quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Tibe. You are one of those people who ragged on America and President Bush incessantly. Your convaluted thinking would say that it would be better for Iraq to have Saddam in power today instead of the government they now have. In light of that please spare us quibs about Islam and human rights.
Did Iraq become another American State? What business is it of the Americans who is in power in another country? You make it your business because of OIL and because America thinks it can police the entire world by terrorism tactics. You call it 'liberation', they call it terrorism. How many MORE have died in Iraq since you the super terrorists invaded that country?? Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ayisha: Tibe, some people in here dont class the Old Testement as 'The Bible', except when it suits them of course. These prefer the stuff written by Paul and call it Christianity and only accept the New Testement as 'The Bible', except when it suits of course.
A book that has been re written so many times looses its value. In 20 years there will be a 3. testament where there will be free tickets to the swingerclubs and its okay to wanna go for a free ride on your neighbour but just not on sundays
That said - the quaran is oldfashion and belong in the stoneage in many ways.
People get further with genuine compassion and common sense.
Posts: 1325 | From: For tooti http://www.csa.gov.uk/ | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is our business Tibe because we have peckers 12 inches long. When are you going to figure out the way the world actually works. You are one of those people who would rather have Uday and Kusay Hussein putting women in wood chippers than support the United States.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: It is our business Tibe because we have peckers 12 inches long. When are you going to figure out the way the world actually works. You are one of those people who would rather have Uday and Kusay Hussein putting women in wood chippers than support the United States.
Where did y come up with that idea???? I LOVE democracy and freedom for all. I like think US went in Iraq with the right motives but wouldnt want them to continue the raid they are on unless they come up with better proofs that what they had against Iraq. Otherwise we end up in WW 3.
Posts: 1325 | From: For tooti http://www.csa.gov.uk/ | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:That was strange. This is what my bible says...the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die. Deuteronomy 22:13-21
Those were the customs of ANCIENT Jews, 4000 years ago. Nowhere in the Bible it says that we should adopt those ANCIENT JEWISH customs as ETERNAL laws, laws for all places and people and time. They were meant for a specific people for a specific time.
Christians honor and revere the Old Testament as inspired by God in its own era, and they can learn timeless truths from it, but they also believe that Jesus Christ has fulfilled this sacred text, so people no longer have to be stoned to death for a sin like adultery. Sins are dealt with in a new way under the New Covenant—forgiveness and restoration. Jesus is Our Law.
Christianity offers humans dignity. It treats their sins through spiritual transformation in accordance with Christ’s death on the Cross. No longer do we have to undergo the severe physical punishments outlined in the Old Testament, for such sins as adultery and homosexuality. Now, under the New Covenant, the Church seeks sinners, not to punish them by hitting them with rocks or crushing them with stonewalls, but with the message of repentance, forgiveness, and restoration. But if they refuse, then they are free to go their own way. That is the risk of freedom, but the Church does not persecute them by reinstituting the penalties in the Old Covenant.
In contrast, sharia ultimately degrades society and diminishes freedom. It does not promote human rights or simple justice. Islam would drag all of us backwards to a diluted old law, enslaving us under judgment and severity.
Posts: 3773 | From: unfinished thought | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ayisha: Tibe, some people in here dont class the Old Testement as 'The Bible', except when it suits them of course. These prefer the stuff written by Paul and call it Christianity and only accept the New Testement as 'The Bible', except when it suits of course.
A book that has been re written so many times looses its value. In 20 years there will be a 3. testament where there will be free tickets to the swingerclubs and its okay to wanna go for a free ride on your neighbour but just not on sundays
That said - the quaran is oldfashion and belong in the stoneage in many ways.
People get further with genuine compassion and common sense.
Yes, thats what Quran says too, you just have to read it with open eyes and heart, not something many manage to do Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:That was strange. This is what my bible says...the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die. Deuteronomy 22:13-21
Those were the customs of ANCIENT Jews, 4000 years ago. Nowhere in the Bible it says that we should adopt those ANCIENT JEWISH customs as ETERNAL laws, laws for all places and people and time. They were meant for a specific people for a specific time.
Christians honor and revere the Old Testament as inspired by God in its own era, and they can learn timeless truths from it, but they also believe that Jesus Christ has fulfilled this sacred text, so people no longer have to be stoned to death for a sin like adultery. Sins are dealt with in a new way under the New Covenant—forgiveness and restoration. Jesus is Our Law.
