I'm REALLY 'virussed off'. No-one wants to debate with me, so instead I'm having to waste my time removing viruses of my hard drive.
Its SO annoying. Everytime I say something 'controversial' I get whacked by a virus. If people have a problem with my thoughts, let's hear them so I can [at least] identify the 'roots of discontent'. After all isn't that the whole purpose of Democracy - to bring people together and identify solutions to problems and barriers they face?
Monday, January 28, 2008
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Jihad, Jihad
Its seems many 'Jihadist' Scholars appear to scream delightfully "Jews are apes and pigs", or "Jews are brothers of apes and pigs" (or something to that effect), and they use a number of Quranic Verses [1] to justify this slander (and libel). So what's the deal?
Well the Quranic verses refer to incidents that happened ~2500 years ago (~500BCE) that were very specific to a group amongst the Israelites. They were punished for deliberate transgressions [despite a number of Divine Warning] by being transformed into apes and pigs, and the verses were revealed:
1. to prove Al-Amin really was a Prophet (since these incidents aren't to be found in traditional Israelite Scriptures)
2. as a warning to the Madinite Israelites if they continued transgressing against Al-Amin (by spreading lies eg he was insane, a liar etc etc)
So how is this relevant in the modern context? Actually I have NO idea! If the 'Jihadist Scholars' are suggesting the modern Jews are somehow related to those Israelites, then presumably they have complete Family Charts and Histories to justify this claim. If they're simply trying to be insulting, then the Jews can simply retort "Well you're the children of rapists, mass-murderers, incest, Devil-Worshippers, Pagans, Human Sacrificers, Bestialitists", etc etc since if one goes back up the Family Chain far enough (especially during their Pre-Islamic Days) one will find all these practices prevalent amongst their people.
And I'm sorry but this is COMPLETE bullsh*t [2]. I have NO idea what sources this 'Jihadist Scholar' has used but it doesn't reflect reality. Al-Amin was asked to go to Madina to bring peace and unity to a peoples wracked by decades of constant strife and warfare. Thus his focus and responsibilities lie in identifying and solving Social Problems, and rebuilding the nation. Whilst some Madinite Israelites were the source of quite a few problems Al-Amin encountered, it would be 'Intellectual Terrorism' to categorise all of them as THE ENEMY or 'The Source of All Evil'. It is equally irresponsible to invent history that implies Al-Amin was obsessed with destroying Madinite Israelites. However it would be correct to state that those Israelite Tribes that sided with the Pagans to destroy the Muslim Ummah were attacked and defeated. Unfortunately this interpretation significantly alters the entire context, and is no longer helpful to the Palestinians in their quest to eject the Israelis from Israel.
I can't help feeling that the biggest disaster [in Modern Islamic History] was when the Palestinians [fed up with bandying around the Arab Nationalist Flag to garner support for their cause] suddenly turned to the 'Islam Bandwagon' to try and gain sympathy and support. After that they seem to have [quite cleverly] re-interpreted history to imply "Jews are the BIG enemy that needs exterminating". I'm sorry dear Palestinians, whenever I see your miserable state my heart goes to you. But ultimately [in this equation] you ARE the Terrorists. You shot yourselves in the foot [by siding with the British against the Ottomans] and now you have to accept the consequences of your actions.
However as a 'fellow' Muslim I would like to see a Two-State Solution simply because judging by events like this [4, 6] Palestinians need time to evolve to the point they can respect Jewish Neighbours [instead of screaming 'hellfire and brimstone' at the mere mention of the word 'Jew'] (I think the Palestinians have lost sight of the reasons they are fighting. 'Resistance' only makes sense if they're attacking an immediate enemy. However since they're only targetting innocent civilians, surely that makes them guilty of murder...). But since the Palestinians have NO right to demand specific pieces of land (eg Jerusalem), they should just be grateful for whatever they're given. If after that anyone from Palestine attacks the Jewish 'Cancer', then that will be [correctly interpreted as] an 'Act of War' and they're on their own
As for 'Slave Girls', 'Slavery' was [more or less] globally abolished [3] around 100 years ago. The Quranic Verses relating to Slavery and 'those whom your right hand possess' ie Slave-Girls refers to a practice that existed 1400 years ago. However there are sufficient Hadiths requiring 'freeing of Slaves' for penance to suggest Islam actually wants to destroy this despicable industry so we should congratulate and honour any global attempts to do this. Besides how can we discuss global Brotherhood and Sisterhood if [in the same breath] we also want access to slave-girls?
