I don't care

[Draven2]

I don't careThis was an email that a buddy from work sent me. I love this, and must say that I agree 110%. I DON'T CARE ! Could not have said this any better myself!? The lady that wrote >this letter is Pam Foster of Pamela Foster and Associates in Atlanta. She's been in business since 1980 doing interior design and home planning. She recently wrote a letter to a family member serving in Iraq Read it! WHAT'S ALL THE FUSS? "Are we fighting a war on terror or aren't we? Was it or was it not started by Islamic people who brought it to our shores on September 11,2001? Were people from all over the world, mostly Americans, not brutally murdered that day, in downtown Manhattan, across the Potomac from our nation's capitol and in a field in Pennsylvania? Did nearly three thousand men, women and children die a horrible, burning or crushing death that day, or didn't they? And I'm supposed to care that a copy of the Koran was "desecrated" when an overworked American soldier kicked it or got it wet? Well, I don't. I don't care at all. I'll start caring when Osama bin Laden turns himself in and repents for incinerating all those innocent people on 9/11. I'll care about the Koran when the fanatics in the Middle East start caring about the Holy Bible, the mere possession of which is a crime in Saudi Arabia. I'll care when Abu Musab al-Zarqawi tells the world he is sorry forhacking off Nick Berg's head while Berg screamed through his gurgling, slashed throat. I'll care when the cowardly so-called "insurgents" in Iraq come out and fight like men instead of disrespecting their own religion by hiding in mosques. I'll care when the mindless zealots who blow themselves up in search of nirvana care about the innocent children within range of their suicide bombs. I'll care when the American media stops pretending that their First Amendment liberties are somehow derived from international law instead of the United States Constitution's Bill of Rights. In the meantime, when I hear a story about a brave marine roughing up an Iraqi terrorist to obtain information, know this: I don't care. When I see a fuzzy photo of a pile of naked Iraqi prisoners who have beenhumiliated in what amounts to a college hazing incident, rest assured that I don't care. When I see a wounded terrorist get shot in the head when he is told not to move because he might be booby-trapped, you can take it to the bank that I don't care. When I hear that a prisoner, who was issued a Koran and a prayer mat, and fed "special" food that is paid for by my tax dollars, is complaining that his holy book is being "mishandled," you can absolutely believe in your heart of hearts that I don't care. And oh, by the way, I've noticed that sometimes it's spelled "Koran" and other times "Quran." Well, Jimmy Crack Corn and -- you guessed it, I could not have said this any better myself! If you agree with this view point, pass this on to all your e-mail friends. Sooner or later, it'll get to the people responsible for this ridiculous behavior! If you don't agree, then by all means hit the delete button. Should you choose the latter, then please don't complain when more atrocities committed by radical Muslims happen here in our great country.

To remove this ad, register today for free or log in if already registered!

[nick95673]

however invading a nation that didnt really do it is wrong. and then calling the nation that really did have something to do with it our closest friend is a problem. then having really bad info on going to war is wrong. If my friends and i both kill a man because we think he is going to rob a bank because we swear we saw guns on him and well hes from the part of town where bank robbers come from. Then it turns out he has priors but had no gun and was just going to do a deposit. I dont then turn around and ask for a pat on the back for doing what i thought was the right thing at the time.

[05_ CivicJDM]

^You make no sense with your what-if rants... The fact is we're at WAR now because of Islamo Facists all over the world. You must have forgotten 9/11, oh thats right you were in high school picking your wedgie outta your ass...

Great thread +1rep for you...

