Is Obama' Speech loaded or what

[جوري]

I wish I can find my RC to shut his hypocritical bazoo up!
He's not getting his votes from the U.N council, so what's up with all the crappola?

[joesixpack]

The only president worse than Obama was G W Bush.

[جوري]

You know what bugs me, is that he doesn't take a stand.. sort of like their policy with Mursi.. they classify him as 'neither a friend nor an enemy'.. always a leeway to whatever the tides drag them at the end of the day and at the same time doing exactly and carrying exactly their chosen agenda underneath- and the agenda is always the same always AIPAC motivated.. so that at the end of the day behind door number two, you'll still find door number one!

[Darth Ultor]

Obama is full of ****. So is Romney. I'm voting Gary Johnson.

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[White Rose]

To be honest, none of the political leaders are fit to be president anymore which is why our votes dont really matter. The president is going to be picked by ones running US.
What really annoys me is how he swings from left to right in an instant. Doesnt even try to hide it...

[yahia12]

Cmon Obama is doing a good job cleaning Bushs mess on foreing policy. Atleast he hasnt declared new wars and been reaching out for peace on earth. :peace:

[جوري]

You don't have to be vocal about your agenda to carry out the same acts. Isn't that the definition of a hypocrite? Even though republicans are openly hostile, the democratic party houses the most Zionists and pushes most for Zionist policies

[Jedi_Mindset]

Cmon Obama is doing a good job cleaning Bushs mess on foreing policy. Atleast he hasnt declared new wars and been reaching out for peace on earth. :peace:

You forgot libya, yemen, somalia, pakistan, and afghanistan??????
War doesnt have to be invasion, this can also be launched in covert wars or assasination drones, allying with a government to crackdown a islamic revival (yemen et cet)

Obama is no different than bush, and the future president not be different than them.

US is pushing itself in a new world war, just like israel. I think it doesnt matter anymore, wether anyone is salafi, shia, sufi, deobandi....the main goal is to destroy the arabs and muslims in general and this can happen by creating or inflaming civil wars. Secterian warfare...or just oppositions clashing with each other, attempts to create civil war in egypt between copts and muslims...

I think its best to do not fall in their agenda. They're gonna risk a new world war for this.

The one who lays down now is indeed the best.

[Independent]

the main goal is to destroy the arabs and muslims in general

Why? Simply because they ‘hate’ Islam? A hatred so all-consuming that it exceeds any other strategic motive? President after president, since the birth of the state, the same hatred? Are we really to believe that the US doesn’t really care about Russia, China, S. America, the rest of the world, the economy, or their own society, because they are so consumed with hatred for Islam?

Where is the direct, top-level evidence of this conspiracy? Where did the leaders sit down and decide that destroying Islam is the strategic priority of the US, now or at any point since the creation of the state? Where are the conferences that must have taken place throughout history to decide this policy?

Why should anyone even bother with this attack? What makes Islam so important that so many countries in the world would be obsessed with destroying it? Why is it that the only people who seem to know about this plan are themselves Muslims?

This is a full-on conspiracy theory on a grand scale. To prove it you need more than a list of wars against countries who are Islamic. You need to prove that the US fought these wars primarily because those countries are Islamic.

And even if you managed that, then you need to explain why - if Islam is truly the strategic imperative - has the US wasted the large majority of its time, money and man-power against non-Islamic targets?

In the history of the US, the biggest wars have been the Civil War and the two World Wars. None of them had anything much to do with Islam. Even since WW2 the biggest US wars, the biggest US casualties, and the biggest US strategic commitments have been against Communist targets (N.Korea, Vietnam, Cuba), not Islamic ones. It’s only very recently, after 200 years of US history, only since the Iranian Embassy siege, that Islam finally begins to creep up the US strategic agenda.

Show me the Islamic equivalent of the Wannsee Conference.

[جوري]

Islam is the last ideology left against capitalism and since the fall of communism that's all that's really left. It's an ideological war no more no less!

[Independent]

US is pushing itself in a new world war, just like israel. I think it doesnt matter anymore, wether anyone is salafi, shia, sufi, deobandi....the main goal is to destroy the arabs and muslims in general and this can happen by creating or inflaming civil wars. Secterian warfare...or just oppositions clashing with each other, attempts to create civil war in egypt between copts and muslims...

I think its best to do not fall in their agenda.

I repeat, where and when were the meetings that decided this? Who is in charge of this plan of destruction?

[Darth Ultor]

Darth Vader on the planet Vulcan

[سيف الله]

Salaam
Salaam

I repeat, where and when were the meetings that decided this? Who is in charge of this plan of destruction?

