Do Western Leaders claim they respect Islam/Muslims because they want Oil ?

[truthseeker63]

Do Western Leaders claim they respect Islam/Muslims because they want Oil and other Resources from Muslim Majority Population Nations abnd because they need support from their Puppet Leaders in the Middle East and other parts of the Muslim World ? Are these Western Politicans lying please share you're views on this subject ?

Toni Blair, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton talk about Islam

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Auol4Tt9v2k

Bush and Islam: Words versus Deeds

By Nicola Nasser
Global Research, September 28, 2006
28 September 2006


Bush is also on record as saying that “Islam is a religion of peace” and praising Islam’s “commitment to religious freedom,” statements that were criticized by the popular U.S. televangelist Pat Robertson.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/bush-an...sus-deeds/3351

Quran 2:120

And never will the Jews or the Christians approve of you until you follow their religion. Say, "Indeed, the guidance of Allah is the [only] guidance." If you were to follow their desires after what has come to you of knowledge, you would have against Allah no protector or helper.

http://quran.com/2/120

[joesixpack]

Based on what I've seen, Western leaders, just like non Western leaders, are little more than sociopaths. I don't think any leaders of any nations actually have any respect for the bulk of humanity.

[Jedi_Mindset]

They're hypocrites and decievers, if bush really had ''love'' for islam than he wouldn't have supported israel in his words, wont have launched wars, so they are just there to decieve the muslim majoirty that the american government is a example of ''human rights''


Ofcourse the puppets need to take care of their image, if the western people knew about the crimes and the truth of these wars then they would most likely rebel.

[glo]

Based on what I've seen, Western leaders, just like non Western leaders, are little more than sociopaths. I don't think any leaders of any nations actually have any respect for the bulk of humanity.

Perhaps people who want to be politicians and in any position of power should automatically not be allowed to! The very fact the they like the idea of being in a position of power makes their intentions and motives suspect ...

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

[joesixpack]

Perhaps people who want to be politicians and in any position of power should automatically not be allowed to! The very fact the they like the idea of being in a position of power makes their intentions and motives suspect ...

Here in the US, we have a jury system for trying criminal cases. Jury duty is something all citizens are required to do. If you are asked to serve, your employer must excuse you from work. It's like conscription, but it ensures that those serving are not a self selecting group acting in their own self interest.

I think all government positions should be like that. I think from the head of state all the way down, government should be made up of citizens selected at random. Yes, we would get a few kooks and yahoos, but under the system we have now we only get charismatic sociopaths.

[جوري]

I am yet to see western leaders respect Islam and Muslims.. what gave you that idea akhi?

[جوري]

I think all government positions should be like that. I think from the head of state all the way down, government should be made up of citizens selected at random. Yes, we would get a few kooks and yahoos, but under the system we have now we only get charismatic sociopaths.

with all due respect the jury system in America is the dumbest thing ever, by admissions of those selected. 12 random uneducated morons off the street to determine your fate? does that seem fair to you? Also the smarter the would be jurist the faster they get eliminated. They don't want anyone influencing the jury with political, medical, or professional views in general and the result is always the worst of people determine the fate based on the sophistry of a lawyer not based on evidence or law or justice.
I have listed several cases here to that matter of colleagues or friends who were sued by a patient looking to make a buck by climbing on someone else's hard work even though the case is so laughable should be tossed out and never make it to court all together..
people sue the city for falling on a city block and when they win absurd amounts of money that comes from you and me the tax payer and to foster their lazy bad habits of not working.
This is a failed system and the worst system ever and to carry that to all branches would further guarantee that folks get places because of some privilege rather than quality of the individual so a thousand times NO!.

[joesixpack]

The Jury system in the US works quite well, actually. The goal is to have one's peers pass judgment rather than magistrates who are of an entirely different social class. With the exception of a few high profile cases, jury trials are rarely questioned. I have actually sat on a jury and have a lot of experience with the jury system. I am college educated and was never removed from a jury because of my education. Most of the people who get rejected from jury service are rejected because they are police or family members of police or they are friends or family of the defendant or the prosecution. The Jurors I served with in the past were all quite unremarkable except that they were intelligent and reasonably well educated. They all took their duty seriously, as I did.

As far as lawsuits, most never actually make it to trial, and of those that do the jury is pretty astute at judging facts. This is not to say that lawyers don't create confusion in the system or that some lawsuits aren't specious, but I would be very loath so see the civil tort system thrown out, as it is the ONLY way for a poor person to get justice when he or she has been criminally wronged. Even then, the barriers to that justice are still quite high. Sensational stories to the contrary, lawsuits don't arbitrarily award millions to clumsy people. If you look at the details of many of the higher profile cases you'll often find that they aren't the boondoggle that they are portrayed as in the press.

