82 1 min 8 yrs

Marching through the institutions?

I’ve always thought that religion and the modern military were a strange couple. Nevertheless, it sounds like the Pentagon is being advised a real anti-Christian headbanger. One consequence: a Pentagon statement that Christian proselytisers “could face court martial for promoting their faith”.

If there’s anything in the report (I’ve not seen it elsewhere), some people are going to go completely mental.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

82 thoughts on “THE PENTAGON: DON’T GO TALKING ABOUT GOD

  1. What about Muslims serving in the military and shooting non believers when they’re cross?
    Have they got a plan for that too?

  2. One consequence: a Pentagon statement that Christian proselytisers “could face court martial for promoting their faith”

    There is no evidence that a Pentagon statement said that.

  3. “There is no evidence that a Pentagon statement said that.”

    Well, there’s an awful lot of websites carrying what they haven’t said!

    Chuck Hagel and President Obama along with Mad Mike Weinstein.
    All tolerant men I’m sure.

  4. Should Satanist soldiers be allowed to preach Satanism in the military?

    Counselling?

    Huh?

  5. The Founding Fathers invented America so that Satanists could say their prayers over Devil’s Altars. Or whatever the hell they use.

  6. As I walk this dark aisle,
    Let me see your light for a while.
    As I swim this lake of fire,
    Let me drink your tears for a while.

    That kind of prayer. That’s the ticket.

  7. Satanists helped frame the Constitution??

    There have been Christian ministers of all shapes and sizes in the US military probably since the beginning
    Now if this IS true that Christians are to be banned from sharing their faith, what’s driving that?
    Oppressed minorities like satanist soldiers?
    Or maybe the Reverend Chewbacca.

  8. Oppressed minorities like satanist soldiers?
    Or maybe the Reverend Chewbacca.

    Indeed, why not?

  9. Don’t argue with me argue with American author and Harvard law professor Noel Feldman who argues that the US has no official state religion;

    If that’s the case then surely Satanists or the Rev Chewbacca or the Flying Spaghetti Monster have equal religious rights to Christians?

  10. ” The second article of the Navy regulations of 1775 read: “The Commanders of the ships of the thirteen United Colonies, are to take care that divine service be performed twice a day on board, and a sermon preached on Sundays, unless bad weather or other extraordinary accidents prevent.”

    I am pretty sure that is true for the army as well.

    So what’s going on?
    Who’s suddenly taking offence to a country founded by Christians and God fearing men fleeing religious persecution? What’s behind it?
    Something has to be behind it.

  11. That link seems to be at odds with the NYT article;

    This model called for a new understanding of church and state, and the framers of the American Constitution rose to the occasion. They designed a national government that, for the first time in Western history, had no established religion at all. The Articles of Confederation, which were drawn up during the Revolutionary War, had been silent on religion — itself something of an innovation. But the Constitution went further by prohibiting any religious test for holding office. And the first words of the First Amendment stated that ”Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” If the people were to be sovereign, and belonged to different religions, the state religion would be no religion at all. Otherwise, the reasoning went, too many religious denominations would be in competition to make theirs the official choice, and none could prevail without coercing dissenters to support a church other than their own — a violation of the liberty of conscience that Americans had come to believe was a God-given right. Establishment of religion at the national level was prohibited. Religious diversity had ensured it

  12. It is indisputable that the US was founded by largely Christian men

    But what is disputable is that they wanted a particulae religious ethos for the society they were trying to create.

  13. Agit8ed – There wasn’t a United States Navy in 1775. For starters the Declaration of Independence was signed until 1776 and the Constitution and actual launch of US Navy vessels didn’t start until the 1790s. So your quote from a rather one-sided source leaves much to be desired.

    In any event the Founding Fathers were quite clear in their objections to an established religion.

  14. Many of the Founding fathers were deists and some likely atheists. While chaplains have been present in the armed services since Christ was a corporal to comfort the soldiers they were not there to spread the faith so to speak among civilian populations.

  15. It should also be pointed out that while the Founding Fathers were revolutionary for their time and deserve great credit for the advancement in history they achieved we are not locked into every view they held at the time(see for example slavery).