Also [as far as I'm aware] Islam forbids enslaving free people (the idea being "Ok you can keep the slave industry that already exists, but you can't force any 'free peoples' into it") which should have resulted in the industry [slowly] withering away over 1000 years ago.
Rape is punishable by stoning to death for married men and 100 lashes (on the bare back with a jaldah/dirrah [5]) for the unmarried. The age/religion/gender etc of the victim is irrelevant.
Paedophilia is the same as rape (even though Al-Amin married a 6 year old girl).
Whilst Polygamy is permitted, there are a number of points that need to be made about this issue:
1. The male has to honour each wife as though he were ONLY married to her. Thus if he marries four wives, he is actually responsible for four SEPARATE households (yes that can be VERY expensive, time-consuming and require very sophisiticated Human-Management Skills, since each wife also has her parents and associated family).
2. Since the most successful Islam Social Systems have ALWAYS been those based on a Matriarchal System, with each Wife effectively a 'Queen' (with quite a hefty/frightening amount of Social/Political Power), only a brave/foolish soul would consider venturing down the 'Polygamy' path.
3. 1400 years ago wealth was scarce, and polygamy offered an effective solution for females [from poorer backgrounds] to gain access to it by marrying someone wealthy. However that hurdle has effectively been eradicated (especially in the Industrialised World) thereby allowing the female to make a more measured choice when deciding on a suitable spouse.
Al-Amin actually dissuaded a female from marrying a male "because he is a wife-beater". Because wealth was scarce 1400 years ago, females were more limited in their choice of husband. Thus once they married they were pretty much stuck, and simply had to hope the husband had a 'feminine side'. Since wealth is more easy to obtain now-a-days females have more of a choice, so the focus is on the males to show a degree of 'femininity'.
As for discipline, that just sounds like an excuse for 'female abuse' ie "I will beat you if you 'disobey' me" attitude.
Whilst I'm not happy about this, I've decided to support SGRs (Same Gender Relationships) as a Marital Union (as opposed to 'civil unions') [because of some very complicated social reasons].
This is just pure 'Intellectual Terrorism' [4], and seems to have been written by someone 'inspired' by Adolf Hitler, 'Mein Kampf' and the 'Jewish Conspiracy' rubbish he was promoting. It is such demented garbage that I have no choice but to accuse ALL the 'Jihadist Scholars' [mentioned in this article] of being Heretics. And the punishment for Heresy is...Public Crucifixion.
Islam is neither peaceful nor 'unpeaceful'. Islam teaches us to solve Social Problems (and that is ultimately the purpose of Law) by whatever means necessary.
References:
1. http://answering-islam.org.uk/Authors/Arlandson/jew_apes.htm
2. http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sd&ID=SP68304
3. http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/459886/a-muslim-who-gets-it.thtml
4. http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sr&ID=SR2504
5. http://www.answering-islam.org/Books/Hughes/d.htm
6. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/7208969.stm
Well the Quranic verses refer to incidents that happened ~2500 years ago (~500BCE) that were very specific to a group amongst the Israelites. They were punished for deliberate transgressions [despite a number of Divine Warning] by being transformed into apes and pigs, and the verses were revealed:
1. to prove Al-Amin really was a Prophet (since these incidents aren't to be found in traditional Israelite Scriptures)
2. as a warning to the Madinite Israelites if they continued transgressing against Al-Amin (by spreading lies eg he was insane, a liar etc etc)
So how is this relevant in the modern context? Actually I have NO idea! If the 'Jihadist Scholars' are suggesting the modern Jews are somehow related to those Israelites, then presumably they have complete Family Charts and Histories to justify this claim. If they're simply trying to be insulting, then the Jews can simply retort "Well you're the children of rapists, mass-murderers, incest, Devil-Worshippers, Pagans, Human Sacrificers, Bestialitists", etc etc since if one goes back up the Family Chain far enough (especially during their Pre-Islamic Days) one will find all these practices prevalent amongst their people.
And I'm sorry but this is COMPLETE bullsh*t [2]. I have NO idea what sources this 'Jihadist Scholar' has used but it doesn't reflect reality. Al-Amin was asked to go to Madina to bring peace and unity to a peoples wracked by decades of constant strife and warfare. Thus his focus and responsibilities lie in identifying and solving Social Problems, and rebuilding the nation. Whilst some Madinite Israelites were the source of quite a few problems Al-Amin encountered, it would be 'Intellectual Terrorism' to categorise all of them as THE ENEMY or 'The Source of All Evil'. It is equally irresponsible to invent history that implies Al-Amin was obsessed with destroying Madinite Israelites. However it would be correct to state that those Israelite Tribes that sided with the Pagans to destroy the Muslim Ummah were attacked and defeated. Unfortunately this interpretation significantly alters the entire context, and is no longer helpful to the Palestinians in their quest to eject the Israelis from Israel.