[جوري]

The Jury system in the US works quite well, actually

It doesn't!

The goal is to have one's peers pass judgment rather than magistrates

That's the operative word. One's peers. How many people in a south baltimore court do you believe are peers to an Asian doctor, or who will rule with justice when he inherits a case from another who died of a woman whose children are to be born with birth defects because of her own drug/alcohol problem? in fact the jury is of her peers not his. He loses money, possibly suspend his license, his insurance goes up while she finds a nice way to support her habit.
I am not even going to touch on the cases of alleged terrorism, yeah Tareq Mehanna found a jury of his peers and Dr. Afifa found a jury of her peers..
come on everyone sees through this charade, there's no point defending it!
It is better at least to have someone with some understanding of the law over twelve emotive idiots with a herd mentality and are easily manipulated with words not evidence!

Yeah I believe that they would keep you- if you fit the criteria they seek not the randomness you imagine. Not suggesting you're an idiot but if your views are ones that they like they'll keep you, they don't want folks to influence the outcome they go into the trial with. Just depends on whether the DA or the lawyer is the smarter talker!
I am yet to meet with one medical doctor who gets chosen, I myself was selected to show up at a most inconvenient time then eliminated after they thoroughly wasted my time with BS.
There are idiots who get paid to do this for a living and I have a patient whose mind was half mush was constantly sitting as a juror. Horrifying to say the least
best,

[YusufNoor]

:sl:

never believe a western politician. there is one sure fire way to tell if they are lying. if you see their lips move, they're lying!

:wa:

[Roasted Cashew]

never believe a western politician.

as if most of our eastern politicians are very truthful people.. Most have been either American puppets or dictators - or both.

[جوري]

& that is why folks are revolting.. we're yet to see a change of policy in the west or at least a successful revolt at that for the 'wall street movement' has been the brunt of all jokes!

[KAding]

They claim to respect local values simply because they value good relations with countries in general. After all, countries like the US and the UK have a perfectly good and respectful relationship with the overwhelming majority of countries on the planet. Most of those countries have no oil either. In fact, I would say the US and UK have pretty good relationships with most Muslim-majority countries, including those that are not rich in resources. They want to keep it that way for a multitude of reasons, one of them being that instability is generally bad for business. No to say that strategic resources such as oil are not important here, but they are clearly not the only reason why foreign policy is generally respectful and non-hostile in demeanor.

Also, I actually do believe that most Western leaders really do make a distinction between 'radical' Islam and more 'moderate' forms of Islam. They clearly try to respect the latter and are hostile to the former, out of national interest of course, but also because they really believe there is a difference between the two.

[جوري]

Also, I actually do believe that most Western leaders really do make a distinction between 'radical' Islam and more 'moderate' forms of Islam. They clearly try to respect the latter and are hostile to the former, out of national interest of course, but also because they really believe there is a difference between the two.

And how is that distinction made in your opinion when the bombs are raining down on us? furthermore, what is the distinction itself since we have no such things in Islam as 'moderate' and 'radical'-- the west can keep friendly relations with like minded countries what is your point? the rest of the countries it has an interest in one form or another and the tactics and games aren't reserved to what they can get of oil at the price they want. They play a game with everything from cotton to wheat to closing down factories to napping natural resources to control populations, but that's a topic for another day and another thread.
Do you believe in the stuff you write or simply don't bother do research on the topics you see them lip service on your local news?

best,

[Roasted Cashew]

we have no such things in Islam as 'moderate' and 'radical'

Indeed. There is no mention about Sunni and Shia either but unfortunately over time to classify different people terms are used. I for one would not be want to be labeled the same as the terrorists that call themselves Muslims. Although unfortunate, he is fair in using these terms.

[جوري]

. There is no mention about Sunni and Shia either

Sure there is- don't you read the Quran?
well I guess that explains so much!

[Roasted Cashew]

Sure there is- don't you read the Quran?

The mention of the word Sunni and Shia? Quote to me one verse then.

[جوري]

Here let me help you- Maybe it will straighten you on one road or the other- notice in the transliteration the word shiaa? gasps..

Al-An'am [6:159]

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ فَرَّقُواْ دِينَهُمْ وَكَانُواْ شِيَعًا لَّسْتَ مِنْهُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ إِنَّمَا أَمْرُهُمْ إِلَى اللّهِ ثُمَّ يُنَبِّئُهُم بِمَا كَانُواْ يَفْعَلُونَ

Inna allatheena farraqoo deenahum wakanoo shiyaAAan lasta minhum fee shayin innama amruhum ila Allahi thumma yunabbiohum bima kanoo yafAAaloona

6:159 As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allah. He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did.

