Stop whining about Russian nukes and foreign terrorists etc. The problems are really the fruit of what many of you want and support.

Let me explain....

Virtually every war, every act of violence and every evil we endure comes as a result of mankinds greed or religious differences. The Serbs fight the Croats and ethnic Albanians, the Catholics fight the Protestants, the Sikhs fight the Hindus and each other, Hutus versus the Tutsis. Even Hitlers forage into Europe was primarily a religious thing......hate of the Jews and Gypies........promoting his own weird extreme right-wing agenda.

The long term solution is simple: a world where there is equality for all, where there is food for all and where religious prejudices are not allowed. More have died in the name of God or religion than any other form of tragedy.

Yet anytime a group of organization has an agenda of working towards one world government, a plan to feed the world, an agenda that would outlaw prejudice on the basis of religion, a plan to help us all work together and understand one another, the extreme right wing fanatics fight against it and call it Satanic. Any time nations decide to form alliances with other nations instead of fighting them, it is viewed as a 'conspiracy' by these same ultra-right warmongers.

These people see no ethical problem that 90% of the world's people live on 10% of the food.

If we had a world where there were not 200 or more nationalist governments each suspicious of the others, we may not have thousands of nuclear warheads pointed at us. If we did not have a world where people insisted that their understanding of 'God' was the only right one, we would truly have a more understanding and loving world.

If there were only three people left in the world, one claiming that Jesus was God, one claiming that Allah was God and one claiming that everything was a part of God, it wouldn't be long before two of them were dead.

If there were only two islands in the world, both the same size. One contained only 100,000 people living in absolute luxury and the other contained 10,000,000 who were starving in an overcrowded situation, the 100,000 living in luxury would kill those from the other island who tried to come on to 'their' island.

Too many people have the warped twisted opinion that they are 'God's favorites' and everyone that is a different race, color or religion is nothing but a pile of shit.....They don't use that word....that would taint their 'purity'.

The moral of the story: If you are going to criticize every individual and group that are trying to build a more equitable and understanding world, then you deserve the turmoil you get. You don't like nukes pointing at you, then work towards building a world where the borders eventually disappear. You don't like overpopulation, then stop thinking it's your God-given right to have twelve children.

You cannot isolate yourself in a bubble and keep the world out although it seems many of you think you can if you have enough weapons. Cut out the hate and eventually we will have a world where we don't live under the constant threat of attack.

-- Craig (craig@ccinet.ab.ca), February 18, 1999

Answers

Craig, can you certify 100% compliance on that future niceness stuff ?

Wisdom is better than weapons of war: but one sinner destroyeth much good.
Ecclesiates 9

-- Runway Cat (runway_cat@hotmail.com), February 18, 1999.

Well there it is folks, a bona-fide new world order troll right in our midst.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), February 18, 1999.

>"Cut out the hate and eventually we will have a world where we don't live under the constant threat of attack. "<

So how do you propose to do that??? 7000 years haven't been able to.

Won't ever happen until God comes down to straighten out the mess Himself. Men are incapable of governing themselves in peace. We'll all figure that out when the missles are flying probably.

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), February 18, 1999.

Craig,

look at it this way: badly maintained missiles, besides being inaccurate tend to fall short. Thus missiles aimed at the US, fired on transpolar or near transpolar trajectories have a greater chance of landing in Canada, than they do in the US...er that *is* a '.ab.ca' in your email address, isn't it?

seems to me, by and large *we* aren't the ones who should be worrying...

Arlin

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), February 18, 1999.

Why is it that YOU INVAR THE BIGEST FOOL OF ALL dares to quesTION THe sanity OF CRAIG THE nonFOOL???? HATEFULL SpiTEFULL IDIOTS Like you are 89.233876% reSPOSIBLE FOR THIS MESS!!!! HOW DID your hate and eVIL GROW UNCHALLeNGED BEFORE DIEtER????

-- Dieter (questions@toask.com), February 18, 1999.

I have solved the mystery... Craig is Dieter!!!

-- *!@#$% (noone@all.com), February 18, 1999.

NIEN NIEN NIEN NEIN!!!!!How is it thaT YOU ARE ABLE to draw BREATH WITH SUCH A Shallow BRaIN FUNCTION????? JACKASS!!!

-- Dieter (questios@toask.com), February 18, 1999.

Bite me Craig -- I mean Dieter! You stand revealed!!!

-- *!@#$% (noone@all.com), February 18, 1999.

Umm, not to side with Craig, because we are diametrically opposed ideologically - and I disagree with much of his posts, BUT...

Craig at least can articulate an argument without sinking to the infantile levels of Jimmy Bagga Doughnuts aka: Dieter, BabU and INVIOD.