[ex2k3]

I don't condone the behavior of terrorists but I understand where they come from. The United States believes that our way is the only way to do things and we push our beliefs on other countries that believe other ways. The Islamic people are far more spiritual than we are. They believe in putting Allah in everything, schools, government, business. I mean they pray atleast 5 times a day. They are tired of American values being pushed on them. The majority of Islamic people in the Middle East are not terrorists, even if they don't like America, they wouldn't declare war on us. The few radicals that actually attacked American institutions should be taken down and suffer the consequences but that has nothing to do with invading Iraq and trying to bring democracy to that country. Also, you can't demand that they respect you first, that's not how it works. Remember when you're a kid and everyone tells you, you have to show respect to get respect, that still applies here. We interfered in their lifestyle, they got pissed, and now we're are mad at them for retaliating. You can only hit the hornet nest so many times before you get stung.

[nick95673]

Originally Posted by 05_ CivicJDM

^You make no sense with your what-if rants... The fact is we're at WAR now because of Islamo Facists all over the world. You must have forgotten 9/11, oh thats right you were in high school picking your wedgie outta your ass...

Great thread +1rep for you...

I was all signed up to go off to boot camp by october of 2001. I didnt forget 9/11. However Bush did. Instead of fighting the nation(s) that actually had something to do with 9/11(saudi Arabia) or finish the job in Afghanistan he invades Iraq. Nice job. To get us in there he ignores all reports that could prevent us from going in. He demands a dictator who has done a good job of keeping terrorist under his thumb show us his weapons of mass destruction. Well he didn't have w.m.d.'s. I am sorry to say but if we want to say we are not a 1 nation world we must respect leader's homes. We have no right to demand to see his bedroom. Do you think we would open the white house up to a crazy china? In fact not only did he not have w.m.d's but we now know that the last of his w.m.d. development programs were blown up by Clinton in attacks republicans described as a "spin doctor" move. I was all for going in to Iraq when it happened. I am all for finishing the job. Its just I don't see how you can finish the job. They say if we leave a civil war will break out. Well what do you call what is going on over in Iraq now? Muslims are not Europeans their society is not set up the same way as ours. Iraq really should be about 4 nations that spread in to the nations around there. After ww1 when the leaders of the world were drawing the borders of the middle east they didn't take in to account tribal borders they drew it based on mountain ranges and rivers. Democracy does not need to be everywhere. Democracy is not the answer to everything. This is the most retarded thing our nation has ever done with the most retarded president ever(i voted for him). You cant stop terrorism by killing people. That tends to make them hate you. We have 3 options and 2 will never happen the first one is the one I like the most 1) go back in and destroy everything that moves. redraw the borders in the middle east so they make sense to the people living there. then kick the Jews out of Israel and give them Sicily. 2) pull out now so we hopefully don't kill the one guy who can truly rule Iraq the way it must be ruled. 3) Stay there for 20 years. the attacks never stop just like in Israel because there is an unjust occupation. And every 5 years a huge attack happens on Americans. No matter what if we kill all but 1 terrorist and we put up all the security at malls and air ports one day the final terrorist drives a huge home made bomb on to a dam either by boat or u-haul. We are not fighting an army so we cant fight it like a normal war. Don't you think if anyone could beat gorillas it would be the "evil" Russians. Well only one gorilla action has ever been put down in history. We lost in Iraq, Russians lost in Afghanistan, Columbians are losing in their own country. Then our 3 leaders(bush, cheney, rummy) who wanted to force us in to this war all had better things to do during Vietnam. Well I have friends in Iraq who have kids. I know if you ask them their kids having a dad is the most important thing.

[ZapThyCat]

Back onto the subject of Iraq?

Anyone that thinks that Iraq wasn't an actual threat to the US is either 1. Playing politics and lying or 2. ignorant of the facts.

I'm thinking #1, it's becoming a favorite pasttime nowadays.

In any case, Iraq was a threat.
1. Do you seriously think that Saddam Hussain wasn't a threat? He's a modern Hitler.
2. There are 3 countries in the world with the ability to make weapons-grade anthrax. US, Russia and.... Iraq. Do you seriously think Russia or the US was doing it to us?
3. Every intelligence agency in the WORLD knew that Iraq had WMD's. Suddenly they don't. Something's definitely fishy there. To claim that "Bush lied" just shows that you are as partisan as they come. Most likely, you were anti-Bush before he was elected and that's the real reason you hate him.