I can't help feeling that the biggest disaster [in Modern Islamic History] was when the Palestinians [fed up with bandying around the Arab Nationalist Flag to garner support for their cause] suddenly turned to the 'Islam Bandwagon' to try and gain sympathy and support. After that they seem to have [quite cleverly] re-interpreted history to imply "Jews are the BIG enemy that needs exterminating". I'm sorry dear Palestinians, whenever I see your miserable state my heart goes to you. But ultimately [in this equation] you ARE the Terrorists. You shot yourselves in the foot [by siding with the British against the Ottomans] and now you have to accept the consequences of your actions.
However as a 'fellow' Muslim I would like to see a Two-State Solution simply because judging by events like this [4, 6] Palestinians need time to evolve to the point they can respect Jewish Neighbours [instead of screaming 'hellfire and brimstone' at the mere mention of the word 'Jew'] (I think the Palestinians have lost sight of the reasons they are fighting. 'Resistance' only makes sense if they're attacking an immediate enemy. However since they're only targetting innocent civilians, surely that makes them guilty of murder...). But since the Palestinians have NO right to demand specific pieces of land (eg Jerusalem), they should just be grateful for whatever they're given. If after that anyone from Palestine attacks the Jewish 'Cancer', then that will be [correctly interpreted as] an 'Act of War' and they're on their own
As for 'Slave Girls', 'Slavery' was [more or less] globally abolished [3] around 100 years ago. The Quranic Verses relating to Slavery and 'those whom your right hand possess' ie Slave-Girls refers to a practice that existed 1400 years ago. However there are sufficient Hadiths requiring 'freeing of Slaves' for penance to suggest Islam actually wants to destroy this despicable industry so we should congratulate and honour any global attempts to do this. Besides how can we discuss global Brotherhood and Sisterhood if [in the same breath] we also want access to slave-girls?
Also [as far as I'm aware] Islam forbids enslaving free people (the idea being "Ok you can keep the slave industry that already exists, but you can't force any 'free peoples' into it") which should have resulted in the industry [slowly] withering away over 1000 years ago.
Rape is punishable by stoning to death for married men and 100 lashes (on the bare back with a jaldah/dirrah [5]) for the unmarried. The age/religion/gender etc of the victim is irrelevant.
Paedophilia is the same as rape (even though Al-Amin married a 6 year old girl).
Whilst Polygamy is permitted, there are a number of points that need to be made about this issue:
1. The male has to honour each wife as though he were ONLY married to her. Thus if he marries four wives, he is actually responsible for four SEPARATE households (yes that can be VERY expensive, time-consuming and require very sophisiticated Human-Management Skills, since each wife also has her parents and associated family).
2. Since the most successful Islam Social Systems have ALWAYS been those based on a Matriarchal System, with each Wife effectively a 'Queen' (with quite a hefty/frightening amount of Social/Political Power), only a brave/foolish soul would consider venturing down the 'Polygamy' path.
3. 1400 years ago wealth was scarce, and polygamy offered an effective solution for females [from poorer backgrounds] to gain access to it by marrying someone wealthy. However that hurdle has effectively been eradicated (especially in the Industrialised World) thereby allowing the female to make a more measured choice when deciding on a suitable spouse.
Al-Amin actually dissuaded a female from marrying a male "because he is a wife-beater". Because wealth was scarce 1400 years ago, females were more limited in their choice of husband. Thus once they married they were pretty much stuck, and simply had to hope the husband had a 'feminine side'. Since wealth is more easy to obtain now-a-days females have more of a choice, so the focus is on the males to show a degree of 'femininity'.
As for discipline, that just sounds like an excuse for 'female abuse' ie "I will beat you if you 'disobey' me" attitude.
Whilst I'm not happy about this, I've decided to support SGRs (Same Gender Relationships) as a Marital Union (as opposed to 'civil unions') [because of some very complicated social reasons].
This is just pure 'Intellectual Terrorism' [4], and seems to have been written by someone 'inspired' by Adolf Hitler, 'Mein Kampf' and the 'Jewish Conspiracy' rubbish he was promoting. It is such demented garbage that I have no choice but to accuse ALL the 'Jihadist Scholars' [mentioned in this article] of being Heretics. And the punishment for Heresy is...Public Crucifixion.
Islam is neither peaceful nor 'unpeaceful'. Islam teaches us to solve Social Problems (and that is ultimately the purpose of Law) by whatever means necessary.