  16. I would have no trouble at all taking this report at face value had it been about the British military receiving such an order from the EU commission or something along those lines (in fact, I’ll be surprised if this doesn’t already apply over here, such are the times we’re living in), but over in the USA, I think that things are very different.
    Although it’s misleading to state that the USA is inherently a more Christian country (as people, not countries, have religious faith), the USA certainly wears Christianity on its sleeve in ways which we don’t. So I’d imagine that the US state would have a lot of trouble trying to promote a direct attack on faith, such as this. I don’t know, but I’d imagine that there are a lot of people in the US military who identify themselves as Christians, perhaps a slightly higher proportion than in the rest of society at large. (US readers, do you think that’s a fair guess on my part?)

    No, what I think this might be, is that the state wants to discourage the most extreme, uncalled-for, “in your face” mode of proselytizing. And so, a journalist has taken this to its most extreme conclusion and has theorized that this could lead to court-martials. Let’s wait and see who actually gets CM’d, and precisely what for, before concluding that the sky is falling…

  17. There wasn’t a United States Navy in 1775.

    On Friday, October 13, 1775, meeting in Philadelphia, the Continental Congress voted to fit out two sailing vessels, armed with ten carriage guns, as well as swivel guns, and manned by crews of eighty, and to send them out on a cruise of three months to intercept transports carrying munitions and stores to the British army in America. This was the original legislation out of which the Continental Navy grew and as such constitutes the birth certificate of the navy.

    http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq31-1.htm

    But Hey!
    What do these guys know?!

    No argument re your 10:23 and 10:25.

    And anyway you’re doing your pompous thing again. The point is that freedom of religion (Christian in that context) was written into your constitution and the military navy and army had chaplains/pastors/priests ministering to the men from the start. Which according to the websites I have looked at was 1775.

  18. Tom,
    No argument there, It’s the querying of the influence and presence of Christian ministers in the military from a very early date that amazes me!
    Off to bed.

  19. Actually the Founding Fathers were quite different to the Puritan Fathers. From your own link;

    One hundred and fifty years later, George Washington took another oath, swearing to “faithfully execute the office of the President of the United States” and pledging to the best of his ability to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” The constitution that he swore to uphold was the work of another group of America’s progenitors, commonly known as the “Founding Fathers,” who in 1787 drafted a constitution for the new nation. But unlike the work of the Puritan Fathers, the federal constitution made no reference whatever to God or divine providence, citing as its sole authority “the people of the United States.” Further, its stated purposes were secular, political ends

  20. Agit8ed,
    It’s the querying of the influence […] from a very early date

    Ah, you see, that’s where you’re going wrong. You’re forgetting, our grandfathers were wrong about everything. They were moral imbeciles with the intellects of baboons. They wouldn’t even have approved of gay marriage, so blind and unenlightened were they. We, however, have taken a sudden great leap forward in terms of morality. We know better than all the previous generations combined, which is why we are overturning all the norms that those poor, pitiful primitives held dear.

  21. Agit8ed- You whine pompous when someone points out your errors. If you stop making errors I’ll have less opportunity to be called pompous by you.

    There wasn’t a United States of America in 1775. In fact Massachusetts for instance commissioned its own ships to fight the British and protect commercial vessel.

    You seem confused by the fact that because most of the Founding Fathers were Christians of some type that they sought to create a Christian state. They did not. That European model was one they wished to avoid.

  22. Tom – I can’t speak for your ancestors in particular, but in general we have made great strides in knowledge. That may not always mean great strides in “morality”, although there have been great strides there as well (as well as new complications and temptations).

  23. It’s the querying of the influence

    That link that you supplied at 10.27 queries the influence very well.

  24. Mahons just a note you shouldn’t criticize anyone with their understanding of or belief in anything after your erroneous comment regarding the founding fathers and slavery and the implication it gives.

    But you have never been one for facts or history have you…..

  25. That link supplied from Princeton contrasts the doctrine of the ‘Puritan Fathers’ and the ‘Founding Fathers’ very well;

    The Puritan settlers had fled England, where Archbishop William Laud had persecuted them because they refused to subscribe to religious beliefs and practices that they deemed to be unscriptural. Now in the American wilderness, they were free to worship according to the dictates of their consciences, governed only by the rule of God’s word. And, second, those Puritan Fathers organized a Christian State. They established their Congregational churches as the official religion of Connecticut, supported by tax revenues and defended by the coercive arm of government. The churches defined “heretics,” and the state punished them, even to the point of executing those found guilty of “direct, express, presumptuous, or high-minded blasphemy.” Moreover, citizenship in the state was directly tied to one’s religious faith.

