Christians die amid neocons’ stab at ‘Democracy Building’
Note from Dan: Mark Jurkevich has been traveling a lot lately so he’s taking a break. Here’s one of his columns from last March, with a new headline and art. With foreign-sponsored chaos in Syria, Europeans evacuating Benghazi and Islamists streaming over the Libyan border into Mali and Algeria, it’s no less apropos today.
Here we go again – the ritualistic drumbeat is reaching a frenzied finale preparing Americans for a U.S.-supported bloody overthrow of a sovereign state’s government in the name of spreading democracy; this time, Assad in Syria.
The Left and the Right are in a testosterone-driven race to lead the charge; Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the “Friends of Syria” conference in Tunisia declared the Assad government illegitimate, while Republican leadership demands “safe passage corridors” for rebels. Since Assad is not using jets, they can’t call it a no-fly zone.
Over the last fifteen years Americans have been conditioned by this ritual – a long standing sovereign government starts being referred to as a “regime,” we are told it’s undemocratic, the “freedom loving” opposition is suddenly armed to the teeth, then, after much bloodshed and expenditure of U.S. treasure, the sovereign government is toppled. Inevitably, the fruits of this ritual are – well, like most big government programs – a costly mess with myriad undesirable consequences.
Democracy Building is indeed a big government program. The total estimated costs of the Iraq and Afghanistan projects are $4 trillion, according to a Brown University study. Add in the other half dozen “democracy project” costs during this time, and it’s enough to solve the U.S. debt crisis. The usual big program waste and fraud are well documented for these projects. They also have a 100% failure rate for replacing a tyrant with a peace-loving democratic government.
Given the enthusiastic support for the Democracy Building program by the GOP’s conservative wing, the Tea Party and evangelical Christians, one can only conclude that they believe their core unifying value of shrinking big government programs stops at the U.S. border. Yet, these democracy projects, wars of choice, are more wasteful and ineffective than the big domestic programs conservatives want to cut. There’s also a side effect of these projects that should be of particular concern to the evangelicals: they have consistently caused the destruction of ancient Christian communities.
To date, the track record includes:
Kosovo. U.S. involvement to remove the bad guy, Slobodan Milosevic, began in 1999 with bombing of Serbia, including Kosovo. Kosovo, the historic cradle of western Slav Christianity, continues to be a ward of NATO and its installed KLA run government. KLA was designated an Islamic terrorist organization by U.S., France and UK until 1998. The Christian population has been largely removed, now only 10% of total population. Hundreds of ancient churches and monasteries have been systematically destroyed on KLA’s watch.
Palestine. From 2001 the U.S. and Israel implemented a regime change strategy, including systematic physical destruction of governmental infrastructure, to replace bad guy Yasser Arafat with a democratically elected government. In 2006, the U.S. got its wish. Elections were held. The Islamist Hamas was elected, with a platform promising the destruction of Israel and allegiance to Iran. Clearly, no friend to Christians. By contrast the secular Arafat traditionally attended Christmas Mass in Bethlehem, until Israel prohibited him. Since the regime change, there has been one war with Israel and the peace talks are moribund.
Iraq. This costly 2003 doozy promised democracy, replacing bad guy Saddam Hussein, a secular leader, whose right hand man, Tariq Aziz, was a Christian. Today, Iraq is in an unstable simmering civil war. Oh, and the new local powers are decimating the Christian population, cutting it in half since 2003, when it was over 5%.
Egypt. The 2010 regime change was to bring democracy, replacing bad guy Hosni Mubarak, a secular leader. The Muslim Brotherhood, accused last year by the FBI Director of supporting terrorism in the U.S. and abroad, is now in control. Ever since, the ancient Christian community making up 11% of the population has been under assault, its members murdered and churches burned.
Libya. The 2011 regime change was to bring democracy, replacing bad guy Muammar Gaddafi, who notably was a great champion of women’s rights and known for leaving the Christian community in peace. Since his removal, Libya has devolved into tribal anarchy with atrocities reported daily.
Syria. And now the drum beats for regime change to bring democracy, replacing bad guy Bashar al-Assad. The Syrian Christian Community, 10% of total population, supports the secular Assad, and is predicting it will be decimated if the U.S. supported Islamic “freedom fighters” seize power.
The stated objective of these projects is to replace tyrannical governments in sovereign states with peaceful democratic ones. Clearly this big government program, Democracy Building, is a costly abject failure. It’s time for conservatives to begin fighting big government waste outside the U.S. borders with the same zeal that they display on the domestic front.
January 30, 2013 - 6:00 AM
The GOP don’t have control of the White House. Is he saying that Obama is a Neocon?
Note to Dan:
The Neocons have been out of power since 2006. Not sure where you get your information these day, but the Obamabots have been in charge for over 4 years now. Just thought you might like to know….
This is a two fold strategy that is being implemented. On one side sovereign secular states are being replaced with “freedom fighters” or “rebels” who are there to destabilize the countries involved. On the other side governments are using these wars to bankrupt once wealthy nations to poverty in order to destabilize the economy. The point of all of this is control by the top elite that make these decisions for us.
Paddy O’Ryan and Henry,
The neocons may be out of power, but they are still around, they are still influential, and this nation is left to deal with the huge pile of trash otherwise known as “fruits of neocon foreign policymaking” that they left after 8 years of running that and much of our defense establishment. That you neither see that nor realize the implications of it is unsurprising.
Well, how is that “supporting Assad” thing working out for them.
http://www.indcatholicnews.com/news.php?viewStory=21744
“About a thousand Christians, both Greek Orthodox and Roman Catholic are trapped in the small village of Yaakoubieh in the north of Aleppo a Franciscan Friar reports.
Fr Francois Kouseiffi OFM Cap, Parish Priest of the church of San Francesco in Hamra, Beirut, in Lebanon, said: “They are completely worn out, with no food, no electricity, lack of basic necessities, and find themselves in the midst of heavy fighting between loyalist forces and opposition groups. They are unable to leave the village and “are in terrible condition, where they risk extinction.”
Apparently Assad’s intent on slaughtering people other than themselves is intefering in their life style. I’m not a big fan of “democracy building”, but I also don’t see the community of civilized nations in this world standing around picking its nose while Assad gasses his citizens.
And yes, Syrian Christians….he’s coming for you too.
Although keeping a low profile now, the neocons of the Bush presidency were in a full court press as advisers to candidates Romney, and Perry.
They also continue to preach their worldview:
Wofowitz ["we will be greeted as liberators"] lectures at the conservative think tank, American Enterprise Institute, along with Richard Perle ["and a year from now, I’ll be very surprised if there is not some grand square in Baghdad that is named after President Bush"]; Donald Rumsfeld, [ Iraq War "would last five days, or five weeks, or five months, but it certainly isn’t going to last any longer than that"] is regular guest on conservative media programming…
Unfortunately, old neocons don’t die they just go to conservative republican “think tanks” or the conservative lecture circuit,as a way to try and shape policy and opinions into their “new world order”.
The sad reality is that being “out of power” or being so wrong so often as to not deserve attention no longer matters. When it is all ideologues all the time, having power is only one aspect of their damage. What “power” has Grover Norquist or Limbaugh EVER held?
Like the deficit hawks, it no longer seems to matter to some of you just how wrong those you follow or support really have been.
Obama’s “lies” matter, Obama’s “mistakes” matter, Obama’s “power grabs” matter, Obama’s “debt” matters, Obama’s everything matters in ways nothing anyone ever did before has. Telling.
“In their book This Time is Different, Reinhart & Rogoff looked a centuries of data about credit and other financial crises. To prod policy makers into becoming more data driven, they have made all of their statistical data available for download. This stands in stark contrast to the gut feel approach we have seen be deployed so disastrously over recent decades.”
http://www.reinhartandrogoff.com/data/
The Syrian Christians have backed the repressive Assad for decades – they turned a blind eye to his brutal rule, virtually ignoring it because he did not target the Christian population. With his vicious and indiscriminate murder of the Syrian citizenry, only now do the Christians “see” his murderous tendencies – but now it is generally too late.
Henry / Paddy et. al.