Anybody that argues that Saddam should be put back in power should forfeit their right to be an american and be forced to live under his rule. See how you like the system of government. Idiot.

[nick95673]

i voted for bush hell up until 5 months ago i bet you could find pro bush posts of mine. I would hate to be under Sadam. But that doesnt give us the right to attack iraq. And yes other nations did think not all that he had wmd's. DUHDUHDUH he didnt have any. So we take him out and justify it with crimes against humanity that happened b4 we attacked him the 1st time. If his crimes against humanity were so bad why didnt we take him out the 1st time. Even Donald wanted to quit last year but bush said he couldnt because it would make everything look bad. And good job on taking the "your not american if you question bush's actions" stand. If you dont question the man who said "Too many OB-GYNs aren't able to practice their love with women all across this country." or "There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again." who do you question? I dont know but he sounds dumb to me. People judge me all the time on this forum for poor grammar or wording. But to say you are un american to question this man is retarded. He has brought us down in the eyes of people around the world and for nothing. He hasnt brought much good to us. yes our economy is going well but not as well as nations with really poor leaders.

[silverdevil]

Zap, I wish to address your post before the original one.

Originally Posted by ZapThyCat

Back onto the subject of Iraq?

Anyone that thinks that Iraq wasn't an actual threat to the US is either 1. Playing politics and lying or 2. ignorant of the facts.

I'm thinking #1, it's becoming a favorite pasttime nowadays.

In any case, Iraq was a threat.
1. Do you seriously think that Saddam Hussain wasn't a threat? He's a modern Hitler.
2. There are 3 countries in the world with the ability to make weapons-grade anthrax. US, Russia and.... Iraq. Do you seriously think Russia or the US was doing it to us?
3. Every intelligence agency in the WORLD knew that Iraq had WMD's. Suddenly they don't. Something's definitely fishy there. To claim that "Bush lied" just shows that you are as partisan as they come. Most likely, you were anti-Bush before he was elected and that's the real reason you hate him.

Anybody that argues that Saddam should be put back in power should forfeit their right to be an american and be forced to live under his rule. See how you like the system of government. Idiot.

First of all, the U.S. had no right to use force under the U.N. accords that we 1. set up, and 2. rattified. The only reason we didn't act unilaterally is because the British and Aussies will go to hell and back with us.

Saddam was not an imminate threat to the U.S. in any other way than economically. We were spoonfed the intelligence that the administration wanted us to see and they pushed those reports that favored their intended actions to us allthewhile ignoring the conflicting reports. This is documented fact and to ignore it is to play partisan politics.

To impose democracy is anti-democratic and is, by all means, despotic.

Originally Posted by Draven2

I don't careThis was an email that a buddy from work sent me. I love this, and must say that I agree 110%.



I DON'T CARE !
Could not have said this any better myself!? The lady that wrote
>this letter is Pam Foster of Pamela Foster and Associates in Atlanta. She's been in business since 1980 doing interior design and home planning. She
recently wrote a letter to a family member serving in Iraq Read it!
WHAT'S ALL THE FUSS? "Are we fighting a war on terror or aren't we?
Was it or was it not started by Islamic people who brought it to our shores on September 11,2001? Were people from all over the world, mostly Americans, not brutally murdered that day, in downtown Manhattan, across the Potomac from our nation's capitol and in a field in Pennsylvania? Did nearly
three thousand men, women and children die a horrible, burning or crushing death that day, or didn't they? And I'm supposed to care that a copy of the Koran was "desecrated" when an overworked American soldier kicked it or got it wet? Well, I don't. I don't care at all.
I'll start caring when Osama bin Laden turns himself in and repents for incinerating all those innocent people on 9/11. I'll care about the Koran when the fanatics in the Middle East start caring about the Holy Bible, the mere possession of which is a crime in Saudi Arabia. I'll care when Abu Musab al-Zarqawi tells the world he is sorry forhacking off Nick Berg's head while Berg screamed through his gurgling,
slashed throat.
I'll care when the cowardly so-called "insurgents" in Iraq come out and
fight like men instead of disrespecting their own religion by
hiding in mosques. I'll care when the mindless zealots who blow themselves up in search of nirvana care about the innocent children within range of their suicide bombs.
I'll care when the American media stops pretending that their First Amendment liberties are somehow derived from international law instead
of the United States Constitution's Bill of Rights. In the meantime, when I hear a story about a brave marine roughing
up an Iraqi terrorist to obtain information, know this: I don't care.

