₦airaland Forum

Pastor AIO:
Sorry, did I call anything the Gospel of Jesoul. I meant to say the doctrine of JeSoul. Yes, I'm aware of the gospels of Matthew Mark Luke and John. I am also aware that the text in these gospels are used to support and argue for a variety of doctrines. I'm sure that you know what Orthodoxy is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthodoxy

Why would anyone need to impose an orthodoxy if the right and proper doctrines were already laid out in the bible? Who could read the bible and come up with a different idea of what it was saying. Why the need to impose orthodoxy? It idea of it kind of reminds me of the thought police in oppressive societies. What's so bad about someone having a different opinion of you. Oh, I see, you have a hotline to the absolute truth and anyone who thinks differently from you is a damned heretic. (Hey I know you don't think like this, I only joking! )http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Police

See as you just finished me here lol . . . you're right. Permit me to ask, in the simplest and most concise of declarations, what is the Gospel of Jesus Christ to you?

I see where you're coming from. I asked a question earlier. I said IF GOD IS LOVE, THEN HOW CAN AN UNGODLY PERSON PRACTICE LOVE?

What is the source of the Love that the ungodly person is experiencing.
Oops there I go again with that word, experience. What is the experiential basis for your Faith in Christ? Or did you just read the bible and say, "hmm, that seems to make sense".

Perhaps because we have a spectrum of characteristics in-built in us? we are after all made in the image of God aren't we? and we exhibit these characteristics at different times and to different degrees?

Perhaps because "ungodliness" is relative? not a definite state of mind/being? I daresay even Hitler would've loved his children while batting no eye lid in murdering that of another?

---

I totally agree with you as regards faith and works, that you cannot put the cart before the horse. However if you see the cart bubbling along down the path wouldn't you say that it is safe to assume that the horse is actually in front of the cart.

Very nice question. Safe to assume? maybe, because its never safe to assume. Our understanding and grasp of things we cannot see are very very handicapped.

The fruits of the spirit are love joy and peace. Is there any other tree that you know that can provide these same fruits or is it only the spirit? We need to know so that if there are any further distinctions to be made we can be prepared.

Lol, any other tree I know of? No I can't say that I do.

If you're refering to people who exhibit these qualities without having known or experienced the Holy Spirit - solid question. Perhaps its the same answer as the 'ungodliness'? we're made in God's image and hence have these qualities inherent in us? And when someone is transformed by belief in Jesus, He becomes their motivation?

Deep Sight:
Jesoul: before you take to flight, might i enquire if Hebrews says faith must be in the sacrifice on the cross, or it speaks about faith in God.

My memory does not serve me well, so please help.

Thx mi love.

From Hebrews, I'm not so sure the two are entirely different.

Because it starts out with men/women of the OT, some were of Abrahimic roots, others pagans, including one pro.stitute named Rahab - yet they were all commended for their faith. They knew nothing of Jesus or a cross and certainly millions have lived and died under the same circumstances.

But Hebrews culminates and comes full circle, saying the these people died still holding on to their faith - and then Hebrews points to Jesus as the fulfilment of that faith, calling Him in unequivocal terms the "fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith" (Heb 12). (Maven touched a bit on this) They may not have known Jesus in their minds, but they knew Him in their hearts through their faith.

I hope this answers your question?

Lol@ Spiked.
Ibime is so far the only one on NL who successfully brings out the black in me the yeye boy does not know he has unleashed something that should've been kept locked up. Don't worry Ibime, you'll accrue some dividends alright. . . though I don't think it'll be the type you like
and btw you're also religious, thou knewest not? The zeal, passion and fevor with which you practise Obamism has few rivals here on NL

Ibime:
Honestly, I got nothing for you. . . . my lil bro got a few tracks on youtube with little skills I taught him. . . . I dont think you would like it though. . . .

Why? is he rapping about guns, gold teeth, b's and cash money? In that case I'll take a pass but in general I appreciate talent when I see it.

Deep Sight:
I do not accept the Bible as inviolable truth, so quoting Hebrews on Faith is nothing to me: but anything i quote to you should mean something to you since YOU accept the bible as inviolable truth. Also i see no reason to take the words of Paul above the words of Christ?