    But unlike the work of the Puritan Fathers, the federal constitution made no reference whatever to God or divine providence, citing as its sole authority “the people of the United States.” Further, its stated purposes were secular, political ends: “to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty.” Instead of building a “Christian Commonwealth,” the supreme law of the land established a secular state. The opening clause of its first amendment introduced the radical notion that the state had no voice concerning matters of conscience: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”4 In debating the language of that amendment, the first House of Representatives rejected a Senate proposal that would have made possible the establishment of the Christian religion or of some aspect of Christian orthodoxy.5 There would be no Church of the United States. Nor would America represent itself to the world as a Christian Republic

    So, it seems like Feldman is correct when he states that US has no official state religion.

  26. //But unlike the work of the Puritan Fathers, the //

    Actually, not only do we need to treat their constitutional ideas with great caution, it appears their dietary habits were also not quite in line with modern tastes..

  27. Regarding the involvement of Christian clergy in the US Army and Navy, either the United States Army Chaplain Corps has got it wrong as well as Wikipedia and others or there is another explanation. (1775 seems to be the earliest agreed date.)

    Regarding the US being a Christian nation, the founding fathers based the constitution on Judaeo/Christian principles even though as is accepted not all were Christians. Here is the Catholic Education Resource Centre’s take.

    “Is America a Christian nation? The answer is both yes and no, depending on what one means by the phrase.”

    http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/politics/pg0040.html
    Very interesting reading.
    But as I said last night the FACT is that America has been regarded as a Christian nation since its inception.
    Now whilst the Government and the (Christian) Church have been separate (quite right in my view), the FACT is that its Presidents are sworn in on oath ON THE BIBLE, the nation is described as ONE NATION UNDER GOD, its currency states IN GOD WE TRUST, and the President has had access to a PRESIDENTIAL CHRISTIAN CHAPLAIN.
    Them’ns FACTS.
    Now as far as I can see the practice of having a chaplain or Christian clergyman “on tap” for the President/government goes back to something like 1789, even earlier..

    please read here..

    http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1045&context=wmborj&sei-redir=1#search=%22u.s.senate%20guidelines%20guest%20chaplains%22

    And what I asked last night was what was the impetus; the motivation behind these sudden changes/constraints on Christianity in the US military? I don’t mean this latest rumour, but even before that there has been a gradual and growing attack on (especially Christian) religion. (The Trijicon rifle sights verses is but a part of this whole thing.)

    Because like as in the UK if we were to throw out the whole Monarchial Defender of the Faith, Church – State relationship, it would profoundly affect everything our nation has been built upon.
    The same with the USA. If these anti Christian modernisers are going to eradicate the traditions and influences of Christianity upon their laws and Government, then everything that America stands for will change for ever.

  28. ” Actually, not only do we need to treat their constitutional ideas with great caution, it appears their dietary habits were also not quite in line with modern tastes..”

    Typical Noel.

  29. Woodrow Wilson, in his election campaign for President, made the same point:
    “A nation which does not remember what it was yesterday, does not know what it is today, nor what it is trying to do. We are trying to do a futile thing if we do not know where we came from or what we have been about….
    America was born a Christian nation. America was born to exemplify that devotion to the tenets of righteousness which are derived from the revelations of Holy Scripture.”

    http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/politics/pg0040.html

  30. “Agit8ed- You whine pompous when someone points out your errors. If you stop making errors I’ll have less opportunity to be called pompous by you.”

    Where do you get the whining bit from Mahons? You can’t get that from what I type on the web, so you must infer it somehow..

    I am noted for moaning, for complaining and occasionally losing my rag, but not for whining. Interesting.

  31. Yeah!
    Meldrews moan and dogs whine.
    I am definitely a Meldrew.
    Mahons likes to talk about people whining.
    I wonder why?
    Where does that association come from?
    Being beaten as a sprog do you suppose?

  32. But as I said last night the FACT is that America has been regarded as a Christian nation since its inception

    Possibly by you but the fact is that the Founding Fathers, (as opposed to the Puritan Fathers), who framed the highest law in the land didn’t think that.

  33. Memo to the Pentagon. when you have Non Christian US Army people (eg Muslims) around weapons it’s not been such a great idea…has it.

    Are you familiar with a olace called ‘Fort Hood’ by any chance?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Hood_shooting

    Conversely
    How many evangeising Christian officers have gone nuts with a weapon and killed your own troops? To the nearest dozen or so, will be fine….take your time…..