Okay - god develops too so that he fits into our century??? NICE - i would love to see his life strategy coach Posts: 1325 | From: For tooti http://www.csa.gov.uk/ | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:That was strange. This is what my bible says...the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die. Deuteronomy 22:13-21
Those were the customs of ANCIENT Jews, 4000 years ago. Nowhere in the Bible it says that we should adopt those ANCIENT JEWISH customs as ETERNAL laws, laws for all places and people and time. They were meant for a specific people for a specific time.
Christians honor and revere the Old Testament as inspired by God in its own era, and they can learn timeless truths from it, but they also believe that Jesus Christ has fulfilled this sacred text, so people no longer have to be stoned to death for a sin like adultery. Sins are dealt with in a new way under the New Covenant—forgiveness and restoration. Jesus is Our Law.
Christianity offers humans dignity. It treats their sins through spiritual transformation in accordance with Christ’s death on the Cross. No longer do we have to undergo the severe physical punishments outlined in the Old Testament, for such sins as adultery and homosexuality. Now, under the New Covenant, the Church seeks sinners, not to punish them by hitting them with rocks or crushing them with stonewalls, but with the message of repentance, forgiveness, and restoration. But if they refuse, then they are free to go their own way. That is the risk of freedom, but the Church does not persecute them by reinstituting the penalties in the Old Covenant.
In contrast, sharia ultimately degrades society and diminishes freedom. It does not promote human rights or simple justice. Islam would drag all of us backwards to a diluted old law, enslaving us under judgment and severity.
Matt 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 5:18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 5:19 Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 5:20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.
Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ayisha: Tibe, some people in here dont class the Old Testement as 'The Bible', except when it suits them of course. These prefer the stuff written by Paul and call it Christianity and only accept the New Testement as 'The Bible', except when it suits of course.
A book that has been re written so many times looses its value. In 20 years there will be a 3. testament where there will be free tickets to the swingerclubs and its okay to wanna go for a free ride on your neighbour but just not on sundays
That said - the quaran is oldfashion and belong in the stoneage in many ways.
People get further with genuine compassion and common sense.
Yes, thats what Quran says too, you just have to read it with open eyes and heart, not something many manage to do
Depends on the eyes that reads it something can be either hatefull or gloryfied. Objective read i would say the quaran is old fashioned (a long with the bible in any version)and has no place in daily life in year 2009
Posts: 1325 | From: For tooti http://www.csa.gov.uk/ | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: It is our business Tibe because we have peckers 12 inches long. When are you going to figure out the way the world actually works. You are one of those people who would rather have Uday and Kusay Hussein putting women in wood chippers than support the United States.
You really are delusional aren't you? Oh and you dont use inches, you use centimetres, someone only told you they were inches. 12cm = just under 5 inches, nothing to brag about Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ayisha, first I slam is not the fastest growing religion, secondly, it needs to be destroyed and will be in the end. Thirdly, you cannot realistically take the Bible or the Koran literally. we do not kill goats to make a frickin offering in 2009 or stone women to death like some muslims still want to do. Fourthly, my name is not Patrick, it is Charles.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Ayisha, first I slam is not the fastest growing religion, secondly, it needs to be destroyed and will be in the end. Thirdly, you cannot realistically take the Bible or the Koran literally. we do not kill goats to make a frickin offering in 2009 or stone women to death like some muslims still want to do. Fourthly, my name is not Patrick, it is Charles.
charles i just read 20 minutes ago online that there aint anything in the quran that says to stone someone to death.
Posts: 62 | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tibe still working: Okay - god develops too so that he fits into our century???
The law was never given to the New Testament believer but the Old Testament believer. It was given for a reason- 1. to show us that we are sinful. 2. To lead us to Christ.
Gal 3:19: “What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made.”
In other words when Christ (the seed) was born there would be an and to the law.
Gal. 3:23-25: “But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed. Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, that we may be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor. " NO MORE (Old Testament) LAW. V. 26 “For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.” Everything in the New Testament covenant is by faith, not law.
Rom.11:6 “And if by grace then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. but if it is by works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work." It is either one or the other it can't be both, these are two different covenants.If you choose to be under one then you are removed from the other.
Rom. 6:14-15 “For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law, but under grace.”