Well, I already knew that. And at this point and with your permission, I must quietly dismiss myself. Certainly everything I may subsequently put forth as it is from the body of the scriptures will be meaningless and of no consequence to you.

But please I hope you see the problem with using only one verse or teaching from the scriptures and holding onto it as your position while ignoring others that contradict it or teach in addition other requirements. Cheers.

Hit tracks? you mean so wack they literally hit and result in a headache?

Talk is cheap boy, wicked cheap.

Post 8 bars, heck make it 4 bars only, let us evaluate this gem in the rough, that has been overlooked by Defjam.

MyJoe:
You cannot overemphasise love because it just covers some many things - the sacrifice you believe in, everything. As for accepting the whole Bible, that would require a treatise, but let me just say you are not entirely blameless with regards to dismissing parts of it. And if anything I said made you angry, let it pass, for that is never my intention.
Sleep well.

Angry ke? not at all my brother, not at all.

I agree Love is indeed the greatest. I'm just trying to show you and Deepsight, that according to the bible, love is not the way to be saved - but Faith in God is - and love is what naturally follows this genuine faith.

Fast ones are not my style and the discussion is getting muddy so I will ask simply one question again Deepsight:

Deep Sight:
Jesoul, you must tell me what peculiar faith the good samaritan is said to have had.
If you cannot do this, your discussion on faith fails.

JeSoul:
Heb 11:6  And without faith it is[u] impossible[/u] to please God

  How does Heb 11:6 square with your insinuation the Samaritan's good works, divorced from faith was what will save him?

If it is impossible to please God without faith, how is the Samaritan going to be saved?

---

Romans 1: 16 I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 17For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith."

MyJoe:
The Samaritans were considered inferior by the Jews. Why? Simply because they did not worship in Jerusalem - that did it for the Jews. Today people today are considered damned by some Christians just because they hear about a gospel and refuse to accept the article of faith that Christ died for your sins - that does it for Christians. There is clear parallel here.

I take particular exception to this.
 It is not christians that peddal this teaching, IT IS THE BIBLE! Please see John 3:18 "Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son."

 I don't understand why some would pick certain parts of the scriptures they like and chant love love love, when the bible taught so many other things first and above - SIN, SACRIFICE, REDEMPTION, THE CROSS etc


  It would be wiser and more honest to reject the entire bible, than pick the parts that suit you and then proceed to declare that "the way".

---

Deep Sight:
Jesoul, you must tell me what peculiar faith the good samaritan is said to have had.

If you cannot do this, your discussion on faith fails.

Particularly tell me why the parable did not simply say - a good plumber - or a good man from Judea?

Why was it so cardinal that someone outside the given belief system was selected to make a parable on.

Is it a coincidence that the parable ends by justifying that person who is of a different belief system.

Now look at the Scripture above and tell me Jesus did not single out Love as the overarching rule for finding the Lord?

I just pointed this out:

JeSoul:
Jesus wasn't insinuating the Samaritan's good works were what would save him. He was simply showing Love for God, and love for one's neighbor results in actions such as was expressed by the Samaritan.

Jesus did not tell that parable to establish the foundation on how to be saved! not by any stretch of the imagination. I dare you to prove otherwise. He told it to express who was one's neighbor, and how to show love to them, even neighbors the Jews had scorned, showing how even they with their expression of love were better than the so-called "called and chosen".

 And please salvation by faith is not my position, you keep trying to make it such. It is the biblical position and it could not be more explicit:
Luke 7:50
Jesus said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace."

Ephesians 2:8
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God

Romans 5:2
through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we rejoice in the hope of the glory of God.

and the greatest of them all

Hebrews 11:6
And without faith it is[u] impossible[/u] to please God  

  How does Heb 11:6 square with your insinuation the Samaritan's good works, divorced from faith was what will save him?

 I certainly didn't write Luke, Ephesians and Romans.

^ at odds?

What were Jesus' first words before He told that parable? why did He tell that parable?

Luke 10:25
On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. "Teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?"
26"What is written in the Law?" he replied. "How do you read it?"
27He answered: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.
28"You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live."
29But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?"


  and then Jesus went on to tell the parable of the Samaritan specifically to show who is ones neighbor, and what true love is -  which comes after loving God. If this isn't faith I dunno what is.