Neocons are not tied exclusively to the GOP, nor to the Democratic party. In fact, Irving Krystal, arguably the founder of the movement actively supported Hubert Humphrey in the 1968 elections.
Neocons have a very powerful presence in the various think-tanks and lobbies which actively help shape US policy, especially foreign policy. This includes American Enterprise Institue, The Center for Security Policy, The Hudson Institure, The Foundation For The Defence of Democracies, the Jewish Institute for National Security Affaires, The Middle East Forum, The Wahsington Institute for Near Est Policy, etc.
Some of the core beliefs of the neocon movement are that US power should be used for spreading democracy and preserving US dominance. They are for unilateral US action, rather than coordination through international institutions such as International courts and the UN. The neocon movement is particularly focused on the Middle East and is very strongly pro-Israel. There is a lot of cross-over between the Israeli lobby and the neocon movement.
Neocons had a very strong influence on the Clinton Administration. To the surprise of many, they even had a stronger influence over the Bush II Administation. They have less influence over Obama, but certainly they are a huge force that the Obama Administration is constantly dealing with.
Going back to the 1970s, the neocons were a force to be reckoned with – but their power over the last 3 administrations has been very strong. Notably, two of those administrations were Democratic, and one GOP.
By the way, the neocons were quite fond of Obama’s Secretary of Defense of the first 4 years – Robert Gates.
The neocons have always hated Chuck Hagel, the highly respected former Republican Senator who Obama has nominated to be the next Defense Secretary. Hagel has been blasted by many neocon leaning Democrats and Republicans. Obama has had to work real hard to get a number of Democrats not to fight him on this nominiation.
Kristen#5 – Have you ever wondered why after decades in power, the Assad government has suddenly “decided to slaughter its own people”. It makes no sense. And, like most things that make no sense, it is not true.
Assad is fighting a civil war in which the other side is coordinated, funded, trained, advised and supplied by the US and its proxies. The neocons have been targeting Syria since the mid-1990s, and the US military was ready to go after toppling Hussein…until “mission accomplished” became clearly premature.
The neocon objective now is to turn Syria into a failed state, which is viewed as better than a strong stable country that is a historic enemy of Israel. Also, when Syria becomes a failed state, it will put more pressure on Iran, which is the neocons and Israel’s big prize these days.
So the Boy Messiah has been a Neocon all along? Who’d a’ thunk it?
“Have you ever wondered why after decades in power, the Assad government has suddenly “decided to slaughter its own people”
No, I don’t actually wonder. It seems the Syrian population is sick and tired of living under the junta-backed dictatorship style of rule that Assad and his father have held the country under for decades. They don’t check their homicidal tendencies at the border either – Syria is well known for injecting itself into the domestic policies of its neighbors, lately most famously Lebanon. I see no downside to Assad being overthrown, and if that can be accomplished without any American casualties…great.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323829504578271760567783172.html
“Syrian opposition activists and rebels said Tuesday they found the bodies of dozens of military-age men along a river in the war-ravaged northern city of Aleppo with telltale signs of summary execution.
A man being carried off was among dozens found dead in Aleppo Tuesday.
These people said the men were killed by forces loyal to President Bashar al-Assad, and to back up their claims they provided graphic video images, which appear to show the dead men caked in mud with recent gunshot wounds to their heads.”
If we’re the ones funding and training the opposition forces, we need to do a better job.
Dan: As this is a reprint, where are the previous comments? Can you re-load them in front of today’s first comment?
DAN: “The neocons may be out of power, but they are still around, they are still influential, and this nation is left to deal with the huge pile of trash otherwise known as “fruits of neocon foreign policymaking” that they left after 8 years of running that and much of our defense establishment. That you neither see that nor realize the implications of it is unsurprising.”
I love it. the Democrats have the power in government (especially in troop sending by the commander in chief)…and still lybia, egypt, and syria is a right wing, neocon’s, decision.
Thanks for clearing that up. So I guess we need to credit George W. Bush for the Health Care Bill.
You guys blow my mind.
Dave Gresham, I’m not going to reload the comments on this thread. BUT, I’ll link to the original thread in the note at the top.
Thanks for inspiring that.
I wholeheartedly disagree that Bob Gates was a neocon. He more readily fits the profile of a pragmatist.
As a matter of fact, Gates tin his memoirs, “From the Shadows” (1996) stated that while a CIA analyst, he participated in an anti-Vietnam War rally in Washington in the early 1970s. In these same memoirs, Gates claimed that Brent Scowcroft was his mentor – Snowcroft opposed the Iraq invasion, as did Gates privately. Gates’ memoirs also indicate that he would support a dialog with Iran – that this strategy would make political and diplomatic sense for the US – opposing the view that war with Iran was an answer. Those are not the thoughts of a neocon.
Gates was a hawk in the 1980′s while dealing with the old Soviet state. Because of these views, and because Reagan and Gorbachev became partners after the fall of the USSR, there was no place for Gates. Gates was skeptical of “new” Russian cooperative bilateral relations with the US .
To me, it would be virtually impossible to be a neocon and serve in the administrations of Nixon to Ford to Carter, Reagan, Bush I and II and finally a member of President Obama’s administration. Wherever Gates served – although he was involved in the Iran-Contra disinformation – his ability to be a moderate and realistic voice for such a diverse group of presidents demonstrated his more moderate and realistic worldview.
The consummate civil servant – arriving in Washington at 23 – Gates finally ended his long career in 2011 at the age of 68.
Agree, Hillary…it seemed like most of the stupid stopped when he because Sec of Defense. Had he been there from the beginning, as opposed to that bellicose pinhead Rumsfeld, our foreign involvements would likely look very different today.
Hillary#16 – I also agree with you. As you noted, Gates thinking did evolve and adjust with the times, and he had his Hawkish periods. Above all, Gates was a top tier civil servant who understood politics inside the Beltway.
That understanding allowed him to thread a lot of needles, including being quite acceptable to the neocons.
I am not sure that some people seem to grasp that being elected is not the only form of power or influence, nor is being “appointed”. The Neocon influence and pervasive attitude has been rather systemic in all reality. And like I said, being so spectacularly wrong so often for so long should have had them run out of town on a rail decades ago. Like bad economic advisers, and pundits (on bnoth sides) they just keep circulating and polluting the decisions and direction of this nation.
Comment by MarkJ — January 30, 2013 @ 12:00 pm
“Neocons are not tied exclusively to the GOP, nor to the Democratic party. In fact, Irving Krystal, arguably the founder of the movement actively supported Hubert Humphrey in the 1968 elections”.
Please point to neocons in the recent [ten years] Democratic party – there was no such term in the 1960′s, so let’s stick to current events. The closest thing to a neocon in that period [60's-70's] were Hawks.
Sandi, thank you for the insightful comment. I think it would be interesting for many if you shared some names of powerful members of the neocon movement. Those interested could then dig a little deeper into the bios of these folks and see if any pattern emerges.
When I refer to neocons, i am using the term as related to foreign policy or world events [non economic, non religious] Neoconservatives IMO, formulate policy reflecting a belief that “democracy” can and should be installed by the United States, by any means, around the world – even in Muslim countries such as Iraq, Iran, and Saudi Arabia.
Thus the Bush administration and its neocon advisers “ginned” up the evidence in order to go to Iraq, and according to GW Bush, “A democratic Iraq will be a great triumph in the history of liberty. And a democratic Iraq will be a source of peace for our children and grandchildren.”
June 25, 2005 weekly address.
War, to promote “democracy”, is a core value of neocons.
Just wanted to point out what my definition of a neocon is. Others may have a different definition, thus a different perspective.
No sense in debating oranges and apples.
So why wouldn’t Bill Clinton save 800,000 Rwandans from extermination in 1994?
Has an American president EVER had so much blood on his hands?
yes and then sandi why dont you dig into obamas past and see what if anything besides communism, you can come up with….
Wow, where to start…Bill Kristol, Elliot Abrams, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Michael Hayden, John Lehman, Cofer Black, Rudy Guiliani, John Ashcroft, Donald Rumsfelkd, Dick Cheney, Norm Podharetz, John NcCain, Marco Rubio, Jon Kyl, Lindsey Graham, Joe Lieberman, Mitt Romney.
OUCH the typos, I think you can tell who I mean.
