Archive for the ‘islamic theology’ Category

Obama on Islam in India

November 7, 2010 Comments off

Here is video of President Obama speaking on Islam after being asked a question about jihad and what he thinks about it. The answer is stunning and vastly ignorant. Just like much of the establishment political, media and academic elite.

What about Muhammad directly participating in war to further Islam? Why is there never logic connecting that to Muslims warring today? Why does he invoke Ghandi’s name? Ghandi has absolutely nothing to do with Islam or Jihad. It is Obama’s wishful thinking that somehow Islam’s enemies, Muslims who are violent, need to be isolated from the the Ghandi Muslims. Muslims are not going to care about Ghandi, it is Muhammad they follow and are loyal to. They will follow his mold principally rather then Ghandi, no matter how much Obama thinks they should do otherwise because Islam is a religion of peace.

What should have taken place after 9/11 or prior to be perfectly honest, is that Islam should of been singled out by the intellectuals and politicians as a violent religion that preaches Muhammad, who directly participated in war, is the Muslims mirror for his/her pattern of conduct. Obama you are a piece of work, and cannot intelligently deal with topics because your political investment swings counter to the truth.


Islam and Muhammad debate

October 27, 2010 Comments off

Another debate at Liberal Forum, this time dealing with the religion of Islam and its history. Click HERE to view it and enjoy!

Whoopie and Joy go unhinged!

October 14, 2010 Comments off

Wow, Whoopie and Joy really got upset on The View about O’reilly telling it like it is. Namely Muslims were responsible for September 11th, 2001. Whoopie just goes berserk and cannot handle the truth so much she immediately tries to equate. She thinks O’reilly was over the top in saying that Muslims were responsible. Yet, then Whoope immediately uses the tired old lie of stating that Timothy McVeigh was a Christian. He is not and was not. But I guess its OK for Whoopie to use, as an argument, what she gets upset at O’reilly for. Typical double-standard!

Perhaps Whoopster needs a little history lesson and needs to spend some time doing comparative religion studies! Check my Islam commentaries for more information on that.

Iran to meet Nasrallah – but who knows?

October 14, 2010 Comments off

Amidst renewed although what seems to be fading peace talks between Israel and Palestinian territories, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad decided it would be a good idea to visit South Lebanon and Bint Jbeil. What is intersting, is that out of 4 different stories, here, CNN, FOX News and MSNBC. Only here has this very telling line;

During his visit, Ahmadinejad was to meet top Lebanese officials as well as with Hassan Nasrallah, leader of the Iranian- and Syrian-backed Hezbollah militia which largely controls the southern border region with Israel and is also sworn to the Jewish state’s destruction.

We would figure that Lebanese officials would be met with by Ahmadinejad during this visit, however Hassan Nasrallah? The leader of Hezbollah? Why is it that 3 out of 4 major news outlets, including FOX News did not even mention that. Why is that?

Middle East
According to Council of Foreign Relations Hassan Nasrallah profile, we can determine that he is indeed in Lebanon and as recent as July 2010 has met Khaled Meshaal leader of HAMAS. And as recently as 2006 during the Israel-Hezbollah war Israeli warplanes bombed Nasrallahs home.

While Hezbollah and Palestinian group Hamas do not have organizational ties, Nasrallah has met with Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal several times, most recently in July 2010 when Meshaal traveled to Lebanon to discuss “regional developments” (Al-Manar) with Nasrallah. It has also been reported that Hezbollah gives military training, as well as financial and moral backing, to Hamas and has acted as a role model (PDF) for the group.

Fascinating, so we can easily determine that Ahmadinejad is visiting a terrorist leader, one of the biggest in the world right there in Southern Lebanon. The scene of devastating bombing by Israel in 2006, so of course Nasrallah would be there, among the people, infiltrating their hearts and minds with propaganda. I have an idea, let Israel eliminate their target! They are fully aware of the area, as they have significant experience within that Area of Operations. Obama, this is your moment, if they manage to take out Ahamdinejad the leader of Iran and a powerful pusher behind the weaponization of nuclear weapons, AND Nasrallah? This would be a devastating blow to enemies from the north and east, two sides of Israel with reverberations effecting Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran and Russia to name a few.

Do you think this will happen? I do not but I can hope and pray can’t I? Let me know what you think in the comments.

Islam and the Way of Muhammad

October 12, 2010 Comments off

Muhammad was the son of a merchant and orphaned at age six eventually marrying a rich widow Khadijah and having six children. Born in 570 AD, Muhammad (Arabic: محمد, Muḥammad) himself is considered an ideal man, al-Insān al-Kāmil (الإنسان الكامل) in Arabic. By 630 AD all of Arabia was under his control. He is not considered divine nor is he to be worshiped. He is humbly a messenger of Allah and a model in how a Muslim should live his or her life. As the Qur’an declares, Muhammad is a; “… beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah.”(Surah 33:21)

Please view the rest here or by hovering your mouse above the Islam tab and choosing the article you with to read.

I have lost all confidence in the FBI

October 10, 2010 Comments off

Oh just speak like a normal American FBI Director Robert Mueller. Mr. Mueller you have become entrenched in political correctness and your language is sub-standard at best for the office that you hold. You make me cringe inside every time you open up your damn mouth.

Claire Berlinski on Uncommon Knowledge

October 6, 2010 2 comments

Peter Robinson, is my favorite public intellectual despite himself modestly calling himself a laymen. He conducts interviews for Hoover Institutions Uncommon Knowledge video series. This is quite possibly one of the most undeniably intellectually stimulating sites on the Internet. On its recent video interview titled, “Thatcher & More with Claire Berlinski” Claire Berlinski discusses her new book and presents a fascinating history of Margret Thatcher prior, during and after.

Berlinski lays out the case that Great Britain prior to Thatcher was in desperate disrepair and the world knew it. The character and person of Thatcher is described as well. There is also a point that really set Thatcher apart through the moral view of essentially capitalism, or what is specifically labeled by Berlinski as “Thatcherism” compared against free-market economics in the economist sense. Margret Thatcher rigorously defended this view by stating the economic application is better, because morally philosophy is centered on the individual! The immorality comes into play when the personal economy of an individual, the actual choices made by individuals in their daily lives is limited and becomes afterthought. There was a strong religious component or background from which this view is diffused, interpreted and ultimately utilized as well.

There is one point in the video around 33 minute mark in which Claire Berlinski essentially states that, as i paraphrase the argument, we should not tell Muslims how to interpret the Qur’anic words such as shari’a and jihad. However coming from my position, we don’t, we let prominent Islamic scholars and traditions formed by prominent Islamic theologians as well as history of prominent Islamic civilizations tell us how to interpret the words such as Shari’a and jihad. What do we do with the history of Muhammad and the clear and concise tradition of Muhammad being a model Muslim, one which is to be mirrored in Surah verse 33, 21?ref1 Muhammad directly participated in warfare to further his religion, if a Muslim does not mirror Muhammad in all ways in his/her life, is that person fully Muslim? How does a Muslim reconcile with the violence expressed by Muhammad to further his religion? These are questions regarding Islam and Islamic history that need to be addressed yet not presented within the interview on Uncommon Knowledge for the Hoover Institution.

I feel it is almost a lazy position by Berlinski because it fails to account for other foundations of which arguments are made. However the clear and concise point about questioning Muslims respect for the superiority of the Constitution of the United States is brilliant and I think a fundamental.