When I see a fuzzy photo of a pile of naked Iraqi prisoners who
have beenhumiliated in what amounts to a college hazing incident, rest assured that I don't care.

When I see a wounded terrorist get shot in the head when he is told not to move because he might be booby-trapped, you can take it to the bank that I don't care. When I hear that a prisoner, who was issued a Koran and a prayer mat,
and fed "special" food that is paid for by my tax dollars, is
complaining that his holy book is being "mishandled," you can absolutely believe in your heart of hearts that I don't care.

And oh, by the way, I've noticed that sometimes it's spelled
"Koran" and other times "Quran." Well, Jimmy Crack Corn and -- you guessed it, I could not have said this any better myself!
If you agree with this view point, pass this on to all your e-mail
friends. Sooner or later, it'll get to the people responsible for
this ridiculous behavior! If you don't agree, then by all means hit the delete button. Should you choose the latter, then please don't complain when more atrocities committed by radical Muslims happen here in our great country.

This is so ignorant that I don't know where to begin.

First of all, it is NOT illegal to carry a Bible in Saudi Arabia. How do I know? I've been there twice, most recently two years ago.

It is also misleading to say that they "the Islamic Fundamentalists" brought the war to us. We actually took it to them right after WWII when the U.S. and Britain decided to take a controlling interest in the Middle East to gain enough petro to support their war machines. We started to interfere in the affairs of those countries and even installed our own little country to help us in the area (you guys knew that Britain was the one who created Israel, right?) Had we not stuck our greedy little noses in that area to begin with, none of this would've happened. This is a backlassh to our failed international policies towards that region.

We started this over half a century ago and now that it has made its way around to our shores we so conveniently forget how it started.

Please, I have a minor in history and I find post-WWII world history to be the most interesting. I won't even continue to show how wrong this letter is because it would just be a waste of my time. Those who know about what I'm talking about know I'm right while those who want to support the Bush War machine (in the name of increasing our economic growth) will think me a fool.


Here is a good video to watch (18:14 long): http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...6017363&q=noam

[ex2k3]

I believe Saddam should have been taken out of power as well, but that was not the original goal. The orginal goal was to stop the risk of WMDs getting into the hands of terrorists organizations.
Osama bin Laden hates Saddam as much as we do, he declared "jihad" on him when Iraq first invaded Kuwait before the first Gulf War. Bin Laden however hated it even more when American troops came over to interfere in what he believed were Islamic problems. He distrusted his home country Saudi Arabia for allowing this and declared attacks on them after he didn't get what he wanted from the royal family. That's when he was exiled from Saudi Arabia and started al Qaeda. The U.S. intelligence suspected that Saddam might be helping al Qaeda with funding and weapons. Don't think that is very likely unless bin Laden is more forgiving than he lets on.

Honestly, I'm tired of the U.S. foreign policy. We think we can do anything we want and mold weaker countries into our image. We've been doing this for decades and I can see why other countries can hate us. I'm glad that Saddam was captured and Iraq has been liberated but obviously a lot of people there disliked the fact they we had to trample their whole country to do it. No one is arguing that Saddam be put back in power, hell even if he was put back in power, his credibility and strength as a leader/dictator would be severly broken.

