Fox News, 9/27: Tom Cruise publicly supports George Bush's quest for war with Iraq

Group: alt.religion.scientology Date: Fri, Sep 27, 2002, 9:13pm (CDT-2) From: Numbnuts90069@yahoo.com (SherlockNumb)

In response to Barbara Streisand and other Democratic celebrities voicing opposition to a U.S. war with Iraq, Tom Cruise setpped up to the microphone today to announce his total support for President Bush and his desire to go to war with Iraq.

Cruise admitted that he did not have all the intelligence information that President Bush has on Iraq, but because he is the President of the United States, he "must be telling the truth" on what he knows.

Was BS among that group of Hollywood lamebrains who promised to move out of the country if Republicans won some election?

I find this encoraging news for a number of reasons.

Firstly, Al Quada is a cult. Tom Cruse is urging war against a cult and thoughtful Americans will wonder if they can trust ANY secretive non-reason based organisation. Scientology is of cource 'religious' but then so is Al Quada. People will make the connection.

The public amy also wonder why the cult does not contribute to the war by paying tax like the rest of us.

Tigger... you may be planning to divert attention from scientology on to AL Quada. This will not work.

You may like to ask yourself why scientology needs to resort to such tricks if it has such a strong case?

I think a war may well result in a campaign to disarm religious extreamism in the US. Scientology hs invested a high proportion of its ill gotten gains in weaponry (according to posters on this site) and they have much to lose form this.

CoS said Al Qaeda was part of a psychiatrist conspiracy. Now they have to find a psychiatrist in Saddam Hussein's inner circle, to explain the "source" of his wickedness. Maybe they'll find Saddam's daugher-in-law's cousin's brother-in-law is a shrink, so they can link it to their delusional psych conspiracy theories.

What I want to know is: now that Tom has
said he favors war, will he pilot an F-16
over Baghdad and fly through all kinds of
showy explosions, like in his movies, or
will he be content to let other people do
the killing and dying?

Then again, dying is just dropping the body
anyway.

This is not a war against Al-Queda, and
we can expect an increase rather than a decrease
in religious insanity here in the U.S. as
a result of a war. This country has many
Fundamentalist Christians who believe (and some
who claim to believe) in the literal truth
of the Book of Revelation. They think that
a world war that starts in the Middle East
is inevitable, and even acceptable, because
it will usher in the return of Jesus.

Don't be fooled. An attack on Iraq is about
global domination, a personal vendetta ("He
tried to kill my dad"), and the price of
oil. If the Administration wanted to fight
terrorism, it could start by supporting
peace in Colombia, rather than war. But
war in Colombia suits oil interests just fine--
at least in terms of the next quarterly
report, which is what is at stake.
The same goes for the Middle East.

And if the IRS is involved in the management
of Scientology, don't expect a war in the
Middle East to have much effect on that.
Scientology is a control mechanism that works
for a few tens of thousands--do you think
that people of the ilk of the Bush family
and the old cold warriors like Rumsfeld
are going to oppose something like that?

Tom Cruise is an ill-educated ignoramous. Why anyone listens to this self-absorbed dope is beyond me.

They say a man wrapped up in himself makes a small parcel. One of Nicole's quips after her divorce from TC was "At last I can wear high heels again".....

the venusian traindriver
(be careful whose shoes you step into - the sequins on them may clash with the colour of your beard....)