How can the law be used to prevent sin, to not let sin have mastery over you? It can’t. When people today insist that we must keep the laws of the Old Testament covenant they are removing themselves from the covenant of grace and are not under the headship of Christ but are under Moses. The New Testament makes it clear in Jn.1:17: “The Law came through Moses.” GRACE and TRUTH came through Jesus Christ.
Paul made it clear through his writings "I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain." (Gal 2:21). Gal 2:19: "For I through the law died to the law that I might live to God.” in other words, Paul is saying the law is dead to him. We don't use what is dead to have life.
Those who had been under the law ( the Jewish people) had been delivered from it to something far better and so has the church.
Rom. 7:6: “But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.”
The Christian who seeks to keep the law to be justified or sanctified has fallen from grace (Gal 5:4).
Acts 2:42 states that the early Church followed not Old Testament rules but “the Apostles’ doctrine.”
The law of God, God’s laws, Moses commandments, God’s commandments are the same laws united under the old covenant. The law," "the law of the Lord," and "the law of Moses," are the same (they include circumcision, priesthood and sacrifices) see-Luke 2:22, 23, 24, 27; 2 Chron.31:3. ("The law," "the law of Moses," "the, book of the law," "'the law of God," are the same- Neh. 8:2, 3, 8, 14, 18.)
When God speaks about the law he does not divide the ceremonial from the moral, it is all one unit. Jews today continue to keep them as one unit identifying them as 613 laws (not 10).
Here is what needs to be answered- did Jesus fulfill only the ceremonial law of Moses only or all of it? All these commands (613) were the law, these are not just Moses ordinances. They were all nailed to the cross and whatever was nailed there died with Christ. The Old Testament law is no longer operational for the believer. Whatever the apostles taught to the church were those commands to keep as a New Testament believer.
The Old Covenant of Moses is the primary focus of the Old Testament but it is not the initial covenant with Israel- the one with Abraham was and the Mosaic covenant fulfills a number of its promises. The New Covenant becomes the primary focus of the New Testament and is the last covenant of the Bible because it reveals the grace of God through Jesus Christ to all mankind. It becomes the only way both Jews and Gentiles are restored to God.
The Judaizers who believed and kept the law by obligation came in to bring the believers back into bondage. In Acts 15:10 the early church rule on this matter of the law. “Now therefore, why put God to the test, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear”. The law of Moses is not binding for the gentiles is made clear in Acts 15.
The Bible says the just shall live by faith, not the law or commandments of the Old Testament.
Paul a former law keeper states “the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me.” (Gal 2:20)
Rom 8:3-6 “For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh, that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.” It is the Spirit inside the believer that we are to obey to walk according to Jesus.
1 Cor. 15:57 “the strength of sin is the law.” But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.”
Gal 2:16 "knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.”
The New Testament focus and exalts Christ not the law. So what is the law for today? Paul tells us “that the law is good if one uses it lawfully” (Tim. 1:8). So what is the law for today if it is still considered good?
Look at Paul’s interpretation in 1 Tim.1:9, that law is made NOT for good men but FOR law breakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious." Is this not the law that states all have fallen short of the glory of God? Good men would be those who repent and follow Christ, not the Old Testament laws.
So is a Christian under law? No, but there are commands we are to obey that are strictly found for the Church in the New Testament, so we are not without law, just not under the Old Covenant law.
Posts: 3773 | From: unfinished thought | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:secondly, it needs to be destroyed and will be in the end.
How do you destroy a belief? go on im interested
quote:Thirdly, you cannot realistically take the Bible or the Koran literally. we do not kill goats to make a frickin offering in 2009 or stone women to death like some muslims still want to do.
That shows you dont know Quran, there is no stoning women or goat offerings in it.
You really should educate yourself on 'culture' as you are sadly lacking, as was proved in your attempts to tell ME (a Brit) what British 'culture' is. You cannot distinguish between religion and culture, but I also know some Muslims cant either
quote:Fourthly, my name is not Patrick, it is Charles.
Nice to meet you Charles. Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I do not care what the Koran says. i have to deal with 2009 Islam. Religion is a major componet of culture, in fact it is WHERE a culture gets it's values. You cannot be a real Brit from a cultural point of view and be a Muslim.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tibe, You did not complain abpout American power when we LITERALLY saved you from Hitler. We gave up a quarter of a million dead boys to allow you to be what you are today and the cold hard facts are we did not have to do it. Hitler could have never invaded America across the atlantic.