I am no more anti-Bush than I am anti-parties. I hate this two party system of government we have, it's been a problem ever since George Washington left office. Democrats, Republicans, Left, Right, who gives a f*ck. No one wants to listen and compromise they all just want to blame the other party for the countries problems. I'll say just like Chris Rock, "no one is completely conservative or liberal, no one is just one thing. Listen to what is being said, mull it around in your head for a minute, then form your opinion! Everyone has things they're conservative about, and things they're liberal about. Crime I'm conservative, prostitution I'm liberal."

[nick95673]

No one argues putting Sadam back in power. However taking him out of power was more retarded than putting him back in to power.

[ZapThyCat]

Saddam may have not been an immediate threat to the US, but then again, al-quida wasn't either. Sure, they could make some attacks, but that wouldn't cause the collapse of the USA, now, would it? It's all relative. Iraq would have been whole-heartedly in support of them if they had the chance.

As far as "documented" evidence, in favor of the government falsifying reports of WMD's... that's pure bull. Every country in the world knew it, and now that we've gone in there, we can't find them. So was every country's intelligence wrong? Not likely. More likely that everyone is backpeddling for political purposes and no one's found them in Iraq yet, because Iraqis aren't as stupid as we think. Heck, they buried an entire freaking army base in the deserts and we only found it a few months back, how easy would it be to hide a bunch of barrels?

I don't like Bush, but the cliche that he's a dumb texan hick it really worn out. He graduated from Harvard, and not with just a BS. If you really think it takes *NO* brains to do that, then you need to check yourself. He's not a fool. I know that it's hip and funny to talk about southerners that have an accent like they are all rednecks, but the truth is that it's just an accent, a dialect, and they are no more stupid than arrogant Californians.

Yes, the stated goal was that we were going in after WMD's. That's what we talked about. But for me personally (and I know that has nothing to do with your opinions or the negativity of the press) I felt that we were going in to liberate the people of a country, EXACTLY in the same way that we had liberated concentration camps from Hitler in WW2.

And yes, it is very much illegal to carry a Bible in Saudi Arabia. I'm sure you could get away with it on the military base, or in your sheltered subdivision, but if you went out into the actual country and the cities with it, you would be dead. You're deliberately being misleading.

And the US didn't cause the islamic fundamentalism, we had nothing to do with the middle east after WW2. That was Britain and France's mandate. Moreover, we didn't "install" any country in the area to help our interests, and neither did Britain. Israel installed itself, jews had lived there for thousands of years and suddenly they started migrating there in droves, they started their own state, Britain actually tried to stem the flow of Jews there. Then the **** hit the fan, and when the dust had settled, the Jews owned more than their mandated section of the wilderness, and actually made it prosper. When they were invaded by other countries again and again, they made the invaders pay for their aggression. I fail to understand how you claim that Israel "helps us" when in reality, they are a hinderance to us in virtually every way. They aren't our "agent" there, they are the reasons for our crummy relations with the arabs.

Finally, Saddams crimes against humanity were ongoing, they didn't stop after the first gulf war. And through his sons, they would have kept on going.

[nick95673]

Originally Posted by ZapThyCat

Saddam may have not been an immediate threat to the US, but then again, al-quida wasn't either. Sure, they could make some attacks, but that wouldn't cause the collapse of the USA, now, would it? It's all relative. Iraq would have been whole-heartedly in support of them if they had the chance.

As far as "documented" evidence, in favor of the government falsifying reports of WMD's... that's pure bull. Every country in the world knew it, and now that we've gone in there, we can't find them. So was every country's intelligence wrong? Not likely. More likely that everyone is backpeddling for political purposes and no one's found them in Iraq yet, because Iraqis aren't as stupid as we think. Heck, they buried an entire freaking army base in the deserts and we only found it a few months back, how easy would it be to hide a bunch of barrels?