References:
1. http://answering-islam.org.uk/Authors/Arlandson/jew_apes.htm
2. http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sd&ID=SP68304
3. http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/459886/a-muslim-who-gets-it.thtml
4. http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sr&ID=SR2504
5. http://www.answering-islam.org/Books/Hughes/d.htm
6. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/7208969.stm
Monday, January 21, 2008
Intellectual Terrorism
An 'Intellectual Terrorist' is someone who uses word to demonise and terrorise a target victim
eg Adolf Hitler used words to terrorise European Jewry
I accuse George W Bush of being an 'Intellectual Terrorist' who used words to terrorise and demonise Muslims and The Muslim World.
Just as a 'Ford Galaxy' is a type of Vehicle, so Nazism is a type/strain of Intellectual Terrorism, thus I propose the word 'Southernism' (and 'Southernist') to describe the type of Intellectual Terrorist who uses words to demonise Muslims (since Texas and the Southern States of USA seem to be the origins of this strain of Terrorism)
I also accuse George W Bush of planning 9/11 as part of the plan to 'Intellectually Terrorise' Muslims and the Muslim World. The 9/11 Report [4] clearly states a complete failure of implementation of internal systems, procedures, Best Practices etc etc led to 9/11 happening. What no-one bothered asking was:
1. If those internal systems, procedures, Best Practices were in place, would 9/11 have happened?
2. Who had to authority to override the internal systems, procedures, Best Practices thereby allowing 9/11 to happen?
I would also like to see the White House indicted for 'Crimes against Humanity' the way the Serbs and Nazis were similarly indicted and punished for their respective crimes.
As for these 'attacks' on Islam [1, 2, 3], Muslims should categorise them as examples of Southernism and simply ignore them. Once Society learns to recognise Southernism and Southernists as vile, pathetic creatures (similar to Nazis and other such dangerous filth), insha-Allah they'll be socially ostracised
References:
1. http://www.iviews.com/Articles/articles.asp?ref=IV0801-3496
2. http://www.anorak.co.uk/twitterings/179872.html
3. http://www.local6.com/news/15138651/detail.html
4. http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/
eg Adolf Hitler used words to terrorise European Jewry
I accuse George W Bush of being an 'Intellectual Terrorist' who used words to terrorise and demonise Muslims and The Muslim World.
Just as a 'Ford Galaxy' is a type of Vehicle, so Nazism is a type/strain of Intellectual Terrorism, thus I propose the word 'Southernism' (and 'Southernist') to describe the type of Intellectual Terrorist who uses words to demonise Muslims (since Texas and the Southern States of USA seem to be the origins of this strain of Terrorism)
I also accuse George W Bush of planning 9/11 as part of the plan to 'Intellectually Terrorise' Muslims and the Muslim World. The 9/11 Report [4] clearly states a complete failure of implementation of internal systems, procedures, Best Practices etc etc led to 9/11 happening. What no-one bothered asking was:
1. If those internal systems, procedures, Best Practices were in place, would 9/11 have happened?
2. Who had to authority to override the internal systems, procedures, Best Practices thereby allowing 9/11 to happen?
I would also like to see the White House indicted for 'Crimes against Humanity' the way the Serbs and Nazis were similarly indicted and punished for their respective crimes.
As for these 'attacks' on Islam [1, 2, 3], Muslims should categorise them as examples of Southernism and simply ignore them. Once Society learns to recognise Southernism and Southernists as vile, pathetic creatures (similar to Nazis and other such dangerous filth), insha-Allah they'll be socially ostracised
References:
1. http://www.iviews.com/Articles/articles.asp?ref=IV0801-3496
2. http://www.anorak.co.uk/twitterings/179872.html
3. http://www.local6.com/news/15138651/detail.html
4. http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/
Sunday, January 20, 2008
Texting for Talaq
I don't understand this issue [1]. Texting is principly no different from sending a letter or using Morse Code (or any form of long distance communication eg email, phone, telegram etc etc) so why is this problem vexing the Scholars?
As far as I'm aware Talaq can ONLY be accepted if the male says it in front of a qualified Judge with the wife alongside him. All these other exotic methods are irrelevant and inconsequential. Of course in situations where either party is unable to attend, he/she can be represented by legal representation. Isn't this beginning to sound like the 'Western' System?
1. http://www.montereyherald.com/ci_8025706?source=rss&nclick_check=1
As far as I'm aware Talaq can ONLY be accepted if the male says it in front of a qualified Judge with the wife alongside him. All these other exotic methods are irrelevant and inconsequential. Of course in situations where either party is unable to attend, he/she can be represented by legal representation. Isn't this beginning to sound like the 'Western' System?