  Jesus wasn't insinuating the Samaritan's good works were what would save him. He was simply showing Love for God, and love for one's neighbor results in actions such as was expressed by the Samaritan. Instead of the empty doctrinarians that were prevalent at the time and even now, who simply professed but never showed evidence by their actions.

Ibime:
^^^. . . . nuccas of my kind of talent died in the 1990's. . . . I cannot be expressing my talent to this auto-tune generation. . . . it would be too much for them to handle!

Lol, something I will agree with 1000%.

Abeg show us newbies what we missed . . . a link will suffice if that be too much to divulge abeg send to my inbox charissa911@hotmail.com.

I am waiting to be schooled by his highness . . .

Deep Sight:
And this -

The Parable of the Good Samaritan -

Why do you suppose that a "samaritan" is used in this example, if not to show that the leaning of tribe, doctrine and dogma is irrelevant but the leaning of the spirit is all that counts?

Still isn't different from anything we've already said:

JeSoul:
I have consistently maintained FAITH in God is what saves. There are scores of non-christians, non-jews lauded in the scriptures for their faith . . . they never had the Torah, never knew who Jesus was yet expressed the kind of faith in God that He requires.

Those who heard the gospel, understood it and still chose instead to hold onto their works - instead of faith in God/Christ - are the ones the bible condemns.

mavenbox:
Thanks, Kristonium, if we were physically discussing I would have stopped. But since this site may be here for years, you do not know who may visit in years to come and find answers here. Someone willing to understand, someone who found this page via google.

Jesoul, as you have truly said, no doctrine can save any. In fact, all that is required to save one is to accept that Jesus died to pay for their sins and has thus reconciled them to God if they mentally accept the offer (how Adam mentally accepted to sin). My entire explanation was background, which i tot DeepSight would appreciate cos he appears meticulous. Obviously i didnt need to do that.

That being the #1 and only reason to persist in these discussions over and over.

Deep Sight:
@Jesoul, Mavenbox;

What do you make of this scripture -

Does it perhaps serve to cast some light on the perspective of Christ in terms of those who are really standing with him?

Exactly what it says and it is in concert with everything else we've been saying. That being in righteous standing is not a matter of words or professions of faith or expressions of the miraculous - But simply in FAITH which results in ACTIONS of love and righteousness. Faith without works in dead as we've been chanting since day 1.

  How does this differ from anything else we've been preaching Deep?

Abeg carry go jor . . . we all have our moments . Besides, Jesoul's not rapping so much anymore, I'm leaving that to the real experts. Catch me on an acoustic/reggae stage near you.

and as for moments yours hasn't arrived yet . . . whats the problem? UPS lost it? or it doesn't flat out exist?

and please take that love song of your signature . . . it is at strong odds with the perception and image I (and I'm sure many others) have of you. Please eh, biko, stop confusing us.

There are plenty soulja boy and young jeezy tracks that would be more suited to you

Ibime:
hehehehehe. . . . Je Soul! Je Soul! Je Soul!. . . . . how many times I done call your name for hia?. . . . I guess you know my statements are all tongue in cheek . . . . I like pulling your leg, cos you react like Obasanjo trying to push a bill through the House of Reps.

Ehen now, and I have learned how to respond in a manner that is most fitting for you. Na gra-gra you like, na gra-gra I go givey you. Abi I nor try?

Pastor AIO:
Mind you, I'm not saying that I haven't seen a christian that didn't practice love.  I'm saying that I haven't seen a christian that due to accepting the doctrines that you and mavenbox espouse have practiced love.  The correlation that I question is between accepting the doctrine and becoming filled with love.

There you go again.
  Is this the gospel of Maven and Jesoul and Noetic? or the Gospel of Mathew, Mark, Luke and John? please direct the credit to the proper authority.

  Overall, I'm not so sure we're saying completely different things. I have not now nor ever said a doctrine is what saves, please show me a quote where I insinuated such? so please don't dash me wetin I nor do. I have said FAITH FAITH and FAITH in Christ - which must lead to good works is what justifies and saves.