I don't like Bush, but the cliche that he's a dumb texan hick it really worn out. He graduated from Harvard, and not with just a BS. If you really think it takes *NO* brains to do that, then you need to check yourself. He's not a fool. I know that it's hip and funny to talk about southerners that have an accent like they are all rednecks, but the truth is that it's just an accent, a dialect, and they are no more stupid than arrogant Californians.

Yes, the stated goal was that we were going in after WMD's. That's what we talked about. But for me personally (and I know that has nothing to do with your opinions or the negativity of the press) I felt that we were going in to liberate the people of a country, EXACTLY in the same way that we had liberated concentration camps from Hitler in WW2.

And yes, it is very much illegal to carry a Bible in Saudi Arabia. I'm sure you could get away with it on the military base, or in your sheltered subdivision, but if you went out into the actual country and the cities with it, you would be dead. You're deliberately being misleading.

And the US didn't cause the islamic fundamentalism, we had nothing to do with the middle east after WW2. That was Britain and France's mandate. Moreover, we didn't "install" any country in the area to help our interests, and neither did Britain. Israel installed itself, jews had lived there for thousands of years and suddenly they started migrating there in droves, they started their own state, Britain actually tried to stem the flow of Jews there. Then the **** hit the fan, and when the dust had settled, the Jews owned more than their mandated section of the wilderness, and actually made it prosper. When they were invaded by other countries again and again, they made the invaders pay for their aggression. I fail to understand how you claim that Israel "helps us" when in reality, they are a hinderance to us in virtually every way. They aren't our "agent" there, they are the reasons for our crummy relations with the arabs.

Finally, Saddams crimes against humanity were ongoing, they didn't stop after the first gulf war. And through his sons, they would have kept on going.

well said. But the evidence is there. I totally forget the guys name so i am going to get ripped to shreds for mentioning it but.. One of the largest sources of information for the state department to argue for war was a former cia informant. The reason he was a former cia informant is that the cia realized he would say what ever it took to keep the cia sending him money. So when that flow dried up he went to the state department who keapt paying him to lie. Then when we cracked the Iranian code he told Iran! Bush was dumb enough to invite this guy to vip events and at some point to sound cool bush or rummy told him about how we were able to decode iranian messages. I can not wait for 2008. I hope McCain wins out. Its just the 3 men leading the nation right now are smart men who make poor, stupid, evil or ignorant decisions. Now if all their decisions are just poor and they really did mean the best then who cares because we still have the same problem as if they were flat out evil.

[ZapThyCat]

Originally Posted by nick95673

Its just the 3 men leading the nation right now are smart men who make poor, stupid, evil or ignorant decisions. Now if all their decisions are just poor and they really did mean the best then who cares because we still have the same problem as if they were flat out evil.

Ever stop and think that maybe those men have access to information we don't have, and that they are making the best decisions they can? If something doesn't add up and sounds strange or incompetent to us, then you have to wonder if we simply aren't privvy to the information that they have, and that maybe they are making some decent decisions that we have no clue about

It's hard to imagine some of these decisions being good... but you never know. I can't judge unless I have all the facts, and I don't... so I can't.

[silverdevil]

Originally Posted by ZapThyCat

Saddam may have not been an immediate threat to the US, but then again, al-quida wasn't either. Sure, they could make some attacks, but that wouldn't cause the collapse of the USA, now, would it? It's all relative. Iraq would have been whole-heartedly in support of them if they had the chance.

Bin Laden hates Saddam, why would he accept help from him? It makes no sense.

Originally Posted by ZapThyCat

As far as "documented" evidence, in favor of the government falsifying reports of WMD's... that's pure bull. Every country in the world knew it, and now that we've gone in there, we can't find them. So was every country's intelligence wrong? Not likely. More likely that everyone is backpeddling for political purposes and no one's found them in Iraq yet, because Iraqis aren't as stupid as we think. Heck, they buried an entire freaking army base in the deserts and we only found it a few months back, how easy would it be to hide a bunch of barrels?