We may disagree, but he's not an infant troll.

Unless he's Sybil in disguise.

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), February 18, 1999.

Yeah, lets all have one big happy planet! No borders! One race!

I was getting sick of that white minority (11%) population! They are so stupid that they are nearly extinct in a few generations anyway!

...but does the UN have wellfare, social-security and medicaid/medicare yet?

-- Anonymous99 (Anonymous99@anonymous.com), February 18, 1999.

INVAR!!! WHy do you insist on trYing to guess WHO IS DIETRE??? When the TIME IS RIpe Dieter will unmask HIMSELF!!!! YOU WILL ALL BE AMAZED by the TruE Dieter!!!! WHY DO you continUE WITH YOUR IDIOCY???? UNlike YOU dieter is not harD OF HEART!!! UNlike you DIETER IS NOT INsanE!!! BUT dieTER MUST SPEAK AS ONly DIEter can, TO EXPOSE FOOLS!!!! DO YOU SEE THAT YOU ARE CHIEF AMONG THE FOOLS??????

-- Dieter (questions@toask.com), February 18, 1999.

Nikoli,

I never thought I'd see the day.

Craig,

The long term solution is simple: a world where there is equality for all, where there is food for all and where religious prejudices are not allowed.

Read Orwell's Animal Farm, check out History, anytime this rhetoric is bought by a Nation the end result is that some people are always 'more equal than others'.

Although it's a compassionate ideal, it excludes the fact that evil people exist and will attempt to manipulate any world system for their own gain.

You also wrote: More have died in the name of God or religion than any other form of tragedy.

This statement gets tossed around this forum from time to time without any numerical statistics to back it up. Proof?? Let us compare the raw numbers to the combination of lets say...Hitler, Stalin, Ho Chi Min, Pol Pot and the followers of their ideology foisted upon the masses. Can you say Killing Fields? Death Camps? Infantacide? Euthanasia? To top it off most of these murders did not take place sword vs. sword, more like Gov. vs. unarmed citizen. So take your world gov. and shove it.

You wrote: where religious prejudices are not allowed. People willing to kill in the name of Religion are freaks. But I am happy to let them keep their prejudices so I can keep mine. Is that not part of as you wrote :" a world where there is equality for all,"?

You wrote: Cut out the hate and eventually we will have a world where we don't live under the constant threat of attack.

Add lust for power, greed, selfishness and murder and I agree.

NWO bite my butt.

-- Deborah (wearethe@world.com), February 18, 1999.

Craig says, "More have died in the name of God or religion than any other form of tragedy."

What a maroon. Do the body count. In this century alone, close to 100 million people have been killed in the name of atheistic ideologies-- Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, etc.

(And don't gimme that, "Hitler's forage into Europe was primarily a religious thing" jive. The man was a pure Darwinist. Ol' Charlie's ideas, filtered thru Nietzche, set him on his master race mission.)

The worst thing, though, is that whenever someone kills in the name of God (which, God knows, has happened and is happening far too often), he has to distort the gospel message to justify what he's doing.

When people kill in the name of atheistic ideologies, they don't have to distort anything. They are simply taking the "survival of the fittest" message to its logical conclusion.

Religious people have screwed up big-time over the centuries (it's called SIN!). But secular humanists wielding power scare the living sh** out of me.

-- rick blaine (y2kazoo@hotmail.com), February 18, 1999.

Well said, Rick and Deborah.

-- Why2K? (who@knows.com), February 18, 1999.

"close to 100 million people have been killed in the name of atheistic ideologies-- Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, etc."

Rick, that doesn't really contradic what Craig said, the atheistic ideologies were after the religions; -because- of religions. I'm not siding with Craig, I think he's wrong, just want to point that out.

Also, I believe you're wrong with this statement "When people kill in the name of atheistic ideologies, they don't have to distort anything. They are simply taking the "survival of the fittest" message to its logical conclusion."

Stalin, Polpot etc. new that religions was a strong oposing force to their total control, i.e., church gatherings and sermons are powerful factions to conteract governments. By supressing them, they ensured their control. It doesn't mean that because they declared their country atheist that they didn't themselves believe in a higher power. I don't know if they did or not, it's irrelevant.

Public and private gatherings of any kind are dangerous to someone wanting to maintain total control. This forum is an example, we dissiminate information between many intelligent people, and so we're aware of the government's spin about Y2K.

Being afraid of atheists in general is the same as being afraid of religious people in general.

-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), February 18, 1999.

Here, here, Chris!! Ideology and dogma by any other name would smell as foul. Today an evil empire, tomorrow a "most favored nation".