1. http://www.montereyherald.com/ci_8025706?source=rss&nclick_check=1
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Living in Fear
Its unfortunate that Muslims are focused on "living in Fear of God's Punishment otherwise He'll Get you" [1]. Islam teaches us to be awestruck by His Power, Majesty and Beneficence etc etc and to worship Him because of these characteristics (this is the reason the Quran constantly exhorts us to study our environment to understand and appreciate God's Stunningly Powerful Design and Implementation Abilities - and surprising as it may seem those verses are NOT there as a 'Bible-bashing' exercise eg "Oh look how wonderful 'our' Quran is, it contains all this stuff about conception, does your cr*ppy Bible have anything similar?"). Whilst I agree we should fear His Punishment, that's only as a warning to avoid unlawful acts eg backbiting, Zina, Hedonism and Prostitution filth etc etc We're not supposed to live in fear 'just in case God Blasts us out of existence for scratching our noses the wrong way' - though I suspect some of us actually go to that extreme.
By the way is this really the way Presidential Elections are fought in USA [2]? People make their choice NOT because a particular candidate has weak management or political abilities but because...they don't like his name?!! Now I am concerned about the events in the world's SOLE Superpower. Mind you I do remember the 2004 US Election Theme being "God, Guns and Gays" so perhaps I shouldn't really be surprised by this obsession about a person's name.
References:
1. http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=196320&version=1&template_id=47&parent_id=27
2. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3216580.ece
By the way is this really the way Presidential Elections are fought in USA [2]? People make their choice NOT because a particular candidate has weak management or political abilities but because...they don't like his name?!! Now I am concerned about the events in the world's SOLE Superpower. Mind you I do remember the 2004 US Election Theme being "God, Guns and Gays" so perhaps I shouldn't really be surprised by this obsession about a person's name.
References:
1. http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=196320&version=1&template_id=47&parent_id=27
2. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3216580.ece
Speechless!
I wanted to rip The Vatican apart regarding the reasons for The Crusades. Then I saw stuff like this [1, 2] and I was left speechless! I can now see why initiatives like this [3] are treated with mirth and ridicule, and I don't really know what to say.
Muslims (including myself) like to boast of 'Islamic Superiority'. However this needs to be reflected by some form of evidence, and at the moment all the [winning] cards are in the hands of the athiests, cynics and other Non-Muslims. After all if the Quran [constantly] pleads with us to learn, understand and apply, then why aren't we? Ok so any reasonably educated Muslim can rattle off names like ibn Sina, Al-Biruni, Al-Khwarismi etc etc but these people lived over a millenia ago - what the hell have we been doing since?
I actually congratulate people like Ibn Waraq, Parvin Darabi etc [4] because they're challenging the Muslim World to break out of its current slumber with questions like these [5]. Whilst I can actually answer each and every one of them I refuse to do so. The sole purpose of such questions is to determine the ability of Muslims to think logically [based on Quran and Sunnah], but if I'm the only 'free thinker' out there then it says little about the Muslim World.
I want to speak proudly about my Islamic Heritage. Perhaps one day I will be able to do so without fear of mockery and ridicule.
References:
1. http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID={26CC3516-345F-4F9D-B448-3A027C0B1A46}
2 http://www.wikiislam.com/wiki/Persecution_of_non-Muslims_in_Muslim_countries
3. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=508901&in_page_id=1770&ito=1490
4. http://www.wikiislam.com/wiki/Muslims_who_left_Islam
5. http://www.wikiislam.com/wiki/Hundreds_of_Questions_to_Ask_a_Muslim
Muslims (including myself) like to boast of 'Islamic Superiority'. However this needs to be reflected by some form of evidence, and at the moment all the [winning] cards are in the hands of the athiests, cynics and other Non-Muslims. After all if the Quran [constantly] pleads with us to learn, understand and apply, then why aren't we? Ok so any reasonably educated Muslim can rattle off names like ibn Sina, Al-Biruni, Al-Khwarismi etc etc but these people lived over a millenia ago - what the hell have we been doing since?
I actually congratulate people like Ibn Waraq, Parvin Darabi etc [4] because they're challenging the Muslim World to break out of its current slumber with questions like these [5]. Whilst I can actually answer each and every one of them I refuse to do so. The sole purpose of such questions is to determine the ability of Muslims to think logically [based on Quran and Sunnah], but if I'm the only 'free thinker' out there then it says little about the Muslim World.