I never said the government "falsified" evidence. What they did was push the evidence that supported their views and their desires of invading Iraq while sweeping dissenting reports and intelligence under the rug. Those brought before Congress and the American people were those approved by Rummy, Cheney, and Condi. Even Colin Powell's Chief of Staff has stated, multiple times, that he didn't want to go with the Bush and Neo-Con crowd on this one but Cheney and Rummy kept pushing him. This is the main reason for his resignation, according to his former Chief of Staff. In two interviews since the COS broke that news, Powell has never said that what his COS said was wrong. He just changes the subject to avoid saying he is right and embarass Bush, whom he still holds in high esteem. There are also documented arguments between Rummy and Powell. Now, you tell me, who knows more about military movements, some old guy or a retired Four Star Army General? Hmmm.

Originally Posted by ZapThyCat

I don't like Bush, but the cliche that he's a dumb texan hick it really worn out. He graduated from Harvard, and not with just a BS. If you really think it takes *NO* brains to do that, then you need to check yourself. He's not a fool. I know that it's hip and funny to talk about southerners that have an accent like they are all rednecks, but the truth is that it's just an accent, a dialect, and they are no more stupid than arrogant Californians.

Yes, Bush graduated with an MBA from Harvard. That is not much to say about him, tho. There was no reason for him to be accepted in the first place except for his daddy's influence (same with Yale). Just as jocks pass and graduate Division-1A universities and can't read or write, Bush could do the same at Harvard. With a little help from fellow students and the professors overlooking a thing here and there, it should be quite easy to accomplish.

Originally Posted by ZapThyCat

Yes, the stated goal was that we were going in after WMD's. That's what we talked about. But for me personally (and I know that has nothing to do with your opinions or the negativity of the press) I felt that we were going in to liberate the people of a country, EXACTLY in the same way that we had liberated concentration camps from Hitler in WW2.

There is a huge difference between concentration camps and the Iraqi population. Saddam was not nearly as ruthless or murderous as Hitler was. Sh!t, if you count, I bet Saddam didn't even kill 100.000 people in all his reign. That's not even close to Hitler's numbers.

Originally Posted by ZapThyCat

And yes, it is very much illegal to carry a Bible in Saudi Arabia. I'm sure you could get away with it on the military base, or in your sheltered subdivision, but if you went out into the actual country and the cities with it, you would be dead. You're deliberately being misleading.

It is not illegal! I saw Christian services being carried out in Riyadh. Some people in power might not like it, but there is no written law forbidding it. Like I said, I saw a house there, in the Saudi Capital, where a Christian wedding was taking place right out in the open. This was in 2002, tho, but I doubt it's changed for the worse since.

Originally Posted by ZapThyCat

And the US didn't cause the islamic fundamentalism, we had nothing to do with the middle east after WW2. That was Britain and France's mandate. Moreover, we didn't "install" any country in the area to help our interests, and neither did Britain. Israel installed itself, jews had lived there for thousands of years and suddenly they started migrating there in droves, they started their own state, Britain actually tried to stem the flow of Jews there. Then the **** hit the fan, and when the dust had settled, the Jews owned more than their mandated section of the wilderness, and actually made it prosper. When they were invaded by other countries again and again, they made the invaders pay for their aggression. I fail to understand how you claim that Israel "helps us" when in reality, they are a hinderance to us in virtually every way. They aren't our "agent" there, they are the reasons for our crummy relations with the arabs.

You don't think that Britain had anything to do with creating the state of Israel? Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British...e_of_Palestine

In order to control the Suez canal and the transport of Oil to Europe, Britain needed a base in the area, namely Palestine. Also, in an effort to appease anti-Semitic feelings in Europe (Germany, France, Austria), Britain encouraged Jews to move "back to their homeland." This mess was created by the U.K. and supported by the U.S.

[05_ CivicJDM]

This debate can go back and forth all day! Thank GOD we live in the country we do and are afforded those rights by those who sacrificed before us...