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), February 18, 1999.

Chris said, "It doesn't mean that because they declared their country atheist that they didn't themselves believe in a higher power. I don't know if they did or not, it's irrelevant."

I've got a hunch that if they did believe, they wouldn't have so ruthlessly butchered MILLIONS of people in their quest to create heaven on earth.

There's something about knowing deep down that one day you'll have to stand before God's throne and give an account that can temper those ruthless urges.

Irrelevant? Hardly.

-- rick blaine (y2kazoo@hotmail.com), February 18, 1999.

Ah, now I understand why you always attack anyone who can line the dots up and see a pattern of manipulation perpetrated by the UN, The Council on Foreign Relations, The Trilateral Commission, The Royal Institute of international Affairs, Kissinger Associates, The Bildeberg Group, the Rockefeller and Rothschild hierarchies et al.

Craig, you are an apologist for the NWO. You actively encourage the loss of freedom world-wide. You by default support all the atrocities perpetrated by these people against the human race in their goal to achieve a docile, controlled, bar coded mass of humanity.

The sad thing Craig is I think your heart's in the right place. Your post above however is one of the most extreme examples of naivety and sheer wishfull thinking (much like your outlook on the potential for chaos that y2k may cause) that I've seen in a very long time.

I agree with you that in the past (pre 1900 say) Religion was the root cause of most death and turmoil in the world other than disease and natural causes. One only has to think of the Inquisition, The Crusades, the extermination of Indians in the New World in the name of Catholicism... the list is endless.

On the other hand this century you have Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler et al. You have two major wars started by you're ideological compadres, financed by the elite, manipulated by them, and the spoils divided up with reparations as the icing on the cake. That's just two major wars, there are plenty of sideshows played out or playing out now in the wings too. I think at this stage in the game Religion comes a very bad second in the boot hill stakes Craig.

A very few people control the world... not everything that happens in the world, but its direction toward more centralization of power and erosion of freedom. You can't control 6 billion people with taxes because there are too many people. But, you can do it by coup d'itat of the mind, which is to persuade and pressure people through fear to think the way you want them to think, or preferably, not to think at all. You're like a farmer. You can control a whole vast herd of sheep because most of the sheep will follow the one in front, and those stragglers that don't immediately conform get the dose of fear from the sheep dog.

The same people, on apparently different sides of politics, are actually connected to the same organizations. These organizations have a proven agenda of a world government, a world central bank, a world army, microchip population, and so forth. These persons are not opposites at all but are a part of a one-party state. There are very powerfull connections between the last two U.S. Presidents, who were apparently opposites and on different sides--Bill Clinton and George Bush. They were both involved with the same organization.

The media and politicians have a cozy unwritten agreement that projects a myth to people, which is that prime ministers, presidents and top politicians are the top of the pyramid in terms of decision- making in the world. The presidents and prime ministers then walk around the world stage and act as if they are the final arbiters of power, and the media goes along with this, which means that the echelons ABOVE the Clintons, who actually pull the strings, never get researched and investigated because they are invisible to the public.

These are the people who decide who becomes President because they own the money and the media. The average person may think the President is the most powerful man in the world. No, he's not. He's only the most famous front-man in the world!

Case in point, you're friends at work TODAY Craig.......

problem-reaction-solution.

A problem is covertly created and you (whoever is doing it) make certain that someone is blamed for the problem. This might be a war. It might be a run on the currency, or a government collapse. It can be anything. You then use the media to stimulate public opinion in relation to your created problem, so that the public cries out: "Something must be done!" At that point, the public will accept anything...as long as something is done!

At that point, those who have created the problem got exactly the public reaction they wanted. They then openly, in the public arena, offer the solution to the problem that THEY created, and get the solution that they wanted all along.

If you take the world army scenario (a favorite theme of this group of people), the last thing that the "problem-reaction-solution" required in Bosnia was an effective U.N. peacekeeping operation. If it was effective it could be effective in Rwanda and Somalia. If it was effective, there would be no problem to solve. So, as a result of the U.N. peacekeeping operation NOT working, there continued to be a problem. The U.N. peacekeeping WAS DESIGNED not to work. The more horrific pictures that came out of Bosnia, the louder came the cry: "Something must be done!" And, this was understandable from the public's point of view. The solution put forward was, and is, effectively a WORLD ARMY...the 60,000 man force...the biggest multinational force assembled since the 2nd World War. I could on and on, but a common theme among all the people who have been the major peace negotiators in Bosnia, is membership in the same organizations that have as an agenda the creation of a world army.

President Boris Yeltsin said Thursday he had told President Clinton that Russia would not let NATO use force against Yugoslavia over its handling of the Kosovo crisis.