    I think you guys need to reconsider your policy.

  34. Fort Hood was just a random ” workplace violence ” issue. Hasan probably had a bad day.

    Obama said so, it must be true.

  35. Random workplace violence is a chap taking another chap outside for a jolly good thrashing. Fisticuffs over trivia.

    Listening to a foreign Eyeslmic wackjob preacher, dressing up in your long shirty pyjamas then planning how to bring a weapon to work and killing many people isn’t in the same ball park.

    Obama’s a clown….a Muslim socialist clown. And you lot elected him…twice.

  36. I wonder how many ‘Non – Christian’ soldiers were around weapons and fought against evil in WWII?

  37. Fortunately for Obama, he ran without an opponent either time.

    Every member of the Republican Party / Tea Party clearly loves Obama, despite what they say, since they have chosen to be such a disorganized rabble that produces such incoherent leaders.

    Every Tea Party member is clearly on Obama’s payroll.

  38. “Possibly by you but the fact is that the Founding Fathers, (as opposed to the Puritan Fathers), who framed the highest law in the land didn’t think that.”

    No Paul,
    not just by me, by all Europeans of my generation. It is well known that many Americans of both world wars went to church Catholic or Protestant, and were welcomed by local congregations. Thew very fact that American war graves are marked with crosses emphasises the point.
    Clearly too, President Woodrow Wilson recognised America’s Christian heritage, as do the Catholic Education Resource Centre of America.
    I have theological issues with the Catholic church, but I recognise that there are many fine and devout men and women in amongst all the bad stuff. Even that great intellectual Malcolm Muggeridge who became a Christian, went into the Catholic church.
    You may not like it, but Christianity and kindness and service and generosity are inextricably linked to America.
    So again I ask, what is driving this governmental anti Christian attitude?

  39. Please correct as you see fit Mahons,

    “IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
    The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America…”

    America started off as the thirteen original States, yes or no? That in 1775 they were colonies of Great Britain is to quibble. The fact is that America was already moving towards nationhood.

    But in any case this is still not the issue. It is arguing about side issues. Deny if you can O Wise One, that America whilst maintaining a separation between Church (Religion) and State, has nevertheless seen the two things intertwined at every practical level and expression of nationhood.

    WHY are you arguing about this? It is a known historical and observable FACT.
    And you STILL skirt around the question as to why suddenly and swiftly America is abandoning the Christian values which have underpinned the growth of this great country!

  40. They are just the sort of chaps you’d probably approve of being refreshingly free from Judeo Christian influence

    Reverting to innuendo? Is that the best you can do Dog?

    Never mind the fact that Croatia is and was a predominantly Catholic country and Serbia is almost totally Eastern Orthadox, as a matter of fact I’d say that the SS Handschar division were almost as almost ‘refreshingly free from Judeo Christian influence’ as the División Azul or División Española de Voluntarios of the Waffen SS or indeed these ‘gentleman’

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Free_Corps

    But hey, there was Muzzies in it so let’s not let that get in the way of a good rant eh?

    Now, would you like to answer the question; how many ‘Non – Christian’ soldiers were around weapons and fought against evil in WWII?

    Not just by me, by all Europeans of my generation

    Perception doesn’t make it correct Agi. You made the claim above that “The point is that freedom of religion (Christian in that context) was written into your constitution” – it wasn’t. It’s there to see in black & white on the link you supplied The US has no official religion.

    You may not like it, but Christianity and kindness and service and generosity are inextricably linked to America.

    There you go getting all presumptuios again. What make you think I don’t like it?

    Agi, you are proud of your Christian heritage and that’s fair enough but it doesn’t make you anything special. I know non Christians who have a perfect Christian ethos, I know people who profess to be Christians and they are absolute bastards. People are not defined by their religious ideaology they are defined by their individual and collective actions. Being Christian doesn’t nessecerilly make you any better a person or doesn’t give you any special privileges, which appears to be the case with the US military in this article.

    So again I ask, what is driving this governmental anti Christian attitude?

    I don’t know and I care even less.

  41. “The point is that freedom of religion (Christian in that context) was written into your constitution” – it wasn’t. It’s there to see in black & white on the link you supplied The US has no official religion.”

    I will clarify that Paul. I meant the freedom to practice religion. I agree I didn’t make that clear, although I have elsewhere 😉

    “The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. It is one of the ten amendments that comprise the Bill of Rights.”