While in a sense I accept what you said above, I believe that a) I understand it differently to you, and b) that John 3:17 does not mention a sacrifice of any sort.  Earlier verses do mention that the son shall be lifted up like the serpent, and that is the closest thing in the whole passage that can be taken to mean his sacrifice on the cross (but by really forcing the issue).  However that is not to say that I don't accept the sacrifice.

Forgive me, I meant John 3:18.
And Pastor please kindly read this thread to see where I stand, cos it seems in your beef against pentecostalism you're lumping everyone into the same box.   https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-361617.32.html#msg5065947

Deep Sight:
Yes i know you are happy to dismiss that scripture laughingly and with a wave of the hand simply because it does not suit your dogma. Who's cherry-picking now?

Emi ke? cherry pick? I hold every consonant, syllable, vowel, comma and period in greatest of regards. I have addressed Acts 10 fully on the other thread and showed you how it does infact go hand in hand with John 3:17, the beatitudes and every other verse.

 But you're still standing there, feet dugg firmly in the mudd, armed with the beatitudes, fending off every other verse that contradicts your position.

 I don't mean to argue with you my husband, I'm simply saying "this is what the bible teaches", by all means if you'd like to believe otherwise it is your certainly your God-given perogative. I'm simply saying don't say the bible only teaches the beatitudes is the way because it doesn't.

Let me give you a poser. Do you realize that if you go to rural india now and start preaching this gospel of yours to native hindus, your assertion will sound nothing short of bizzarre to them. Occultic, even.

I agree 1000%. 1Cor 1:18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God

Will you assert to me that honest, sincere and simple-minded individuals amongst them (who according to you lot would have been merrily on their way to heaven since they had not heard of Jesus) would suddenly stand condemned on account of the fact that the word you have brought to them is so drastically alien that it means nothing to them?

If that is the case, you will do more good to such people by refraining from preaching your gospel to them, so that they may be judged on conscience, as your gospel comes with a terrible and draconian weight - to wit - believe that my carpenter died for your sins or guess what - you are going to hell! _{And to hell with the fact that you are a good, kind, compassionate, loving, honest lover of your fellow-man; how dare you refuse to believe that my carpenter is God, and he died for your sins. Oya, staright to hell!}

I don't think I've ever asserted such a thing.

I have consistently maintained FAITH in God is what saves. There are scores of non-christians, non-jews lauded in the scriptures for their faith . . . they never had the Torah, never knew who Jesus was yet expressed the kind of faith in God that He requires.

Those who heard the gospel, understood it and still chose instead to hold onto their works - instead of faith in God/Christ - are the ones the bible condemns.

Ibime:
Thank God I do not fall into such a category. If I did, my parents would be asking me why I never marry.  . I said "respect your superiors". The 'superior' infers intellectual prowess, not age. 

Intellectual prowess, age, wisdom etc . . . they are all elders/superiors. You should be sitting at the feet of your parents in the hopes that you will soak some of the wisdom they radiate instead of beating your empty chest on NL.
 
  and I hope you don't marry, my heart already breaks and bleeds for that poor, unsuspecting victim girl.

B*tch please!!!   

I expected nothing less from you.

That suggests you have a better solution. Since you have none, you will be well advised to sharrap!!! Criticising his[i] only[/i] option is not constructive.

Great, then take your own advice and subsequently stay off 99% of topics here in this section. For you, that would be wisdom.

Ibime:
I wonder when this De La Soul will learn to respect her superiors.

Giving respect to my elders is something I enjoy and take pride in doing, and it has become more and more obvious you do not fall into such a category.

Rewind to her original quote:

Alright darling, please suggest an effective "non-dialogue" approach to dealing with Iran considering sanctions are already in effect, and considering the US military resources are overstretched and political will (both in US and Europe as well as Middle East) has been eroded by the impeachable lies that Bush and Blair told to get into Iraq.

I await your suggestion.

negro please. I reserve such for future sessions with UN reps, not NL agberos who are simply seeking more fodder to fuel their folly.

How the fluck can we talk about effecting a resolution to the Iran crisis without assessing our current capabilities and where we stand (or rather, where George Bush has left us)?

For crying out loud, where did jesoul stomp on "assessing our current capabilities" as a bad move? stop putting quotes in my your mouth.