PP, the neocons have only one interest, and it’s nothing to do with healthcare.
Sandi, the only connection I see among your list is that they are all republicans.
How about Elliot Abrams, Kenneth Adelman, Douglas Feith, Scooter Libby, David Wurmser, Bret Stephens, Aaron Friedberg, Bernard Lewis, David Frum, Max Boot, Charles Krauthammer, John Bolton.
By the way, I wouldn’t but Romney into this category..but, I do acknowledge that its arguable, like so much about Romney.
MarkJ, your article is very thought provoking. I never have been a fan of the US style of nation building. It has always been too subversive for me. That we continue to insist that Democracy is the end all for all nations is supremely arrogant in my view. I think the example you cite in Palestine is instructive. We sought regime change so that democratic elections could take place, and the people elected Hamas. Did we really not see that possibility?
I would not be opposed to our getting out of the Middle East totally. Let the chips fall where they may. What we are doing in that region seems less than effective. Perhaps we are in too deep now to back out. I don’t know.
I would be interested to here what folks think about a strategy that gets us out of the middle east altogether.
“The neocons have always hated Chuck Hagel, the highly respected former Republican Senator who Obama has nominated to be the next Defense Secretary”
comment by MarkJ
That’s true, but despite their public stances, the current opposition to his nomination as defense secretary among the GOTP is less about his previous policy positions and more about not wanting a Republican involved during the certain large Defense Dep’t. cuts that are imminent, sequester or no sequester. They fear the bi-partisan cover it would lend Obama would diminish their political weapon in blaming the president’s party and claiming they are the exclusive defenders of the Pentagon budget. Politics, not policy, drives opposition to Hagel’s nomination the most.
More than a few of the neo-cons listed were advisors to the Romney campaign.
Does Condeleeza Rice fall into or just out of this group? And what about Bush II?
Hey, I never claimed I could name them all, or even most of them but even a cursory look at our foreign and domestic policy for the last two decades tells us they are there and in real numbers in places of influence even if not real power.
Not to mention, as I have said often, no matter how badly they fail, perform or make things, they keep coming back and gaining influence and power. We do not seem able to retire Neocons or bad economists (among other things).
Personally, I always wanted to think Condoleeza Rice was too smart for the role she played and too loyal not to. Bush was so “leadable” I am not sure if even he understood “The Bush Doctrine”. Certainly he brought many of those Neocons back to DC when he came and he did say “mushroom cloud”, so he is “one of them” I would have to say.
Not for nothing more than throwing a bone, Scoop Jackson and Charlie Wilson were no slouches in that erroneous mindset back in the day. The Dems have Neocons too, just not nearly as many or as influential anymore. Clinton had his share of them.
26.Does Condeleeza Rice fall into or just out of this group? And what about Bush II?
Comment by Jason Perdue — January 30, 2013 @ 2:54 pm
For what it’s worth, IMO Bush II who was not the sharpest stick in the bundle fell under the evil influence of Darth Vader Cheney. He later came to regret that, probably influenced by his father and Jim Baker as was evidenced by his appointment of Bob Gates to secdef.
I think Condi Rice saw Cheney and the neocons are her ticket to becoming the first woman President. Once she realized that was not the case, she suddenly saws the appeal of the academic world and hopes to eventually redeem her reputation there.
hay wayne goodman,
did you watch the colin powell interview with bill oreilly last night?
if you had, you would have seen him explicitly throw himself in with W., Cheney, and others who advocated the invasion of Iraq.
If you want to be truthful, please don’t leave out ol’ colin from your list of neocons.
I would be interested to here what folks think about a strategy that gets us out of the middle east altogether.
Comment by Jason Perdue — January 30, 2013 @ 2:50 pm
Jason. I don’t think isolationism has ever proven to be a viable policy
for us. But the arrogance of thinking that we can import our culture and beliefs and superimpose it on cultures that are thoussnds of years old will doom our policies to continued failure. As long as a major motivator of our policy in the region is the thirst for oil and a desireto impose our beliefs, we will continue to be an unwelcome presence for the vast majority of the people there.
Good phrase Mark J, success demands we “thread a lot of needles” sometimes quickly and that is no easy thing.
“So why wouldn’t Bill Clinton save 800,000 Rwandans from extermination in 1994?
Has an American president EVER had so much blood on his hands?”
Ya’ll ever notice how the RWers complain that moderates and libs lay a lot of blame for what’s wrong with this country on GWB — and they go and dredge up stuff to blame on President Clinton?
It’s hilarious!
Dan,
I think Suzie’s comment / question can lead to a thought provoking discussion.
My view about why Clinton did nothing about the slaughter in Rawanda is that the U.S. did not consider Rawanda strategic. While America continues to wrap its strategic interventions in cheap Wilsonian rhetoric, the fact is that our foreign policy is not driven by these ideals.
That is why we declare great concerns about people dying in some countries like Libya, and Syria, but don’t give a damn about other countries like Rawanda.
A different way of answering Suzie’s question is that Clinton did not go into Rawanda because there was no powerful lobbies or think tanks pressuring him to. That is in contrast to Iraq, Libya, Syria, Iran, etc., where some of the most powerful lobbies and think tanks have been actively pushing the U.S. into these affairs. They do it by feeding the news media with their views, making political campaign donations for politicians that comply and for those that don’t comply, their opponents get the support.
Its all legal, and I am not sure there is any other answer than for Americans to get more involved in civics and for counter-interests to get smart about how to build an effective lobby / think tank infrastructure.
MarkJ , I get the feeling you’re dancing around the point you’re trying to make.
MarkJ, Simply put, Ike warned us about the Military Industrial complex. We didn’t listen and we now have the Media and Special Interests in addition to what Ike warned of. We are the Corporate Sates of America ruled by an oligarchy over crony capitalism. Democracy is an illusion as both parties in the US have followed the same foreign policy for over 40 years. We are pushed into voting for our party of choice by emotional issues like gun control or Roe v Wade.
“There’s a sucker born every minute” -P.T. Barnum
Thanks for the old comments link Dan. Factoid for the gang here: The United States is scheduled to open, or expand, 35 bases in Africa during calendar year 2013. And our long term land exploitation leases (corporate) with despotic African governments is nearing double the size of Texas (and is growing). Problem is, most of the peasants lose their farms and are displaced to die, having no other marketable skills in an agrarian society.
I also think that the memory of the Somalia debacle was fresh on the mind of President Clinton and the American people. Maybe that was an excuse, but the tragedy of Somalia was real. Tribal wars are complicated and not easily defined as the good guy – bad guy. We are continuing to face that reality in Libya, Egypt et al.
Indeed Dave! Through the 1990s the US did not consider sub-Saharan Africa strategic. All that is changing rapidly when the US woke up and noticed that China has quietly amassed strategic relationships in the region through which it is locking up natural resources for a song. The great race is just starting, but its going to be a doozy.
Markj,
I enjoy reading your thoughts on international issues. Given your experience and knowledge, I would be interested in hearing your opinion regarding global monetary issues; particularly as it pertains to the US dollar.
My view about why Clinton did nothing about the slaughter in Rawanda is that the U.S. did not consider Rawanda strategic. While America continues to wrap its strategic interventions in cheap Wilsonian rhetoric, the fact is that our foreign policy is not driven by these ideals.
I think a big part, Mark J, is also the Democrats are hypocritical frauds when it comes to compassion for those truly hurting. Clinton and the totally Democrat-controlled Congress REFUSED to help nearly a million black people who were being hacked to death.
Again, I’ll point out the Blessed Mother KNEW in 1982 when she made her apparition at Kibeho, Rwanda the American president wouldn’t lift a finger to help.
Also note in her apparition, the Blessed Mother spoke out a warning against sexual promiscuity. Her warning was ignored, and thus followed the AIDS pandemic in Africa. What was the liberal response? The godless one, naturally. Distribution of condoms.
Suzie: if you’re going to argue that AIDS is God’s will, then condoms are His will, as well.
That is, unless you’d like to claim that condoms, used to prevent disease and unwanted pregnancy (thus, helping prevent your oft-lamented abortions), are from Satan, and AIDS, a horrible disease that is killing over a million people per year (many, many of them being God-fearing heterosexual married couples), is from God. Please feel free to explore that line of thought, because it casts God in a pretty negative light and Satan in a pretty good one.
