| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Mackie" |
| Date: |
17 Sep 2006 06:47:54 PM |
| Object: |
Blood to the Height of Horses Bridles |
Concerning the deadly fiasco at Rome . . .
"Marko Amnell" <marko_amnell@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1158507997.714266.34090@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
"I think what he wants to do is highlight the differences
between Christianity and other religions such as Islam and Judaism."
You 'think'? What good is that? Anyone can "think". What is the
basis for your "thinking" that you would so capriciously include
Judaism in this assessment? It's not in any of the extant text quoted
in English from that address in which criticism is exclusively directed
against Islam--where it entirely belongs.
"Benedict did the smart thing to apologize."
The 'smart' thing? Where a lack of resolve, flight from a fight, a
switching of horses in midstream is deemed "smart"?
Pity you are not better informed as to all this, or you would not be so
naive in your 'thinking'. Why would you not, at the very first,
recognize the keyword, "Reason" from the Pope's address as being a
statement of solidarity with his friend, the fabulous Italian
firebrand, Oriana Fallaci, whose latest book was entitled what?
What is the title of her new book? What is it?
"He might have apologized sooner . . ."
What manner of reason is that? In all the "infallibility" of his
office--how can that be possible?
From http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/17/world/europe/17cnd-pope.html . .
..
"Church experts said it appeared to be first time a pope has made such
a direct apology."
'This is really, really abnormal,' said Alberto Melloni, professor of
history at the University of Modena who has written several books on
the Vatican. 'It's never happened as far as I know.'"
It were better he should have disenrobed himself and disappeared,
barefoot and naked to spend the rest of his life whipping his own back
to ribbons in some monastic cell of the Carpathian mountains.
Did Benedict not have the wisdom to know what telling the truth to
Islam would engender in the darkened, mordant pit of unregenerate
Muslim narcissism . . .
MOGADISHU (Reuters) - Gunmen killed an Italian nun at a children's
hospital in Mogadishu on Sunday in an attack that drew immediate
speculation of links to Muslim anger over the Pope's recent remarks on
Islam. --September 17, 2006
And nevermind all this firebombing of the churches. Christ!
Benedict has hands dripping in martyred Christian blood--and now, to
whom may he apologize for that? To Islam? To apologize is to say to
the murdered nun's father and mother, she died for a cause that was
over before it started, that she gave her life for a Pope's voice full
of big words meaning nothing.
Rabbis teach that to save one life is to save the whole world. But
what of he, who makes the loss of one life, Death in apology for the
faith than had enlivened it? Shall not all the world be condemned to
Hell for it?
Short of a Christian resolve to carry this Benedictine Crusade forward
without dissimulation till the bleeding of that death-dealing faith is
reaching to the height of horse's bridles--there is no 'smart' thing to
be done.
--
Mackie
http://vignettes-mackie.blogspot.com/
http://whosenose.blogspot.com
.
|
|
| User: "serwad" |
|
| Title: Re: Blood to the Height of Horses Bridles |
18 Sep 2006 12:11:37 AM |
|
|
"Mackie" <mackiemesser@zoomshare.com> wrote in message
news:1158536874.373010.70550@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
Concerning the deadly fiasco at Rome . . .
"Marko Amnell" <marko_amnell@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1158507997.714266.34090@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
"I think what he wants to do is highlight the differences
between Christianity and other religions such as Islam and Judaism."
You 'think'? What good is that? Anyone can "think". What is the
basis for your "thinking" that you would so capriciously include
Judaism in this assessment? It's not in any of the extant text quoted
in English from that address in which criticism is exclusively directed
against Islam--where it entirely belongs.
SUUUURE! AND THE CRUSADERS OF ROME CAME TO MIDDLE EAST TO BUY SOME CABBAGES!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mackie" |
|
| Title: Re: Blood to the Height of Horses Bridles |
19 Sep 2006 01:25:07 AM |
|
|
"serwad" <serwad@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:fQpPg.5941$8s6.208@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
SUUUURE! AND THE CRUSADERS OF ROME CAME TO MIDDLE EAST TO BUY SOME CABBAGES!