There is no way you could have been liberated without us. Next time the germans get cranked up they can have you.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: You cannot be a real Brit from a cultural point of view and be a Muslim.
Well FACT is that I AM a Brit and I AM a Muslim. Guess that makes me something special and knocks your theory into a cocked hat me duck Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Tibe, You did not complain abpout American power when we LITERALLY saved you from Hitler. We gave up a quarter of a million dead boys to allow you to be what you are today and the cold hard facts are we did not have to do it. Hitler could have never invaded America across the atlantic.
There is no way you could have been liberated without us. Next time the germans get cranked up they can have you.
Ehhm please show me where i complain???
We payed your help back after the war old dept and old water under the bridge. We also entered Iraq side by side with the US eventhough we was obligated to. So stick your pibe back in the hole!
Posts: 1325 | From: For tooti http://www.csa.gov.uk/ | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Pamela in Blue: charles i just read 20 minutes ago online that there aint anything in the quran that says to stone someone to death.
That's because a goat ate the pages of the Quran with the stoning verses.
But it was there. This is seen analogously, in the severe Islamic punishment for theft: cutting off the hand. But the goat missed that one.
Once again, Muhammad and Islam take things too far, especially when we compare him and his religion with Jesus and Christianity.
Muslims assert that the punishment of stoning an adulterer preserves society and the family. In reply, however, it is difficult to imagine a punishment that does just the opposite. Depriving children of one of their parents by stoning him or her to death breaks down the family and can only cause irreparable damage to the children, once they learn why their father or mother will never return to them. Allah took him or her away, out of his divine "compassion." Also, this irreversible punishment forever shuts down any hope of reconciliation between the fractured married couple. It is true that the witnesses can stop the punishment under certain conditions by not initiating it (Muslim no. 4196, and the translator’s note 2161; and Maududi 3:308-09). But what if the rocks are thrown and the criminal is killed, but later on the offended party changes his or her mind? By then, it is too late.
What I also find ludicrous is the confusing policy in sharia is the concealment of one’s sexual crimes when the goal is to deter them and preserve society. Maududi cites three hadiths that show Muhammad telling the criminals that it had been better for them if they had concealed their crimes.
First, this hadith reports that Muhammad says: "If any of you is guilty of any immorality, he should better remain hidden under the curtain of Allah, but if he discloses it to us, we shall certainly enforce the law of Allah on him" (Maududi 3:305). Second, the following one says that a man confessed his sin to the prophet, so he ordered the man to be stoned to death. But at the same time he said to the condemned man: "Would that you had kept the matter hidden: this would have been better for you" (3:305). Finally, Maududi cites this hadith that has Muhammad saying: "You should yourselves pardon the crimes which merit prescribed punishment because when a crime which calls for such a punishment comes to my notice, it will become obligatory on me to award the punishment" (3:305)
However, this concealment contradicts the ultimate purposes of punishing zina: to preserve the family and society and to deter future sexual criminals. These three hadiths say just the opposite. Instead, Islamic law only encourages criminals to go further underground, rather than confess their crimes openly in order to receive help and healing. Concealment serves only to make society collapse secretly—that is, if Muslim apologists are to be believed about the danger of sexual sins being the only factor in a large civilization’s downfall.
Muhammad completely misses the mark when we compare his harsh and excessive policies with those of Jesus and his early church, who offer holiness from the inside out, not impose it from the outside. Muhammad is a deformer, not a reformer, of the earlier religion (and Judaism). In light of this, we drop the excessive terms "crime" and "criminal" and use the more accurate "sin" and "sinner."
Muslim apologists frequently cite the Torah to demonstrate how excessive and harsh the Bible is. So who am I or other Christians to critique the Quran? But this completely misunderstands around 1,400 years of Old Testament history, beginning from the time when tradition says Moses lived up to the advent of Jesus, and it completely misunderstands a standard Christian interpretation of the Old Testament.
Christians honor the Old Testament, but they also take this multifaceted document in its historical context. The Torah was part and parcel of its culture. It either reflects its culture (like some architectural features of the tabernacle), or it improves on its culture (ethical monotheism). Not all of the old law applies to today’s world. Second, Christians look back at the Old Testament through the vision of Jesus. For Christians, Jesus’ interpretation of these laws is final. He takes away their sharp sting with his death on the cross and by his sinless life and divine love.