    “Agi, you are proud of your Christian heritage and that’s fair enough but it doesn’t make you anything special. I know non Christians who have a perfect Christian ethos, I know people who profess to be Christians and they are absolute bastards. People are not defined by their religious ideaology they are defined by their individual and collective actions. Being Christian doesn’t nessecerilly make you any better a person or doesn’t give you any special privileges, which appears to be the case with the US military in this article. ”

    I agree with most of that except that the US military and other American organisations (Boy Scouts for one) have had that freedom for generations.

    Lastly, You say you don’t care. But I think you should care because the West is based upon mainly Christian principles, and whilst you may not believe or practice as is your right, much of what you assume about justice, compassion and the worth of the individual and the opportunities afforded; are based on those values.

    We could both agree that a man could build a house any way he likes, but if you ignore the guidelines and building regs, there will be problems.

  42. So, it seems like Feldman is correct when he states that US has no official state religion.

    That’s not quite correct. Judaism is the state religion of the US and that is why a menorah can be seen on the lawn of the White House but never a cross. I’ll stick with wikipedia because it’s viewed as ‘credible’ even though, in matters of contention, it is absolutely untrustworthy:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noahide_laws

    In Judaism, the Seven Laws of Noah (Hebrew: שבע מצוות בני נח‎ Sheva mitzvot B’nei Noach) form the major part of the Noachide Laws, or Noahide Code.[1] This code is a set of moral imperatives that, according to the Talmud, were given by God[2] as a binding set of laws for the “children of Noah” – that is, all of humankind.

    The seven laws listed by the Tosefta and the Talmud are[7]
    1.Prohibition of Idolatry
    2.Prohibition of Murder
    3.Prohibition of Theft
    4.Prohibition of Sexual immorality
    5.Prohibition of Blasphemy
    6.Prohibition of eating flesh taken from an animal while it is still alive
    7.Establishment of courts of law

    And item 1 is the problem because worship of Jesus is considered as idolatry, yet the prohibition of idolatry is to be imposed on all humankind.

    The Seven Laws of Noah were recognized by the United States Congress in the preamble to the 1991 bill that established Education Day in honor of the birthday of Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the leader of the Chabad movement:

    Whereas Congress recognizes the historical tradition of ethical values and principles which are the basis of civilized society and upon which our great Nation was founded; Whereas these ethical values and principles have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization, when they were known as the Seven Noahide Laws.

    So it’s Christianity which is being targetted, though not islam because muhammad is not viewed as an idol in terms of item 1.

  43. “That’s not quite correct. Judaism is the state religion of the US..

    You never fail Allan.. 😉

  44. The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion

    Which goes back to my previous question;

    If that’s the case then surely Satanists or the Rev Chewbacca or the Flying Spaghetti Monster have equal religious rights to Christians?

    Allan, is there nothing in your world that is not a conspiracy theory / controlled by Jews?

  45. “If that’s the case then surely Satanists or the Rev Chewbacca or the Flying Spaghetti Monster have equal religious rights to Christians?”

    Errrrrrm,

    In principle yes, but in reality and positive outcomes both are such a joke that they cannot be taken seriously in terms of historical influence and moral worth.

  46. Allan,
    You should come to synagogue with me. They would love to stone meet you I am sure. 🙂

  47. Agit – just be careful not to discuss the content of my post at 10.16pm yesterday. The last thing your mindset needs is another challenge, especially as you are a “naive idealist” – at 60-something!

  48. Allan m’Ladd

    I skimmed your 10:16.
    Judaism is not the religion of the USA, although I would agree that the Jewish voting bloc is very powerful even though Jews support both parties. I don’t have a problem with that. Just as in Germany, if given the chance the Jewish people are obviously very talented and hard working. They got to be successful in Germany for those reasons, no other. Same in the US.
    You are trying to read into this something that just isn’t there, and I refuse to go there with you!

  49. In principle yes

    Good, I’m glad you’ve finally saw some sense and conceded.

    They cannot be taken seriously in terms of historical influence and moral worth

    Satan cannot be taken seriously? Isn’t he the whole raison d’etre for Christianity?

  50. I concede the point, but not the sense! 🙂

    “Satan cannot be taken seriously? Isn’t he the whole raison d’etre for Christianity?”

    I said Satanists not Satan. And anyway what satanists want you would not want your daughters exposed to.
    The essence of Christianity is RECONCILIATION between God and man made possible by the Lord Jesus Christ.
    Satan is just a bit player in that Cosmic drama. Satan is a created being who thought he could displace the Almighty.

