An Amazing Display of Precision

"gatt" wrote in message
...

There hasn't been peace in the middle east since before the Old Testament.
They've been fighting each other over God for over six thousand years and,
remember: Islam is a religion of peace.


How can that be? Isn't Islam only about 1300 years old?

"Steven P. McNicoll" writes:

"gatt" wrote in message
...

There hasn't been peace in the middle east since before the Old Testament.
They've been fighting each other over God for over six thousand years and,
remember: Islam is a religion of peace.


How can that be? Isn't Islam only about 1300 years old?

A quick read of the OT will explain. Just the first few chapters are
enough.

"Bob Fry" wrote in message
...

A quick read of the OT will explain. Just the first few chapters are
enough.


No it won't. The Old Testament begins with the creation. The statement in
question was, "There hasn't been peace in the middle east since before the
Old Testament." The statement is immediately recognized as crapola because
there was nothing before creation.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

No it won't. The Old Testament begins with the creation. The statement
in
question was, "There hasn't been peace in the middle east since before the
Old Testament." The statement is immediately recognized as crapola
because
there was nothing before creation.


Do you have evidence of this or is this something you take on faith?

"Peter Gottlieb" wrote in message
et...

Do you have evidence of this or is this something you take on faith?


Evidence of what? That the Old Testament begins with Creation? Sure, I
have evidence, the freakin' Bible!

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
.net...

"Peter Gottlieb" wrote in message
et...

Do you have evidence of this or is this something you take on faith?


Evidence of what? That the Old Testament begins with Creation? Sure, I
have evidence, the freakin' Bible!

You evidently know as much about nations and states as you do about
"evidence".

"Tom S." wrote in message
...

You evidently know as much about nations and states as you do about
"evidence".


You evidently haven't read the previous messages.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
.net...

"Tom S." wrote in message
...

You evidently know as much about nations and states as you do about
"evidence".


You evidently haven't read the previous messages.

Maybe if you wouldn't snip all the context....

You know Steven, brevity in UseNet is not as critical as it is in your day
job.

"Tom S." wrote in message
...

Maybe if you wouldn't snip all the context....


I leave enough.

Corky Scott wrote:

snip

The controller ok'd the switch to the group target from the "safe
house" virtually instantaneously, which would lead one to believe that
the military was pretty sure of it's target, and therefore that anyone
running down the road in the proximity of the target must be hostile
and legitimate targets.

I would hope they were "pretty sure of [the] target" before they even
started.

It would just be nice to know if we're oooing and aaaahhing over a hit
on actual enemy or an example of "collateral damage".

Corky Scott

--
Frank....H