I’d love to see how you parse that. My breath is bated…
———–
That said, a great, thought-provoking post, Mark J, as usual.
“Again, I’ll point out the Blessed Mother KNEW in 1982 when she made her apparition at Kibeho, Rwanda the Vatican’s deity wouldn’t answer a prayer to help.”
Implicit comment by poster #48
It’s time for conservatives to begin fighting big government waste outside the U.S. borders with the same zeal that they display on the domestic front.
comment by MarkJ
Uh, Mark, you might want to get a little better acquainted with the zeal displayed by conservatives in the U.S., and the results they’ve been achieving with said zeal. Alternatively, it may be easier to imagine it’s still the Reagan era U.S. polity from afar.
Again, I’ll point out the Blessed Mother KNEW in 1982 when she made her apparition at Kibeho, Rwanda the American president wouldn’t lift a finger to help.
Also note in her apparition, the Blessed Mother spoke out a warning against sexual promiscuity. Her warning was ignored, and thus followed the AIDS pandemic in Africa. What was the liberal response? The godless one, naturally. Distribution of condoms.
Comment by Suzie — January 30, 2013 @ 11:29 pm
“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” -Epicurus
Suzie, your “blessed mother” seems to know a whole lot and condemn people for something she helped create and knew the outcome of anyway… you and your deluded stories are rather funny.
Its funny your people depict her as being white, too. I wonder how the story of ol’ JC would have turned out if she would have told the truth about her pregnancy?
“Again, I’ll point out the Blessed Mother KNEW in 1982 when she made her apparition at Kibeho, Rwanda>..”
I saw unicorns on the Murray Run greenway yesterday.
Seriously, why is Bill Clinton being held more responsible than God for the deaths of 800,000 Rwandans?
I saw unicorns on the Murray Run greenway yesterday.
Comment by gdad — January 31, 2013 @ 8:36 am
LMAO!
Rwandans don’t kill people. Bill Clinton sitting in the White House kills Rwandans.
Actually, if only Ronald Reagan has paid attention to the Blessed Mother in 1982, he no doubt could have stopped the Rwanda slaughter of the future AND he could have forced everybody to stop having sex and wiped out AIDS. So it’s really all RR’s fault.
Seriously, why is Bill Clinton being held more responsible than God for the deaths of 800,000 Rwandans?
Comment by Dan Casey — January 31, 2013 @ 8:55 am
I would like to know the same, Dan. I would also like to know why the Catholic Church that was in the area heavily proselytizing in the area aren’t held more responsible as well.
Those of us that reside in reality know that if, Clinton, would have jumped into Rwanda just as soon as they killings started, the Republicans would have been screaming that our country needed to stop being the police of the world and to let them be. Its a lose-lose situation.
History revision seems to go with the Tea party and the gun activists. I seem to remember a Congress existed during Bill Clinton’s Presidency that was totally against our involvement in Rwanda, Bosnia, and Somalia. The Black Hawk down added to Congress’s political capital and prevented Clinton from doing anything in Rwanda, not to mention the many other International factors. Clinton had to override Congress on Bosnia and had his attack not been a total success, Congressional Republicans were ready to eat him alive.
For RWers to try and hold Bill Clinton responsible is the ultimate in hypocricy.
There are a lot of hell holes and large scale massacres with heinous “rulers” we did not “stop” or intervene in. We hit Grenada hard, but man, we cannot be “everywhere” and we are not Superman. Could Clinton have taken action to save anyone in Rawanda? IDK, he was pretty busy being persecuted for breathing most days. He would have been accused of “wagging the dog” if he had tried.
57. Justin True – in fact the GOP did scream and their platform in GWB’s first election was to stop Nation Building and avoid the small foreign conflicts. One of the promises that got him elected.
“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” -Epicurus
Suzie, your “blessed mother” seems to know a whole lot and condemn people for something she helped create and knew the outcome of anyway… you and your deluded stories are rather funny.
Its funny your people depict her as being white, too. I wonder how the story of ol’ JC would have turned out if she would have told the truth about her pregnancy?
Justin,
God allows for free will; therefore God allows people to do evil. As for Mary, the black teenage girl who has since become a nun reported that her skin color was indeterminable. The visions she reported at the time came to pass 12 years later. But Mary said the killings could be avoided if the people only would repent, pray, and stopped sinning. They chose not to do that.
Of the many claims of Marian apparitions, very few are determined to be authentic by the Catholic Church. This is done by assessing accuracy of the predictions, noting miracles that have taken place as a result, and looking at the lives of the visionaries afterward.
Could Clinton have taken action to save anyone in Rawanda? IDK, he was pretty busy being persecuted for breathing most days. He would have been accused of “wagging the dog” if he had tried.
You’re saying the mightiest country in the world couldn’t have stopped a bunch of guys with machetes? And this was well before Clinton’s dog-wagging days. He knew of the carnage and chose to do nothing for the simple reason he did not see any political benefit. Clinton was and is a heartless soulless, immoral man who talked a great game about compassion, but was anything but. He talked a great game about caring for black folks, yet allowed nearly a million blacks to perish. He talked a great game about ‘the children” but enabled the slaughter of 8 million of them through abortion, and that was just in this country.
But Clinton was merely acting the way liberals act. I have no doubt obama would act the same way. They only care about their own power. Their talk of compassion is a lie.
I seem to remember a Congress existed during Bill Clinton’s Presidency that was totally against our involvement in Rwanda
Both House of Congress and the White House were controlled by Democrats at the time of Rwanda. They just didn’t care.
I saw unicorns on the Murray Run greenway yesterday.
Comment by gdad — January 31, 2013 @ 8:36 am
Now, all you need do is wait for the Catholic Church to certify your vision, then BAM, you’re a prophet!
63 Suzie – Check your dates again and look at who controlled the House.
I saw unicorns on the Murray Run greenway yesterday.
This seems an odd comment from Gdad. Doesn’t he profess to attend church services? And doesn’t that inherently express believe in the supernatural?
63 Suzie – Check your dates again and look at who controlled the House.
YOU check again, Richard.
Suzie – you might remember this quote – During one of the 2000 Presidential debates, the moderator, Jim Lehrer, raised the issue of Rwanda. “There was no U.S. intervention,” he said. Then he asked George W. Bush, “Was that a mistake?” In a rare show of solidarity with the Clinton White House, Bush answered, “I think the Administration did the right thing in that case. I do. It was a horrible situation. No one liked to see it on our – you know, on our TV screens. But . . . they made the right decision not to send U.S. troops into Rwanda.”
Seriously, why is Bill Clinton being held more responsible than God for the deaths of 800,000 Rwandans?
We can certainly say God warned the people of Rwanda what would happen if they didn’t stop sinning. He also warned them to stop their promiscuity. Again, they didn’t heed. Ergo the AIDS epidemic.
So we Americans need to ask ourselves why our fate should be any different they way sexual promiscuity has now gained societal acceptance (due to liberals who have defended and advocated for it). Ditto for abortion.
God tends to find rural pockets of devout Catholics for His Marian apparitions. Now that our country has been hijacked by the leftwing and communists who are now in charge of rewriting our societal mores, I am wondering if America is not due a severe warning from maybe a small hispanic community in Arizona or perhaps a field in west central Ohio because we are headed for serious disaster, people.
Now, let’s all think hard, who do we know, all too well, who comes across as “a heartless soulless, immoral”, who talks about compassion, but is anything but? Who talks a great game about caring for black folks, the children and the country but shows nothing but disdain and hatred for them in every political position?
Suzie – you might like this article as well http://www.nytimes.com/1995/02/13/opinion/l-gop-bill-endangers-un-peacekeeping-031295.html
Suzie – check out who sponsored this act and why The National Security Restoration Act
An act to prevent U.S. troops from serving under United Nations command unless the president determines it is necessary for the purposes of national security, to cut U.S. payments for UN peacekeeping operations, and to help establish guidelines for the voluntary integration of former Warsaw Pact nations into NATO. H.R.7, passed 241-181, 2/16/95.
