__________________
People who are always looking for fault,can find it easily all they have to do,is look into their mirror.
There they can find plenty of fault.
this is might get me in trouble here as i am not ant-semitic,i don't hate israel or muslims,but radical zionism and islam are both scary and threats to christianity.
My pray for both jews and muslims is that they find peace with god and become borned of water and spirit.
Judaism and islam both deny that jesus christ is the only way to salvation.
yes they are!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
__________________
DAVID A MAN AFTER GOD'S HEART.........
Location: In two of the most beautiful states in the U.S.A
Posts: 1,676
Re: What Does Jesse Jackson Know That We Don't?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tstew
I love how we ignore "idiots" like Jesse Jackson and ignore 99% of the things he says...until he stumbles into something that we feel like is beneficial for our arguments...then he is credible and worthy of being quoted and paid attention to.
I was thinking the same thing. Ain't human nature strange. God must have created man for his oiwn amusement. The monkeys weeren't funny enough.
I think you don't know what you're talking about. First, "Palestinians" don't have a "policy". They just want their land back and to raise their children in peace.
They sure have a funny way of showing it. Is teaching your children that murdering Jews is an honorable thing and allowing them to watch children's TV programming that glorifies being a suicide bomber. You are fooled if you think that a majority of Palestinians want to just live in peace with Israel. Why did they elect Hamas, a terrorist organization, to power several years ago?
Quote:
If you're talking policy the issue is with the Palestinian Authority, and the Palestinians are very suspect of them anyway.
They can't even have peace among themselves let alone with Israel! The tribal infighting they have conducted against each other over the past several years has killed many of their own brothers.
Quote:
Something else you don't know. The average Palestinian is Christian not Muslim. However, since the conflict with Israel more Palestinians have become Muslim seeing that Islam appears to be the only religious body in the region that is willing to hear their voices. The Palestinian friend I have is Baptist and from a deeply religious Catholic family.
Not true. There are SOME Christian Arabs that are Israeli citizens and some that dwell in the West Bank/Gaza Strip, but the vast majority are Muslims and have always been. And you couldn't pay an Arab Christian Israeli citizen to give up their citizenship for anything! They are free, they have voting rights and they have opportunity. More than the Palestinians give their own people.
Interesting note here: when the Arabs controlled East Jerusalem and the holy sites, do you know how many Christians and Jews were allowed to worship there? ZERO! Since 1967 and the reunification of Jerusalem, all three groups have been allowed to worship at their holy sites freely, with the Muslims being allowed to "police" the Temple Mount. In the meantime they have been systematically excavating the Temple Mount to remove any trace of Jewish history there that preceded them by thousands of years. Like the Holocaust they deny, they do also with the historical fact that Israel had a Temple standing on that site.
I understand commpassion for the innocent Palestinians that want peace and harmony, but evidently they either are very few who want what is good and right for all or they are a very silent majority. But to demonize Israel or the U.S. or radical theologies, look at the historical facts: the Arabs are their own worst enemy.
__________________
When a newspaper posed the question, "What's Wrong with the World?" G. K. Chesterton reputedly wrote a brief letter in response: "Dear Sirs: I am. Sincerely Yours, G. K. Chesterton." That is the attitude of someone who has grasped the message of Jesus.
I'm just saying that I would be more interested in other sources. Tomorrow we will be right back to lambasting Jackson and calling him nuts for his very next article...regardless of what it is. A source or a person is either credible and should be taken seriously or they're not.
When has he not been credible? JJ does not have a reputation for making stuff up, he has a rep for radical views. He is not credible as a spokesperson for the entire African-American community, but when he calls New York City "Hymietown", when he says Israel is practicing apratheid, when he speaks and espouses his convictions, he is being very accurate as to what his core beliefs are.
I don't believe he is fabricating wild illusions when he intimates what Obama's foreign policy will be in the Israeli/Arab conflict. Where would he get such notions if he didn't think his relationship with BO that has included, no doubt, many conversations about policy and issues and topics of mutual interest? Why would JJ say these things so matter of factly if his close personal relationship with BO didn't give him the boldness to make such statements with such confidence?
__________________
When a newspaper posed the question, "What's Wrong with the World?" G. K. Chesterton reputedly wrote a brief letter in response: "Dear Sirs: I am. Sincerely Yours, G. K. Chesterton." That is the attitude of someone who has grasped the message of Jesus.
I love how we ignore "idiots" like Jesse Jackson and ignore 99% of the things he says...until he stumbles into something that we feel like is beneficial for our arguments...then he is credible and worthy of being quoted and paid attention to.