He's exaggerating but hes on the right lines. Western powers, (namely the USA) for over 50 years have been at the forefront of blocking moves towards the people of the middle east determining their own destinies.

plenty written on this subject, the evidence is voluminous.

[Mustafa2012]

You know what bugs me, is that he doesn't take a stand.. sort of like their policy with Mursi.. they classify him as 'neither a friend nor an enemy'.. always a leeway to whatever the tides drag them at the end of the day and at the same time doing exactly and carrying exactly their chosen agenda underneath- and the agenda is always the same always AIPAC motivated.. so that at the end of the day behind door number two, you'll still find door number one!

Politicians will say whatever they can to please their audience.

So one day they'll be praising this person and this country and the next moment they'll praise another person and another country.

It's all a big act. A big grand show of deceit.

They must take good acting classes.

And their speech writers must be getting paid pretty well coz they sure don't write their own speeches.

[Independent]

He's exaggerating but hes on the right lines.

Do you really think so? Let's take a closer look at the line he is following.

The evidence that is missing, in this forum or anywhere else that I can find, is direct evidence of an organised, international Western and/or Zionist plan to kill Muslims and destroy Islam. As you know, there are many versions of this plan, but the general suggestion is that it goes all the way back to the Crusades if not further.

Belief in this plan is so ubiquitous, so routine in Islamic circles, that it is assumed to be fact without question. It’s almost as if the plan taken on the quality of a hadith – it’s an idea repeated so many times, for so long, that it is regarded as indisputable fact.

Every single negative event involving a Muslim anywhere in the world is seen as linked to this plan, and reported as such in Islamic media (and indeed this forum). There are whole websites devoted to listing these events.

What I cannot see, what I cannot find anywhere, is any documented explanation or evidence of how this plan has been organised at the highest level through so many countries, through so many centuries.

Looking back through Jedi Mindset’s posts I do find he offers one piece of documentary evidence. He praises a 19^th century book called The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Of course, this book describes just the kind of international Zionist organization that you need to explain this theory:

Jedi Mindet: “protocols of the elders of zion is a good book too, but its horrific man, i stopped reading meanwhile, but its just true, the book isnt anti-semitic, its very true. alot being lied about so the zionists and freemasons could hide it, but dont believe those lies”

The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is of course one of the most notorious books in history. It was exposed beyond dispute as a fake many years ago. Contrary to what Jedi Mindset seems to think, it was written specifically to stir up anti-Semitism and in this it succeeded beyond the author’s wildest dreams. It became one of Hitler’s favourite books and was a direct influence and inspiration for the Final Solution and the Holocaust. It’s hard to think of a single more vicious, intentionally destructive book in all history.

This book is an outright racist, genocidal text and there is zero excuse for giving it approval and toleration in 2012, in this forum or anywhere else.

I suggest that the reason no other texts besides this one are being quoted is simple. They don’t exist.

[Cabdullahi]

[Jedi_Mindset]

Israel has crossed the red line long ago, with a few hundred nukes and with 80 nukes on high alert if in case they come in ''danger''.

The US and israel are the first countries who can use WMD's like phosphorous bombs and other chemical weapons legally.

[Cabdullahi]

An analogy

A psychopath has a collection of machetes and a normal man has one piece of metal, the psychopath is alerting everyone that this normal man might sharpen this piece of metal to create one knife, and that he might hack people with it.

A knife is not the only thing that can be produced from a piece of metal.

[جوري]

The 'independent' guy is such a hoot.. Govt. usually have complete transparency.. the same transparency of the 'bay of pigs' I suppose!

funny stuff

[Independent]

Israel has crossed the red line long ago

Rather than expressing any regret for your promotion of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, you have instead chosen to talk about Israel again. Do we take it that you still approve of it?

As it stands, this long-discredited, fabricated, genocidal text is still the only evidence of an organised plan anyone has offered here. Is that what it all rests on?

[جوري]

actually no one has discredited the protocols, one only needs to read it and look at world events to see that even if it were 'evil art' it sure does imitate life.. Believe me bullying folks into believing it is some sort of massive conspiracy against those poor Zionists might work for the simpleton vessels but folks aren't blind to what's going on even if they're not vocal about it!

best,

[Mustafa2012]

The term conspiracy theory is used to cast doubt and dis-credit theories which usually have a lot of evidence supporting what they claim.

I remember hearing one expert say (can't remember his name right now) that,

"If there's enough evidence to prove something is true beyond doubt, then it's no longer a theory but a fact."

[سيف الله]

Salaam

Do you really think so? Let's take a closer look at the line he is following.

