22 votes

Can you believe we actually fell for this?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Sorry for the delay - I have a job

First, no, Wikipedia is not a scholarly source. I wouldn't let my students use it - but never mind. I don't really feel like spending much time on this, your language denotes that you are unwilling to even acknowledge basic truth. I'll do a brief search. But, no matter the numbers, even if the US was only in 5th place - that is still a huge majority. And, that was part of my original point. An overwhelming majority of the US is religious, and almost exclusively Christian by percentate, the same majority both Dem and Repub that supported the genocide against Muslims. You are trying to look at the trees and not the forest.
"If you do a simple Google search for a reputable and widely accepted survey on which countries view religion as important, the U.S. is about middle of the road with 65% people saying it's important, whereas 35% say it isn't according to a world Gallup Poll."
----No, I wasn't talking about viewing religion as important. You are trying to replace one thing with another, apples to orange fallacy. I was talking about people that are religious - someone who has a god belief, belief in a super-being, whatever, not who thought religion, as in organized groupings, was important. You are being purposefully deceptive.
One source: http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/faith/2009/12/united_st...
Some Gems:
"The survey found that 85 percent of Americans believe in God and life after death"
"American religiosity is also unique in its vitality among all age groups, according to the survey. Eighty-nine percent of Americans 18- to 29-year-olds are religious or highly religious, and levels of belief remain high among older cohorts: 89 percent of those in their 30s, 88 percent of those in their 40s, 93 percent of those in their 50s and 90 percent of those 60 and older are religious or highly religious.
In Europe, in contrast, religiosity declines from one generation to the next."

It will take me a while to find the original source, it was a long time ago - probably around 2000. But the US respondents to the question: "Do you believe in a god" was second only to Turkey. This includes the number of "nones", or those that have a religious belief but don't have a 'religion'.

"George W. Bush won with an extremely thin majority both times" --- So what? Almost all of the Democrat voters are Christian as well. You point is moot.

"...and I can guarantee you that the second time he won there were plenty of atheists supporting him because of Hitchens and a few others." --- Talk about ass. You can "guarantee"? How is that, exactly. And "plenty"? I knew many atheists at the time, both personally and in forums numbering about 50 or so. I can think of only a few that may have voted for Bush.

Then, by your own study, you claim that there are 5 religious components to cults (subsected from 3), but only 2 non-religious (based on weak minds and group-think). Again, you have an issue with understanding the word "majority".

Your finding of a few groups of small numbers of Christians that opposed the war is pointless. If you made a total number involved they would probably be outnumbered by a single megachurch in Dallas. Were they on TV? Did they have a voice in Congress? If they had a majority in the US, then why did we commit genocide? My family and most of my hometown are devoted Catholics, and for the most part lovely people, but even though a group of Catholic Bishops opposed the war in Iraq, and the Pope himself, they still were OK killing Mooslems.

I know you fancy yourself some kind of brilliant debater, and you probably are. I don't care about debate or scoring points or spending time scouring webpages. You cannot deny the an overwhelming majority of the US are religious, an overwhelming majority of those people are Christian, and aside from some of us that are awake and Ron Paul people, an overwhelming majority of Democrats and Republicans were fine with us killing brown Muslims because they were Muslim. To deny that is to have zero grasp on reality. I'm not "blaming" you, I'm not even "blaming" Christians for our disastrous foreign policy. I am however blaming Christians for being sheep and letting fear get the best of their humanity.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

SteveMT's picture

We are not a Christian nation, we are a Pseudo-Christian nation.

"We are not a Christian nation (if we ever were), we are a Pseudo-Christian nation, and it’s killing us."
http://pastordaveonline.org/2012/05/28/a-pseudo-christian-na...
---------------------
"America’s problem is not that it is too religious, nor that it is not religious enough, but rather that the type of religion it carries is a deadly Pseudo-Christianity."
http://pastordaveonline.org/2012/05/28/a-pseudo-christian-na...
-------------------------
cult: a small religious group that is not part of a larger and more accepted religion and that has beliefs regarded by many people as extreme or dangerous.