68 Suzie – you might remember this quote – During one of the 2000 Presidential debates, the moderator, Jim Lehrer, raised the issue of Rwanda. “There was no U.S. intervention,” he said. Then he asked George W. Bush, “Was that a mistake?” In a rare show of solidarity with the Clinton White House, Bush answered, “I think the Administration did the right thing in that case. I do. It was a horrible situation. No one liked to see it on our – you know, on our TV screens. But . . . they made the right decision not to send U.S. troops into Rwanda.”
Richard just lifted a quote from another site without sourcing. Note the silence from Dan. Recall Dan’s screeching that I plagiarized a poem, even though my version was much different. Here’s the original source that Richard pirated
http://forums.anandtech.com/archive/index.php/t-1072253.html
But anyhow….
George Bush was obviously being charitable to Clinton, and he no doubt was relying on Clinton’s false claim tha’t know the scope of the massacre, which we later found out to be a lie. So in 2000 when Bush said he agreed with Clintons action based on limited knowledge, he didn’t know Clinton had lied.
This seems an odd comment from Gdad. Doesn’t he profess to attend church services? And doesn’t that inherently express believe in the supernatural?
Comment by Suzie — January 31, 2013 @ 10:27 am
Suzie, you do realize there are more ways than one to worship, or recognize the existence of the Abrahamic gods right? You don’t really think you have it all figured out with 4 fish and a loaf of bread do you?
Now, let’s all think hard, who do we know, all too well, who comes across as “a heartless soulless, immoral”, who talks about compassion, but is anything but? Who talks a great game about caring for black folks, the children and the country but shows nothing but disdain and hatred for them in every political position?
Oh, I thought we were talking about Bill Clinton. Now Sandi has turned it into a personal attack.
If you can’t debate the issues, you can always make it about Suzie
sandi,
please, pray-tell, identify who you refer to as being,
“heartless, soulless, immoral, who talks about compassion, but is anything but? Who talks a great game about caring for black folks, the children and the country but shows nothing but distain and hatred for them in every political position.”
I do not believe that God created AIDS to punish anyone. My opinion is that Suzie is tired of being ignored due to all of the gun comments. She’s seeking attention and she’s getting it.
DAN: Seriously, why is Bill Clinton being held more responsible than God for the deaths of 800,000 Rwandans?
SUZIE: We can certainly say God warned the people of Rwanda what would happen if they didn’t stop sinning. He also warned them to stop their promiscuity. Again, they didn’t heed. Ergo the AIDS epidemic.
OK, so now Suzie’s ever-changing, never-logical theory holds thusly:
1) God warned those people what would happen if they didn’t stop sinning.
2) They didn’t, so 10 years later 800,000 of them got their just desserts and died.
3) Despite all that alleged sinning, President Bill Clinton could have thwarted God’s will and saved those people.
4) In other words, Suzie is claiming that Bill Clinton is more powerful than God.
Jesus, Democrats would never make such a suggestion. It could only have been born in the fetid swamp that makes up the unreal mind of a conservative.
Besides all that, I’d feel remiss if I didn’t bring this to your attention:
We all know that Al Qaeda has this weird ethic, that they may not commit terrorist acts without advance warning that if something doesn’t change, a lot of people are going to die. Every terrorist action they have pulled has been preceded by such a warning. They don’t necessary say where, what and when they’re gonna do the big, bad thing, but they say, “the U.S. must get out of Saudi Arabia or else.”
Obviously you can see the pattern here. She’s claiming that Al Qaeda is the “Godly” bunch.
Oh, I thought we were talking about Bill Clinton. Now Sandi has turned it into a personal attack.
If you can’t debate the issues, you can always make it about Suzie
Comment by Suzie — January 31, 2013 @ 11:07 am
Suzie, when in the hell do you ever debate the issues? Every time I turn around you are talking about the Sun dancing and partying like its 1999…
Come on, Frank… you know who it is. The individuals name sounds like floozie, and rhymes with cSrUaZyIE. Give it a few beers… its still early.
Dan#78 – Excellent application of logic to Suzie’s arguments. I love it. You proved that Suzie in essence claims that Clinton had veto power over God and did not use it. Which makes Clinton a bad person.
To paraphrase Slick Willy – Suzie, I feel your pain.
No kidding, Debbie. Any thread that ends up with “God invented AIDS to punish people for having sex” is a failure.
Thanks Suzie, I knew you would help a sister out!
“I am wondering if America is not due a severe warning from maybe a small hispanic community in Arizona or perhaps a field in west central Ohio because we are headed for serious disaster, people.”
Too late, suzie. You must have missed this documentary:
Signs – Official® Trailer [HD]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4kEnwACgNU
Suzie,
As a tithing, Mass-going, active member of my parish, I am disheartened that you are the “face” of Catholicism on this blog. You remind me of the folks who come to Mass, refuse to greet others in the Sign of Peace, and remain clicking their beads or reading their own missal during the celebration of the Mass. They look up only to scowl at any comment during the homily that could remotely be interpreted as encouraging ecumenism – running home to write yet another letter to the Bishop complaining. You are the few -you may have the ear of the Vatican but it won’t last forever. Get out of your own “personal piety” and look around you. You and your ilk are vocal, but you are a dying breed.
Comment by Debbie — January 31, 2013 @ 11:55 am
“I do not believe that God created AIDS to punish anyone.”
You are correct Debbie! – god “invented” the blogger Suzie to do that.
BlacksburgSuz, we have Ron to counteract Suzie’s influence as far as Catholicism goes here.
Kristen,
You are so correct – Ron is logical, non-judgemental and low-key. His Catholicism is not the “in-your-face” variety! Thanks for the reminder.
Comment by Suzie — January 31, 2013 @ 10:44 am
“God tends to find rural pockets of devout Catholics for His Marian apparitions.”
and in grilled cheese sandwiches, mold, toast, tree stumps,..
I do not believe that God created AIDS to punish anyone.
But isn’t it interestiint AIDS are nearly 100% the result of sex outside of marriage?
Suzie,
As a tithing, Mass-going, active member of my parish, I am disheartened that you are the “face” of Catholicism on this blog. You remind me of the folks who come to Mass, refuse to greet others in the Sign of Peace, and remain clicking their beads or reading their own missal during the celebration of the Mass. They look up only to scowl at any comment during the homily that could remotely be interpreted as encouraging ecumenism – running home to write yet another letter to the Bishop complaining. You are the few -you may have the ear of the Vatican but it won’t last forever. Get out of your own “personal piety” and look around you. You and your ilk are vocal, but you are a dying breed.
I’m just trying to figure which if any tenets of Catholicism you believe in, Bburg Suz. You (and Ron) have said you are pro-choice, a position 100% antithetical to a signature belief of Catholic teaching. You sneer at the mention of the rosary, you don’t believe in Marian apparitions, and you don’t seem to like those with whom you attend Mass.
If you feel you’re that much at war with the Vatican, hon, you might want to do a critical reassessment of your faith.
And as for those who decline the handshake for peace, does it occur to you they might be showing consideration not to spread germs during the flu season?
We have noticed liberals like “conservatives” who aren’t conservatives at all, so it’s not surprising they admire only the “Catholics” who don’t practice or believe in key cornerstones of the faith .
Dan#78 – Excellent application of logic to Suzie’s arguments. I love it. You proved that Suzie in essence claims that Clinton had veto power over God and did not use it. Which makes Clinton a bad person.
Dan’s argument isn’t really logical. Athough God knew which way the decision would ultimately go, He also gave man the power to change course if he so chose. By 1992, it was apparent Rwandans were refusing to heed Mary’s warning, and so the building blocks of the disaster were being set into place, one of which was the election of the immoral Bill Clinton, whom God knew would act in an immoral way should the circumstances present themselves.
Had Rwandans heeded the warning and repented, any number of different deterrents might have occurred, one of which may have been the election of a U.S. president who would have acted morally and stopped the murderous aggressors.
and in grilled cheese sandwiches, mold, toast, tree stumps,..
Anybody can claim anything, hon, and yes some of what humans come up with is pretty silly. But the test that the Vatican applies is pretty rigorous and direct, and its conclusions are difficult to argue with.
“But the test that the Vatican applies is pretty rigorous and direct, and its conclusions are difficult to argue with.”