I do differ with bro Jedi Master on his analysis (I agree with you on the protocol of Zion). In fact many of the Middle Eastern dictatorships are very friendly with the US. (eg. Saudi Arabia, Gulf States etc). So I agree Western powers are not dogmatic in their opposition to Islamic movements (eg. They were happy to support the resistance to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan). They just oppose anybody who don’t serve their interests. And over the years Islamic groups tend to align with those who oppose American hegemonic apparitions in the Middle East.

But like I said there is plenty of reasons why the western presence in the Middle East has been resented for decades (primarily since world war 1 when European powers divided up the middle east into spheres of influence and installed satraps to ensure their interests would be served at the expense of the general population).



There’s plenty written on why the western (primarily US) is so keen to keep the Middle East under their thumb. Good comprehensive place to start

http://www.chomsky.info/talks/20010304.htm

Tangently related. Go to post 49 (last post) for what I think on issues facing Muslims in Europe and the prejudice they face. Certain sections of the intellectual classes are particularly hostile

http://www.islamicboard.com/world-af...m-world-4.html

Ill just finish with some quotes

The Lausanne Treaty was signed on 24th July 1924. The states recognised Turkeys independence. Britain evacuated Istanbul and the straits and Harrington left Turkey. Consequently, one of the British MPs protested against Curzon in the House of Commons for recognising Turkeys independence. Curzon answered him by saying:

‘the point at issue is that Turkey has been destroyed and shall never rise again, because we have destroyed her spiritual power: The khilafah and Islam’.

On how the ideology of secularism was used to undermine the Islamic basis of these societies

On the reasons why some Muslims are hostile to certain aspects of secularism

Christians and Jews in the West live in secularised societies in which most people have a stronger allegiance to their countries than to their religion. However, in many parts of the world where the nation state is of more recent origin, people continue to derive their sense of identity less from nationality than from their religion. While most Muslim majority counties are headed by modern secular governments today, in some of them a strong sense of national allegiance has yet to take firm hold. Not surprisingly efforts to secularise society that go against people’s loyalties often create résistance

More relevant perhaps to many Muslims suspicions of secularisation is a history of governments ruthlessly imposing secularisation on an unwilling public. Despite episodes in Western history where religion was brutally repressed, secularisation in the West is often perceived as a relatively benign process that evolved over time and reflected the popular will. It has been seen as guaranteeing religious freedom and enabling religion to concentrate on its spiritual ideas.

In many Muslim countries the process has been far more traumatic and coercive. In the 1020s the Turkish leader Attaturk, determined to build a modern state in Turkey after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, suppressed the madrasa, abolished sufi orders, mandated a latin alphabet instead of Arabic, imposed western surnames in place of old Islamic names and titles, and forced Turks to wear Western dress.

Reza Shah Pahlavi, the Shah of Iran who rules from 1921 to 1941, stripped the ulama, the religious scholars, of their endowment, replaced the sharia with civil law code, prohibited citizens from going on hajj, suppressed shi religious rites commemorating the death of Husayn, and forbade Islamic dress. His soldiers tore of women’s veils in the street, and unarmed protesters who demonstrated against the regimes dress laws in 1935 were shot. Hundred died. His son Muhammed Reza Shah was just as anyto religious. He closed madrasas, restricted public displays of religion, and imprisoned, exiled and killed many members of the ulama

Because of these experiences secularism is perceived by many Muslims as anti-religious and intolerant and a threat to the foundations of their society.

Now getting back on topic

Yeah Obama taking credit for the Arab spring, really does takes the biscuit +o(

[MustafaMc]

It was exposed beyond dispute as a fake many years ago.

I would like to read what evidence you have to make this claim.

This book is an outright racist, genocidal text and there is zero excuse for giving it approval and toleration in 2012, in this forum or anywhere else.

If it is authentic, then there is every reason in the world to 'spread the word' about what it has to say. If it is a fabricated hoax then let's see the proof.

[Independent]

Ok, so I guess between all these replies I have an indirect answer to my question at least – there is no document. The Protocols is the best you’ve got.

I’ve been googling The Protocols today and it really is depressing. I thought only the occasional extremist crazy guy had time for this kind of obvious junk but it’s all over the place. Neo Nazis, right wing white political parties and, it seems, large numbers of Muslims like yourself. I see it is very popular today in Egypt, Palestine and other parts of the Islamic world and has even received tv coverage. Amazingly, it seems to be 9/11 that has triggered off the new increase in sales. I really hope that moderate Muslims recognise this book for the racist, genocidal text that it is.

actually no one has discredited the protocols,

You show an amazing lack of intellectual curiosity. The Protocols has been thoroughly debunked, and for internal textual reasons besides anything else.