You know, I don't think we even qualify as pseudo-Christian.

People love to whine that America is a Christian nation, but you know something, the U.S. Constitution makes ZERO mention of Christianity as being the True Religion, or otherwise expressing that Christ is the lone savior of mankind. There were several established Churches at the state level, but most of those were incrementally abolished via Federal pressure.

Some states still have de facto majorities of one version of Christianity or another, but no individual state really qualifies as a Christian nation because none of them have a government that recognizes any religion. In truth, America's culture has more in common with the paganism of the Roman Empire than it does with the days of the established State Churches of England, Scotland, Italy, Spain, France, or any other European Nation between the 16th and 18th century that had official national churches.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

Damn...

That was a debating beat down I must say.

Sure

If you discount logic and reason.

Not even close.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

You talk, but you don't comprehend.

Atheistkult types love to yammer about logic and reason, but they are often bereft of both when it comes time for their application in a discussion.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

Nice Straw Man

As usual...you have nothing but bigotry.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

Aww, did I hurt your feelings?

Truth can be painful, which is ironic given that I doubt you believe in the concept. A word of advice, try responding to my other post in response to you, you're indignation is, at best, hypocritical.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

wait wait wait... the

wait wait wait... the athiest has trouble with logic and reason? Coming from a person who believes in magical cities in the sky, ruled by cosmic high level spell casting deities who have armies of flying bird-people with floating golden rings over their heads? Or men who get swollowed by whales and live for 2 weeks in their stomaches? Or spell casting nomads who can part oceans with magic spells? No need for proof for any of this either.

I just googled "Most religeous country in the world. What I see is that America is the most religious "industrialized" nation on earth. 89% of people identiy as religious, with 62% being highly religious. Is there some reason you feel the need to include the Congo in your top 10 lists? Perhaps the OP should have said "industrialized."

As much as everyone seems to want to pretend that there isn't a religious spear-head to attack the middle east, you are wrong. Does it mean that "every" Christian wants to drop bombs on muslims? Of course not. However the only Christians who truly mattered; i.e. the evangelical christians who formed the GOP were the spear-head of our foriegn policy by using every conceivable fraud to make sure their CFR bankster elite masters kept getting the nomination. However they were only responsable until Obama won. After that you could start to lay the blame a little more heavily at the feet of the "faithful idiots" who worship government instead of gods over on the Democrat side of the isle. Still religeous, simply a differant deity.

Last, you can lay blame on every American who wasn't speaking out against this horror, of which, 89% identify as Christian, which of course is what the OP is saying. You can scream and yell insults at him, but like usualy, logic and reason are on his side, not yours.

In fairness, most of those "christians" don't have any more idea what their religieon is than they know what their government is. Just apathetic, stupid sleepy sheep being happily led to the slaughter, so really its not even fair to call them "christian" in this case. However the Evangelicals and "tea party" types certainly were & are aware. I work with the tea party all the time. These people, even the ones who are fully aware of central banking, non-aggression princpal and all the stuff that makes us daily paulers who we are, still hate muslims because of their @#$%ing twisted religious beliefs. You may not agree with their religious belief's personally, and may think they "misinterpret" them, but that hardly matters when they outnumber you vastly and get their way politically.

You can babble, but apparently you can't read either.

You complain that I insulted you're atheistkult comrade-in-arms, and then spent you're entire first paragraph regurgitating idiotic cliche insults that would probably pass for a 3rd rate knockoff of Seth MacFarlane after about 12 shots of Scotch? Tell me why you have the superior command of logic again?

As to the few actual arguments that you made, allow me to repeat what I said previously.

"Most religeous country in the world. What I see is that America is the most religious "industrialized" nation on earth. 89% of people identiy as religious, with 62% being highly religious. Is there some reason you feel the need to include the Congo in your top 10 lists? Perhaps the OP should have said "industrialized."