–Suzie
And btw, many of the priests are pretty rigorous and direct with the altar boys, who better not be difficult and argue.
I don’t think this is the last time we will be seeing Suzie argue that Bill Clinton is more powerful than God. It appears that she’s undergoing some powerful conversion, and is (characteristically) taking it to the extreme.
May God help the liberals when she joins them . . .!
Blacksburg Suz, please be at peace, no one believes Suzie is the face of religion, or Catholicism. That is just not the “face” we see her displaying. Trust me on that.
Oddly enough for the Catholic Church, hording riches on earth is a position 100% antithetical to a signature belief of Jesus’ teaching, but they do it anyway. Among many other things.
It appears that she’s undergoing some powerful conversion
Not really. I’ve just sharpened the focus of what I already believed. Perhaps you should consider reacquainting yourself with the faith you grew up with, Dan. If you look closely, it all makes sense.
Oddly enough for the Catholic Church, hording riches on earth is a position 100% antithetical to a signature belief of Jesus’ teaching, but they do it anyway. Among many other things.
Sandi,
I’ve already addressed this with your twin, Hillary. All priests which includes bishops and popes take a vow of poverty. But the pope can’t drive around in a Yugo and live in a 1000 square-foot ranch. There are necessarily larger more costly appurtenances because of the office. But priests themselves do not live in luxury.
Your claim is like saying obama “hordes” riches because of his office (Although in his case, it’s probably true).
BTW, hon, you meant “hoards”, not “hordes”. That’s why we put it in quotations.
Lewis Black on Creationism:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=3PDZTveY4uQ
Makes a convincing argument.
#93 Now suzie is seeing unicorns.
“Had Rwandans heeded the warning and repented, any number of different deterrents might have occurred, one of which may have been the election of a U.S. president who would have acted morally and stopped the murderous aggressors.”
It IS pretty great entertainment to watch suzie splutter and start channeling Pat Robertson after Dan nailed her butt to the wall using her own words.
“And as for those who decline the handshake for peace, does it occur to you they might be showing consideration not to spread germs during the flu season?”
Even to a non-Catholic, it’s quite clear Suz was talking about folks who ALWAYS refuse. You lose again.
“Athough God knew which way the decision would ultimately go, He also gave man the power to change course if he so chose.”
I’m still trying to decide whether this is the stupidest and most illogical statement I’ve ever read on this blog, or just the second stupidest.
“Athough God knew which way the decision would ultimately go, He also gave man the power to change course if he so chose.”
I’m still trying to decide whether this is the stupidest and most illogical statement I’ve ever read on this blog, or just the second stupidest.
Comment by gdad — February 1, 2013 @ 9:15 am
Which part do you disagree with? That God knows the future or that God allows free will?
Let’s review at the AIDS thing:
In 1982, the Blessed Mother predicts catastrophe if Africans don’t stop being sexually promiscuous. Shortly thereafter Africa experiences widespread disease, the previously unknown AIDS, to which monogamous married couples, following the commandment of God, are virtually immune.
Yet leftwingers say, “Naw, the two couldn’t possibly be connected”.
Suzie#93 worte “Had Rwandans heeded the warning and repented, any number of different deterrents might have occurred, one of which may have been the election of a U.S. president who would have acted morally and stopped the murderous aggressors”.
I was for Bush I, quite the centrist Republican, although more suited for a Secretary of State than President. A lot of fascinating studies have been put forth as to how and why he lost to Clinton.
Sheesh, thanks to Suzie, I now understand that we should blame his 1992 election loss to the sexual promiscuity of Rawandans. This is real out of the box thinking. Dan – please encourage Suzie to write a guest post to develop her argument further.
Suzie, if God created AIDS, then he also created the much more contagious/deadlier 1918 Spanish flu strain. Can you explain why?
#108 Nonsmokers who haven’t had heavy exposure to second-hand smoke are nearly immune to lung cancer. Which of god’s laws have the smokers violated?
BTW hon, I did not say “hordes”. I had a typo in hoarding. Sue me.
And FGS, I was not speaking of the Popemobile that helps God defend him or of his palatial offices, robes and coffers. I was speaking of the untold wealth hoarded at the Vatican which would doubtless relieve more suffering than the meager efforts of poverty stricken priests and missions.
Jesus was very clear on this. He was also clear that God does not send disease and disability, but I am sure you are right that God is as vengeful, spiteful and small as you are.
gdad at 10:33 a.m., clearly, smokers indulged in an oral fixation outside the sanctity of marriage.
The Popemobile was built on a Yugo chassis, correct? It sure looks like it.
Personally I had never heard of, “the Blessed Mother predicts catastrophe if Africans don’t stop being sexually promiscuous.” until Suzie posted it the other day. Not everyone is Catholic, Suzie, and those who aren’t could not care less what “miracles” the Vatican says happened.
68. Suzie – I hope you did not spend a lot of time hunting that quote, because you came up with the wrong cite. But since this is a quote in the Public Domain by a politician, you can find it many, many places. Sorry you chose the wrong one.
But then , after reading your God’s will comments, I realize that there is no use discussing facts and logic with someone who believes God is speaking directly to them.
Not everyone is Catholic, Suzie, and those who aren’t could not care less what “miracles” the Vatican says happened.
Just because you don’t believe in Marian predictions doesn’t mean you won’t be affected by them. Just like even if you don’t believe in gravity, you can still fall on your bum.
Sheesh, thanks to Suzie, I now understand that we should blame his 1992 election loss to the sexual promiscuity of Rawandans.
Mark,
I’m just saying Clinton’s election could have been one of the many pieces God put into place that led to the genoicde after man continued sinning.
–
I have no idea why any of you so-called Christians have trouble with the idea of God’s retribution. It’s all through the Bible, both Old Testament and New.
Suzie, if God created AIDS, then he also created the much more contagious/deadlier 1918 Spanish flu strain. Can you explain why?
Comment by Dan Casey — February 1, 2013 @ 10:23 am
Punishment for that immoral WWI, silly! And we all know that only godless homos and fornicators died in the 1918 outbreak. Real Christians were immune. In fact, real Christians are protected by God and immune to all viral and bacterial infections.
/sarc
Suzie, if God created AIDS, then he also created the much more contagious/deadlier 1918 Spanish flu strain. Can you explain why?
Perhaps it was because people failed to heed the message of Fatima.
Let’s review at the AIDS thing
In 1982… the previously unknown AIDS…
Comment by Suzie — February 1, 2013 @ 10:11 am
Is there an ignorance world record that you’re going for of which the rest of us aren’t aware? There were hundreds, if not thousands, of cases of AIDS worldwide prior to 1982. The first known case of someone dying from it is in 1959 and possibly another death within the US that same year. The official arrival of AIDS in the Western Hemisphere was in 1966. In 1969, Robert Rayford of St. Louis dies of a mysterious illness, later evidenced to be HIV-related. In 1978, a Portuguese man is the first recorded death from HIV-2, the second identified mutation of the disease. They’ve even now determined that symptoms of AIDS in African populations started showing up in pretty large numbers in 1975, a full 7 years before the alleged Marian apparition.
I’m sure your apology for being so completely wrong is immediately forthcoming. We’ll wait.
JM White,
What Suzie meant was, she didn’t know about AIDS until after 1982. You see, she projects all of her beliefs and knowledge onto the entire world, and takes it from there. It’s a very convenient for her to apply her reasoning.
“Shortly thereafter Africa experiences widespread disease, the previously unknown AIDS, to which monogamous married couples, following the commandment of God, are virtually immune.’
Poor choice words here Suzie. Very poorly stated. What you really mean is that people who are monogamous weren’t as likely to be exposed to the disease. Miraculous indeed.
Immunity infers that said monogamous people possessed a biology that prevented them from getting the disease. Alas, this just isn’t true, as viruses don’t discriminate against sexual practices or marital status. The just need hosts.
I must also point out that you list “the commandment of God”. This also incorrect. The Bible lists many commandments about marriage, which presumably also come from God.
I could give you a summary, but I think America’s Best Christian does it best here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFkeKKszXTw
“Perhaps it was because people failed to heed the message of Fatima.”
