actually, I am glad that Bush didn't sink to the level of Chavez and act as he did.

The thing I came away with from this week with the United Nations, is I just wish we would say to hell with the UN, keep our 3 billion dollars a year and probably more then that,and tell them to get the hell out of our country. As to Chavez, he can also get out, take Danny Glover and the millions of illegal aliens with him!

Originally Posted by hope2006

http://www.bushisantichrist.com

And if anyone thinks different then .....

How to explain those photos in the end of the article ?

How to explain his consistently destructive behaviour and actions throughout all the years of being in the office ?

There are many more questions and articles -

This is just a follow-up note upon today's UN meeting

He's just a bumbling stooge and a pharisee - plain and simple, as are most the rest of them. Calling Bush etc., the anti-christ is flattering him far more than he's due.

I can't think of one politician or official in this country whom I would even refer to as a statesman.

I don't think we could call him a scaridy cat

I don't know about that Nitty. I think I could call him a scaredy cat.

He's scared of people he has no power over such as Mexico and illegal aliens. I'll tell you right now, he's scared to death of both of them. Why do you think he kisses their (put whatever you want here, I don't cuss).

With all due respect to you, and I certainly do respect you Nitty, but I think he's plenty scared of a lot of people.
And it's not us. That's the sad part. That's why he treats us like dirt and he treats illegal aliens like they're visiting diplomats.

Originally Posted by hope2006

It looks like Chavez has something against Bush which gives him that power

Might have something to do with the multiple coup attempts made against him.

Originally Posted by Charles Rangel

George Bush is the President of the United States and represents the entire country. Any demeaning public attack against him is viewed by Republicans and Democrats, and all Americans, as an attack on all of us.

No, it isn't, if by "us" he means Americans. Although I'd argue that sponsoring and submitting draft legislation before Congress year after year(aka Universal National Service acts) is an attack on all of us.

LegalUSCitizen
You are right about the illegal alien part, all of it, I was referring to the part about islamic jihadist.

Judy, I happen to be from Okla, and I don't think Janis was from okie. I will claim Will Rogers for Okla though, I have nothing against Janis, just seems to be a wasted life though, with the booze and pills.

I really don't think Bush is doing whatever the heck he is doing with this globalization craziness and Mexico out of fear, I think he is just a bumbling misguided fool.I could say a lot worse but I will refrain myself on these boards. I was not trying to take up for Bush with Chavaz, to me that was a huge disrespct of America, to come here to our country and attack Bush as he did and the huge warm welcome from the UN was another big disrespect of America, and personally, I cannot comprehend why we pat the largest part of the UN bill, to have to hear crap like that! Esp. when they have proven themselves to be the most imcompetant organization in the world. The food for oil scandel should have been the end of them as far as I am concerned.