Evidence for God from Science

i side with PEACE.

littleshepard,

true...but hating bush is the least of my defects.

Sorry Sonny, but hate according to Jesus is the same as comitting murder! Not that I myself don't hate. In fact I hate with a vengence someone very closely related to me, (although forgive instantly when they aren't a jerk for more than one day.) It's probably one of my "biggest" sins right now. Just thought I'd share with you that the both of us are murderers! Have a pleasant evening!

Whoa! Have I missed a lot of pages! Why didn't I get my e-mail update again?!?! I'll post another post commenting on those I have yet to read later.

PEACE wrote:My frustration is ppl beefing on M.moore for telling lies and 'misdirecting' people when I think this superpower country does the same and gets praise.
The end of dictatorship is always a good thing- acting quickly and killing only a few is always a good thing-
'lying about the reasons aint.....................
Its only my opinion...... but I wouldn't trust Bush.

Yeah, I understand your point about the US not actually just saying "we took Saddam out before he could cause us harm, plain and simple." Instead it's masked with talk of freedom, liberty, etc. You didn't see them fighting for liberty in Rwanda - so I DO see your point about the government.

But just because the US government is not upfront, is no reason for Micheal Moore or anyone else to follow suit. Two lies do not add up to truth.

My brother and I argue to no end about the following statement: "If every country were like the US, the world would be a better place." He says no, I say yes. It's a loaded statement for sure.

Well Felgar, what's so wrong with Canada? I thought it was a magical land in the clouds where people talk funny and play hockey... and no one is murdered by guns or feels the need to lock their doors. My Mom went there when she was pretty young. The only things she remembers are getting her fingers slammed in a door and watching a pig make a poopy. I figure it must be a pretty darn nice place. Also, even living so close to it I never hear anything about it. How can we be sure it exists? Do I need pixie dust and a pleasant thought to get there?

Forge- "Guns, bats and clubs, it's all good!" So you do have serious problems! I thought so. Tell me, do you have any pent up anger? Do you get along well with your parents? Did you have an enjoyable childhood?

It amuses me to see such optimism about any human-led government. Of course they're going to lie to you! Of course they're greedy! Of course they're going to abuse their power! I say my country is too big to be run effectively. Every country should ideally be the size of one of our states, (without war, that is.) Yes we elect the people, but gosh darn it if we don't elect them based on too much ignorance, and like we really know what they're all doing up there! Social Studies class doesn't teach you about how ineffective the system is! If people only did their jobs and weren't greedy... or sinful at all for that matter! Socialism, I say, is the ideal system. But because people are selfish and greedy and all that it won't work. Oh, and lazy. That's what the Christian community did after Pentecost, right? But even with only Christians involved it failed! Can't wait for the monarchy Jesus will head!

Here's the bottom point on the war: in the end it will benefit Iraq and save lives. Why is that so difficult to understand? Because of that, and that alone, it is a good thing. End of story!

well I duno do I,
I'm just a little man.

but America must have hasd ulterior motives than to save another country if they are gunna spend as much as they have/are.

http://costofwar.com/

U that man setting up the 'kill Moore campaign'?- sounds it.

Peace, you have it all wrong. I have said many times that anyone has a right to their opinion, and the right to free speech. Just the same, I have the right to call people on it when they spread lies. Moore can say whatever he likes, even if it is silly conjecture. I just want to make sure that people know that what he says is not true.

no.1 - If i wonna roll with with M. moore's theories to some extent- damn it i will- I got my own mind, own choices and I can 'choose' what I believe and what I disgard after reading/ watching M. Moore.
And people all over the world can do exactly the same.

Sure, believe what you will.

U.S government lies- Too little ones.
Theres these big ol' nasty nuclear weapons just chillin in SAaddams back garden.

The justification for war was based o a few things, nuclear weapons was not one of them. The ability to make nuclear weapons was. Chemical weapons existed there, 36 tons of sarin found for example. Numerous biological weapons labs were found. There is further proof that some of the weapons were moved to neigbouring countries before the war, by the governments that supplied them in the first place. Saddam was making progress towards rebuilding a full WMD capability, according to the UN report after the war, and already had delivery missiles that could reach anywhere in the Middle East.