Posts: 3773 | From: unfinished thought | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
oh Please UT stop bullshitting for once! a goat my arse!
Murder is in Quran as a crime punishable by death. Not theft, not adultery, not fornication, but Murder. Any hadith that says otherwise should have been thrown out on the first sorting through the pile and Muhammed would NOT have gone against Allah, so your theory is rubbish.
-------------------- If you don't learn from your mistakes, there's no sense making them. Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Tibe, You did not complain abpout American power when we LITERALLY saved you from Hitler. We gave up a quarter of a million dead boys to allow you to be what you are today and the cold hard facts are we did not have to do it. Hitler could have never invaded America across the atlantic.
There is no way you could have been liberated without us. Next time the germans get cranked up they can have you.
Ehhm please show me where i complain???
We payed your help back after the war old dept and old water under the bridge. We also entered Iraq side by side with the US eventhough we was obligated to. So stick your pibe back in the hole!
*grabs tibe and forces her to bow down to our great white saviour The American Man with the 5 inch dick*
(hey Tibe, you bite one ankle I bite the other) Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Tibe, You did not complain abpout American power when we LITERALLY saved you from Hitler. We gave up a quarter of a million dead boys to allow you to be what you are today and the cold hard facts are we did not have to do it. Hitler could have never invaded America across the atlantic.
There is no way you could have been liberated without us. Next time the germans get cranked up they can have you.
Ehhm please show me where i complain???
We payed your help back after the war old dept and old water under the bridge. We also entered Iraq side by side with the US eventhough we was obligated to. So stick your pibe back in the hole!
*grabs tibe and forces her to bow down to our great white saviour The American Man with the 5 inch dick*
(hey Tibe, you bite one ankle I bite the other)
Nahhh would touch him with anything - remember my man is muslim so im under his restriction and some of them is i cant look at other men , im veiled and if i come closer than 10 feet to any american i must blow my self up (or was it blow him )
Posts: 1325 | From: For tooti http://www.csa.gov.uk/ | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tibe still working: im veiled and if i come closer than 10 feet to any american i must blow my self up (or was it blow him )
im sure UT will find a copy/paste to clarify that Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- If you don't learn from your mistakes, there's no sense making them. Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Tibe, You did not complain abpout American power when we LITERALLY saved you from Hitler. We gave up a quarter of a million dead boys to allow you to be what you are today and the cold hard facts are we did not have to do it. Hitler could have never invaded America across the atlantic.
There is no way you could have been liberated without us. Next time the germans get cranked up they can have you.
The Anglo-American financial elite suported Hitler's rise to military preponderance in Europe, U.S. companies such as Standard oil, Ford, IBM, and people such as Prescott Bush- the grandfather of the former president, assisted Hitler.
Without U.S. support, Hitler would never have risen, and World War 2 would NOT have occured, so spare me the sanctimonious rubbish.
The U.S. Ambassador in Germany, William Dodd, wrote FDR from Berlin on October 19, 1936 (three years after Hitler came to power), concerning American industrialists and their aid to the Nazis:
"Much as I believe in peace as our best policy, I cannot avoid the fears which Wilson emphasized more than once in conversations with me, August 15, 1915 and later: the breakdown of democracy in all Europe will be a disaster to the people. But what can you do? At the present moment more than a hundred American corporations have subsidiaries here or cooperative understandings. The DuPonts have three allies in Germany that are aiding in the armament business. Their chief ally is the I. G. Farben Company, a part of the Government which gives 200,000 marks a year to one propaganda organization operating on American opinion. Standard Oil Company (New York sub-company) sent $2,000,000 here in December 1933 and has made $500,000 a year helping Germans make Ersatz gas for war purposes; but Standard Oil cannot take any of its earnings out of the country except in goods. They do little of this, report their earnings at home, but do not explain the facts. The International Harvester Company president told me their business here rose 33% a year (arms manufacture, I believe), but they could take nothing out. Even our airplanes people have secret arrangement with Krupps. General Motor Company and Ford do enormous businesses/sic] here through their subsidiaries and take no profits out. I mention these facts because they complicate things and add to war dangers."
posted
That is all crap sudaniya. You have some good views on american history but sometimes you come up with this looney tunes stuff that is way out there. the United states rebuilt the german economy during the 1920's under the Weimar republic. Hitler was bank rolled by VanPapen and the German aristocrats who had the money but lacked the popular support the nazi's had.