I want to speak proudly about my Islamic Heritage. Perhaps one day I will be able to do so without fear of mockery and ridicule.
References:
1. http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID={26CC3516-345F-4F9D-B448-3A027C0B1A46}
2 http://www.wikiislam.com/wiki/Persecution_of_non-Muslims_in_Muslim_countries
3. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=508901&in_page_id=1770&ito=1490
4. http://www.wikiislam.com/wiki/Muslims_who_left_Islam
5. http://www.wikiislam.com/wiki/Hundreds_of_Questions_to_Ask_a_Muslim
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Britain the Springboard for Global Jihad
Someone suggested Americans actually believe Britain has become some kind of 'springboard' for global 'jihadists' and we should be more concerned about this than the outcome of the American Presidential Elections.
Well based [purely] on this article [1], I would propose that we should be concerned about events in USA. After all Election Battles in the UK are focused on each candidate's ability to deliver results based on their past performances [in Cabinet] (Ok Tony Blair was the exception to the rule). I don't remember anyone ever 'raking up muck' (is it really a crime to be a Muslim in USA?) in the hope of personally humiliating the opposition - and I'm sure UK Candidates have plenty to hide themselves.
Anyway moving onto this piece [2], surely oxidisation is a 'miracle'! Seriously I think Pope Benedict should continue from his most honorable predecessor by continuing Pope John Paul's excellent work of seeking forgiveness [3] and building new bridges by asking forgiveness from the Scientific Community for atrocious crimes committed by the Church against Scientists. Who knows, the Pope may even [one day] seek forgiveness [from the Muslim Word] for the Crusades (particularly events in Ma'arra [4, 5, 6])
References:
1. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3194740.ece
2. http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/mark_steel/article3342149.ece
3. http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,230447,00.html
4. http://utah.indymedia.org/news/2003/10/6476_comment.php
5. http://www.crusades-encyclopedia.com/cannibalism.html
6. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ma'arrat_al-Numan
Well based [purely] on this article [1], I would propose that we should be concerned about events in USA. After all Election Battles in the UK are focused on each candidate's ability to deliver results based on their past performances [in Cabinet] (Ok Tony Blair was the exception to the rule). I don't remember anyone ever 'raking up muck' (is it really a crime to be a Muslim in USA?) in the hope of personally humiliating the opposition - and I'm sure UK Candidates have plenty to hide themselves.
Anyway moving onto this piece [2], surely oxidisation is a 'miracle'! Seriously I think Pope Benedict should continue from his most honorable predecessor by continuing Pope John Paul's excellent work of seeking forgiveness [3] and building new bridges by asking forgiveness from the Scientific Community for atrocious crimes committed by the Church against Scientists. Who knows, the Pope may even [one day] seek forgiveness [from the Muslim Word] for the Crusades (particularly events in Ma'arra [4, 5, 6])
References:
1. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3194740.ece
2. http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/mark_steel/article3342149.ece
3. http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,230447,00.html
4. http://utah.indymedia.org/news/2003/10/6476_comment.php
5. http://www.crusades-encyclopedia.com/cannibalism.html
6. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ma'arrat_al-Numan
Monday, January 14, 2008
Is anybody out there?
I think I've bored everyone off my blog. Ahh well I guess I'm not 'Mr Popular'.
Anyway I thought I'd share my views on a news items I picked up [1] - Is there any reason why the Lord's Prayer can't be recited over Loudspeakers instead of Church Bells?
References:
1.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/01/14/nchurch214.xml
Anyway I thought I'd share my views on a news items I picked up [1] - Is there any reason why the Lord's Prayer can't be recited over Loudspeakers instead of Church Bells?
References:
1.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/01/14/nchurch214.xml
Sunday, January 13, 2008
CIA v Pentagon
I'm sorry Alex but are you suggesting the 'War on Terror' is actually a low-intensity war between the CIA and The Pentagon? Please forgive me if I reply "At this point we're entering the Twilight Zone!"
Conspiracy conspiracy
I'm sorry Donald and Bob but is this [1] what you guys are referring to?
Perhaps I am a Muslim, or 'English' or just plain naive, but [to me] it seems a little extreme to engineer mass-murder and grand treason because of what may or may not be happening (or happen in the future) in Eurasia.
