[Zimphire]

How the Jews Distorted the Torah and Rejected, Cursed, and Hated Muhammad.

The idea that Jews (as well as Christians) are renegades who have rejected the Prophet Muhammad and distorted their Scriptures is a foundation of the dhimma: these people can't be given equal rights in Islamic society because they have already proved themselves untrustworthy. "Saudi Iqra TV: 'Stories from Before the Verses Came Down' How the Jews Distorted the Torah and Rejected, Cursed, and Hated Muhammad," from MEMRI, with thanks to Romy:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatc...ves/006459.php


Check out the segments. Looks like Nazi propaganda all over again.

Sad this is being played mainstream.

[BoomStick]

The muslims are peaceful and never lie.

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by Zimphire

Sad this is being played mainstream.

Wahabism is not mainstream but an extremely radical tribal version of Islam.

Taliesin

[Zimphire]

It is the MAJOR SECT of the gov and society of Saudi.

Not that really had anything to do with what you quoted that I said.

IT IS BEING PLAYED MAINSTREAM. Meaning, in all of Saudi.

[PacHead]

Originally Posted by Zimphire

It is the MAJOR SECT of the gov and society of Saudi.

Not that really had anything to do with what you quoted that I said.

IT IS BEING PLAYED MAINSTREAM. Meaning, in all of Saudi.

It is most definitely mainstream.

Many mosques in the USA, yep the USA, are financed by the wahabis, they're spreading their disease all across the world, spending billions to set up schools and finance their islamonazi propaganda..

[budster101]

Absolutely true.

[DBursey]

Just where do those nasty Wahhabists go for their economic, political and military support? Hmmm ...

[Randman]

An interesting take on Saudi life is Inside The Kingdom by Carmen bin Laden, former sister-in-law to our buddy Usama. I listened to the audible.com version and enjoyed it. And it seemed fair enough. The woman reading it was a bit annoying though, especially after hearing the real Carmen.

[zizban]

You know, I'm tired of Saudi Arabia and Iraq. First we save the Saudi's asses in the first gulf war and now we liberate Iraq. And what do we get in return? HIGH GAS PRICES!! We should be getting our oil for free from these towel heads, damnit.

The above was sarcasm.

[osxisfun]

But. But... W was going to "jawbone" the Saudis into lower prices during the 2000 election cycle.

If his jaw starts and ends with his hand then JawBoning is on the March™

[Zimphire]

Originally Posted by DBursey

Just where do those nasty Wahhabists go for their economic, political and military support? Hmmm ...

Originally Posted by osxisfun

But. But... W was going to "jawbone" the Saudis into lower prices during the 2000 election cycle.

If his jaw starts and ends with his hand then JawBoning is on the March™

What does this have to do with the topic? Use some much needed self control.

You anti-Bush zealots crack me up.

[Krusty]

Originally Posted by Zimphire

You anti-Bush zealots crack me up.

Its not just Bush, it has been all of our presidents of both parties. Its ironic that probably the worst example of Muslim autocracy has been our long standing biggest ally in the Muslim world.

Originally Posted by Boomstick

The muslims are peaceful and never lie.

Especially the ones we are in bed with, apparently.

[Warung]

Originally Posted by DBursey

"...why don't you come with me little girl, on a magic carpet ride"

[Zimphire]

Originally Posted by Krusty

Its not just Bush, it has been all of our presidents of both parties. Its ironic that probably the worst example of Muslim autocracy has been our long standing biggest ally in the Muslim world.

Especially the ones we are in bed with, apparently.

Again, this really has nothing to do with said topic.

[Randman]

Originally Posted by Zimphire

Again, this really has nothing to do with said topic.

Oh, that doesn't stop so many people who feel they have to make there lame point whenever and wherever they choose. Goes for both sides of the fence, politically, which is why there's never any compromise or even an agreement to disagree. Too many of these people have to keep repeating the same garbage over and over lest they actually start to think about what drivel it is.

[Zimphire]

Actually I have noticed a trend in this part of the forum.

No matter what is posted, the SAME few people turn it into a Bush bashing thread. They have no self control.

None.

Which tells you a little bit about the nature of the Bush hater.

[Randman]

I can handle people bashing anyone but wish they'd do it in the appropriate forum and thread. If we're talking about Beyonce and Salma's butt, do you really care about some idiot poster railing about the government of a country he or she knows little about, doesn't live there and probably has never been there.

[DBursey]

Originally Posted by Zimphire

What does this have to do with the topic? Use some much needed self control.

You anti-Bush zealots crack me up.

Any zealotry I may feel most assuredly has nothing to do with your president. How is my posting of a relevant graphic reminder of your administration's support for the repressively anti-democratic, misogynic Saudi oligarchy (whose actions your post is meant to condemn) to be considered as less than relevant to your topic?

Please feel free to enlighten me in this regard. If you are in any way convincing, perhaps I'll temper my posts accordingly.

You may not enjoy being reminded of such loathsome relationships as are cultivated & maintained by your administration, but I certainly don't deserve your castigation for relating them in this thread.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by DBursey

Any zealotry I may feel most assuredly has nothing to do with your president. How is my posting of a relevant graphic reminder of your administration's support for the repressively anti-democratic, misogynic Saudi oligarchy (whose actions your post is meant to condemn) to be considered as less than relevant to your topic?

Please feel free to enlighten me in this regard. If you are in any way convincing, perhaps I'll temper my posts accordingly.

You may not enjoy being reminded of such loathsome relationships as are cultivated & maintained by your administration, but I certainly don't deserve your castigation for relating them in this thread.

He's got a point, Zimphy. If you want to castigate Saudi Arabia for their anti-semitism wouldn't you find it ironic that the biggest ally of Israel--the target of said anti-semitism--is also the biggest ally of Saudi Arabia.

But Randman is correct. Pretty much every President of the modern era (post WWII anyway) has been suckling at the teat of whatever Crown Prince is sitting on the throne in Saudi Arabia. The relevance of our current President is that he has come out in public for putting pressure on Saudi Arabia to change their ways but then fails to deliver with policies.

So, indirectly, thre is reason to criticize Bush in this thread, but only indirectly.

[DBursey]

Absolutely. Although, in all fairness, Mr Bush's Saudi hand-holding is representative of a much larger relationship that goes back to the second WW (and to before big oil), when the U.S. was given airbase rights to support its efforts in the far east theatre. The Sauds were desperate for hard currency to pay off tribal leaders, clerics and the like. The petroleum economy had not yet begun its exponential ascention, and Meccan pilgrimage taxes weren't cutting it. In return, the US 'loaned' and minted tonnes of bullion into silver coinage and otherwise became involved in Saudi affairs.

The Arabian penninsula was, and remains, a fiercely tribal, patriachial society where the common man possesses very little in the way of human rights, and the common woman less than that of a camel. One can understand the how the practical interests in maintaining a strategic relationship are more quickly and easily served through the cultivation of such repressive regimes.

Perhaps the pursuit of such practicalities have been having unintended/unassumed consequences of late, no? In any case, the cognitive dichotomy represented in the free world's supposed 'leader' holding hands both viscerally and metaphorically with a leader of such a loathsomely repressive regime is increasingly apparent to the entire world, including those areas whose hearts and minds must be swayed if this 'war' on terror is to be anything more than an evolving clash of cutures.

**All IMHO of course. I qualified the term war not from any disrespect to servicemen, but to my own honestly held conviction that the entire effort might have been more effectively prosecuted and better served as an international policing effort with limited (but clear) military objectives.