"Iraqi intelligence documents, confiscated by U.S. forces, show numerous efforts by Saddam Hussein's regime to work with some of the world's most notorious terror organizations, including al Qaeda, to target Americans. They demonstrate that Saddam's government possessed mustard gas and anthrax, both considered weapons of mass destruction, in the summer of 2000, during the period in which United Nations weapons inspectors were not present in Iraq. And the papers show that Iraq trained dozens of terrorists inside its borders.

One of the Iraqi memos contains an order from Saddam for his intelligence service to support terrorist attacks against Americans in Somalia. The memo was written nine months before U.S. Army Rangers were ambushed in Mogadishu by forces loyal to a warlord with alleged ties to al Qaeda.

Other memos provide a list of terrorist groups with whom Iraq had relationships and considered available for terror operations against the United States.

Among the organizations mentioned are those affiliated with Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Ayman al-Zawahiri, two of the world's most wanted terrorists. Zarqawi is believed responsible for the kidnapping and beheading of several American civilians in Iraq and claimed responsibility for a series of deadly bombings in Iraq Sept. 30. Al-Zawahiri is the top lieutenant of al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden, allegedly helped plan the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist strikes on the U.S., and is believed to be the voice on an audio tape broadcast by Al-Jazeera television Oct. 1, calling for attacks on U.S. and British interests everywhere.

A senior government official who is not a political appointee provided CNSNews.com with copies of the 42 pages of Iraqi Intelligence Service documents. The originals, some of which were hand-written and others typed are in Arabic. CNSNews.com had the papers translated into English by two individuals separately and independent of each other."
CNS News

Also, if the US government lied about this, then so did the rest of the world, the UN Security Council unanomously approved the resolution asserting Saddam's violations of the 17 previous resolutions over 11 years. Those resolutions dealt with a few things, among which was that the burden of proof was on Saddam to show that he had discontinued his weapons programs. The original resolution, from 1991, decalring war on Iraq for invading Kuwait authorized removing Saddam from power if he did not comply with the ceasefire agreement, which he did not. Saddam was a massive state sponsor of international terrorism, many training camps and terrorists were found there. He was considered a threat to international peace, by all of the UN Security Council.

Here is the resolution that passed through the US congress authorizing the president to go to war should Saddam not comply:
JOINT RESOLUTION
To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.

Whereas in 1990 in response to Iraq's war of aggression against and illegal occupation of Kuwait, the United States forged a coalition of nations to liberate Kuwait and its people in order to defend the national security of the United States and enforce United Nations Security Council resolutions relating to Iraq;

Whereas after the liberation of Kuwait in 1991, Iraq entered into a United Nations sponsored cease-fire agreement pursuant to which Iraq unequivocally agreed, among other things, to eliminate its nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs and the means to deliver and develop them, and to end its support for international terrorism;

Whereas the efforts of international weapons inspectors, United States intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led to the discovery that Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons and a large scale biological weapons program, and that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program that was much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than intelligence reporting had previously indicated;

Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire, attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons inspectors to identify and destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction stockpiles and development capabilities, which finally resulted in the withdrawal of inspectors from Iraq on October 31, 1998;

Whereas in Public Law 105-235 (August 14, 1998), Congress concluded that Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened vital United States interests and international peace and security, declared Iraq to be in `material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations' and urged the President `to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations';

Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations; Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolution of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people; Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council;

Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq; Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens;

Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001, underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations;

Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction, the risk that the current Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against the United States or its Armed Forces or provide them to international terrorists who would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that would result to the United States and its citizens from such an attack, combine to justify action by the United States to defend itself;

Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) authorizes the use of all necessary means to enforce United Nations Security Council Resolution 660 (1990) and subsequent relevant resolutions and to compel Iraq to cease certain activities that threaten international peace and security, including the development of weapons of mass destruction and refusal or obstruction of United Nations weapons inspections in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 (1991), repression of its civilian population in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 (1991), and threatening its neighbors or United Nations operations in Iraq in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 949 (1994);

