Should the Pope apologize??

[beattyfamily]

No, he shouldn't.

 

[ChrisFL]

I didn't realize that those countries were US territories. Its gonna be news to them!

Naive and Im not surprised. If Bush truly was getting Al Qaeda to stop being a threat to westerners around the world, not just America or what he CLAIMS to be America, maybe we'd all be getting somewhere.

 

[DawnCt1]

Naive and Im not surprised. If Bush truly was getting Al Qaeda to stop being a threat to westerners around the world, not just America or what he CLAIMS to be America, maybe we'd all be getting somewhere.

You mean he doesn't walk on water! What's Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid done for ya lately?

 

[disneyfan67]

You're welcome. Just wanted to add something I forgot last night; my confusion about the conservatives apparent trepidation about our safety should we get a Democratic regime. Is this just political posturing or are you guys actually serious? Can you tell me with a straight face they you really believe Al Gore would have whimpered and hid under the desk after 9/11. Come on, he would have been in Afghanistan just as quick as Bush was and you guys know it. If you honestly think a Democrat isn't capable of keeping us safe, that's just wrong. Btw, UR is a very wise man indeed if you want to take the time to have a honest rapport with him. He does answer you, you just don't like the answer.

You want an honest answer and input from different conservatives on this board? Then I'll give you my take on the questions you asked.

Am I nervous or have trepidation or a Democrat being in charge of my security?

My answer would be yes but it would also depend on which Democrat we're talking about. If it's Joe Liberman or Joe Biden for President, then I have no problem with that and he would have my support. If we're talking about Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Barbra Boxer, Howard Dean, or John Kerry being in charge, then I'm pretty nervous about our country's national security. I've heard their views on how they think things should be done and it doesn't inspire confidence in me. We shall soon see though because as I said before, a change in the guard is in the works, at least in 06.


Can you tell me with a straight face they you really believe Al Gore would have whimpered and hid under the desk after 9/11.


He wouldn't have hid but his administration would probably have taken a serious hit in the mind of the general public. After all he would have freshly came off a previous administration that he served for 8 years as VP and there would have been no debate who was to blame for letting the attacks take place. Same goes for a lot of the troubles that GWB had in his first term. Enron, Tyco, Dot.com stock market bust, and a host of others, would have plaged Al Gore like a bad rash. All those incidents that I described were years in the making and would have still happened and it would have affected him, IMO. It's hard to be a effective leader when your polls are rock bottom and the public has lost confidence in you. Just ask GWB how easy it's been this year.


Would he have attacked the Tailban? Yes, and the public would have demanded it.

Would he have fought for or approved the Patriot act? No, probably not and his thoughts on that bill are pretty well documented.

Would he take a hardline postion against radical Islam? Probably not. I think he's way too politically correct to speak out and say the things that need to be said.. It's the career poiltician inside of him.


Anything else is hard to judge because Al Gore like Hillary Clinton, has changed his postion on many issues too many times to get an accurate read on him. I have a feeling he might make another run at the WH in 08, so that means another change is in the works. He's a career politician, it's to be expected.

 

[ChrisFL]

Please show me where Christians and Jews are rioting in the streets through out the world, shooting nuns, and burning churches and we might have a discussion. In the meantime, I see barbaric acts by savages. (both words in one sentence)

Thoughts provoke actions, while Christians may not be taking up arms in the same way that Muslims are, a Christian-led nation attacked a soverign Muslim country already. And the excuse was that they were possibly threatening us.

Muslims get recruited to do suicide missions, Americans and other western countries get recruited to join the military and go to Iraq, with the same goal in mind, kill those who could maybe possibly threaten them.

Now what if the Muslims use the Pope's and other known Christians words (like President Bush) as possible threats against them? Bush has already shown his propensity to invade other countries so why would the average Muslim want to believe that he would stop.

It is so OBVIOUS that most people here don't understand the fundamental issue is that what Christians are saying or doing isn't much different than what Muslims are saying or doing, it's just being done in a different way.

 

[Saxsoon]

I demand an apology about some of the wisecracks about Bush's beliefs in this country. I demand an apology about being called a sheep and a kool aid drinker and only watch Faux News. I demand an apology for all the wisecracks about Christianity in this thread and the many others.

And I would expect an apology from some conservatives for calling libs DemocRats, unpatriotic, they are terrorists, baby killers, tree hugging hippies, etc.


If you can't tell, that was being completely sarcastic.