You could take at least one tip from your mentor Osama, and speak in
quieter more threatening, lower-case tones.
--
Someone here has been making the obtusely comical claim that Islam is a
"rational religion". In the following few paragraphs I propose to
refute that contention, irrefutably. I begin by absurd exercise of
entertaining its possibility.
If Islam were indeed a "rational religion" then any true Muslim would
always be ready to listen to reason. Let us just see. Let some
Muslims address the following argument in quiet, reserved,
well-reasoned tones in total absence of screaming and upper-case
shouting as I set about to make, by reason, the following case . . .
Resolved: Concerning the "Crusaders of Rome" -- their purposes were
valiant and just.
The argument proceeds thus:
Long before that dread day in 570 A. D. on which Muhammad was born;
before there was even so much as one (let alone seventy-two) holy
Muslim Virgins adorning golden couches in an Islamic heaven; long
before there was any such place as a "Muslim heaven" nor even one
Muslim martyr all hot in his socks for his ride on a stick of dynamite
to get there, long before any such kind of awful nonsense had yet to be
born all deformed and tangled up with itself in this world at all,
there was Rome.
There was Rome, first pagan and then Christian, as both had existed,
like Judaea of the Jews, in a Middle East where no Muslim existed.
Let your Islamic reason begin to get the picture.
There was no Islam, nor any god known to Christians and Jews by any
such name as "Allah" during the time that Rome had begun to exert its
rule over the Jews of Judaea in 63 A.D. In that year when a pretender
to the Hasmonean throne of Jewish Judaea, Hyrcanus II, had made
alliance with Pompey of Rome to unseat his own brother, Aristobulus
II--thus, Jewish rule, by such rash stratagem as that, came to an end
and Hyrcanus was forced to sit in the impudence and impotence of his
blue-blood patrician poop, to watch Pompey install Antipater, father of
Herod, an Idumenaen, to rule over the Jews, not to mention his own dumb
butt.
Now listen to reason, dear Arabia, if ye be rational! Idumaea
(pronounced ee-dum-aye-yah), also known as "Edom" was a land bordering
Judaea that stretched from the south-western shores of the Dead Sea to
the gulf of Aqaba. The Edomites, according to the records of Jewish
heritage, were the progeny of Jacob's brother Esau, a people whose
blood is said to be a mix of Hebrew (of Abraham-Isaac) and Arab, as the
term "Arab" would be applied to those who dwelt just beyond Edom in the
Hejaz, the neighboring coastal mountains east and southward from
Aqaba--Lawrence of Arabia country.
Esau (first son of Isaac, brother of Jacob) and his Edomites, being of
mixed Hebrew/Arab blood, could be regarded as neither "Arab" nor Jew,
either by Arab or Jew, for this reason: no inheritance was due to Edom
from either side. From the Hebrew side, the inheritance was of
Abraham/Isaac/Jacob and thence to his 12 sons (tribes): but it was
Esau, the elder brother of Jacob, who sold his birthright to Jacob and
was cast out to become father to the Edomites . After this, the name
"Israel" was given to Jacob and to all his progeny, to all 12 sons: to
the Judaeans, the "Jews" (children of Judah), the Benjamites (children
of Benjamin), the Reubenites (of Reuben), Danites, and so on.
When Antipater and his Edomite progeny, Herod the Great, and Herod
Antipas came to rule over Judaea, it seemed to the Jews that nothing
could be worse. So when they rose up in revolt to be crushed by Rome in
70 A.D. and again in 140, they found something that could be almost
worse: they could be crucified by the roadside, hung like so much beef
to cook in the sun, while the starving, wounded remnant pass by
beneath, weeping into exile.
While a few stayed on, there would not soon be very many to venture a
return, not so long as Jews were being denied a right to so much as set
foot within a gate of their own sacred ancient city, Jerusalem. And no
matter how fervent the hope; the very wish for such a return could only
come to heartbreak as the prohibition set against them went on and on,
even on up until and right on through the Holy Roman reign of
Constantine, Constantius, the more favorable time of Julian the
Apostate--who detested Christians so bad that he dreamed to see a
return to Judaea of the Jews, with a rebuilding of the temple, a
glimmer of promise that soon perished with his own life in battle
against the Persians (or the Parthians? Trust me--he died.)