Whereas in the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1), Congress has authorized the President `to use United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council Resolution 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677';

Whereas in December 1991, Congress expressed its sense that it `supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 as being consistent with the Authorization of Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1),' that Iraq's repression of its civilian population violates United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 and `constitutes a continuing threat to the peace, security, and stability of the Persian Gulf region,' and that Congress, `supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688';

Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime;

Whereas on September 12, 2002, President Bush committed the United States to `work with the United Nations Security Council to meet our common challenge' posed by Iraq and to `work for the necessary resolutions,' while also making clear that `the Security Council resolutions will be enforced, and the just demands of peace and security will be met, or action will be unavoidable'; Whereas the United States is determined to prosecute the war on terrorism and Iraq's ongoing support for international terrorist groups combined with its development of weapons of mass destruction in direct violation of its obligations under the 1991 cease-fire and other United Nations Security Council resolutions make clear that it is in the national security interests of the United States and in furtherance of the war on terrorism that all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions be enforced, including through the use of force if necessary;

Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the war on terrorism through the provision of authorities and funding requested by the President to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;

Whereas the President and Congress are determined to continue to take all appropriate actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;

Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution to take action in order to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States, as Congress recognized in the joint resolution on Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40); and

Whereas it is in the national security interests of the United States to restore international peace and security to the Persian Gulf region: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This joint resolution may be cited as the `Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002'.
SEC. 2. SUPPORT FOR UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS. The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by the President to--
(1) strictly enforce through the United Nations Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq and encourages him in those efforts; and
(2) obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.
SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to--
(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.
(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION- In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that--
(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and
(2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorist and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

As you can see, there were numerous reasons, of which WMD was one.

The fact that by going to war they now are in such a better position in relation to oil.
Oil for me was still an important part- Not just for America as a country- but for the Individuals at the top of The U.S government-
'THEIR OIL COMAPNIES' -The ones laying pipes in The east,
the ones garenteed contracts in the East without outside compitition from any other companies.
the ones doing Maintanance work in the East-
Damage caused by the War.
they all profit twice.
They win the war- save the people- and get rich themselves.
G. Bush was into making money before he was the president- and he aint gunna be president foreva, Y not increase his finacial state

This is where I seriously disagree. If you have any objective proof of this, please show it. This is nothing but conspiracy theory. No-one in the US government benefits financially from the war.

My frustration is ppl beefing on M.moore for telling lies and 'misdirecting' people when I think this superpower country does the same and gets praise.

Please provide proof of where any government has lied. You are just making assertions, not backing it up with proof. Saying that there were no WMD's there while before the war they said there was, does not constitute a lie. For it to be a lie you have to know beforehand that it is not true, and no-one in the world knew that. In any case, chemical weapons were found there, along with evidence that the rest of the weapons were moved before the war. What lies can you point out, and provide evidence that backs up your assertion?

Its an achievement for Moore for letting people know there is a different side and that everything ur wonderful Government does and tells you is not nessessarily 'right or tru'.

You must have me confused with someone else. I am not an American, I am from Africa. I stand on the side of truth though, and on the right of the US to defend themselves against any potential threats. I also support their efforts to spread freedom, I witnessed way too much genocide and killing in Africa to have any sympathy for dictators who murder their own people.

You profess to stand on the side of peace, but it seems to be conditional on your personal likes and dislikes of individuals.

I see no point in continuing this discussion unless you can show some proof for your assertions.

Peace for you too.

I aint got the time to preach like you.
I respect everything u said.........
I aint got a clue where u get ur 'facts'/ information from...............
n woteva you think i'ma claim/ state im about Peace till I die.

I dunno If you want to read it or not as It is not directly linked to Iraq or Mi. Moore but this is just one example of how Bush and his top dogs or Fat cats are seriously interested in Middle East oil-
And I believe The war has been convient for them............