 

[ChrisFL]

You mean he doesn't walk on water! What's Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid done for ya lately?

So you still assume that Im a democrat? Yeah, I guess that doesn't surprise me either

 

[louie694]

Naive and Im not surprised. If Bush truly was getting Al Qaeda to stop being a threat to westerners around the world, not just America or what he CLAIMS to be America, maybe we'd all be getting somewhere.

with all the obstruction from the left here in this country alone it's amazing that the administration has been as successful in preventing another attack as they have been. but you're not satisfied until all of europe and the world in its entirety is also protected by us? typical leftist illogic. you are never satisfied with anything that bush or the administration does even when they are successful. attend any "impeach bush" rallies lately?

 

[DawnCt1]

It is so OBVIOUS that most people here don't understand the fundamental issue is that what Christians are saying or doing isn't much different than what Muslims are saying or doing, it's just being done in a different way.

But you do of course.

 

[ChrisFL]

with all the obstruction from the left here in this country alone it's amazing that the administration has been as successful in preventing another attack as they have been. but you're not satisfied until all of europe and the world in its entirety is also protected by us? typical leftist illogic. you are never satisfied with anything that bush or the administration does even when they are successful. attend any "impeach bush" rallies lately?

obstruction from the left? Republicans have the Presidency, House and Senate, how much obstruction can that be??????

Please by talking that you're just digging a hole

 

[disneyfan67]

I saw these political cartoons and I thought it would be a good place to share it, since it pertains to the discussion.

 

[Kendra17]

Many were offended by the Pope's rude and uninformed remarks, including the Prime Minister of Turkey. I'm certain you've seen the news today, Charade, if you've heard of the story in the first place. Ratzinger called Muhammad “evil and inhuman".

you really know nothing about Muhammed, Holly. It's really very obvious. Muhammed was evil-- unless you think killing those that disagree with Islam humane, that is. That is what he proposed and that is absolutely what he did. Would you like to know how many innocent people he killed during his three rampages in Medina-- just because the Quraysh and Jews wouldn't convert to Islam? You go look that up, Holly. Then you stand by the statement that he wasn't evil. These people were INNOCENT. Their ONLY 'crime' was a disbelief that Muhammed was the prophet. That's it. And, that's the only crime that we are guilty of today-- the only reason the Jihadists perpetuate attacks and the only reason the majority of Muslims stand by silently.

All this debate about Islam is wrong. Muslims believe that the Koran is The Word of God. Period. And, they believe that the later surahs abrogate the earlier, more peaceful surrahs. Although so many of you don't seem to want to believe that, it's absurd to deny their theology/ideology. They freely admit this is true.

 

[Charade]

Thoughts provoke actions, while Christians may not be taking up arms in the same way that Muslims are, a Christian-led nation attacked a soverign Muslim country already. And the excuse was that they were possibly threatening us.

Muslims get recruited to do suicide missions, Americans and other western countries get recruited to join the military and go to Iraq, with the same goal in mind, kill those who could maybe possibly threaten them.

Now what if the Muslims use the Pope's and other known Christians words (like President Bush) as possible threats against them? Bush has already shown his propensity to invade other countries so why would the average Muslim want to believe that he would stop.

It is so OBVIOUS that most people here don't understand the fundamental issue is that what Christians are saying or doing isn't much different than what Muslims are saying or doing, it's just being done in a different way.

Oh pulease!!! Do we really need to rehash the reasons (the main reason) we went into Iraq? No, we don't.

It's y'all that don't understand. Probably never will.

 

[Charade]

obstruction from the left? Republicans have the Presidency, House and Senate, how much obstruction can that be??????

Please by talking that you're just digging a hole

Hey! They're not called the "opposition" party for the fun of it!

 

[Kendra17]

Another one of those "what the hell was he thinking" Kodak moments.

One would think people that high up on the food chain would know what's not worth saying and when to shut up. But, nooooo ............... open mouth, insert foot.

You have one set of standards/expectations for Muslims and one set for everyone else. Your posts are consistently hypocritical. Anyone that is critical towards Islam or discusses the statements, actions, and murders the intolerant Muslims facilitate are criticized endlessly.

Islamics, however, are given a free pass from you and others. You remain ignorant of the Koran, Sira, and Hadiths. It would appear that you don't read any source material. It would appear that you don't understand the issues yet feel free to form opinions based on your feelings of the matter and your feelings on how the world SHOULD work, rather than how it actually does.