It was not until 438 A.D., when thanks to the blessed heart of Eudocia,
estranged wife of Jew-hater Theodosius, that finally, as he sought to
regain her favor, Jews were allowed, as per her plea, a pilgrimage to
Jerusalem for the festival, once a year, of Sukkot.
But that was still 199 years before the first Muslim had yet to set an
Islamic battering ram against the gates of Holy Roman Jerusalem--for
whatever rational Islamic purposes might be conceived as the best
reasons in the world for such bloody conquest, rape, vandalism and
plunder of a people for whom peace and goodwill had found a place to
dwell, in a place where the fine art of forgiveness had even begun to
be studied. So, I hope that I may be forgiven for not being able to
conceive whatever Islam would present as their "reason" for poking
their noses into the possessions of Christendom where Muslims do not
belong--which is to say nothing of those Christian noses poked into
Jewish Judaea, except, "Who is Jesus of Nazareth?"
When the Crusaders came to turn back the Islamic plunder and sacking of
Jerusalem, when they lowered their visors, spurred their mounts and
rode upon the alien Arabian invader, they came also to punish his
aggression, his defilement of a sacred city over which he had no claim,
no birthright, either from heaven or out of the earth. And when the
Crusaders saw the streets of Jerusalem awash in Muslim blood, in a
torrent of gore that rose, as they say, even to the height of the
horses' bridles--I cheer, I cry, "Huzzah!" Because I see nothing but
justice being done. Islam invaded to make assault not just upon a land
and its people but upon a light that had only just begun to radiate
into world to be recognized for the bright ray of something real sweet
and nice that it still is, any time it comes to be even so much as
minimally understood and reckoned a-right.
And while it is true that the zeal of the Crusaders was so intense that
they stupidly let it spill over against the very blood of Christ in his
brethren, the Jews, even in Europe and all through the Balkans as they
thundered onward toward their appointment on the plain of Armageddon
with the Saracen devil, even so, somehow, no matter how deeply that
saddens me, I am able to forgive it for one reason alone, which is for
what it proves: for certainly no Jews could have been slaughtered by
the Crusaders in Judaea had there been no Jews left to be slaughtered.
They were there all right, both because they'd been there all along,
and moreover because they'd been coming back, and that being due in no
small measure to the sainted efforts of the Empress Eudocia. It proves
that unlike Esau, the Jews, the Israelites had never on this earth
given up their birthright to the inheritance of that land. And so long
as they had remained there, in Judaea, Samaria and Galilee in the other
holy cities, such as Safed, Hebron, Sepphoris, or Tiberias through it
all, every claim that a Muslim would try to force his name upon as
"Arab" or "Egyptian" by such an historical fiction as "Palestinian," is
false, is Philistine aggression, robbery. It is to Mecca and Medina
that his eyes must turn--but never in this world to Jerusalem.
So long as the dark empire established by force of Islamic invasion
throughout the world is allowed to remain in place, so long as it is
seen to gain legitimacy by no other reason than longevity of unjust
possession, then there is no 'reason' in it at all. There is no reason
in the law of the jungle, and there will be no peace in the world, so
long as that rules.
--
Mackie
http://vignettes-mackie.blogspot.com/
http://doo-dads.blogspot.com/
http://whosenose.blogspot.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mackie" |
|
| Title: Re: Blood to the Height of Horses Bridles |
19 Sep 2006 02:13:16 PM |
|
|
From: "Mac the Nice" <jpdm45@hotmail.com>
Subject: Blood to the Height of Horses Bridles
Date: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 1:25 AM
Resolved: Concerning the "Crusaders of Rome" -- that their purposes
were valiant and just.