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/jan2002/oil-j03.shtml



Peace August blood.
Take it easy.

Your source explains a lot about your worldview:

"About the World Socialist Web Site
The World Socialist Web Site is the Internet center of the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI). It provides analysis of major world events, comments on political, cultural, historical and philosophical issues, and valuable documents and studies from the heritage of the socialist movement.

The WSWS aims to meet the need, felt widely today, for an intelligent appraisal of the problems of contemporary society. It addresses itself to the masses of people who are dissatisfied with the present state of social life, as well as its cynical and reactionary treatment by the establishment media.

Our web site provides a source of political perspective to those troubled by the monstrous level of social inequality, which has produced an ever-widening chasm between the wealthy few and the mass of the world's people. As great events, from financial crises to eruptions of militarism and war, break up the present state of class relations, the WSWS will provide a political orientation for the growing ranks of working people thrown into struggle.

We anticipate enormous battles in every country against unemployment, low wages, austerity policies and violations of democratic rights. The World Socialist Web Site insists, however, that the success of these struggles is inseparable from the growth in the influence of a socialist political movement guided by a Marxist world outlook.

The standpoint of this web site is one of revolutionary opposition to the capitalist market system. Its aim is the establishment of world socialism. It maintains that the vehicle for this transformation is the international working class, and that in the twenty-first century the fate of working people, and ultimately mankind as a whole, depends upon the success of the socialist revolution.

The partisanship of the World Socialist Web Site by no means excludes objectivity or honest debate. We welcome a broad exchange of viewpoints with workers, students and intellectuals who are seeking an alternative to bourgeois politics and capitalist economics. Polemics and debate, the dialectical means by which knowledge and truth are established, are an integral component of the WSWS. Only intellectual integrity and commitment to historical truth are required of those who wish to contribute to the site.

The World Socialist Web Site
and the international working class

The financial crisis that began in Asia and is enveloping the entire world economy poses sharply the need for the international unification of working people. Transnational production and global financial markets have changed the face of capitalism forever. In the past two decades the limited social safety nets in the advanced countries have been torn up, while workers have suffered wave after wave of layoffs and an erosion in their real income.

In the less developed countries, national development programs have been cast aside, while free trade zones and other cheap labor schemes have been established to facilitate the unrestrained exploitation of workers. To the extent that the old organizations of the working class-whether they called themselves communist, socialist, or labor-have remained wedded to the nation state, they have proven themselves incapable of responding to this assault on jobs, living standards and basic rights.

The World Socialist Web Site, published by the coordinated efforts of ICFI members in Asia, Australia, Europe and North America, takes as its starting point the international character of the class struggle. It assesses political developments in every country from the standpoint of the world crisis of capitalism and the political tasks confronting the international working class. Flowing from this perspective, it resolutely opposes all forms of chauvinism and national parochialism.

We are confident that the WSWS will become an unprecedented tool for the political education and unification of the working class on an international scale. It will help working people of different countries coordinate their struggles against capital, just as the transnational corporations organize their war against labor across national boundaries. It will facilitate discussion between workers of all nations, allowing them to compare their experiences and elaborate a common strategy.

The ICFI expects the world audience for the World Socialist Web Site to grow as the Internet expands. As a rapid and global form of communication, the Internet has extraordinary democratic and revolutionary implications. It can enable a mass audience to gain access to the intellectual resources of the world, from libraries and archives to museums.

In the fifteenth century Gutenberg's invention of the printing press played a critical role in breaking the control of the Church over intellectual life, undermining feudal institutions, and fostering the great cultural revival that began with the Renaissance and ultimately found expression in the Enlightenment and the French Revolution. So today the Internet can facilitate a renewal of revolutionary thought. The International Committee of the Fourth International intends to use this technology as a tool for the liberation of the working people and oppressed all over the world.