 

[ChrisFL]

Oh pulease!!! Do we really need to rehash the reasons (the main reason) we went into Iraq? No, we don't.

It's y'all that don't understand. Probably never will.

please tell me then, is it oil? to make daddy Bush (the smart one) proud? nevermind it isn't important, the outcome has become obvious to anyone who has intelligence enough to see a problem and those who are able to think for themselves

 

[ChrisFL]

Hey! They're not called the "opposition" party for the fun of it!

whatever they're called I guess we'll see what happens when they take power, yet I fail to see how it could make things any worse than they already are.

 

[Fitswimmer]

The Pope should not apologize, but perhaps the media should. The quote that has created all this was a few lines of a longer speech that concerned faith and reason. The media took those lines out, conveniently downplayed the fact that it was a quote from a 15th century Emperor and ignored the rest. None of the Muslims blowing up churches and killing nuns heard the speech, they just heard what the media gave them.

To the other issue-I'm waiting to hear the Democratic plans for protecting this country as well. I was watching Tim Russert last week on the Today show and he said that many in the Democratic party are waiting for the same thing. You're not getting my vote by telling me how bad the other guy is. If your plan is so much better, then lay it for us! Let us see! Don't expect us to vote you into office without having some clue how you're going to govern. I'm concerned about 2008, because I've yet to see a candidate emerge on EITHER side that I would consider voting for.

 

[eclectics]

You want an honest answer and input from different conservatives on this board? Then I'll give you my take on the questions you asked.

Am I nervous or have trepidation or a Democrat being in charge of my security?

My answer would be yes but it would also depend on which Democrat we're talking about. If it's Joe Liberman or Joe Biden for President, then I have no problem with that and he would have my support. If we're talking about Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Barbra Boxer, Howard Dean, or John Kerry being in charge, then I'm pretty nervous about our country's national security. I've heard their views on how they think things should be done and it doesn't inspire confidence in me. We shall soon see though because as I said before, a change in the guard is in the works, at least in 06.


Can you tell me with a straight face they you really believe Al Gore would have whimpered and hid under the desk after 9/11.


He wouldn't have hid but his administration would probably have taken a serious hit in the mind of the general public. After all he would have freshly came off a previous administration that he served for 8 years as VP and there would have been no debate who was to blame for letting the attacks take place. Same goes for a lot of the troubles that GWB had in his first term. Enron, Tyco, Dot.com stock market bust, and a host of others, would have plaged Al Gore like a bad rash. All those incidents that I described were years in the making and would have still happened and it would have affected him, IMO. It's hard to be a effective leader when your polls are rock bottom and the public has lost confidence in you. Just ask GWB how easy it's been this year.


Would he have attacked the Tailban? Yes, and the public would have demanded it.

Would he have fought for or approved the Patriot act? No, probably not and his thoughts on that bill are pretty well documented.

Would he take a hardline postion against radical Islam? Probably not. I think he's way too politically correct to speak out and say the things that need to be said.. It's the career poiltician inside of him.


Anything else is hard to judge because Al Gore like Hillary Clinton, has changed his postion on many issues too many times to get an accurate read on him. I have a feeling he might make another run at the WH in 08, so that means another change is in the works. He's a career politician, it's to be expected.

Thanks. Interesting take. I suppose my response would be the same one you gave me. Thanks for a well thought out, non judgemental post. Lots of things I certainly don't agree with but nothing I would totally dismiss out of hand except Gore's run in '08. Not gonna happen. Not Hillary either, imho.

 

[ChrisFL]

The Pope should not apologize, but perhaps the media should. The quote that has created all this was a few lines of a longer speech that concerned faith and reason. The media took those lines out, conveniently downplayed the fact that it was a quote from a 15th century Emperor and ignored the rest. None of the Muslims blowing up churches and killing nuns heard the speech, they just heard what the media gave them.

To the other issue-I'm waiting to hear the Democratic plans for protecting this country as well. I was watching Tim Russert last week on the Today show and he said that many in the Democratic party are waiting for the same thing. You're not getting my vote by telling me how bad the other guy is. If your plan is so much better, then lay it for us! Let us see! Don't expect us to vote you into office without having some clue how you're going to govern. I'm concerned about 2008, because I've yet to see a candidate emerge on EITHER side that I would consider voting for.

About the media, I dont know how much western media affects the middle east but I DO think that more should have been done to investigate the practices of Al-Jazeera since it seems to be the middle east's biggest news source.