  51. You are trying to read into this something that just isn’t there…

    No Agit – it’s right there, right in front of you at 10.16pm which is why I posted it. Have a look: it’s there!

    As for jews being more talented and hard-working, they are no more talented nor hard-working than any other whites, but they do pull for each other in a way that no other self-declared group does or could. That alone is how they got to control media, politics and judiciary in all countries in which they are present. If your assertion were correct, then Israel would be able to thrive without the huge subventions from the US and the trans-generational ‘reparations’ from Germany.

  52. Allan,
    my dear man,
    The German Jews did well in Germany for no other reason trhan that they were talented and hard working. the US Jewish population ditto.

    But Israel, my favourite country after England has absorbed so many people from all over the world, fed them, housed them, educated them and given them medical care has had help from the US for strategic reasons, not just humanitarian. They have had a lot of support from Jews all over the world, and when I die, money will be going to help Magen David Adom and the Israeli equivalent of Help for Heroes.

    So yes they do pull together, but God is also working out his purposes with them, and He will prevail.
    You need to realise He loves you too, and probably has a role for you in His publicity department.. 🙂

  53. I said Satanists not Satan. And anyway what satanists want you would not want your daughters exposed to

    You’re probably correct however that’s besides the point as the crux of the argument is the dominance of one religion’s rights over others in a country which has no official religion. Besides, there are some Christians that I wouldn’t want my girls exposed to, the Westboro Baptist Church or David Koresh types leaping immediately to mind.

    Satan is just a bit player in that Cosmic drama

    For such a bit player he gets some press. Isn’t that book that you read full of him?. I’d say he’s as famous, (or infamous), as that beardy bloke you like.

  54. “Westboro Baptist Church or David Koresh types leaping immediately to mind.”

    They ain’t Christian.
    If you want to know what a Christian is you only have to pick up a Bible in one of the more modern translations. The NIV is good. I have that one. Amongst others..
    I think you’d be one of the first to point out that a man can call himself anything he wants. That means nothing.
    “By their FRUITS shall ye know them.”

    “For such a bit player he gets some press”

    Yes PAUL, he does. 🙂

  55. Agit – please read and check my comment at 10.16pm yesterday. What is written is there for you to review as a Christian ‘idolator’.

  56. Allan,
    I had another look.
    Are you saying that this group

    “The Seven Laws of Noah were recognized by the United States Congress in the preamble to the 1991 bill that established Education Day in honor of the birthday of Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the leader of the Chabad movement:

    must take the credit for the increase in attacks on Christianity in the US?

    Chabad is rabidly anti Christian (and I can understand to a degree why) but to my mind it is the increased influence of Islam in the US that is driving these attacks.

    Let’s think. Historically men have learnt that if you can’t defeat a nation from without, you do it from within. Saudi Arabia does not give things to the West (UK US) for nothing. They want something in return. That’s (imo) why Bush Junior got himself into such a state over 9/11. His family and friends were doing cosy little business deals with the Saudis.
    So I believe that whilst there are extreme Jewish groups who hate Christianity and would describe our worship of Jesus as the Son of God as idolatry, they are not as influential as some of the Islamic groups within America.

  57. Agit – that is utter nonsense. Judaism and jews absolutely dominate the US and they have admitted as much. You may have “had a look” but either you didn’t understand what you were reading or you are so far consumed by judaism that you cannot bring yourself to grasp what is put before you because of wilful refusal – still, some goys have it.

    From wikipedia, a jewish-controlled site, one reads:

    In Judaism, the Seven Laws of Noah (Hebrew: שבע מצוות בני נח‎ Sheva mitzvot B’nei Noach) form the major part of the Noachide Laws, or Noahide Code.[1] This code is a set of moral imperatives that, according to the Talmud, were given by God[2] as a binding set of laws for the “children of Noah” – that is, all of humankind.

    The seven laws listed by the Tosefta and the Talmud are[7]
    1.Prohibition of Idolatry
    2.etc…

    AGIT – key words ‘In Judaism’: do you see them??

    And item 1 is the problem because worship of Jesus is considered as idolatry, yet the prohibition of idolatry is to be imposed on all humankind, as it reads.