The International Committee of the Fourth International

The World Socialist Web Site arises on the basis of a powerful political history. It represents the historical continuity of the political and theoretical struggle initiated by Leon Trotsky in 1923 against the growth of the Stalinist bureaucracy in the Soviet Union. After playing a central role in the Russian Revolution and Civil War and the rebuilding of the economy, Trotsky emerged as the leading figure in the socialist opposition to the bureaucratic caste that arose in the 1920s, and the nationalist orientation of this emerging elite.

The Stalinist apparatus usurped political power from the Soviet working class, betrayed the ideals of the October Revolution and carried out many of the greatest crimes of the twentieth century. Trotsky's life work culminated in the founding of the Fourth International in 1938, just two years before his assassination by a Stalinist agent.

The collapse of the Stalinist regimes in 1991 was the most profound confirmation of the struggle of Trotsky and the Fourth International. Trotsky had insisted, as early as 1936, that the Stalinist bureaucracy was pursuing a course leading inevitably toward the restoration of capitalism. He explained that it had become a conscious political opponent of the revolutionary and egalitarian aspirations of the international working class.

All the proclamations in recent years about the death of socialism and Marxism conspicuously avoid or belittle the significance of Leon Trotsky and the Fourth International. This is not surprising, for any honest assessment of this political tradition flies in the face of the vulgar and historically dishonest evaluations offered by the professional defenders of capitalism. In the writings and speeches of Trotsky one finds the international socialist alternative to Stalinism that reactionary historians insist did not exist."

Once again, you are entitled to believe what you want, but given the above, plus the unproven conjecture in the article you linked, I'm not convinced their motives are to show the truth.

dear katliz

do you have some one in the iraq war or ever in war ? it is not pretty or what they make of it they can't show you on the tv what it is like to be over there. Why are we fighing when they dont need us now they have their goverment running now so why are we still their so we can be ready when bush want them to go over and attacked another counrty

tarreyl wrote: do you have some one in the iraq war or ever in war ? it is not pretty or what they make of it they can't show you on the tv what it is like to be over there. Why are we fighing when they dont need us now they have their goverment running now so why are we still their so we can be ready when bush want them to go over and attacked another counrty

I know you asked this of Kateliz, but I wanted to chime in. You are right that war is hell - no one who hasn't been through it, can really understand what it's like (me included). And the sacrifice that our soldiers have made, and still make, for our own freedom and lives cannot be understated, and it's something I take very seriously.

But it makes no sense to leave now. They DO need American soldiers over there still. Remember that the Iraqi government is in control now; if they wanted America out then you would leave. But they are smart enough to know that they aren't ready to go it alone. The worst thing you could possibly do is leave too early and allow the Democratic government to fall. The lives of all those who died would have been given in vain if you allow that to happen. The best way to honour their memory is to ensure that Iraqis have a new way of life. Every year the citizens of Holland have celebrated how Canadian troops helped liberate their country in WWII... That is how their memory is honoured, rather than those having died in vain for a lost cause and subsequently forgotten.

Note that I was completely against my government turning our backs when Bush came calling for support. I'm grateful America has the good sense to at least try doing some justice in the world when NO ONE else will.

Felgar wrote: Note that I was completely against my government turning our backs when Bush came calling for support. I'm grateful America has the good sense to at least try doing some justice in the world when NO ONE else will.

I Agree Whole-Heartedly!!!

"What's right isn't always popular, and what's popular isn't always right."

Forge wrote:"What's right isn't always popular, and what's popular isn't always right."

Isn't that just about always the case?

Not when it involves certain acts with a very attractive spouse.

dear katliz

you have a cousin in the war he helipcops back the dead body back from iraq. What if it was he was the one in the body bag being ship back would you still fell that people should die? how many people should die because of this war? how many bush lies are we going to listen to intil we loose all childrens? so why arent you fighting then? in farent 9/11 bush had warning that bin laddren was planing but did nothing ? WHY ? yeah atleast democrate doent lie like repuluicants? figure they always do lie. Micheal moore doesnt twist the fact it just it make your great bush look bad boo woo. How long do we need to be in irag for he just has them over so they will be ready when he goes over to another counrty.