I provided a link to my source, I find it interesting that you didn't provide a link to yours. Anyhow, the fact that your friend was unable to qualify exactly what he was talking about speaks volumes to his intelligence and his ability to actually have a "rational" discussion. I'm not a mind-reader, though I'm sure in your wild imagination you assume I'm the sort of superstitious person to argue exactly that (the atheistkult adherent can never contain his/her sarcasm, it goes against his/her vindictive nature).

"Is there some reason you feel the need to include the Congo in your top 10 lists? Perhaps the OP should have said "industrialized."

I didn't give any top 10 lists, I gave a link to a world Gallup Poll on importance of religion, done by country, that covers most of the world with a few exceptions where data could not be gathered (Romania didn't make the list, among others, though since I've been there 3 times I can testify via experience that they are industrialized, civilized, and far more religious than the average American). Here's the link again for your discernment:

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

You say "perhaps" he should have qualified his statement more thoroughly? I thought you were interested in sticking to just "the facts" and not covering up for the blunders of like-minded friends, which is the way both politics and religion work according to you. Anyway, it's interesting that you focused only on The Congo (I didn't even mention an African country by name, I just noted in passing in response to the OP's overreaching assertion that all of Africa, most of South America and East Asia are more religious than America, work on your reading comprehension please) and that you didn't make mention of Italy, Greece, Poland, Singapore and a few others that I did mention by name and are pretty well industrialized, though maybe not to the same extent as the U.S. As far as my sourcing goes, visit the following link regarding developed nations:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developed_country (note: The top 47 ranked countries in terms of Human Development Index, all of the countries I listed by name in my prior post are in there, and most of them fall into the Advanced Economy categories as well, so you fail, albeit less so than your friend)

"As much as everyone seems to want to pretend that there isn't a religious spear-head to attack the middle east, you are wrong. Does it mean that "every" Christian wants to drop bombs on muslims? Of course not."

Explain this to your brainless friend whom you're sticking up for. What you've described is called Dispensationalist Eschatology (s sub-school of Premillennialism), which is definitely popular with Bush's support base. Your friend failed to even mention the 4 other viewpoints on this subject widely held in various Christian groups inside and outside America and made a singular, blanket statement. As far as I'm concerned, Israel is little more than nice beachfront property on the Mediterranean being occupied by a group of mixed Eastern European practitioners of a defunct covenant.

"However the only Christians who truly mattered; i.e. the evangelical christians who formed the GOP were the spear-head of our foriegn policy by using every conceivable fraud to make sure their CFR bankster elite masters kept getting the nomination."

Gotcha, so every Christian who didn't vote for Bush in 2000 and 2004 didn't matter. Tell me again why I'm the only one who is being insulting here?

"Last, you can lay blame on every American who wasn't speaking out against this horror, of which, 89% identify as Christian, which of course is what the OP is saying. You can scream and yell insults at him, but like usualy, logic and reason are on his side, not yours."

I'm still waiting for you to demonstrate one logical or reasonable thing that the person in question has uttered. He was clearly off on all his facts, as I proved previously, and the only thing that you've done here is attempt to play the atheistkult apologist, move the goal-post around a bit, and lavish me with an amusingly ridiculous barrage of idiotic cliches right out of the Christopher Hitchens playbook (I've still yet to hear any one of you clowns explain exactly how him, Sam Harris, and a few others get a pass on their promotion of the Iraq War while myself and others are given the onus of having to document our longstanding opposition to it).

"In fairness, most of those "christians" don't have any more idea what their religieon is than they know what their government is."

True enough, and you don't have any more idea on how to use spell check than they do on said subjects, not to mention you seem to get most of your conspiratorial lingo straight from The Venus Project/Zeitgeist Movement playbook, and as far as I'm concerned, they're one of the few groups even more deluded and crazy than the Bush crowd.

"You may not agree with their religious belief's personally, and may think they "misinterpret" them, but that hardly matters when they outnumber you vastly and get their way politically."

You don't have to explain this to me, you need to explain this to your comrade, he's the one blurting out the factual errors. I think Democracy and Universal Suffrage are both systemically evil modes of governance, primarily because they place too much power in the hands of people like them, and also people like you in places like Sweden. Ignorance plus voting equals mass suffering and death, whether your shepherd is named John Hagee or Christopher Hitchens.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

Thanks for the wall of

Thanks for the wall of douche-baggery. If you're looking for a source, type it into google and take your pick. You'll find a dozen sites that all say a dozen differant things. Here was the one I picked: http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/faith/2009/12/united_st...