"I conveyed to Clinton my view, both by phone and by letter, that this (threatened military strikes against Yugoslavia) will not work...We will not let you touch Kosovo,'' Yeltsin said in televised comments."

The response from NATA (your NWO friends Craig...)

NATO To Act 'Very Soon' If Kosovo Talks Fail SKOPJE (Reuters) - NATO Secretary-General Javier Solana warned Thursday that NATO would act swiftly if Serbs and ethnic Albanians failed to reach a peace agreement at talks in France.

Asked at a news conference in Macedonia how fast NATO would act if the talks failed, Solana said: ``It would be very soon."

The NWO agenda continues apace...

So Craig, 10 points for wishfull thinking in you're NWO utopia, -50 points for the loss of freedom that we will all relinquish if you and you ilk get their way. Not that we have THAT much freedom now, but it's better than the alternative.

Be careful what you wish for Craig because at this rate, especially with y2k coming along conveniently for all sorts of machinations to take place, you might just get what YOU wanted.

Andy

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), February 18, 1999.

Amen Andy. You Go Sir!!!

Those that have eyes to see and ears to hear may be the only ones left standing.

Beware the government that wants to "help you and your security".

Our Gov. is on a fast track to the wishes of Craig and other unaware sheople.

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), February 18, 1999.

<< I agree with you that in the past (pre 1900 say) Religion was the root cause of most death and turmoil in the world other than disease and natural causes. One only has to think of the Inquisition, The Crusades, the extermination of Indians in the New World in the name of Catholicism... the list is endless. >>

My, what a fine, balanced statement. No anti-Catholicism on this forum. Fortunately, I've given up taking on historical revisionism for Lent. Sheesh!

-- Franklin Journier (ready4y2k@yahoo.com), February 18, 1999.

Craig (and other bleeding hearts):

Did you ever stop to think that the two island scenario (one with 100,000 and the other with 10,000,000 [whatever]) might be due to the following:

Island A -- 100,000 population. A somewhat reality based religion or lip service to religion or de facto atheist/agnostic. Industriousness (Protestant work ethic). Birth control and abortion. English common law based legal system.

Island B -- 10,000,000 population. Wacko religion like Catholicism or one of the wog/mud people religions. Manana (tomorrow) attitude. Drops litters of kids with no more forethought than rabbits, cats, and dogs. Religious/cultural strictures against birth control and abortion. Continental or warlord based legal system.

Yes, you -- and cultures -- do reap what you sow. Take Europe and the Americas for example. Which are more prosperous and stable? The ones with a Protestant background. Which are less so? The ones with a Catholic background. Q.E.D.

Why should island A inhabitants have to buckle to the pleas of those on island B for help. Screw 'em. They (B) reaped what they sowed.

-- a (A@AisA.com), February 18, 1999.

Craig,

you said: I agree with you that in the past (pre 1900 say) Religion was the root cause of most death and turmoil in the world other than disease and natural causes. One only has to think of the Inquisition, The Crusades, the extermination of Indians in the New World in the name of Catholicism... the list is endless.

Some of these Relgious attacks seem like thinly veiled selfish greed expoditions to grab more wealth & power. Maybe the name of Religion was used politically to pacify the sheople.

Just a theory.

-- Deborah (peopledont@change.com), February 18, 1999.

"Yes, you -- and cultures -- do reap what you sow. Take Europe and the Americas for example. Which are more prosperous and stable? The ones with a Protestant background. Which are less so? The ones with a Catholic background. Q.E.D. "

Yup.... And then there's Russia, which scuttled religion altogether. It's been hard-core atheist for the past 80 years or so, & just look at how prosperous & successful THEY've been.

-- heard all (this@crap.before), February 18, 1999.

YES YOU FOOL!!!! why do you not consider TAHITI??? WHY DO YOU NOTconsider FIJI???? arE these lands of HATE AND DISCORD??? Or maybe they BE LANDS OF relATIvE PEACE AND HARMONY???? DO THESE PEoPLE SEEM UNHAPPY AS do SO many in THE WEST???? WHY IS THIS??? DID NOT your JEsUS TEACH YOU the turNING OF ThE OTHER CHEEK???? Did not youR JESuS TEACH YOU THe giving of THE CLOAK to those whoSUE???/ WHY, oh help me SEE WHY IS IT NOT SO??? INFIDEL!!!

-- Dieter (questions@toask.com), February 18, 1999.

To: heard all (this@crap.before) You said:
Yup.... And then there's Russia, which scuttled religion altogether. It's been hard-core atheist for the past 80 years or so, & just look at how prosperous & successful THEY've been.