THIS argument in abstract: the current historical revisionism of the
multicultural postmodern scholastic agenda, by a sneaky cherry-picking
of facts, produces a most marvelously fashionable threadbare,
droopy-pantsed, bad-haired, backward-capped fad of opinion in the minds
of the public that the Crusades were war crimes. By no more sleight of
hand than that, a conclusion may be darkly insinuated to the mental
mush of the gullible muddle-headed masses that Christians and Jews
never had a rightful place in the Middle East. That would be funny,
even hilarious were this not happening to show that there is no
psychosis that cannot be merchandised in the college for 'knowledge'.
The argument proceeds thus:
Long before that dread day in 570 A. D. on which Muhammad was born;
before there was even so much as one (let alone seventy-two) holy
Muslim Virgins adorning golden couches in an Islamic heaven; long
before there was any such notion as a "Muslim heaven" nor even one
Muslim martyr all hot in his socks for that ride on a stick of dynamite
to get him there, long before any such kind of awful nonsense had yet
to be born all deformed and tangled up with itself in this world at
all, there was Rome.
There was Rome, first pagan and then Christian, as both had existed,
like Judaea of the Jews, in a Middle East where no Muslim existed.
There was no Islam, nor any god known to Christians and Jews by any
such name as "Allah" during the time that Rome had begun to exert its
rule over the Jews of Judaea in 63 A.D. In that year when a Judaean
pretender to the Hasmonean throne, Hyrcanus II, had made alliance with
Pompey of Rome to unseat his own brother, Aristobulus II--just by such
rash stratagem as that, Jewish rule over Judaea came to an end and
Hyrcanus was forced to sit in the impudence and impotence of his
blue-blood patrician poop, to watch Pompey install Antipater, father of
Herod, an Idumaean, to rule over the Jews, not to mention his own dumb
butt.
Idumaea (pronounced ee-dum-aye-yah), also known as "Edom" was a land
bordering Judaea that stretched from the south-western shores of the
Dead Sea to the gulf of Aqaba. The Edomites, according to the records
of Jewish heritage, were the progeny of Jacob's brother Esau, a people
whose blood is said to be a mix of Hebrew (of Abraham-Isaac) and Arab,
as the term "Arab" would be applied to those who dwelt just beyond Edom
in the Hejaz, the neighboring coastal mountains east and southward from
Aqaba--Lawrence of Arabia country.
Esau (first son of Isaac, brother of Jacob) and his Edomites, being of
mixed Hebrew/Arab blood, could be regarded as neither "Arab" nor
Hebrew, either by Arab or Hebrew, for this reason: no inheritance was
due to Edom from either side. From the Hebrew side, the inheritance was
of Abraham/Isaac/Jacob and thence to his 12 sons (tribes): but it was
Esau, the elder brother of Jacob, who sold his birthright to Jacob and
was cast out to become father to the Edomites . After this, the name
"Israel" was given to Jacob and to all his progeny, to all 12 sons: to
the Judaeans, the "Jews" (children of Judah), the Benjamites (children
of Benjamin), the Reubenites (of Reuben), Danites, and so on.
When Antipater and his Edomite progeny, Herod the Great, and Herod
Antipas came to rule over Judaea, it seemed to the Jews that nothing
could be worse. So when they rose up in revolt to be crushed by Rome in
70 A.D. and again in 140, they found something that could be almost
worse: they could be crucified by the roadside, hung like so much beef
to cook in the sun, while the starving, wounded remnant pass by
beneath, weeping into exile.
While a few stayed on, there would not soon be very many to venture a
return, not so long as Jews were being denied a right to so much as set
foot within a gate of their own sacred ancient city, Jerusalem. And no
matter how fervent the hope; the very wish for such a return could only
come to heartbreak as the prohibition set against them went on and on,
even on up until and right on through the Holy Roman reign of
Constantine, Constantius, the more favorable time of Julian the
Apostate--who detested Christians so bad that he dreamed to see a
return to Judaea of the Jews, with a rebuilding of the temple, a
glimmer of promise that soon perished with his own life in battle
against the Persians (or the Parthians? Trust me--he died.)