That we did business with Germany in the 1930's does not mean we advocated war or supported Nazi philosophy. We also did business with Stalin and the japanese.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: That is all crap sudaniya. You have some good views on american history but sometimes you come up with this looney tunes stuff that is way out there. the United states rebuilt the german economy during the 1920's under the Weimar republic. Hitler was bank rolled by VanPapen and the German aristocrats who had the money but lacked the popular support the nazi's had.
That we did business with Germany in the 1930's does not mean we advocated war or supported Nazi philosophy. We also did business with Stalin and the japanese.
You seem to believe the financial and technical assistance to Hitler as "accidental" or due to the "short-sightedness" of American businessmen, the evidence strongly suggests some degree of premeditation on the part of these American financiers. Similar and unacceptable pleas of "accident" were made on behalf of American financiers and industrialists in the parallel example of building the military power of the Soviet Union from 1917 onwards. Yet these American capitalists were willing to finance and subsidize the Soviet Union while the Vietnam war was underway, knowing that the Soviets were supplying the other side.
You need to refute evidence of American industrial support for Hitler's war machine.
In two gears Germany will be manufacturing oil and gas enough out of soft coal for a long war. The Standard Oil of New York is furnishing millions of dollars to help. (Report from the Commercial Attaché, U.S. Embassy in Berlin, Germany, January 1933, to State Department in Washington, D.C,)
The Standard Oil group ( now EXXON MOBILE) of companies, in which the Rockefeller family owned a one-quarter (and controlling) interest,1 was of critical assistance in helping Nazi Germany prepare for World War II. This assistance in military preparation came about because Germany's relatively insignificant supplies of crude petroleum were quite insufficient for modern mechanized warfare; in 1934 for instance about 85 percent of German finished petroleum products were imported. The solution adopted by Nazi Germany was to manufacture synthetic gasoline from its plentiful domestic coal supplies. It was the hydrogenation process of producing synthetic gasoline and iso-octane properties in gasoline that enabled Germany to go to war in 1940 — and this hydrogenation process was developed and financed by the Standard Oil laboratories in the United States in partnership with I.G. Farben.
"TheAmericanPatriot", I'm NOT at all interested in your signature intransigence:
Do you refute:
-Standard oil assistance to Hitler's war machine, before and during the war?
-Chase Manhatten Bank's financial assistance to Hitler?
-General Electric's assistance to Hitler?
-Henry Ford's financing of Hitler, before and during the war?
-Wall Street's extensive assistance to Hitler?
-That one hundred American corporations were involved in the construction of Germany's war machine?
The contribution made by American capitalism to German war preparations before 1940 can only be described as phenomenal. It was certainly crucial to German military capabilities. For instance, in 1934 Germany produced domestically only 300,000 tons of natural petroleum products and less than 800,000 tons of synthetic gasoline; the balance was imported. Yet, ten years later in World War II, after transfer of the Standard Oil of New Jersey hydrogenation patents and technology to I. G. Farben (used to produce synthetic gasoline from coal), Germany produced about 6 1/2 million tons of oil — of which 85 percent (5 1/2 million tons) was synthetic oil using the Standard Oil hydrogenation process. Moreover, the control of synthetic oil output in Germany was held by the I. G. Farben subsidiary, Braunkohle-Benzin A. G., and this Farben cartel itself was created in 1926 with Wall Street financial assistance.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes I refute your data on the level of involvemnt with Hitler. Those stroies have been floating around for years but you can produce no substantive evidence to validate those points.
That American companies traded with germany in the 1930's would not be improper.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Yes I refute your data on the level of involvemnt with Hitler. Those stroies have been floating around for years but you can produce no substantive evidence to validate those points.
That American companies traded with germany in the 1930's would not be improper.
Your then ambassador seemed to of thought otherwise; he thought it improper... it's improper when those companies engaged in the armaments sector, the same armaments that claimed the lives of young American marines and soldiers.
Merely stating that you refute it, without actually refuting it, is comical.
No sane individual would deny Standard oil's work with I.G. Farben, nor IBM's co-operation with Hitler in his activities against the Jews.