Note that religion in Russia -- still held by the people -- regardless of the Communist Party pushing atheism -- tends more to the Catholic end of the spectrum than Protestant.

Also note the criteria of the TYPE OF GOVERNMENT

If you've heard it all before, it's obvious you weren't listening. -- heard all (this@crap.before), February 18, 1999.

-- A (A@AisA.com), February 18, 1999.

AisA wrote:

<< Wacko religion like Catholicism or one of the wog/mud people religions. Manana (tomorrow) attitude. Drops litters of kids with no more forethought than rabbits, cats, and dogs. Religious/cultural strictures against birth control and abortion. >>

And Dieter wrote:

<< DID NOT your JEsUS TEACH YOU the turNING OF ThE OTHER CHEEK???? >>

Yes, He did. Thanks for the cheap shot AisA. Have a nice day.

<< Yes, you -- and cultures -- do reap what you sow. Take Europe and the Americas for example. Which are more prosperous and stable? The ones with a Protestant background. Which are less so? The ones with a Catholic background. Q.E.D. >>

Some of us don't measure the success of various Christian systems based on material prosperity. And rightly so, since I'm thinking you'd have a heckuva time extracting that particular criterion of success out of the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles. Now if we measure a Christian system based on its faithfulness to the founding principles and teachings passed on by the Lord and the Apostles then .... Catholicism, hands down. Then Eastern Orthodoxy. Protestantism follows in its various forms.

You can't use an argument like that against Christians, AisA. We don't give a damn about looking foolish in the eyes of the world and its criteria of success. Something our Master taught us.

Now, this has devolved into yet another nasty religious spat. Anybody care to exit to Pastor Chris' board to debate my statements above?

-- Franklin Journier (ready4y2k@yahoo.com), February 18, 1999.

Yup.... And then there's Russia, which scuttled religion altogether. It's been hard-core atheist for the past 80 years or so, & just look at how prosperous & successful THEY've been.

Russia has also been hard-core COMMUNIST for the past 80 years or so. I think that somehow had a bigger influence on their prosperity ;)

--Leo

-- Leo (lchampion@ozemail.com.au), February 18, 1999.

A@AisA.com or whatever..........

It's all part of a package. My point with the 'islands' scenario is that all other things being equal, the ones that are well off seem to do everything possible to keep the others downtrodden. A child born in the USA is no more entitled to wealth than a child born in Somalia.

Certainly some of this is utopian. What's wrong with that? How is it that so many here criticize my 'utopian picture' and at the same time claim that God will set up this utopian picture himself.

It's a cop out, that's what it is. It's the attitude that 'We can do whatever we like and live like kings and screw everyone else because it's their fault........and besides God will fix it eventually anyway.'

Back to the central point.........The extreme right-wing NWO conspiracy paranoidites go to such a level that they believe everything global is evil and everything nationalistic is good. They hate every global institution whether it be NATO or the World Bank or the Red Cross or whatever. How is it they can prefer having Serbs kill ethnic Albanians, Hutus kill Tutsis, Turks kill Cypriots etc., with impunity. It makes perfect sense to have a governing body which will not allow such violence and bloodshed. Yes, it will take a very long time and there will be many hurdles, but surely it is superior to the historical failure of the nation states to maintain peace.

Nah, methinks those that protest too much have an ulterior motive........they secretly desire the death and subordination of anyone and everyone who holds to different cultural and religious ideas than they do. They actually enjoy ethnic cleansing so they can remain 'pure'. The thought of being ruled by someone with different convictions than them, or different skin color is something they can't stomach. Why, just look at their pictures they have of Jesus in their churches and homes........he's always a white anglo-saxon man in a sheet.

And whoever came out with the 'bleeding heart liberal' nonsense.........shows how thick you are......I'm a Reform Party supporter.

-- Craig (craig@ccinet.ab.ca), February 18, 1999.

Franklin:
This is not solely about religion. But you bible (koran, talmud, whatever) thumpers love to make it all about that. It's about CULTURE which, amazingly includes MORE than religion, like the political system.

Yet, there is some basis for that -- note that the Christian religions (catholicsm, Russian orthodox, etc.) having a more "que sera, sera" attitude, and the various wog/mud people religions having fatalistic attitudes, believing in reincarnation, etc., by and large have the more oppressive type governments and economies based on "pull and (ruling) power" than the more secular (less insanely religious) societies.

One of the basics of Christianity is that this existence is a shithole and after you die you go to heaven (if you've been a good little sheep here). Catholicism exemplifies this more than Protestantism where the Protestants (or Deists in the case of the U.S. founders) have a more "well let's do something to improve this existence while we're here" attitude. This works out to cultural choices as to the economic and political systems. Sorry. Fact of life. The more religious the people in a society, the POORER the choices they make in political systems and economies and the more they put up with crap. They reap what they sow.

