trickshot, Invictus, libertyof76, liberty86? Are you avoiding the question, or do you find it unworthy of an answer?

Post from raf -

'Begged'? Is that the correct choice of word for what Gen. Washington was doing?

I don't know, it just sounds so inappropriate in describing [u]anything[/u] that Gen. Washington did during the War.

Eric The('Sought'WouldBePreferable)Hun[>]:)]

If you want to know whats going on, why not do a little research? First, start with the Federalist papers, and a whole slew of writings dating back to the Mayflower Compact. Then look at US history for the last 200 or so years, paying particular attention to US supreme court decisions. Then;
[url]http://www.unwatch.com/[/url]
[url]http://www.igc.org/habitat/agenda21/[/url]
[url]http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/[/url]
[url]http://sovereignty.freedom.org/[/url]
[url]http://www.cascadian.com/CRC/Directory/Sovereignty.html[/url]
[url]http://www.fee.org/[/url]
[url]http://www.mercyseat.net/[/url]
[url]http://www.involved.com/ewolfe/distress/links.htm[/url]

Why don't I explain it myself you ask? I hope the answer is obvious, but in case it isn't, it takes real motivation to look, study, and try to filter fact from fiction.

2 Timothy 3:13  But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.
Titus 3:3  For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another

Raf, 'implore' 'beseech' and the like were very common words used in the 18th century as a matter of courtesy and respect.

There was no 'groveling' as may now attach to the word 'beg' and I'll guaran-damn-tee you that the word 'beg' appears in none of Gen. Washington's entreaties to the French.

Eric The(MoreOnThisLater)Hun[>]:)]

Hiya Eric, how the heck are ya today...

liberty86:

You've got nothing there but a stack of links and a few more cryptic questions.



So you won't explain yourself because you're trying to help me become motivated? Or you won't answer because I don't deserve an answer since I'm not motivated enough to find that answer myself? Circular logic at its finest!


So which am I, one of the evil men or the seducers?


[b]???[/b]

I can't speak for trick, but I'll speak for me. I wouldn't have pissed them off in the first place! We never would have "had" to send troops anywhere! Your "isolationist" statement gives you away. Could you tell me what is bad about "isolationist"? As opposed to "internationalist"?

I'm not trying to get you motivated, that comes from within. If you are content, so be it. As for the second part of your question see above. Idid ans wer ALL your questions several posts ago. [b]Sort truth from fiction![/b] If you have done that, and are content, peace be upon you. May your chains set lightly...

Matthew 7:6  Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

At a certain level, we have to make agreements and arrangements with other countries over things like trade and extradition. It is also in the interest of America to help democratic governments resist totalitarianism in its various forms, such as helping Taiwan vs China.

I don't at all consider myself an internationalist. I think we give [b]far[/b] too much money to other countries and have troops in far too many other countries. We were the single largest donor to Afghanistan last year when it was still ruled by the Taliban. Now, I can see giving some aid to countries that are totally screwed by a [b]naturally occuring[/b] famine, unlike the one in Somalia in 1993, or some other natural disaster. But Africans should have stepped in to aid the Somalis instead of us going in there and playing in that sewer.

We definitely don't need to have 10,000 troops in South Korea to defend them against the North, when South Korea's 1,000,000 troops are some of the toughest, most disciplined in the world.

But we can't just retreat completely off the world stage. With us or without us, the UN will be there, making decisions that will affect the world and the way other countries interact with the USA. I'd love to see the US out of the UN, but we'd still have to deal with them in one manner or another.

You've got nothing to teach me about motivation.


I'm not content. That's why I keep fruitlessly trying to extract real meaning from your posts.


You answered nothing. You gave a list of links and bible quotations. That's no answer. If your answer is that you won't tell me, and that if I want to know what you know, I have to follow your same path of study, just say so.


That's becoming easier and easier.


I've said it before: If libertarians weren't so damned smug, they'd have a much easier time converting people to their way of thinking.


What does this have to do with our discussion? Are you calling me a dog or a pig?

[b]Why be so cryptic?[/b]

I am trying to get a simple translation since I am not a bible expert


Does it mean: don't give the good shit to the bad people, because they don't appreciate it and will throw it in your face?

Eric,
please give some careful consideration to your golfing reference - "guaran-damn-tee."

Words such as 'implore - 'beseech' - as well as 'beg' were all used in the 18th century as words of courtesy and respect.

I 'beg' an audience with........ would be about the same as ...I request a meeting with...today.

You're close Sat, but instead of "bad" people, perhaps "indifferent" may be a better term.
The greek is "choiros", translated out to "swine", a pig. I think the meaning here is that pigs are indifferent to anything around them except their own comfort (i.e. a nice cool place to lie around, and food). In my case, it simply meant citizens who rally to whatever the "cause" of the moment is, without questioning how they got there. "Pearls" greek "margarites" means "word of value". Hope this helps.....

Someone once told me, "Never try to teach a pig to dance. It wastes your time and annoys the pig."

I'll just chalk this up to a lesson learned.

The problem has already been stated repeatedly, however like many of the libs I see on this board (and democrats), you choose to complain about the problem but are unwilling to provide any kind of solution, viable or not.

So, to repeat, what would YOU have us do with these individuals, whose ENTIRE GOAL IN LIFE IS TO KILL AMERICANS?