Snicker, snicker
“Had Rwandans heeded the warning and repented, any number of different deterrents might have occurred, one of which may have been the election of a U.S. president who would have acted morally and stopped the murderous aggressors.” comment by poster #93
The other possibility to have been elected (Perot was not within range of doing so) was George H.W. Bush, and we saw how well his election protected the Kurds of northern Iraq.
Poster #93: what a stupid poster.
George H.W. Bush, and we saw how well his election protected the Kurds of northern Iraq.
Poster #93: what a stupid poster.
Warren thinks 20,000 Kurds dying from exhaustion = 800,000 Rwandans hacked to death.
What Suzie meant was, she didn’t know about AIDS until after 1982. You see, she projects all of her beliefs and knowledge onto the entire world, and takes it from there. It’s a very convenient for her to apply her reasoning.
When did you learn about AIDS, Dan?
Oh, looky. The term AIDS wasn’t used until July 27, 1982.
http://www.factlv.org/timeline.htm
lol.
Oh, looky. The first 4-wheeled motorized passenger vehicles were termed automobiles.
Does that mean cars didn’t exist back then?
“Oh, looky. The term AIDS wasn’t used until July 27, 1982.”
suzie showing her scientific genius. The illness didn’t exist until somebody called it AIDS.
Guffaw, guffaw.
Let me guess, are you also claiming no one died of cancer before it was called cancer? When something becomes “named” is truly not the point here.
http://www.avert.org/aids-timeline.htm
“Our oldest description of cancer (although the word cancer was not used) was discovered in Egypt and dates back to about 3000 BC.
The origin of the word cancer is credited to the Greek physician Hippocrates (460-370 BC), who is considered the “Father of Medicine.” Hippocrates used the terms carcinos and carcinoma to describe non-ulcer forming and ulcer-forming tumors. ”
http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancerbasics/thehistoryofcancer/the-history-of-cancer-what-is-cancer
Oh gee, if only those poor massacred and displaced people could have counted on “the election of a U.S. president who would have acted morally and stopped the murderous aggressors. If only.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/19/AR2007071902294.html
Hell he was even moral enough to “declare” the crisis in Darfur a “genocide”. Just apparently not moral enough to stop it.
So why wouldn’t George W. Bush save hundreds of thousands of Darfur citizens from extermination and millions from being displaced?
Add that to Iraq and Afghanistan and ask yourself, has “an American president EVER had so much blood on his hands?”
Was Bush/Cheney really just “hypocritical frauds when it comes to compassion for those truly hurting”?
Are you “saying the mightiest country in the world couldn’t have stopped a bunch of guys with machetes” in 2003 thru 2005, even after the “lesson” of Rawanda? “He knew of the carnage and chose to do nothing for the simple reason he did not see any political benefit“. Bush “was and is a heartless soulless, immoral man who talked a great game about compassion, but was anything but. He talked a great game about caring for black folks, yet allowed nearly a million blacks to perish. He talked a great game about ‘the children” but enabled the slaughter of 8 million of them through abortion“. He was the Commander in Chief. He had troops in all sorts of Countries, even ones with no evidence of harm to us. Bush was pure evil.
Thanks for helping me see that Suzie.
George H.W. Bush, and we saw how well his election protected the Kurds of northern Iraq.
Poster #93: what a stupid poster.
Warren thinks 20,000 Kurds dying from exhaustion = 800,000 Rwandans hacked to death.
Comment by Suzie — February 1, 2013 @ 2:28 pm
I think that Suzie should have heeded someone’s warning because she is “poster #93″… LOL!
Suzie, I never said I don’t believe in miracles, I just don’t believe in Marian apparitions. I also don’t believe that God created AIDS to punish anyone. You can post about it till the cows come home and I’m sure you will.
Oh, looky. The term AIDS wasn’t used until July 27, 1982.
http://www.factlv.org/timeline.htm
lol.
Comment by Suzie — February 1, 2013 @ 2:37 pm
I’d ask you if you know the difference between “unknown” and “unnamed”, but it’s pretty clear that you do not. I’d lol, too, but I think I’ll just roll my eyes and pity your pathetic attempts at getting attention. That ego of yours seems terribly detrimental.
You know, you’re free to go back on “vacation”. This blog carries on just fine without you, regardless of what self-serving BS your ego whispers in your ear. Or keep on keeping on… It’s not like you have any face left to save around here.
JM White and Dan,
So you’re saying you knew all about the disease years before it came to be first referred to by the CDC as AIDS in 1982?
I also don’t believe that God created AIDS to punish anyone.
I never said He created it punish people. All I said was Mary warned Africans to stop their promiscuity. Then lookie what happened when they didn’t.
As I said, sister, you can believe it or not, but the consequences are still the same.
So why wouldn’t George W. Bush save hundreds of thousands of Darfur citizens from extermination
You’re comparing a few tens of thousands who died in Darfur combat over an 8-year period with nearly one million people chopped to death in three months? There IS no comparison, babe. Besides, Bush was already engaged in the defense of innocents whereas Clinton was busy with interns at all hours of the night.
The origin of the word cancer is credited to the Greek physician Hippocrates (460-370 BC), who is considered the “Father of Medicine.” Hippocrates used the terms carcinos and carcinoma to describe non-ulcer forming and ulcer-forming tumors. ”
That’s nice, Sandi. Too bad we weren’t talking about cancer. So tell us when you learned of the disease that came to be known as AIDS, Sandi. Was it the late 60′s? Early 70?
I don’t know why this question is so tough for libs if everybody knew about the disease before the 80s. lol.
was very clear on this. He was also clear that God does not send disease and disability, but I am sure you are right that God is as vengeful, spiteful and small as you are.
Thanks for the nice personal attack, Sandi. But aside from that….do you have a bible verse to back your claim?
“JM White and Dan,
So you’re saying you knew all about the disease years before it came to be first referred to by the CDC as AIDS in 1982?”
–Suzie
I can’t speak for JM White, Suzie. I learned about it very shortly before it was named. We’re talking a year or most.
But I have to confess that I am not omniscient. Besides, I didn’t know about cars before ’61, when I turned 3. This may seem hard for you to believe, that but doesn’t mean they didn’t exist before then.
I can’t speak for JM White, Suzie. I learned about it very shortly before it was named. We’re talking a year or most.
and earlier we had:
JM White,
What Suzie meant was, she didn’t know about AIDS until after 1982. You see, she projects all of her beliefs and knowledge onto the entire world, and takes it from there. It’s a very convenient for her to apply her reasoning.
Comment by Dan Casey — February 1, 2013 @ 1:26 pm
So Dan insults me, then later ends up backing up my claim. lol
Neither of us claimed to know all about the disease. You claimed that the disease was unknown before 1982, and I refuted that. The disease was unnamed before 1982. They were calling it “gay cancer” and several other things in 1980 and ’81. Ergo, the medical field was aware of a wasting disease prior to 1982 and you misspoke.
This is really simple, Suzie. You say that you were wrong or unaware, we move on and you don’t look so silly. We can’t possibly think any less of you, but you can certainly demonstrate to us that that ever-shrinking gravity well you call a soul is not forever lost.
Neither of us claimed to know all about the disease. You claimed that the disease was unknown before 1982, and I refuted that.
OK. So some people knew a few months or year before that. You’re splitting hairs, and my point basically holds .It was unknown by the vast majority before Mary’s apparitions in Kibeho which actually began in November, 1981.
Honestly. Leftwingers will argue stupid minor points all day in order to avoid the topic at hand.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4034787.stm
“A decade-old toasted cheese sandwich said to bear an image of the Virgin Mary has sold on the eBay auction website for $28,000.”
http://www.theawl.com/2012/04/12-things-currently-being-sold-on-ebay-because-they-kinda-look-like-jesus
I like the tortilla best. It’s a miracle!
The topic at hand is your unabashedly idiotic claims, which are as amorphous as water. You’re the one splitting hairs, pumpkin, even while quasi-admitting your mistake. You started out with “the previously unknown AIDS” and now you’ve changed it to “unknown by the vast majority”.
If I were to split hairs, I would use your own words against you:
“OK. So some people knew a few months or year before that. You’re splitting hairs, and my point basically holds .It was unknown by the vast majority before Mary’s apparitions in Kibeho which actually began in November, 1981.”