-- a (A@AisA.com), February 18, 1999.

Your unhistorical slip is showing. And your double standards too; somebody nails your whole argument by pointing to the anti-religious Soviet Union and you manage to blame the Orthodox anyway. ROFL! But take it to Pastor Chris' board. I'll answer you there, if you're really interested in debate rather than just shooting from behind the trees. But I won't debate it here.

-- Franklin Journier (ready4y2k@yahoo.com), February 18, 1999.

orry Franklin, I'm actually a Catholic (lapsed), I was trying to illustrate a point, I could have mentioned the Moors or the Wars of The Roses or whatever. You do however, prove my point.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), February 18, 1999.

"Chris said, "It doesn't mean that because they declared their country atheist that they didn't themselves believe in a higher power. I don't know if they did or not, it's irrelevant."

I've got a hunch that if they did believe, they wouldn't have so ruthlessly butchered MILLIONS of people in their quest to create heaven on earth."-rick

Rick, I said "higher power", I didn't say a "good and just god". "Higher power" could mean anything that one wants to believe in. From the well known God of the Bible, to Satan, to extra-terrestrials, to living breathing Mother Earth. Well known beliefs are called religions, less known and accepted ones are called cults. So it was irrelevant to my point. Heck, Hitler could have thought he was God himself and THE higher power. I'm sure there's a quack out there now who believes he's the son of God/messiah. As well as a Satan worshiper who believes that he's the son of Satan.

Pardon me Franklin if I ruffle your feathers with my pagan rants, but the same as you feel "persecuted" as a Catholic, I believe that people have the wrong idea about atheists in general. Just want to help set that straight.

-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), February 18, 1999.

"How is it they can prefer having Serbs kill ethnic Albanians, Hutus kill Tutsis, Turks kill Cypriots etc., with impunity."

This sort of behaviour is actively encouraged by the Elite - be it religious or factional warring - it's the oldest game in the world called DIVIDE AND RULE.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), February 18, 1999.

Andy,

Believe me, you didn't need to tell that you are a lapsed Catholic. That was all too obvious.

BTW, you're welcome back home anytime.

<< You do however, prove my point. >>

I don't have a clue what you mean by this.

Now, instead of the answers given in your statement:

<< I agree with you that in the past (pre 1900 say) Religion was the root cause of most death and turmoil in the world other than disease and natural causes. One only has to think of the Inquisition, The Crusades, the extermination of Indians in the New World in the name of Catholicism... the list is endless. >> ...

...you could have listed the SECULAR conquests by the Assyrians, the Babylonians, the Medes, the Persians, Alexander the Great, the Romans (including the sack of Jerusalem in which an estimated 1 million folks died; a political, not a religious war), the fall of the Roman Empire to barbarian hordes, the exploits of Genghis Khan, the Civil War of the United States (1 million dead), on and on ad nauseum.

But then REAL history minus the overlay of anti-religious bigotry would have destroyed your whole point, wouldn't it? Add those all up and they absolutely dwarf any and all other episodes you would have cared to lay at the feet of the Christian religion or any other religion for that matter.

Now, substitute GREED into your sentence above and you will have it exactly right. And sometimes, alas, religious people are greedy too, IN SPITE OF, not because of, their religion (I think you'll agree with me Craig?).

Andy, AisA, et al., the bottom line is, you don't determine truth by taking a body count. Learn a little real history and drop the anti- religious bigotry (especially on this forum). We'll all be better off.

Ahhhhhh, I've broken my Lenten fast....(nahhh, just kidding).

-- Franklin Journier (ready4y2k@yahoo.com), February 18, 1999.

Chris wrote:

<< Pardon me Franklin if I ruffle your feathers with my pagan rants, but the same as you feel "persecuted" as a Catholic, I believe that people have the wrong idea about atheists in general. Just want to help set that straight. >>

I understand completely.

Your points on this thread are excellent. I have in the past brought up the atrocities of atheistic regimes to counter claims of Catholic atrocities, not because I think that that proves that atheists are worse than Christians, but to show that the whole line of argumentation is faulty precisely because it can be universally applied.

And we simply can't determine truth by taking a body count. The argument that, "Such and such a religion (or lack thereof) is full of beans because some folks in that religion were nasty people" contains a logical fallacy; it is fallacious reasoning from the part to the whole. "Atheism is false because some atheists have been horrible people" is a totally bogus argument, as is "Catholicism is false because some Catholics have been horrible people." Folks who have Gotten It about Y2K based on their cool evaluation of evidence and arguments should know better.