The Pearl Harbour atrocity was actually an act of war by one of two immediate major global threats (Nazism and Japanese Imperialism) who also happened to form a coalition. By contrast the recent atrocities were:
1. NOT conducted by ANY military power that was threatening USA
2. NOT going to directly benefit anyone immediately
I have heard rumours that the Taliban were actually removed because they were proving inflexible over the Caspian Sea deal [2] but:
1. political attitudes and interests tend to change over time
2. the longer you wait for a fossil fuel the greater its worth (especially when demand starts to severely outstrip supply)
So you'll have to forgive me if I find your suggestion [that this was some grand 'coalition' conspiracy plan hatched between The Pentagon and the Republican Hierarchy] a little difficult to consume.
By the way bearing in mind that [at least to my knowledge] Yemen is NOT regarded as 'US Territory' wouldn't it be foolish to 'switch off the radar' even if USS Cole was docked?
I'd like to add that just based on this article [3] I would propose Reverend Bill McGinnis is the most knowledgeable 'Muslim Scholar' out there [though bearing in mind 'Muslim Scholars' are busy screaming hellfire and brimstone declaring 'Holy War' on the 'Infidels', its not really surprising].
Incidentally [I believe] 'infidel' derives from 'Infidelity' and means 'Unfaithful', and was used during the Crusades to mean 'Unfaithful to the Cross'. I'm still unclear what 'Muslim Scholars' mean when they use this term.
If we then accept the Americans aren't 'infidels', 'kafirs' [or whatever other accusation is being aimed in their general direction] then I would propose that Colin Powell's warning to President Bush ("you break it you own it") [4] has more than a ring of truth attached to it.
References:
1. http://www.wanttoknow.info/brzezinskigrandchessboard
2. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/west_asia/37021.stm
3. http://www.opednews.com/articles/1/opedne_rev__bil_080112_the_qur_an_forbids_t.htm
4. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/03/AR2008010303259.html?wpisrc=rss_artsandliving/books
Perhaps I am a Muslim, or 'English' or just plain naive, but [to me] it seems a little extreme to engineer mass-murder and grand treason because of what may or may not be happening (or happen in the future) in Eurasia.
The Pearl Harbour atrocity was actually an act of war by one of two immediate major global threats (Nazism and Japanese Imperialism) who also happened to form a coalition. By contrast the recent atrocities were:
1. NOT conducted by ANY military power that was threatening USA
2. NOT going to directly benefit anyone immediately
I have heard rumours that the Taliban were actually removed because they were proving inflexible over the Caspian Sea deal [2] but:
1. political attitudes and interests tend to change over time
2. the longer you wait for a fossil fuel the greater its worth (especially when demand starts to severely outstrip supply)
So you'll have to forgive me if I find your suggestion [that this was some grand 'coalition' conspiracy plan hatched between The Pentagon and the Republican Hierarchy] a little difficult to consume.
By the way bearing in mind that [at least to my knowledge] Yemen is NOT regarded as 'US Territory' wouldn't it be foolish to 'switch off the radar' even if USS Cole was docked?
I'd like to add that just based on this article [3] I would propose Reverend Bill McGinnis is the most knowledgeable 'Muslim Scholar' out there [though bearing in mind 'Muslim Scholars' are busy screaming hellfire and brimstone declaring 'Holy War' on the 'Infidels', its not really surprising].
Incidentally [I believe] 'infidel' derives from 'Infidelity' and means 'Unfaithful', and was used during the Crusades to mean 'Unfaithful to the Cross'. I'm still unclear what 'Muslim Scholars' mean when they use this term.
If we then accept the Americans aren't 'infidels', 'kafirs' [or whatever other accusation is being aimed in their general direction] then I would propose that Colin Powell's warning to President Bush ("you break it you own it") [4] has more than a ring of truth attached to it.
References:
1. http://www.wanttoknow.info/brzezinskigrandchessboard
2. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/west_asia/37021.stm
3. http://www.opednews.com/articles/1/opedne_rev__bil_080112_the_qur_an_forbids_t.htm
4. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/03/AR2008010303259.html?wpisrc=rss_artsandliving/books
Saturday, January 12, 2008
A pattern of attacks
Actually I've just had a thought - what if 9/11 was the 'mother of terrorist attacks', a climax of terrorism activities that appears to have started with the 1996 Khobar Towers Bombing [1]?
And what if the purpose of all of these was simply to drag USA into 'endless conflict' in both Afghanistan and Iraq? Strangely enough at NO POINT did ANY GROUP publicly admit responsibility for all these atrocities (even Bin Laden refused responsibility for 9/11 [2], which is quite strange if he wanted to drag USA into Afghanistan and Iraq).
It's also worth noting that post 9/11, there hasn't been a single attack on US assets ANYWHERE [outside the areas of immediate conflict] , as though 9/11 was meant to be remembered as the 'Mother of Terrorist Attacks'.
That would explain 9/11, but it still doesn't explain what event lead to the attacks in the first place.
Actually there's something else I don't understand. Surely US Navy Warships contain the most sophisticated radar in the world - then how did a terrorist successfully slam a boat packed with explosives into the USS Cole? Do terrorist boats come fully equipped with stealth capability?
References:
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_U.S._embassy_bombings
2. http://911review.com/articles/usamah/khilafah.html
And what if the purpose of all of these was simply to drag USA into 'endless conflict' in both Afghanistan and Iraq? Strangely enough at NO POINT did ANY GROUP publicly admit responsibility for all these atrocities (even Bin Laden refused responsibility for 9/11 [2], which is quite strange if he wanted to drag USA into Afghanistan and Iraq).
It's also worth noting that post 9/11, there hasn't been a single attack on US assets ANYWHERE [outside the areas of immediate conflict] , as though 9/11 was meant to be remembered as the 'Mother of Terrorist Attacks'.
That would explain 9/11, but it still doesn't explain what event lead to the attacks in the first place.
Actually there's something else I don't understand. Surely US Navy Warships contain the most sophisticated radar in the world - then how did a terrorist successfully slam a boat packed with explosives into the USS Cole? Do terrorist boats come fully equipped with stealth capability?
References:
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_U.S._embassy_bombings
2. http://911review.com/articles/usamah/khilafah.html
Friday, January 11, 2008
First Blog
This is my first blog. I keep reading about "Jihad this" and "Jihad that" etc, how the Wahabbis etc have corrupted everything etc etc. Since every Tom, Dick, Patel and Mullah seem to be enlightening us (or should that be 'lighting up the skies'?) with their thoughts, I thought I would add my own...because I can!
I guess everything kickstarted from this article [1] (I'll remove the link if I'm infringing copyright)
I guess the fundamental quesion being asked is "Does the Quran justify violence?", and the answer is "Of course!". We wouldn't be here if we were "nice namby-pamby flim-flam".
The next question is, does this explain Iraq, Afghanistan, 9/11 and 7/7 etc etc
Well assuming 'Muslims' were behind all these atrocities, Islam teaches us to understand the root of the problem. What events happened that led to 9/11? It can't have been events in Iraq since that [rather devastating state of affairs] had existed since Gulf War I [in 1990].
Equally it can't be Israel, since the Arab-Israeli issue has existed since the mid-1930s. And I'm not aware of any other incident.
Additionally this 'kafir' stuff being thrown around is equally confusing. After all were the Allies 'kafirs' when they saved the Saudi-Wahabbis from an [apparently] aggressive Saddam in Gulf War I? And if not, at what point did they suddenly become 'kafir'? And moreover, how do they define 'kafir', and is it the same as the traditional definition?
In the meantime I guess I'll chuckle over this [2], though he could have used some other name instead of 'Achmed' (its actually pronounced 'A-hhh-mudh' and spelt 'Ahmad')
References:
1. http://phibetacons.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZmFiZWI4YTExODM3OWU1NGEyMWFhYTAxNzgzOTEwZmI=
2. http://youtube.com/watch?v=1uwOL4rB-go
I guess everything kickstarted from this article [1] (I'll remove the link if I'm infringing copyright)
I guess the fundamental quesion being asked is "Does the Quran justify violence?", and the answer is "Of course!". We wouldn't be here if we were "nice namby-pamby flim-flam".
The next question is, does this explain Iraq, Afghanistan, 9/11 and 7/7 etc etc
Well assuming 'Muslims' were behind all these atrocities, Islam teaches us to understand the root of the problem. What events happened that led to 9/11? It can't have been events in Iraq since that [rather devastating state of affairs] had existed since Gulf War I [in 1990].
Equally it can't be Israel, since the Arab-Israeli issue has existed since the mid-1930s. And I'm not aware of any other incident.
Additionally this 'kafir' stuff being thrown around is equally confusing. After all were the Allies 'kafirs' when they saved the Saudi-Wahabbis from an [apparently] aggressive Saddam in Gulf War I? And if not, at what point did they suddenly become 'kafir'? And moreover, how do they define 'kafir', and is it the same as the traditional definition?
In the meantime I guess I'll chuckle over this [2], though he could have used some other name instead of 'Achmed' (its actually pronounced 'A-hhh-mudh' and spelt 'Ahmad')
References:
1. http://phibetacons.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZmFiZWI4YTExODM3OWU1NGEyMWFhYTAxNzgzOTEwZmI=
2. http://youtube.com/watch?v=1uwOL4rB-go
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)