One year before July of 1982 (when AIDS was named) would be July of 1981, five months before the Marian
hallucinationapparitions you claim started in November of 1981. Mary was late and you’re still wrong.The sad thing is that you’re supposed to be bringing people to the religion, not driving them away from it with ignorant correlations, nonexistent evidence and an egregiously judgmental attitude. This does not glorify God in any way, but I’m sure you already know that. Nay, instead of glory, He weeps for you. Find your peace and leave us in ours.
Just think of all the stuff in the universe that doesn’t exist because we haven’t discovered it yet! It all just reeks of the scientific method.
Perhaps, until we discovered the world wasn’t flat…..it WAS. (Cue ominous music)
Aren’t you an atheist, JM White? Then you should be happy if you think I am an unfit steward of religion.
I simply repeated the message of the Vatican-approved Marian apparition at Kibeho, and noted how the predictions came to pass. For some reason, this has upset you greatly.
Suzie, I fail to see how it is our fault that you have such difficulty expressing the truth. YOU said it was “unknown” when it was only unnamed, and claimed it was the result of “Her warning was ignored” which is not only preposterous and not evidence based, it is positively childish. As if Africa (isn’t that where your truly poor Zimbabwean orphans are?) was the only place on earth involved with “promiscuity”? You defame God at every opportunity. In fact, you do for God what you do for the GOTP. Keep it up, I am sure He will be pleased.
I’m not upset at all. I’m rather enjoying watching you squirm while trying desperately not to show us that you’re squirming.
I’m actually agnostic, Suzie. I attended Christian schools my entire life and have built, attended and departed more Christian churches than most pastors. If you must label me religiously, I’m a Seeker. Call it the Church of Search, if you like. I give respect and reverence to a higher power that none of us can know until we depart our mortal coils. I do not allow myself to fall victim to the sheer arrogance of thinking that I could know what that power is and how he/she/it thinks. I volunteer my time at churches, both Protestant and Catholic, Muslim mosques, Jehovah’s Witness Temples and Mormon Temples. I’ve studied Shinto, Buddhism, Taoism, Zoroastrianism (for which you should be thankful – the modern Abrahamic religions would likely not exist without it), Wicca and many others in depth.
However, I refuse to prostrate myself and give glory to an entity that claims to be purely benevolent but allows suffering on such a grand scale. I do not allow myself to say one thing is God’s will and then claim that man has the free will to thwart it. I will not believe in Marian apparitions because being sent by God to attempt to influence the will of man is antithetical to giving us free will in the first place. I am utterly repulsed at any being who would create this universe and all within it and then turn His greatest mistake, Satan, loose to inflict suffering upon us. Creating something knowing that you will make all who dwell within it suffer, then destroy it (twice) and blame it all on the sufferers is penultimately passive-aggressive and downright sinister. There is no sadism that is worthy of worship, ever. Thanks for asking, though.
You didn’t “simply repeat” anything. You made bold claims, offered no proof of them and quickly started worrying about my religion or lack thereof after your claims were refuted. You were the one who tried to cross the English Channel in a styrofoam cup; don’t get too bent out of shape because I pointed out that you were taking on water. By the preponderance of the evidence, the disease was already spreading long before the apparition. Saying it was predicted by Mary is like watching the Super Bowl until the end of the first quarter and then claiming that there will be football played that day.
Prediction: Tomorrow, someone will die from a previously unknown prion disease. Count on it. I expect to canonized by tomorrow evening. Get on that. You still have a direct line to the pope, don’t you?
Suzie, I am well aware we were not talking about cancer. We were talking about an illness infecting people before it was known/named. My point was that cancer OCCURRED as far back as 3000BC but was “unknown”, your word, until 460BC when people “learned of cancer”. That is a very long time for something “unknown” to be making people sick and even killing them.
Give it up. Girl lost again.
Dan and J.M are correct, and I personally vividly recall reading about what would later be called AIDS in the Wall St. Journal during the 1980-81 time frame, when they called it a new immune disorder, and often just reported it as a variant of Kaposi’s sarcoma, i.e. “gay cancer”. I remember that the WSJ was on it when there were still just a handful of diagnosed clusters that the CDC had just noticed. They followed the early AIDS story as well as any media outlet, as it fit right into both their journalistic mission (drug development, healthcare, etc) and editorial social issue interests (Moral Majority, Plato’s retreat, Anita Bryant, etc). Even so, very many people were ignoring it then, making it terribly frustrating to see the ignorance grow as the syndrome came into wider public conciousness.
Suzie, I fail to see how it is our fault that you have such difficulty expressing the truth. YOU said it was “unknown” when it was only unnamed
Pretty much nobody knew about the name OR the disease when Mary first appeared at Kibeho, so the substance of my point stands. if you want to split hairs, that’s fine.
—-
“Her warning was ignored” which is not only preposterous and not evidence based, it is positively childish.
Her warning for Africans to cease promiscuous behavior was ignored, then an AIDS pandemic struck within a short time. She gave the teens images of piles of headless bodies and rivers of blood, which came to pass 12 years later. I guess you can draw your own conclusions.
The way the left addressed the AIDS crisis was so typical. First and foremost, their focus was on fleecing people of large amounts of cash. $26 billion federal dollars went to AIDS research in 2010, far outstripping spending for Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, prostate cancer, diabetes, heart disease, hepatitis B and hepatitis C combined.
The simple and moral solution that would have virtually eradicated AIDS wouldn’t have cost a dime: No sex outside of monogamous marriage. But the leftwingers wouldn’t have dreamed of advocating that.
I will not believe in Marian apparitions because being sent by God to attempt to influence the will of man is antithetical to giving us free will in the first place.
Man’s free will isn’t curbed by Marian apparitions. He’s given a choice on how to act. What he does is up to him.
In fairness to Suzie, I think we can all agree that AIDS did not become an epidemic until well into the 1980s.
The fact that something similar was lurking and evolving for sometme earlier, doesn’t change that.
By the way, there is a cat disease called FIPS which has been around for a long time and I understood from several vets that it is basically cat AIDS but has never crossed over to other species. Hmmm.
MarkJ, at one point suzie essentially said the disease didn’t exist until it was called AIDS. It’s just fin to mock her when she does this stuff.
As for ebing fair, suzie posts lies, makes stuff up, insults posters, and twists people’s words, so I see no reason to be “fair” to her. Especially not when she goes back into full “look at me” troll mode like she is now.
“…and noted how the predictions came to pass.”
Pretty much the same as suzie declaring a true prediction five years from now when somebody writes a disparaging column about Coach K.
Those dastardly facts just bounce right off of those utopian bubbles, don`t they Gdad ? What are they made of ? The cost is a lifetime of `Worry`, and that seems like a steep price to pay.
FIP is a mutant variant of FECV (Feline Coronavirus) and the only similarity it shares with HIV is that they’re both RNA retroviruses. FIP is not contagious in that it develops in macrophages that aren’t shed by the body. In order for it to make the jump to humans, someone would have to get infected with FECV somehow and then have it mutate inside them. Even then, it’s unlikely that in the form of a macrophage that it would be contagious.
But yes, in fairness to Suzie, AIDS was not technically an epidemic until the ’80s. That is a far cry from claiming that it was unknown. The pathology of a new disease coming out of Africa was known widely in the medical community for about a decade before 1982, though. I was acquaintances with a virologist (now deceased) who was studying HIV-1 in the late ’70s.
The question was never about being an epidemic IN the United States known specifically as AIDS. And we’re displaying more than enough “fairness to Suzie” by not crushing her for her little “God invented AIDS to punish promiscuous Africans” theory. That little nugget of idiocy, combined with her inane natterings about “Marian Apparitions”, are now what this thread has become about.
“…it is basically cat AIDS”
FIV is cat AIDS. It’s not pretty.
her inane natterings about “Marian Apparitions”
If you believe Marian apparitions are impossible, then you must think the notion of Jesus rising from the dead is really out there. Ditto for anything supernatural, huh? Which would make you an atheist.
It must be a cold dark depressing existence thinking everything will end with your own death. That may explain the pessimism of the far left.