English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

spoke about God,peace,justice,and love for people of the world. What is your idea about his statements?

2007-09-26 05:09:19 · 15 answers · asked by Vahid 6 in Politics & Government Politics

15 answers

I wondered about it myself, when I hear anyone speak they talk the talk but seldom walk the talk. it is all propaganda, pure and simple. all this love and justice and peace etc is just too ambiguous, I mean what do these words actually mean? they have been so distorted and misused the meanings are lost to most people who don't take the time to examine what the dictionary actually says or even what the bible says on love and justice.

his justice may be different then ours, he may think justice is served if you stone adulterers or kill people with a different religion. or killing homos is justice. we think justice is served if murders are executed or rapist spend the rest of their lives in prison, in iran and others rapist serve little time it is the woman who is punished for the act even if it was truly rape. (they just cry adultery)

so if one makes a speech please define the words used, otherswise the interpretations can be so varied really nothing can come out of it. Love maybe different we think love differently, they think love is something you do to punish someone so as to save their souls or because of your love for the society as a whole to protect them from these so called criminals. we think of love as forgiveness of these criminals, or punishment fitting the crime, not cruel and unusual punishment.

or we think love and lust are the same, which they are not, but are confused, but in somes cultures lust is bad for woman and okay for men because it is love expressed to woman even if she hates the guy's guts.

now peace, there is an overused word, peace can mean many things to many people, some people might think of it as just absence of conflict (even if evil is left uncheck they would rather not deal with it so that means peace with the criminals) even if that conflict is justice in action, or peace could be you stop persecuting someone or some nation once they give you their lunch money, and you will refrain from beating them up, or peace could mean tolerance of people who differ from you, or peace could just mean absence of violent wars.

another overused word, freedom, what the heck is that? freedom to do or refrain from what? how do you define freedom? freedom of speech and peaceful assembly, yea most can agree until some politician or group decides it hinders their agendas, then it now terrorism. or freedom from hunger, homelessness and poor medical care.

but wait a minute it sounds good on paper but how do you actually make people free from these things? forced housing? detention centers? forced labor camps? they would get rice and beans and shelter wouldn't they? thus their rights to food and shelter would be fulfilled even if they didn't want to exercise those rights, you are forced to it as it is your right.

or your right to medical care what is the procedure is something you don't want or agree with or the treatment something you don't want? they force it on your as it is your right to have it, and right to employement, what if your disabled and can't work? well you have a right to employment but since you can't work you cant have this right so your interferring with others rights to have these things, so your killed. what if the right to work means slavery and no wages or freedom to move on away from the slavery?

he was talking also about how science is a gift from god and to be used by all and available to all nations, is he saying other nations are obligated to give him access to technology for say health care and better food production etc ? which is good. but what if he is pertaining to technology to equalize his power militarily? what is he wants the united nations to give him access to technology on biological weapons and stealth bombers? according to the united nations the treaties signed indicate as such that all advanced countries must give over all technological information including computers codes and military equipment, codes, and all other technology which may include yours and mine information? our income, our property, our abilities our training and other innovations as well?

so you have to look beyond the words and see how what when where and why. of course they could of showed by example that they are upright people by showing him alot more respect then they did.

RRRRR

2007-09-26 06:18:47 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I hear the most powerful nation on earth drumming up support for a war with Iran and hear the Iranian leader saying that he doesn't want war or nuclear weapons. Given Bush's track record I would believe Ahmedinejad over Bush even though the Iranian leader isn't the most honest of people. But in today's world who is truly honest?

2007-09-26 05:17:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

I believe the statements are genuine and i admire his courage 'cos he has lots of it.
Besides, what's all this? In all the attacks on him i have not seen one objective reason. Nobody has been able to say why he is a tyrant, dictator, stupid, uneducated and all that. All i hear is "holocaust denier". Is he bad simply 'cos America and the west do not like him? Did he actually deny the holocaust or he suggested more research into it? Can't anyone even ask questions or suggest anything anymore?Let all these attackers tell us one quality that makes G. Bush, T. Blair or this Brown better than this guy. Can't we even be objective for once?

2007-09-27 00:25:33 · answer #3 · answered by aminu2763 3 · 0 0

he may well mean what he says from his point of view. if the world stops threatening them maybe he will really live like he speaks.. why should only the USA have nuke capabilitues.for energy orweapons,,who made them the boss.

if he does not stick to it then we can go get him

personally im for peace

2007-09-26 05:17:57 · answer #4 · answered by IHATETHEEUSKI 5 · 1 1

I think he's as much a part of the global agenda as Bush, Clinton, Cheney, Ehud Olmert and their buddies over in England.

2007-09-26 05:15:45 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Freedom of speech -

Dubya did the same blabbing.

Both men are dangerous demagogues who use their religion not for personal inner strength, but to further their political agendas. Very sad.

2007-09-26 05:18:00 · answer #6 · answered by Mr. PhD 6 · 0 1

i have a hard time sucking up the fact that people actually take this man seriously!!! omGwtf?!!

(but then, there are a lot of whack nuts out there that are being taken seriously by huge crowds. insert almost any name you can think of, that you hear on the news....)

2007-09-26 05:27:33 · answer #7 · answered by daddio 7 · 0 0

I'd prefer the USAF put a sidewinder up the tail of his jet as he flies home. Radical Islam was brought back courtesy of Jimmy Carter, Mahmood is not a good person.. He speaks of love when he follows the Mullahs spew of jihad against infidels.

I believe he is representative of evil. A religion that kills with inpunity the people who fail to follow the edicts of the mullah goes against everything I believe.

2007-09-26 05:13:49 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 4

It's a lot different than his fiery rhetoric at his Holocaust deniers conference. I wonder why he didn't use those lines?

2007-09-26 05:14:07 · answer #9 · answered by Pfo 7 · 2 1

He is a two faced liar, He can not be trusted and should be detained while they can still get him.

2007-09-26 05:21:52 · answer #10 · answered by bildymooner 6 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers