← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · il ragno
Thread ID: 16587 | Posts: 13 | Started: 2005-02-04
2005-02-04 14:10 | User Profile
[COLOR=Indigo]When a showroom-minority Secretary of State assures the world we're not going to invade Enemy of Israel X, the smart money moves into preferred shares of Consolidated Body Bag. Within 24 hours of Bush's SOTU, the massmind has had the topic of conversation shifted for them - totally bypassing "why" and going straight to "when". Then again, four short years of Dubya have caused all sorts of short-circuits in that massmind. I think it would be quite interesting to read the text of Bush's speeches circa AD 2000.....when all of these 'givens' - these 'challenges' and 'threats to our freedom' - were things not even [I]mentioned in passing[/I].[/COLOR]
[QUOTE][B]Rice Says U.S. Attack on Iran 'Not on the Agenda'[/B] [I]Secretary of State on Tour of European Capitals[/I] By ANNE GEARAN, AP
LONDON (Feb. 4) - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said a U.S. attack on Iran ''is simply not on the agenda,'' despite the United States' continued criticism of Iran's human rights record and potential nuclear weapons.
Rice would not say whether the United States supports a change of government in Iran, although Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage has expressly said that regime change is not the U.S. goal.
Speaking in London, first stop on a weeklong tour of European capitals, Rice said there is broad international agreement that Iran cannot be allowed to use a civilian nuclear power project to conceal a weapons program.
After a meeting with British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, [B]Rice was asked directly whether the United States might attack Iran[/B]. Doing so could presumably head off the threat that Iran could use a nuclear device against Israel or other nations.
''The question is simply not on the agenda [B]at this point[/B],'' Rice said at a news conference.
Rice said ''We believe particularly in regard to the nuclear issue that while no one ever asks the American president to take all his options, any of his options off the table, that there are plenty of diplomatic means at our disposal to get the Iranians to finally live up to their international obligations.''
The United States and its allies still have diplomatic means to persuade Iran to halt any weapons development, Rice said.
She called the Iranian human-rights record ''abysmal.''
Earlier, Rice met with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, the United States' closest ally in Iraq, holding her first meeting with a foreign leader since taking over from Colin Powell as the top American diplomat.
Their 90-minute breakfast meeting at Blair's Downing Street office covered Iraq, the Middle East and other subjects.
Rice thanked Blair for Britain's support in Iraq ''as we work to support the Iraqi people in their quest and most especially ... as we try to bring to the Israelis and the Palestinians a chance for a lasting peace.''
London is the site of a one-day conference in March to help the Palestinian government build democratic institutions.
En route to London on Thursday, Rice indicated the United States may take a back seat for now in the international effort to bring Israel and the Palestinians closer to a lasting peace.
Rice said she does not plan to attend next week's Middle East summit meeting in Egypt, although she will be close by for talks in Jerusalem and the West Bank.
''Not every effort has to be an American effort,'' Rice said. ''It is extremely important that the parties themselves are taking responsibility. It is extremely important that the regional actors are taking responsibility.''
She said the United States welcomes Egypt's help in hosting the summit and called it one of several hopeful signs for peace.
Middle East peace is one of the main topics for Rice's discussions with European leaders over the coming week, as is Iran. She will visit eight European capitals and the Vatican, with a weekend side trip to see the Israeli and Palestinian leaders.
In stops in Berlin later Friday and Paris next week, she may run into opposition to the U.S.-led war in Iraq. Iran's nuclear ambitions also is expected to be a topic of discussion with Europeans who are trying to head off nuclear weapons development.
It is not clear how much international support there is for any potential action against Iran. The Europeans have offered Iran technological and financial support, and have hinted at a trade deal if weapons development stops. The Bush administration has been cool to the European diplomacy, preferring economic sanctions against Iran.
[B]In his State of the Union speech Wednesday night, President Bush called Iran ''the world's primary state sponsor of terror.''[/B]
At her Senate confirmation hearings last month, Rice said the United States wants ''a regime in Iran that is responsive to concerns that we have about Iran's policies, which are 180 degrees'' antithetical to America's interests. On Thursday, Rice said Iran's approach to human rights and its treatment of its own citizens were loathsome.
''I don't think anybody thinks that the unelected mullahs who run that regime are a good thing for the Iranian people and for the region,'' she said.
Iran's supreme leader on Thursday said Bush's policies toward Iran would fail.
[B]''America is like one of the big heads of a seven-headed dragon,'' Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in Iran's capital. ''The brains directing it are Zionist and non-Zionist capitalists who brought Bush to power to meet their own interests.''[/B]
[I]Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. [/I] [/QUOTE]
2005-02-04 14:22 | User Profile
[COLOR=Red][B][I]"America is like one of the big heads of a seven-headed dragon,'' Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in Iran's capital."[/I][/B][/COLOR]
Interesting cultural development in itself: since when have fundamentalist Islamic clerics started using such Christian phraseology (out of the book of Revelation)?
Is dispensationalism spreading to Iran?
Petr
2005-02-04 14:41 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Petr][COLOR=Red][B][I]"America is like one of the big heads of a seven-headed dragon,'' Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in Iran's capital."[/I][/B][/COLOR]
Interesting cultural development in itself: since when have fundamentalist Islamic clerics started using such Christian phraseology (out of the book of Revelation)?
Is dispensationalism spreading to Iran?Petr[/QUOTE]
Petr, you didn't let the Ayatollah finish his thoughts, where he goes on to say [B]''The brains directing it are Zionist and non-Zionist capitalists who brought Bush to power to meet their own interests.''[/B]
That seems to be a pretty accurate statement to me and not something you'd ever hear from a dispensationalist.
In any case, Iranian leaders, amongst other ME policital and clerical leaders have been calling the United States the "Great Satan" for years and years, and now have the hard evidence to prove it by America's disatrous and illegal actions in Iraq. Bush and his mistress Condi can sabre-rattle all they want, but the fact is that by their belligerence and arrogance they've done more to [I]solidify[/I] support by Iranians for their Iranian mullahs, and Islam in general, than any Friday night sermon in any mosque could ever do. Bush and his masters, by their actions, have proven the Mullahs at least partially prophetic. Remember, Iran hasn't been belligerent to any country since it's war with Iraq, and there's yet to be proof of any nuclear weapons program in Iran, only heresay and fear-mongering by US officials.
As for Congoleezza Rice as SoS, third in line to the US Presidency...for the discerning eye, the ascension of a black woman to this high office signals the cabal is softening up White Americans (by placing her as SoS) to evetually accept a black president. She jus' representin' yo.
2005-02-04 14:46 | User Profile
[B][I] - "That seems to be a pretty accurate statement to me and not something you'd ever hear from a dispensationalist."[/I][/B]
Duh, like I wouldn't know that. My quip about dispies was [I]sarcasm[/I].
Still, an interesting choice of words from an ayatollah - don't Muslims have any apocalyptic images of their own to use?
Petr
2005-02-04 16:18 | User Profile
[QUOTE]Don't Muslims have any apocalyptic images of their own to use?[/QUOTE]
Nope...Jesus wins [I]again[/I]!
2005-02-05 07:34 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]When a showroom-minority Secretary of State assures the world we're not going to invade Enemy of Israel X, the smart money moves into preferred shares of Consolidated Body Bag. ...[/QUOTE] Thank you for the investment advice il ragno.
Other "smart money" strategies would include United Technologies and General Dynamics. Of course... this strategy is dependent on the above companies overcoming competition from the State of Israel.
:biggrin:
2005-02-05 13:19 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]Nope...Jesus wins [I]again[/I]![/QUOTE]
That's not right. Muslims believe in the end of the world and the final judgement presided over by Jesus.
[QUOTE][URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_eschatology]Islam teaches that Jesus [/URL] (Isa, in Arabic) was not the son of God, but he was a prophet. According to Islam Isa never died and he was not crucified; instead he was raised into heaven still physically alive, where he lives now. At the time appointed by Allah, Isa will physically return to the world, end all wars, and usher in an era of peace, a messianic era. There is a hadith that states that upon the return of Jesus ('Isa), he will abolish Christianity, smash all crosses, and kill every pig.[[/QUOTE]
As Belloc pointed out, Islam is in fact a Christian heresy. It's Arianism, mostly. It's generally safe to assume that Islam has an analog to any basic Christian doctrine.
Here's a question for general discussion: what is it that the Muslims have against pigs? I mean, one of their articles of faith is that during Second Coming Jesus kills all pigs in the world. Poor little piggies.
As a Midwestern farm boy I feel compelled to put in a good word for pigs. They're actually much cleaner than other barnyard animals. Pigs only crap in one corner of the pen, and they beat up any young pig who dares to crap elsewhere. This in complete opposiiton to, say, cows and horses who think nothing of shi**ing on their hay. Not to mention chickens, disgusting birds that they are. Pigs can't sweat and so to keep cool they're forced to wallow, but heck, there's no reason to hold that against them. It's cruel not to let them wallow. And root for grubs. If you keep them in a barn with a concrete floor they'll still try to root, even to the point of rubbing their snouts raw.
Pigs are at least as smart as dogs, certainly smarter than horses. They're also quite gregarious and are capable of genuine affection for each other, and even for people. To be sure they don't have the loyal devotion of dogs, but people do keep them as pets.
The pig is quite a worthy animal, and in no way deserving of the opprobrium the entire Islamic world heaps upon them.
Walter
2005-02-05 13:52 | User Profile
[B][I] - "As Belloc pointed out, Islam is in fact a Christian heresy. It's Arianism, mostly." [/I] [/B]
Also a lot like Manicheanism since it introduces a new, top-notch prophet that is supposedly the "[I]parakletos[/I]" (Comforter, Holy Spirit) that Jesus Christ promised that He would send for believers in John 14:16.
(Mani also claimed that about himself)
Petr
2005-02-05 14:32 | User Profile
The Semitic hostility to pigs is probably ecological in origin
As you point out, pigs need to root around: they like eating shrubs, fungi, seeds and other forest-foods that are generally useless to humans
These things aren't available in the Middle East, so pigs must compete with humans for food
... or they must eat carcasses and human rubbish
2005-02-05 15:38 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Petr][B][I] - "As Belloc pointed out, Islam is in fact a Christian heresy. It's Arianism, mostly." [/I] [/B]
Also a lot like Manicheanism since it introduces a new, top-notch prophet that is supposedly the "[I]parakletos[/I]" (Comforter, Holy Spirit) that Jesus Christ promised that He would send for believers in John 14:16.
(Mani also claimed that about himself)
Petr[/QUOTE]
Mohammed claimed to be the Comforter that Jesus promised to send?
I didn't know that.
Could you please post a cite?
2005-02-05 16:07 | User Profile
Mmm--MMnnnn; yo' sho' am nasty, Mistah Spidah!
Dat gal Condi gwine sho' does ol' Yuropeens 'dat we is free from dat debbil bondage ob raceusm--or merit, integrity, subletly, decency, nobilty o' grace, fo' dat matter...
-Mistah Howard.
2005-02-05 19:28 | User Profile
[COLOR=DarkRed][B]"Manes, native to Mardin in Anatolia, first encountered religion in his early youth while living with a Jewish ascetic group known as the Elkasites. After receiving a revelation in his mid-twenties, he would come to a belief that salvation is possible through education, self-denial, vegetarianism, fasting, and chastity.
"He later claimed to be the Paraclete promised in the New Testament, [I]The Last Prophet and Seal of the Prophets[/I], finalizing a succession of men guided by God, which included figures such as Seth, Noah, Abraham, Shem, Nikotheos, Enoch, Zoroaster, Hermes, Plato, Buddha, and Jesus Christ."
...
"Manes declared himself, and was also referred to, as the Paraclete: a Biblical title, meaning "helper", [I]which the Orthodox tradition understood as referring to God in the person of the Holy Spirit[/I]). The title was later applied to Muhammad, founder of the Islamic religion."[/B][/COLOR]
[url]http://www.thelemapedia.org/index.php/Manes[/url]
The following is taken from a superb Christian apologetic site "[B]Answering Islam[/B]":
[COLOR=Blue]"These incidents all very strongly support the contention that the Qur'anic text is, in so many ways, an expression of the mind of Muhammad rather than the dictated words of Allah. Secondly, Muhammad's experiences and the concept he had of his own prophethood are remarkably paralleled in the case of Mani, the celebrated false prophet who at one time obtained so much influence in Persia (Tisdall, The Original Sources of the Qur'an, p. 184). [/COLOR]
[COLOR=Purple][I]Explicitly, however, Mani had claimed that he was the last in the succession of messengers from God, so that in the Arabic sources it is recorded that his followers called him "the Seal of the Prophets". As such Mani had issued his own Scriptures and had set forth a "new law" for his community. This is what Muhammad does. [/I] (Jeffery, The Qur'an as Scripture, p. 79). [/COLOR]
[COLOR=Blue]Mani also believed that someone was crucified by the Jews in place of Jesus which is also the teaching of the Qur'an (Surah 4.157). [B]Significantly he also claimed to be the Comforter promised by Jesus - a claim made universally by Muslims today on behalf of Muhammad in pursuance of the Qur'anic claim that Muhammad's advent was predicted by Jesus (Surah 7.157, 61.6). [/B] [/COLOR]
[COLOR=Purple][I]On the other hand, however, it is affirmed that Mani gave himself out as an apostle of Christ, of his very nature, as the Comforter, the Holy Spirit whom Jesus had promised, and as Christ himself. [/I] (Andrae, Mohommed: The Man and his Faith, p. 104). [/COLOR]
[COLOR=Purple][I]Muhammad was not the first to appeal to these verses as a prophecy of himself. It is well known that Mani, or Manes, renowned in Persian fable as a wonderful painter, made the same claim to be the "person" referred to by Christ. [B]Only Mani distinctly claimed to be the "Paraclete", probably (like Muhammad) in order to win over ill-informed Christians to his side. [/B] [/I] (Tisdall, The Original Sources of the Qur'an, p. 191)."[/COLOR]
[url]http://www.answering-islam.org/Gilchrist/Vol1/3b.html[/url]
Basically, both Manes and Muhammad claimed that not only did the spirit of god(s) speak through them, but also that the holy spirit was more or less incarnated in them. Even if Koran does not record Muhammad making such explicit claims about himself as Manes did, his followers did create quite a hagiography around him in the following centuries.
Yes, many Moslems hold onto a lot more idolatrous image of Muhammad than many people think.
[url]http://www.blessedquietness.com/alhaj/page21.htm[/url]
[COLOR=Indigo][SIZE=4]INTRODUCTION: PLEASE MEET GURU MUHAMMED [/SIZE]
Islam, like Christianity, has its catechism. It is taught in the grand Madrassas (schools) of Saudi Arabia and under Baobab trees in Tanzania, but it is the foundation of truth to the Islamic follower. From childhood he is drilled in the questions, and he gives the answer in a shouting voice. The first question in the catechism is, "What is religion?" The answer: "Religion is what Allah revealed by the mouth of his Prophet, of Wisdom, such as the knowledge of the attributes of Allah, and Prayer, and Almsgiving."
[B]It is evident that Muhammed is the foundation of all truth in Islam. All Bible prophets are cast aside, and their writings are used only to destroy those prophets, mock the authority of the God of the Bible, and blaspheme his Son, The Lord Jesus Christ. [/B]
To further establish the role of Muhammed in Islam, the declaration of faith is given in the catechism. To recite it is the first of five "pillars," or acts of faith, in Islam, and it states, "La ilaha illa `llah; Muhammed rasul Ullah." The English translation is, "There is only one God, Allah; Muhammed is the Apostle of Allah." The word "rasul" can also be translated, "Prophet." The word "Ras" is used in Ethiopia for a king serving under a high king. In the Middle East "Ras" is often prefixed to the name of a mountain or prominent place.
COLOR=Black[/COLOR]
[B]The word clearly puts Muhammed in the highest visible place in Islam, while Allah is unseen and basically "out to lunch." [/B]
...
[B]The Islamic catechism also states, "Muhammed was a perfect man in character and attributes." [/B] This implies that he was sinless. He said he wasn't, but one may yet be killed in a number of Islamic countries for broaching even one question as to the life and actions of Muhammed. [B]Muhammed's followers have made him their infallible god for all intents and purposes. [/B]
...
The Egyptian mystic, [B]Dirimi reported that the Messenger of Allah said, "The first light which Allah created was my light." When Adam got to heaven he found Muhammed's name on Allah's throne and engraved everywhere. Adam asked, "Who then is this Muhammed?" Allah answered, "He is thy descendant, and but for him, I should not have created thee." Then Allah rebuked Adam for not praying to Muhammed. Dirimi also reported, "All of creation was made of the substance of Muhammed." [/B]
...
To believe that Muhammed is the Paraclete, the Spirit of God, is to place him at that event 600 years before he was born, which would imply that he is eternally present and part of the eternal Godhead. There goes Islamic monotheism! They keep digging the hole deeper, but one day they will find they cannot climb out. "[/COLOR]
Petr
2005-02-06 07:18 | User Profile
Petr: very interesting, thanks.