All I was simply saying is Obama's dialogue approach has been taken by Iran and thrown on the muddy ground and they jumped around on it with utter glee, while sticking their tongues out at us. Shikena. How hard is this to comprehend?

Deep Sight:
But he made clear what belief entails. He made clear that belief is demonstrated by obeying his commands of love.

So that's belief, Jesoul. . .

Hang on, i have two powerful scriptures for you on this. . .

Lol . . . your powerful scriptures? Acts 10:34?

You can post verse after verse my dearest Deepsight, but it will not overshadow or negate the biblical fact that "belief in Jesus" is not just to do works of love - but is first and foremost to accept we are sinful and are in need of a savior - this is belief in Jesus as taught by the bible.

  all the works of love and righteousness will naturally follow this, not the other way round. And attempting to put the carriage before th horse in this case is tantamount to Is 64:6.

Pastor AIO:
Now the question is: How many human beings do we know that, after having cerebrally accepted the fact of christ's sacrifice, have actually become more righteous humans, more loving, have actually become a new creation.

Are you saying you've never seen any? I have.

I see the issue you're presenting, BUT all I'm asking is that you or Deepsight prove from the scriptures that this:

Man is not made righteous by works.
Man is made righteous by Faith in the sacrifice of Christ.

- is false, untrue and is not the way to salvation put forth in explicit terms by the scriptures. Shikena.

Whether or not man has fallen short, you don't see them live up to the standard or they doesn't express love or live out their faith is of no consequence. The bottomline is this, is this the formula for salvation Jesus Himself taught or not?

 cos I have a huge problem with this next statement you made calling it "Jesoul's formula":  

I know too many people that make a big deal of professing your formula for redemption (JeSoul) and I have seen nothing redeemed in them. Now if this was a product being sold in the market, by now someone would have called in the Office of Fair Trading to come and arrest you for duping people. There is no evidence for the claims you make of your product.

Again, I didn't write any scriptures, I simply quoted them. Or does John 3:17 not exist in your copy?

The fact that perhaps in PastorAIO's world, he has seen no christians living out the faith of Jesus in works, actions, deeds, love etc surely does not become rule, true and standard everywhere else in the world that there are no christians who trust in their faith to save them, but also have works of love and righteousness?

  I'm not advocating simply a profession of faith I have never done that anywhere as that's not what the bible teaches - I stated explicitly on the other thread this profession of faith without works of righteousness is infact dead and cannot save.

Deepsight,

surely you must see a contradiction with you cherry picking only the beatitudes as the criteria for salvation whereas there are tons of other verses that say one must believe in Jesus as the son of God and accept His sacrifice to be saved?

You cannot pick only one "Jewish dogma" from the entire scriptures and ignore the other ones that don't support and even contradict your position.

It was the same Jesus that taught the Beatitudes that taught in John 3:17 "He who doesn't believe is condemned already".

Ibime:
Imagine a local girl like yourself lauding the quality of a common word like balderdash. . . . .you can take the girl out of the village to Yankee, but you can never take the bush out of the girl. . . no matter how yankeefied one may get, it is obvious that your formative education was subpar.

This I won't dignify with a response.

now @ topic,

It is not surprising to see Republicans adopting an ephemeral view of politics. . . . everything in politics has precedent, and Obama must work within the limitations of the political, economic and military leverage beqeathed to him by George Dubya. . . . my statement stands that with George Bush's whittling down of military and political leverage, there is not much Yankee can do about the Iran situation. . . . this was the case even before Obama started in office. . . . Israel even had to suggest to Bush that to take the sting out of the situation, Israel should bare the burden of taking out the nuclear facilities in Iran. . . . . that still remains the action plan for Iran. . . . can the honourable Je Soul proffer a better solution, instead of yarning megedefegede?

The problem with Obamabots is that they view any and every criticism against their savior as personal and seem to have this insatiable, unscratchable itch, almost a slave-like response mechanism to pounce to his defense - all without exercising the forgotten act of thinking first.

On several other threads I have conceded along with other rational people in this section that these wars and the ME are a no-win situation for Obama. Instead of you taking my post at face value where I simply criticized Kay for praising Obama's "dialouge" approach you went off on a whole unecessary tangent.