Im sorry did my first paragraph seem false? I guess none of those things are true? You don't really believe in heaven, god and angels? Or is it that my descriptions of them got you hot and bothered since I didn't use the acceptable ritualized spooky language to lend reverence to your primitive bullshit? Further more, what's wrong with MacFarlen on 12 shots of whisky?

So let me tell you why I have a superior command of logic: I don't believe in ridiculous and impossible things, such as gods, without requiring evidence.

I seriously doubt that my "athiestkult comrade" (ha) ment 100% of christians want to bomb muslims, afterall if he's here, he's a Ron Paul supporter, and that means he at least aknowledges one christian who doesn't want to bomb the middle east. Though I bet he did have in mind the room full of evangelicals who booed dr. Paul when he mentioned the golen rule in foriegn policy. In truth im pretty sure you're just playing semantics to give you a chance to be butt-hurt when its pretty clear he's blaming the "majority," not every single christian. If you were as smart as you're pretending to be, you wouldn't assume otherwise, because that would be stupid.

So I have no idea who Sam Harris or any of these other "athiest thought leaders" you're refering too are. I don't really follow mainstream media. If he thought going to war was a good idea, than why do I care if he worships the state, spell casting supernatural entites or nothing at all? He's clearly dumb enough to be a part of murder for his government masters. I must have missed the memo at my "athiest club meeting" where we athiests were supposed to rally behind this guy. Because you know we all get together at our athiest temples and pratice the religeon of not believing in primitive mystical bullshit. I attend my "Jesus" athiest church on Sundays, but the rest of the nights its Thor, Spiderman, the Tooth Fairy & the Flying Spagetti Monster that we practice not believing in. The tithes are getting a bit heavy however.

As for the Christians who didn't vote for Bush, they didn't matter because they made no differance.

Look this isn't complicated: There is a tiny pocket of christians (and athiests) who support the non-aggression principal and natural rights. Everyone outside that circle (which is the vast majority of the American public, 89%-or whatever figure you want to grab-of whom are christian)is responsable for letting our government get away with murder.

I personally don't care if a person is christian or athiest. While I think in general an atheist is probably a bit more likley to be capable of reason, there are plenty of stupid athiests who just replace gods with governments. What I care about is if they are individualist or collectivist. In your case, you just sound like an asshole. No one said libertarians had to get along afterall, even though im sure I still like you better than most collectivists I meet.

Lasst eye apologyze 4 mye spalleng, eye'll bee shure 2 uze spall chak 4 u n tha phuture.

You are quite welcome, for the wall that is.

For sake of my own lack of interest in continuing this cute little flame-war, I'll touch the salient points and we'll be done with it. Respond if it pleases you, but this is the end of the road for me on this subject.

Im sorry did my first paragraph seem false? I guess none of those things are true? You don't really believe in heaven, god and angels? Or is it that my descriptions of them got you hot and bothered since I didn't use the acceptable ritualized spooky language to lend reverence to your primitive bullshit?

Hypocritical and sophomoric apply to it more so than the standard of true or false, but as I indicated to your ally, materialists don't work on concepts of true or false, they work by a lower sensory perception level that mimics rational thought at times, but never properly understands its functionality. In all honesty, your assertions are all necessarily false because you don't even grasp the concepts you are attempting to parody, and I'm too bored by your lack of articulateness to attempt explaining it to you, but there are several books that you can look into that will expand your rudimentary education if you are so brave.

Just ask yourself one little question my boy. If I'm the primitive one, why can't you communicate beyond the confines of a brutish philistine?

Further more, what's wrong with MacFarlen on 12 shots of whisky?

Being a comedian who isn't funny has plenty wrong with it, see the South Park episode "Cartoon Wars" for further reference. As for the 12 shots, just try doing it, get behind the wheel of a car for a few miles and then you'll get the picture, though the way you type seems to indicate that you've already put away a few so you can subtract that amount from the 12 if you so please.