Ar-Rum [30:32]

مِنَ الَّذِينَ فَرَّقُوا دِينَهُمْ وَكَانُوا شِيَعًا كُلُّ حِزْبٍ بِمَا لَدَيْهِمْ فَرِحُونَ

Mina allatheena farraqoo deenahum wakanoo shiyaAAan kullu hizbin bima ladayhim farihoona

30:32 Those who split up their Religion, and become (mere) Sects,- each party rejoicing in that which is with itself!

Ash-Shura (The Consultation) شَرَعَ لَكُم مِّنَ الدِّينِ مَا وَصَّى بِهِ نُوحًا وَالَّذِي أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَيْكَ وَمَا وَصَّيْنَا بِهِ إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَمُوسَى وَعِيسَى أَنْ أَقِيمُوا الدِّينَ وَلَا تَتَفَرَّقُوا فِيهِ كَبُرَ عَلَى الْمُشْرِكِينَ مَا تَدْعُوهُمْ إِلَيْهِ اللَّهُ يَجْتَبِي إِلَيْهِ مَن يَشَاء وَيَهْدِي إِلَيْهِ مَن يُنِيبُ (42:13) Basit - Hussari - Minshawi - SharaAAa lakum mina alddeeni ma wassa bihi noohan waallathee awhayna ilayka wama wassayna bihi ibraheema wamoosa waAAeesa an aqeemoo alddeena wala tatafarraqoo feehi kabura AAala almushrikeena ma tadAAoohum ilayhi Allahu yajtabee ilayhi man yashao wayahdee ilayhi man yuneebu Topics discussed in this Verse: [Abraham:religion of] [Allah:guides to Himself those who turn to Him] [Hell] [Islam:Religion of the Pmphets] [Jesus:religion of] [Moses:religion of] [Noah:religion of] [Sects and divisions disapproved] 42:13 (Asad) In matters of faith, [12] He has ordained for you that which He had enjoined upon Noah - and into which We gave thee [O Muhammad] insight through revelation [13] as well as that which We had enjoined upon Abraham, and Moses, and Jesus: Steadfastly uphold the [true] faith, and do not break up your unity therein. [14] [And even though] that [unity of faith] to which thou callest them appears oppressive to those who are wont to ascribe to other beings or forces a share in His divinity, God draws unto Himself everyone who is willing, and guides unto Himself everyone who turns unto Him. -

and many more.. check it out.. read the book sometimes, you might actually develop and understanding of why you're at odds with most Muslims here.

[Roasted Cashew]

Here let me help you

Oh, you were talking about these verses. Still fail to see the terms Sunni and Shia explicitly being used. I was talking about the explicitness of the terms as I am sure you are smart enough to understand.

ADDED : Why can't these verses be used then to classify people into "radicals." Since they are similar to a sect which claim only their interpretation of the Qur'an and Sunnah is the right one and use violent means to further their agenda.

[Logikon]

Do Western Leaders claim they respect Islam/Muslims because they want Oil and other Resources from Muslim Majority Population Nations and because they need support from their Puppet Leaders in the Middle East and other parts of the Muslim World ?

1. Yes that is the case. The current President of Indonesia deserves respect for the way he runs his country but none of the Muslim leaders do.

2. As for the puppet leaders: Who do you think they are? Who bows down to every demand of the US?

[soloqi]

So called western Leaders have nothing but utter contempt for Islam. The fact that since 1923 we have been denied an Islamic state says it all. And so called Muslim Countries are well puppet states with corrupt officials holding office. Oil is still being used because if sustainable energy like solar power and the electric car became common place..well the middle east will destabilize and they will turn their back on the west and unite against a common foe.

Sorry if this is cryptic...i dont want to sound like a fanatic and get banned...True Islam is the enemy or capitalism.

[جوري]

Oh, you were talking about these verses. Still fail to see the terms Sunni and Shia explicitly being used. I was talking about the explicitness of the terms as I am sure you are smart enough to understand.

Actually shia is precisely and clearly communicated, and if you can't read Arabic then I've already added the transliteration so anything left is a question of your own intelligence not mine. Ahel asunnah is a given to denote what a Muslim is. Shia by the very definition of the term is a sect, see verses and translation, and thus is a deviation and the Quran is clear on the matter, we're not of them and they're not of us!
Hope that makes it easier for you to understand.

ADDED : Why can't these verses be used then to classify people into "radicals." Since they are similar to a sect which claim only their interpretation of the Qur'an and Sunnah is the right one and use violent means to further their agenda.

The Quran is a done deal and not open to your renditions and I have doubts that you'd read the noble book all together. On the one hand you're looking for said verses and when faced with it, your meaning evolves and I wish it evolved in a meaningful way, it is as if you just desire a new Quran all together. The Quran and sunnah are already interpreted, you're really in no position to question anyone else's understanding given your own lack of knowledge of its contents and inability to navigate even if for the sole purpose of saving face!


best,