On issues where he he's believed to have first hand knowledge, why not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tstew
I'm just saying that I would be more interested in other sources. Tomorrow we will be right back to lambasting Jackson and calling him nuts for his very next article...regardless of what it is. A source or a person is either credible and should be taken seriously or they're not.
????
Jackson's credibility is low in the eye's of most Americans largely because his political worldview is far to the left of the American mainstream.
But he's not giving a policy speech here. Lets keep that in mind.
His comments on Obama's views toward Israel have to be taken as having some validity because he's know Obama for many years . He and his family have known the Obama family since at least the 1980's back in Chicago. So Jackson is speaking here giving his impressions of what he think Obama's position might be, based on impresssions he's gotten from Obama over the many years they've known each onter. Of course he shoudl be considered credible on that.
Just because he's not credible on certain issues doesnt mean we should say he shouldnt be taken as credible on this.
__________________ http://endtimeobserver.blogspot.com
Daniel 12:3 And those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the firmament; and those who turn many to righteousness, like the stars for ever.
Let's compare it to the following hypothetical....
Imagine with me that the UN decides to partition the United States. They draw a line across every state, dividing each state nearly in half. Then they declare that all land South of the dividing line in each state belongs to the the indigenous native American peoples. Suddenly Native Americans begin moving in and employ bull dozers to raze buildings so that they can build settlements. And let's imaging that you lived South of one of those lines and watched as your home, your family's business, and every memory of the life you know is completely destroyed and given to a Native American Indian. Now....you can't believe for one moment that if I told you to play nice and get a long that you would. Honey, it would be on and you know it. We'd be bombing them, calling on regional allies to assist us, etc. Just like the Palestinian people are doing.
The issue is that there is an acceptable hatred and racism against Palestinians in spite of the fact that the United Nations partitioned their land and handed land over to a people who were largely already settled in Europe for centuries.
Where this hypothetical fails is that there were already millions of Jews living in Palestine and when the UN partitioned the land they did so by the enclaves of where Jews/Arabs lived. Take a look at the original partition. That's why it is so hodge-podge. They didn't just draw a line across a map and say "here it is" they divided it according to where people were already settled. the scenario of bulldozers coming over and knocking down daddy's tabacco and coffee shop didn't happen.
The Jews that lived in Palestine with the Arabs suffered persecution for years prior to the English taking control of that area after WWI. Under the English they enjoyed some respite from the violence against them. But as soon as the English relinquished its control, the Arabs went to war. Those are the facts. The Jews had just as much right to a claim on some of that land as the Arabs, the Arabs didn't want to share. They went to war, lost every time, and to the victoe go the spoils, only Israel didn't "spoil" their enemies. they gave back the Sinai (rich in oil and other natural resources) to the Egyptians, they gave back the West Bank and Gaza, they have made other concessions and compromises onjly to have the Arabs kill more and demand more.
And BTW, Einstein would agree with me.
__________________
When a newspaper posed the question, "What's Wrong with the World?" G. K. Chesterton reputedly wrote a brief letter in response: "Dear Sirs: I am. Sincerely Yours, G. K. Chesterton." That is the attitude of someone who has grasped the message of Jesus.
When has he not been credible? JJ does not have a reputation for making stuff up, he has a rep for radical views. He is not credible as a spokesperson for the entire African-American community, but when he calls New York City "Hymietown", when he says Israel is practicing apratheid, when he speaks and espouses his convictions, he is being very accurate as to what his core beliefs are.
I don't believe he is fabricating wild illusions when he intimates what Obama's foreign policy will be in the Israeli/Arab conflict. Where would he get such notions if he didn't think his relationship with BO that has included, no doubt, many conversations about policy and issues and topics of mutual interest? Why would JJ say these things so matter of factly if his close personal relationship with BO didn't give him the boldness to make such statements with such confidence?
I have not seen any evidence of a close relationship with Barack Obama. I may be mistaken but I think that I remember some candid recordings when Jackson thought his mic was dead when he had some very less than friendly things to say about him. I may have missed it, but I have not seen evidence of a close relationship between them. Jackson does have a penchant for assuming the right to speak for people. I recall him getting involved in several international incidents as a "spokesperson" for all the American people. I guess if you feel conmfortable with that assumption and characterization you should accept this as well.
I'm assuming that you have knowledge of close personal relationships and policy conversations between the two of them?
__________________
There are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Chuck Norris lives in Houston.
Either the United States will destroy ignorance, or ignorance will destroy the United States. – W.E.B. DuBois
Linear Mode