So let me tell you why I have a superior command of logic: I don't believe in ridiculous and impossible things, such as gods, without requiring evidence.

*Yawn* I'm sorry, I get easily bored by broad-reaching metaphysical assertions that are, themselves, bereft of evidence. Furthermore, you atheistkult drones can never even present a non-ridiculous qualifier for the evidence that you require. It's either circles-with-corners, creating rocks too big for the creator to pick up, or some other asinine logical paradox that presupposes an illogical outcome that often hints at a bad LSD trip.

Furthermore, you even said yourself that "there are plenty of stupid athiests who just replace gods with governments." Rationality does not exist without intelligence, the fact that you could even entertain the possibility of the two coexisting is both amusing and mildly depressing, though not really unexpected. You can't even spell your own adopted label properly for crying out loud.

"There is a tiny pocket of christians (and athiests) who support the non-aggression principal and natural rights. Everyone outside that circle (which is the vast majority of the American public, 89%-or whatever figure you want to grab-of whom are christian)is responsable for letting our government get away with murder."

That's a very nice and even insightful notion, it's also not what the OP said, nor can it be gleaned from his post without making an inference that would be tantamount of bad faith.

So I have no idea who Sam Harris or any of these other "athiest thought leaders" you're refering too are. I don't really follow mainstream media.

Although Harris has made MSM appearances, he is primarily an internet icon and a touring circus act along with Dawkins and company. Their relevance in this conversation is primarily for purpose of providing contrary examples in a debate.

I seriously doubt that my "athiestkult comrade" (ha) ment 100% of christians want to bomb muslims, afterall if he's here, he's a Ron Paul supporter, and that means he at least aknowledges one christian who doesn't want to bomb the middle east. Though I bet he did have in mind the room full of evangelicals who booed dr. Paul when he mentioned the golen rule in foriegn policy.

While I share his revulsion at what you cited in the latter part of your statement here, I don't have anything to go on from him to suggest this. Actually, his posts came off as so uninformed on the subject they denoted that if I were in the business of making assumptions, I'd guess that he assumes Ron Paul to be a closeted atheist just as Hitchens though Obama to be the same thing (though Hitchens might have been onto something given some notorious quotes of Obama mocking religious people and The Sermon On The Mount).

There was a time quite long ago (actually, I'm making reference to biblical times) when language was based on high-context thinking, or in other words, being able to assume things based on common cultural knowledge. Modern America is not a high context society, most people literally have no idea how English works as a language and just barely scrape by getting their thoughts across, so me making assumptions on what a person means by saying "It was the Christians who caused Iraq" is saturated with possible implied meanings.

"Lasst eye apologyze 4 mye spalleng, eye'll bee shure 2 uze spall chak 4 u n tha phuture."

Perhaps the Seth MacFarlane analogy to your sense of humor was a bit too charitable on my part. This is more of a "high school freshman who can't figure out how to undo a bra-strap" kind of awkward.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

Loading up the adjective

Loading up the adjective shotgun and spraying a paragraph of nonsense doesn't hide the fact that you just dodged, yet again, the question. If my barbs are sophmoric, your avoidance of the question using "haughty disdain" is a transparent attempt to weasle out of check mate. You may be the spelling bee champion of your church, but im still smarter than you are because I don't believe in ridiculous and nonsensical fantasy-land mythology on faith.

Lets not pretend your "god" myth is difficult to comprehend. Even primitives in the dark ages understood it just fine. Its not complicated. God is your security blanket that helps you deal with hard reality. It sooths your fear of death, softens the blow to your ego when you encounter questions you don't have answers for. It gives you meaning in your life when you fail to create your own. Religion is like a torniquet on your brain. It will save your life, though it will leave you mentally crippled. Sure you can still be brilliant, but you will always be less than what you might have been simply by the fact that you do not demand reason to be the arbitor in all questions.