    But it gets worse because:

    The Seven Laws of Noah were recognized by the United States Congress in the preamble to the 1991 bill that established Education Day in honor of the birthday of Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the leader of the Chabad movement:

    Whereas Congress recognizes the historical tradition of ethical values and principles which are the basis of civilized society and upon which our great Nation was founded; Whereas these ethical values and principles have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization, when they were known as the Seven Noahide Laws.

    Do you see that, Agit? Congress is stating that the ethical values and principles of the US are founded on the Noahide Laws, yet the Noahide Laws state that ‘idolatry’ is prohibited and the Talmud is quite clear that Christ is an idol.

  58. Here’s another one for you Allan..
    Watch the goys (admittedly with guns held to their heads)admit how well Israel is doing… 😉

  59. Agit – on Abe Foxman, he would find ‘anti-semitism’ in an empty cupboard given that he’s a jewish supremacist and his job depends on ‘anti-semitism’. As for Gates, Buffet et al, the Israeli economy is entirely dependent on American subventions and German trans-generational ‘reparations’. Enough of the diversionist smoke-blowing.

    Back to the posts of 10.16pm 2nd May and 11.33pm 3rd May which you refuse to discuss.

    From wikipedia, a jewish-controlled site, one reads:

    In Judaism, the Seven Laws of Noah (Hebrew: שבע מצוות בני נח‎ Sheva mitzvot B’nei Noach) form the major part of the Noachide Laws, or Noahide Code.[1] This code is a set of moral imperatives that, according to the Talmud, were given by God[2] as a binding set of laws for the “children of Noah” – that is, all of humankind.

    The seven laws listed by the Tosefta and the Talmud are[7]
    1.Prohibition of Idolatry
    2.etc…

    AGIT – key words ‘In Judaism’: do you see them??

    But it gets worse because:

    The Seven Laws of Noah were recognized by the United States Congress in the preamble to the 1991 bill that established Education Day in honor of the birthday of Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the leader of the Chabad movement:

    Whereas Congress recognizes the historical tradition of ethical values and principles which are the basis of civilized society and upon which our great Nation was founded; Whereas these ethical values and principles have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization, when they were known as the Seven Noahide Laws.

    Do you see that, Agit? Congress is stating that the ethical values and principles of the US are founded on the Noahide Laws, yet the Noahide Laws state that ‘idolatry’ is prohibited and the Talmud is quite clear that Christ is an idol.

  60. Allan old pal,

    You will never convince me.
    Granted like the Goys
    the Jews have bad people
    They have not too bright people
    They even have dumb people
    Disabled people
    Crooks
    Cheats
    Obsessionals

    and what you say about US aid and German aid is true.
    BUT
    the Jewish people are still here.
    They ARE leaders in technological R&D
    They have made the desert blossom like a rose
    and I remain honoured to have lived and worked there.

    You are fighting on the wrong side Allan. You are fighting against the people God has chosen to call His own. Does it not amaze you to realise how Hitler’s Final Solution has crumbled whereas the Jewish people are back in the land they were thrown out of some two thousand years ago? And look at it! Not a slum, not a ghetto; a vibrant nation filled with people who continue to give to the world…

  61. Agit – I’m not trying to convince you because your neurons are so depleted that what little mind you have left will never be changed, not even by the words of Israelis themselves. But nobody has refuted my arguments. Let’s look at one of your misunderstandings, apart from the one about German ‘aid’ – an absolute falsehood:

    They have made the desert blossom like a rose

    That would mean that the arabs who fled Deir Yassin and the fate of Deuteronomy (“utterly destroy, man, woman and child , . . leave nothing alive that breatheth”) left nothing behind, and yet Mr. Moshe Smilanski (of sixty years experience in Palestine) wrote in the Jewish Review of February, 1952:

    “When the British mandate came to an end the country was well off. Food warehouses, private and governmental, were full and there were good stacks of raw materials. The country had thirty million pounds in the Bank of England, besides British and American securities to a large amount. The currency in circulation was about thirty million pounds, which had the same value as sterling . . . The Mandatory Government left us a valuable legacy, the deep harbour in Haifa, two moles in Jaffa and Tel Aviv, railways, many good roads and government buildings, large equipped military and civil airfields, good army barracks and the Haifa refineries. The Arabs who fled left behind about five million dunams of cultivable land, containing orchards, orange graves, olives, grape vines and fruit trees, about 75,000 dwelling houses in the towns, some of them very elegant, about 75,000 shops and factories and much movable property, furniture, carpets, jewellery, etc.

Comments are closed.