-- Franklin Journier (ready42k@yahoo.com), February 18, 1999.

How about this:

Moe: Anyone who believes in "God" is an idiot.
Joe: You're saying 90% of everyone are idiots.
Moe: I rest my case.

-- a (A@AisA.com), February 19, 1999.

If it makes you feel like you've actually contributed something valuable to the discussion then hey, why not?

-- Franklin Journier (ready4y2k@yahoo.com), February 19, 1999.

"Andy, Believe me, you didn't need to tell that you are a lapsed Catholic. That was all too obvious."

####### Hey Franklin, thats a little condescending don't you think? Has it occurred to you that attitudes that you are exhibiting now may haved caused me to "lapse"?#######

BTW, you're welcome back home anytime.

####### I've never left Pal. But thanks for the offer. Sheesh! #######

<< You do however, prove my point. >>

I don't have a clue what you mean by this.

####### No. I rather suspected that you wouldn't. The tone of this whole post of yours echoes the last 2000 years of Catholicism, alas. i.e. we're right, everyone else is wrong. Let's impose our faith on the Aztecs (what's left of them), the Incas (what's left of them), the Mayans (what's left of them....) #######

Now, instead of the answers given in your statement:

<< I agree with you that in the past (pre 1900 say) Religion was the root cause of most death and turmoil in the world other than disease and natural causes. One only has to think of the Inquisition, The Crusades, the extermination of Indians in the New World in the name of Catholicism... the list is endless. >> ...

...you could have listed the SECULAR conquests by the Assyrians, the Babylonians, the Medes, the Persians, Alexander the Great, the Romans (including the sack of Jerusalem in which an estimated 1 million folks died; a political, not a religious war), the fall of the Roman Empire to barbarian hordes, the exploits of Genghis Khan, the Civil War of the United States (1 million dead), on and on ad nauseum.

But then REAL history minus the overlay of anti-religious bigotry would have destroyed your whole point, wouldn't it? Add those all up and they absolutely dwarf any and all other episodes you would have cared to lay at the feet of the Christian religion or any other religion for that matter.

####### Franklin, please get back in your pram. I am not a religious bigot - I'm merely agreeing with Craig that he's on the money up to the 20th Century as far as religious deaths are concerned, from ALL religions, world-wide. Believe it or not I am a religious, or spiritual person, call it what you will. That does not preclude me from being able to look at history from an unbiased perspective. Religion has a lot to answer for. So do the secular atrocities you cite too. They are all ovrshadowed however by 20th Century atrocities. #######

Now, substitute GREED into your sentence above and you will have it exactly right. And sometimes, alas, religious people are greedy too, IN SPITE OF, not because of, their religion (I think you'll agree with me Craig?).

####### I agree with you 100%. There is a grey area here. And a lot of manipulation trough the centuries. Divide and Rule. And by the way, talking about greed, what's the deal with all the plundered and looted treasures in the Vatican? Don't you think all that gold etc. should be sold to feed some starving people? #######

Andy, AisA, et al., the bottom line is, you don't determine truth by taking a body count. Learn a little real history and drop the anti- religious bigotry (especially on this forum). We'll all be better off.

####### Please take me off your hit list. I'm not a religious bigot. I'm not a bigot, period. Franklin you've managed to turn this thread into a religious one yet AGAIN, please have a little more self- control. #######

Ahhhhhh, I've broken my Lenten fast....(nahhh, just kidding).

####### Say 10 hail mary's and 5 our fathers, remember not to drive away lapsed Catholics, the idea is to bring them back into the fold :) #######

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), February 19, 1999.

####### Hey Franklin, thats a little condescending don't you think? Has it occurred to you that attitudes that you are exhibiting now may haved caused me to "lapse"?#######

I'll clarify first, then apologize. You made the general argument that religion is the general root of all trouble outside of disease and natural causes. You then deployed three examples, bing bing bing, and lo, all three of them pertained to the Catholic Church. I said to myself immediately, "ex-Catholic." That's all I was saying, Andy; when speaking of things religious and historical you wear your "lapsed Catholic" status on your sleeve. And my point in observing that is to show that your analysis of history is far, far from unbiased. In fact, it's radically biased.

That being said, I apologize if my statement offended you. I did not mean it to be offensive, only descriptive.

####### I've never left Pal. But thanks for the offer. Sheesh! #######

Hmmmmm. "Lapsed Catholic" was your description, not mine. I said (and say) that you are always welcome to come back to the Church. That's all.