But since you brought it up, why can't god create a rock too heavy for him to lift? Because its logically impossible maybe? I like how the faithful find new and clever ways to dodge this question, without ever attempting to answer it. Logic can be so difficult. You seem to be particularly fond of dodging questions with intellectual babble that you "hope" makes you sound smart enough that people won't notice your silly attempt to run from logic.

In your defense, you probably don't even do it intentionally. You don't sound like a stupid person, so that means you're a compartmentalized one. You are capable of reason and logic in your day to day life, however you faith is kept walled off from your reasoning mind. Whenever a question or bit of logic threatens to break down that wall (such as the above question you zealots love to dismiss), your mind throws the memnoic kill-switch and puts your brain into read-only mode. You cannot address that question with your reasoning mind because it would force a collision between your reasoning mind, and your faith-based supersticious mind. If that happened, only one would survive. You would emerge as either an athiest or a complete zealot incapable of reason. Wouldn't want that.. you're not ready.

The fact is, perfect beings who can do anything are impossible because it is logically impossible to exist without limitation; as that question so simply points out, to the eternal frustration of frightened servants of the faith everywhere.

But then, athiests have no need to proove there is no god because one is never called upon to "proove" a negative. Yet another logical hurdle christians continually trip over. Im sure when I point out that you have no need to "proove" there is no Flying Spagetti Monster to dismiss the notion (since its @#$%ing stupid), you'll dismiss the statement as "sophmoric brutishness" or some other sweater-vest-wearing, douchbag comment, while dodging the point like its hot.

I don't need a body of evidence, forensics and three reliable witnesses to tell you there is no god, because you'd have to be dumb, compartmentalized, or intellectually lazy to even entertain it as a possiblity. You're talking about ridiculous impossible notions that have no place in an adult convorsation. We aren't 12 year olds playing dungeons and dragons, and yet im expected to provide evidence that we aren't ruled over by a cosmic overlord who casts spells from on high, and who lives in the clouds with his celestials in the magical realm of heaven? Do you want me to provide you with some evidence that its my wife and I putting money under my daughter's pillow when she looses a tooth to dispel the tooth fairy for you as well? But oh wait, go ahead and dodge that.. it was far too "Bob Hope vomiting on jello-shots" for you to actually have to address right?

You may be right about Seth, so I concede on that point. Still I maintain he'd probably be funnier on 12 shots of whisky.

Last, I like how you say you won't be reading this. What a joke. You'll read it, but in some dark corner of your conscious mind, you'll; with a tinge of fear understand that your position is pointless to attempt to defend. That warning will be shutdown in a fraction of a second by your subconscious and immediatly compartmentalized in an attempt to defend yourself from a collision and crisis of faith. Consciously, you'll just be mad and dismiss everything by saying "what an idiot, im done with this." I doubt you'll comment again.

This almost looks like a bad broadway

audition... The cameras clicks almost sound piped in. Its amazing looking at this through another lens. He is reading a script, you can see in his face he is trying to remember those code words...

"They hate our values"

"They hate freedom"

"This enemy likes to hide"

"The enemy is a different type of enemy"

"I received support from Prince Abdullah, Saudi Arabia"

"Universal approval of any action United States takes" This comment is so ridiculous I don't even know where to begin.

"How confident are you that Osama bin laden is behind this" Haha, did you say this was a day after the attacks?! Just had to name drop there.

"Do generations a favor, and whipping terrorism"

Good God... Never forget indeed.

You forgot... War is

You forgot...

War is Peace

Freedom is Slavery

Ignorance is Strength

I fell for it

In January 2007 I woke up. It made me a better person.

Bush's lies were industrial strength but they seemed plausible because he had master deceivers writing the scripts and executing the plays.

President Pinocchio is so obviously deceptive and fork-tongued that it's much, much easier to stay clear.

But I believe President Pinocchio is manufacturing millions of formerly duped people who are now awakening to the truth of all politics and government..

That is no small fete!

I never fell for any of it!

I know who the enemies of freedom are. I know who the real terrorist are. And I never fell for Dumbya's NWO agenda. And the idea that you can end terrorism is ridiculous.