I pray sooner than later, the slavish desire you feel to defend your savior is exorcised from you before you lose completely any of the little sense that you have.

Deep Sight:
With this statement i am certain that you are not familiar with the life and times of Mahatma Ghandi. I will therefore urge you to do some research online about him before reverting to me.

I will also urge you to compare his life and disposition to the commands Christ set forth within the beatitudes.

And as an aside, maybe you should also ponder on the beatitudes. Because they set forth very clearly the qualities required to be saved.

All of which Ghandi had in massive amounts.

Oga dearest Deepsight, haven't we already been over the Ghandi thing? https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-361617.32.html#msg5065947

mavenbox:
JeSoul, I love you. You explained my heart using your last 3 or 4 posts, what I tried to say with many words. I guess thats the hazard of hardened writers of fantasy like me: verbosity.

I have been a fan of yours since day one Maven, believe that girl. I like the way you think and express and some of your breakdowns on the YEC thread I found very illuminating and straight-up delightful to read. Pls keep it up! 

and while verbosity has its ails, it also has its benefits - same as brevity

tensor777:
My point is that it is not necessary for a Christain woman to adorn herself with such paints and pigments.
.

Not necessary? absolutely right. Sinful or unbiblical? absolutely not.

olabowale:
@JeSoul: « #69 on: Today at 09:48:08 PM »  Could you show proof(s) from your Bible?

Modesty, in this case could be advanced to the moderation drinking but not getting drunk, or stealing but not big things, sexual indulgences (this reminds me of the sales of indulgence and before it, there was nothing called Protestants) as long its not every day?

I wanna pull your leg alittle. Amusing myself at the same time that I hope you will see the weakness in the Mosesty.

Alhaji sir, it is always good to cross paths with you    We already know say na cat and mouse you sabi play when it comes to these issues so I will not indulge the above post.

  Btw, how is my Olayiwola? 

^^   this one na real expose oh lol

How come you're so well versed on the issue of Toshmann's sexcapades? I sense you two must've had a run in or two in the past?

Tensor, you speak well brotha. If all you're advocating is modesty, then you have a fan in me.

Surely you're not saying all make-up and finger-painting is wrong are you?

[quote author=pres-elect link=topic=363337.msg5111727#msg5111727 date=1260815510]for now the US has a friend in pakistan. what is america doing, spending more in afghanistan, rather than pakista which already has a democracy that is frail and needs help. and they have nuclear weapons too. support pakistan to drive out their taliban/terrorists, and spend more at home to secure your borders.[/quote]"For now" being the operative word. And I'm not so sure the US can count on any friendships, everyone is out for their own profit not necessarily what's better for the world.

5 american born terrorists were arrested in pakistan recently, who gave them away? their parents. this war on terror, your greatest ally is . . . . the moderate muslims. this war reduces their population and turns the few remaining into extremists

Prez stop it oh, you cannot be serious with that 
Moderate muslims? our greatest allies? negro please! The same moderate muslims that plead the 5th, and astound us all with their overpowering silence whenever terrorists strike around the world? these same moderates?

  The parents that turned them in are only in the 0.01% of the entire 'moderate muslim' percentage. The rest of them just fold their hands and siddon look.

Is it a sin for a christian woman to wear make-up? I think it would be a sin for some not to 

That being said the answer is very simple. Along with everything else a christian does, whether it is sinful or not always comes down to the motive behind the action.

[quote author=pres-elect link=topic=363337.msg5111641#msg5111641 date=1260814599]so why encourage the diet of hate and intolerance by continuing these expensive wars that have no advantage?[/quote]This I will question along with you. I don't believe this war against a shadow enemy can be won.

when the US can pull out, spend money on their economy, increase their homeland security and have peace. note that if the security agents at home had done their work, 9-11 would never have happened. and because of their alertness now, there has been no other attack. never mind politicians claiming they are the ones who kept america safe, america is kept safe by the hardworking security agents

Even if we tightened every lose end, and plugged all the holes in the fences, I still don't think we can keep out every threat. We can certainly do our best, but I don't think we can keep them all out. Even on the home soil now, terrorists are being grown.

And in the case of the ME where we're worried about them becoming certified nuclear threats, the question isn't anymore whether we can keep them out, is it?