It purports to be a secretly-gathered record of a clandestine Jewish world-domination conference in the late 1890s. Yet portions of the text are plagiarised from books written 20-30 years earlier – laughably, even including a work of fiction. If this were a hadith, you would have thrown it out without a second’s delay.

The purpose of the book was to stir up a pogrom in Russia in the 1900s and it succeeded in this. Afterwards, a few decades later, Hitler found everything he needed to know about the world here and he made it a compulsory school text. People bring their prejudices to this book and find them confirmed. That's why they like it.

Interesting company you keep.

[جوري]

Intellectual bullying doesn't work- I don't know if you're aware but receiving validation or lack thereof from random trolls and shills isn't a goal any of us strive for.
One only needs to read the protocols to see them mirror image life so who is in need for the likes of you to decide whether or not they'd been debunked?
Debunked would mean they've no basis in reality and not necessarily a date of publication although let's face it there's more than one school of thought on that one and the obvious conclusion would probably render Zionists extinct by now-- they're nothing but the written version of current events so spare us the empty rhetoric atop of the other nonsense you tinkle upon us like your desire for wiki leak type document of US/Israeli plans for the world!
There's no love lost and Hitler's Mistakes were his to keep and certainly not a burden to be carried or paid for by Palestinians- a five year Jewish Holocaust doesn't compare in my book to a 60+ year one inflicted on Palis, 20+ (modern times alone) inflicted on Afghans, or Iraq, or Bosnian or or or.. every where we look there they're with their poodle the U.S causing carnage on some sovereign nation & there they're urging more of the same against Iran!
Are you for real? you're going to guilt us into wiping your forefather's genocidal mistakes by accepting no less than a genocide of our own people?

[Independent]

One only needs to read the protocols to see them mirror image life so who is in need for the likes of you to decide whether it not they'd been debunked?

In another thread I saw you criticise someone for giving credence to a Shia hadith, which he liked because it appeared to mirror today's events. You told him that the source could not be trusted, so no matter how apparently prophetic it might be, you rejected it and reprimanded him.

Yet now we have a source that is more clearly a fake than any Shia hadith, yet you are falling over yourself to accept it.

As i say, the power of The Protocols is to re-inforce the prejudices that people already hold. Which in your case are at the extreme end of the spectrum.

[جوري]

I have amended my post to answer your trump card.
Fundamentals in religion at any rate are a done deal and not subject to addendums- no such luck exists for politics or are you not keen on bringing up German laws vs. French laws when it comes to promoting vice but make blanket statements when it comes to everything else?
We're not scrutinizing Jewish laws per Torah, we're discussing Zionist politics!

best,

[Independent]

I do differ with bro Jedi Master on his analysis (I agree with you on the protocol of Zion).

Great. Please note, I am at no point saying here that there isn’t prejudice against Muslims in the west and I don't necessarily disagree with the things you list. I'm not talking about specific events here. What I am saying, is that the notion of an organised, international conspiracy dating back to the Crusades, linking all these events together, is bunkum.

Debunked would mean they've no basis in reality and not necessarily a date of publication

To summarise again: The Protocols were published in about 1903. They are supposed to be an account of a real meeting in the late 1890s. But some of the text is plagiarised from books written decades earlier. So The Protocols has to be a fake, whether or not you agree with what’s written in it.

[جوري]

To summarise again: The Protocols were published in about 1903. They are supposed to be an account of a real meeting in the late 1890s. But some of the text is plagiarised from books written decades earlier. So The Protocols has to be a fake, whether or not you agree with what’s written in it.

See previous replies and desist this verruca like persistence on hammering in a point repeatedly discussed and elucidated from our end. I reference you of course to my posts and Br. Mustafa's especially. You're a a pseudo-intellect who seems to have something to say about everything as if an authority figure on the subject & when it is clear that you're not- since your words never address content but always take a superficial cosmetic form whether here or on the evolution thread using third party sources and not even the academic sort- You often ask for a 'source for this' and when offered it, you've nothing to say, either dodge, meander or start something new having read and learned nothing with which on the lowest common denominator would enable you to refute us and solidify your personal beliefs!
Why don't you educate yourself a bit before gauging any topic so you don't end up using all sorts of spins of ad homs. & jabs at intellect in lieu of something substantive?

[Independent]

You're a a pseudo-intellect who seems to have something to say about everything as if an authority figure on the subject & when it is clear that you're not- since your words never address content but always take a superficial cosmetic form whether here or on the evolution thread using third party sources and not even the academic sort

You forgot to mention the usual bit about me being a five year old?

[جوري]

You forgot to mention the usual bit about me being a five year old?

There was no such bit, however, if you feel that, it is an adequate assessment of your person and what you're doing here then please don't let me stop you!


best,