It was not until 438 A.D., when thanks to the blessed heart of Eudocia,
estranged wife of Jew-hater Theodosius, that finally, as he sought to
regain her favor, Jews were allowed, as per her plea, a pilgrimage to
Jerusalem for the festival, once a year, of Sukkot.
But that was still 199 years before the first Muslim had yet to set an
Islamic battering ram against the gates of Holy Roman Jerusalem--for
whatever rational Islamic purposes might be conceived as the best
reasons in the world for such bloody conquest, rape, vandalism and
plunder of a people for whom peace and goodwill had found a place to
dwell, in a place where the fine art of forgiveness had even begun to
be studied. So, I hope that I may be forgiven for not being able to
conceive whatever Islam would present as their "reason" for poking
their noses into the possessions of Christendom where Muslims do not
belong--which is to say nothing of those Christian noses poked into
Jewish Judaea, except, "Who is Jesus of Nazareth?"
When the Crusaders came to turn back the Islamic plunder and sacking of
Jerusalem, when they lowered their visors, spurred their mounts and
rode upon the alien Arabian invader, they came also to punish his
aggression, his defilement of a sacred city over which he had no claim,
no birthright, either from heaven or out of the earth. And when the
Crusaders saw the streets of Jerusalem awash in Muslim blood, in a
torrent of gore that rose, as they say, even to the height of the
horses' bridles--I cheer, I cry, "Huzzah!" Because I see nothing but
justice being done. Islam invaded to make assault not just upon a land
and its people but upon a light that had only just begun to radiate
into world to be recognized for the bright ray of something real sweet
and nice that it still is, any time it comes to be even so much as
minimally understood and reckoned a-right.
And while it is true that the zeal of the Crusaders was so intense that
they stupidly let it spill over against the very blood of Christ in his
brethren, the Jews, even in Europe and all through the Balkans as they
thundered onward toward their appointment on the plain of Armageddon
with the Saracen devil, even so, somehow, no matter how deeply that
saddens me, I am able to forgive it for one reason alone, which is for
what it proves: for certainly no Jews could have been slaughtered by
the Crusaders in Judaea had there been no Jews left to be slaughtered.
They were there all right, both because they'd been there all along,
and moreover because they'd been coming back, and that being due in no
small measure to the sainted efforts of the Empress Eudocia. It proves
that unlike Esau, the Jews, the Israelites had never on this earth
given up their birthright to the inheritance of that land. And so long
as they had remained there, in Judaea, Samaria and Galilee in the other
holy cities, such as Safed, Hebron, Sepphoris, or Tiberias through it
all, every claim that a Muslim would try to force his name upon as
"Arab" or "Egyptian" by such an historical fiction as "Palestinian," is
false, is Philistine aggression, robbery. It is to Mecca and Medina
that his eyes must turn--but never in this world to Jerusalem.
So long as the dark empire established by force of Islamic invasion
throughout the world is allowed to remain in place, so long as it is
seen to gain legitimacy by no other reason than longevity of unjust
possession, then there is no 'reason' in it at all. There is no reason
in the law of the jungle, and there will be no peace in the world, so
long as that rules.
--
Mackie
http://vignettes-mackie.blogspot.com/
http://doo-dads.blogspot.com/
http://whosenose.blogspot.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Son of Discord" |
|
| Title: Happy B-day To Me . . . (Was Re: Blood to the Height of Horses Bridles) |
18 Sep 2006 04:18:29 AM |
|
|
In alt.atheism Mackie shared this wisdom:
<snip>
MOGADISHU (Reuters) - Gunmen killed an Italian nun at a children's
hospital in Mogadishu on Sunday in an attack that drew immediate
speculation of links to Muslim anger over the Pope's recent remarks on
Islam. --September 17, 2006
Hey, wait a minute . . . I don't remember asking for a DEAD NUN for my
birthday! :)
<snip>
(Just jokes, alright?! Sheesh.)
"Son of Discord"
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
" . . The bible is crap, people who believe it
are idiots, and blasphemy is a victimless
crime because the whole fetid pile of
christianic mythology is a ficticious crock of *****."
-Stix, undefeated former Warlord of the BAAWA
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
