First of all, I do not oppose the removal of Saddam Hussein from power -- he's every bit the tyrant that people say he is. What I oppose is a foreign country, a superpower who think they have a mandate to police the world, deciding whom to take out and who to leave in charge (if Hussein, why not al-Assad and Mussharaf, as I keep asking).
Secondly, the comments about Bush were *in response* to your ad hominem attack on Saddam. Again, the point is, I'm sure what you say about Saddam is right. But that's not the point. It's what should be done about it that's the point. Jon Spencer wrote: > I find it interesting that those who oppose taking out Saddam also feel > offended when the truth is spoken about him, but feel no restraint when > impugning with unbridled passion those with whom they disagree (e.g.,. > President Bush). > > Please feel free to express these same sentiments to the parents of the > children Saddam has abused. And note that I did give these thoughts careful > consideration. > > I can understand the stand you are taking with regard to dealing with Iraq. > What I do not understand is why you think that Saddam's ruthless treatment > of the people of Iraq, our brothers and sisters, should be tolerated, and > why his threat to us and the rest of the world should be ignored. You have I have explained more than half a dozen times that there are greater threats to western security in the region. NOT ONCE have I read a response to my question about Pakistan. The onus is on you to defend your government's actions, not up to me to defend the renunciation of war in general, and specifically a militaristic approach to the problem. That defends itself -- "MYOB". > > often railed against the Gadiantons in our midst. Well, can't you see that > Saddam is one of them? He's not "in our midst." Let's worry about the GR's in our midst. Let's start with those who make and promote the use of armaments, for starters. > The Nephites constantly pursued the Gadiantons - > they actively searched for them and tried to destroy them. Were they wrong > to do this? Should they have just said "They didn't get MY daughter, so > it's none of my business!"? > They were only in the righty AFTER they were directly attacked, and attacked in defence of their liberties, property and lives. You are not in that position. We (America as a whole) are in the position of Assyria, having broken the covenant of Zion as recorded in Ether. Again, I haven't read a SINGLE response to that, although both John and I have pointed this out on numerous occasions. Are we speaking past each other, I wonder? > > Do you understand my position? OK, so you feel that Saddam is not a > Gadianton, but that Bush and his controlling CFR are. John and I differ in the details of who the GR's are. I think worrying about the CFR is like worrying about the colour of the paint on the Titanic, so I do not take quite his approach on this. But I find it very interesting that some of the most conservative amongst us and some of the most so-called liberal amongst us can agree that we *do* have Gadianton Robbers amongst us, and that the proposed war against Iraq is a feint, a magician's trick, to divert our attention away from what is happening to our liberties from Argentina and Colombia to the USA and Canada. > It doesn't make sense > to me, but you have the right to your own thoughts. But if, as you say, the > Gospel can only prosper under freedom, it seems that we must constantly try > to defeat the Gadiantons. (Here - your response: "Saying Saddam is a > Gadianton doesn't make him one" to which I respond "No, that fact that he IS > one makes him one." There, one round of emails taken care of.) > We will not establish freedom by overthrowing Saddam Hussein. Did I post the response from Dan Peterson here, a response to someone on another list who had said that the Arabs are not interested in the Gospel? The very day he responded to me he and his wife were having dinner with the Jordanian ambassador, a member of the Q12, a 70, and their wives. The work is going forward, but God works through Zion, not through Assyria. We need to get our nations back to Zion and away from Assyria/Babylon. > > Jon > > John W. Redelfs wrote: > > > After careful consideration, Jon Spencer wrote: > > >Being that Saddam regularly has sex with young girls, I think that we can > > >safely assume that he does not take his religion to heart. > > -- Marc A. Schindler Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland "The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark." --Michelangelo Buonarroti Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer, nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated. ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ==^^=============================================================== This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^^===============================================================