####### No. I rather suspected that you wouldn't. The tone of this whole post of yours echoes the last 2000 years of Catholicism, alas. i.e. we're right, everyone else is wrong. Let's impose our faith on the Aztecs (what's left of them), the Incas (what's left of them), the Mayans (what's left of them....) #######

Simply put, you have a distorted view of both Catholicism and history. This is not the place to try to dispel either one. If you're genuinely interested in another viewpoint then e-mail me.

####### Franklin, please get back in your pram. I am not a religious bigot - I'm merely agreeing with Craig that he's on the money up to the 20th Century as far as religious deaths are concerned, from ALL religions, world-wide. Believe it or not I am a religious, or spiritual person, call it what you will. That does not preclude me from being able to look at history from an unbiased perspective. Religion has a lot to answer for. So do the secular atrocities you cite too. They are all ovrshadowed however by 20th Century atrocities. #######

You charged that prior to the 20th century, "Religion was the root cause of most death and turmoil in the world other than disease and natural causes." Just off the top of my head I named historical events, many of them vast sweeping international conquests, that had nothing overtly religious about them at all. Add 'em up and they obliterate your statement. I'm saying your myopic view of history shows that you are far from unbiased. Don't just cop out and compare me to a child. Answer the argument, Andy. That's what you do with Y2K; try it with your religio-historical worldview.

####### I agree with you 100%. There is a grey area here. And a lot of manipulation trough the centuries. Divide and Rule. #######

Well for gosh sakes, if you agree with me 100% then why didn't you just say "GREED was the root cause of most death and turmoil...." instead of trying to lay that on religion? Zoiks, man!

####### And by the way, talking about greed, what's the deal with all the plundered and looted treasures in the Vatican? Don't you think all that gold etc. should be sold to feed some starving people? #######

Nope. As the largest provider of social services in the world, the Catholic Church already puts her money where her mouth is. The art and architecture of the Catholic Church is a cultural and historical heritage that she has every right to preserve and which she does indeed share with others.

####### Please take me off your hit list. I'm not a religious bigot. I'm not a bigot, period. #######

Actually, Andy, I submit that your statements in this thread are definitely bigoted. Whether that makes you a bigot is for you to decide. Substitute some other examples into your sentence and see how they fly:

"White men have been the root cause of most death and turmoil in the world other than disease and natural causes."

"Jews, with their economic manipulations and contrived wars, were the root cause of most death and turmoil in the world other than disease and natural causes."

"Militant Moslems have been the root cause of most death and turmoil in the world other than disease and natural causes."

All bigoted; all just as untrue as your statement.

####### Franklin you've managed to turn this thread into a religious one yet AGAIN, please have a little more self- control. #######

Andy, go back and read this thread please and see if your statement is accurate. It just blows me away that you and others feel that you can put forth arguments that "religion" (spelled "Catholicism" based on the lopsided examples you cited) is guilty of the majority of the world's ills prior to this century, that my faith can be called "wacko" and compared to "wog/mud people religions" (whatever the heck those are; no bigotry or racism there, of course) and then I get blamed when I object.

Self-control, Andy? You and AisA can say anything, no matter how offensive and untrue about my Church, and I'm not to say anything about it? That's how this works? Sorry, no way. This is a two way street. I did NOT start this. Keep your religious digs to yourself or expect to have them met with counter-arguments.

####### Say 10 hail mary's and 5 our fathers, remember not to drive away lapsed Catholics, the idea is to bring them back into the fold :) #######

The work of the Holy Spirit and your willingness to embrace the truth will get you back into the fold, Andy. I'm trying to uphold the truth, but if my personal approach is a stumbling block to you then I am truly sorry.

If you're ever in my neck of the woods (SW Wisconsin) we'll discuss my shortcomings as an evangelist over a couple of pints of Guiness. I'm buying.

-- Franklin Journier (ready4y2k@yahoo.com), February 19, 1999.

WILL THE MooN Be proven to be made FROM GREEN ChEESE BEFoRE YOU FOOLS STOP This incesSAMT ARgUING???? INFIDELS!!!!

-- Dieter (questions@toask.com), February 19, 1999.

Hey Franklin,

Thanks for the offer - if I'm ever over that way I'll look you up. It's good to see that you your faith is so strong. So is mine but in my own way. Incidentally I'm a great fan of Father Malachi Martin - I am on his wavelength in many respects - perhaps this will give you a clue to my mindset.

One last thing - I really have nothing against the Catholic church - I think you've taken the points I made out of context and twisted them - If you look back you'll see that I've empasised all religions, not just Catholic, and including non-religious factions pre-1900 to be equally as guilty. If I haven't made that quite clear then I'm saying this now.

Later, Andy

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), February 19, 1999.