Qualified observers have argued that Germany could not have gone to war in 1939 without I. G. Farben. Between 1927 and the beginning of World War II, I.G. Farben doubled in size, an expansion made possible in great part by American technical assistance and by American bond issues, such as the one for $30 million offered by National City Bank. By 1939 I. G. acquired a participation and managerial influence in some 380 other German firms and over 500 foreign firms. The Farben empire owned its own coal mines, its own electric power plants, iron and steel units, banks, research units, and numerous commercial enterprises. There were over 2,000 cartel agreements between I. G. and foreign firms — including Standard Oil of New Jersey, DuPont, Alcoa, Dow Chemical, and others in the United States, The full story of I,G, Farben and its world-wide ae-tivities before World War II can never be known, as key German records were destroyed in 1945 in anticipation of Allied victory. However, one post-war investigation by the U.S, War Department concluded that:
Without I. G. Farben's immense productive facilities, its intense research, and vast international affiliations, Germany's prosecution of the war would have been unthinkable and impossible; Farben not only directed its energies toward arming Germany, but concentrated on weakening her intended victims, and this double-barreled attempt to expand the German industrial potential for war and to restrict that of the rest of the world was not conceived and executed "in the normal course of business." The proof is overwhelming that I. G. Farben officials had full prior knowledge of Germany's plan for world conquest and of each specific aggressive act later undertaken ....
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
he may have thought so but if he did that does not prove the point. american historians do not think so and that position is not accepted history. To prove that point you would need to produce a historiographic paper, say 30 pages, showing how top historians of the period see the issue.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: he may have thought so but if he did that does not prove the point. american historians do not think so and that position is not accepted history. To prove that point you would need to produce a historiographic paper, say 30 pages, showing how top historians of the period see the issue.
I take that you believe the conclusions of the post-war investigation by the U.S. War Department to be insufficient?
General Electric was prominent in financing Hitler, it profited handsomely from war production – and yet it managed to evade bombing in World War II.
The Standard Oil group of companies, in which the Rockefeller family owned a one-quarter (and controlling) interest,’ was of critical assistance in helping Nazi Germany prepare for World War II. This assistance in military preparation came about because Germany’s relatively insignificant supplies of crude petroleum were quite insufficient for modern mechanized warfare; in 1934 for instance about 85 percent of German finished petroleum products were imported. The solution adopted by Nazi Germany was to manufacture synthetic gasoline from its plentiful domestic coal supplies. It was the hydrogenation process of producing synthetic gasoline and iso-octane properties in gasoline that enabled Germany to go to war in 1940-and this hydrogenation process was developed and financed by the Standard Oil laboratories in the United States in partnership with I.G. Farben.
Evidence presented to the Truman, Bone, and Kilgore Committees after World War II confirmed that Standard Oil had at the same time seriously imperiled the war preparations of the United States.” Documentary evidence was presented to all three Congressional committees that before World War II Standard Oil had agreed with I.G. Farben, in the so-called Jasco agreement, that synthetic rubber was within Farben’s sphere of influence, while Standard Oil was to have an absolute monopoly in the U.S. only if and when Farben allowed development of synthetic rubber to take place in the U.S.:
No Scholar can refute the role played by Standard oil, IBM, Ford, the DuPonts, Wall Street and a plethora of other American corporations.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
this is a bit like how America educated, trained and had deals with bin Laden and Saddam et al isnt it. All part of the big plot to then go in and 'liberate' and get all the business for rebuilding.
slimey double standards
-------------------- If you don't learn from your mistakes, there's no sense making them. Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ayisha, We also had an alliance with Joseph Stalin during WW II, a man who is responsible for killing more people than Hitler. We did that because it was felt at the time that the Germans were the biggest threat. Foreign policy, for ANY nation, has nothing to do with morality. Diplomatic history is littered with what you call "slimey double standards."
Sudaniya, the conclusions of the war department are one thing. How trained historians see those conclusions and in what context they are put is quite another. If your thesis is that the United States maintained in the 1930's a policy which favored the political advantage of Adolph Hitler and were thus responsible for WW II you have a very very hard case to make. The proper way to make that case is to show the arguments of top scholars, either pro or con on the issue. Do specialists on the 1930's all agree, on which issues do they disagree. Just throwing out a report from the war department in itself tells us little.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
Sudaniya, the conclusions of the war department are one thing. How trained historians see those conclusions and in what context they are put is quite another. If your thesis is that the United States maintained in the 1930's a policy which favored the political advantage of Adolph Hitler and were thus responsible for WW II you have a very very hard case to make. The proper way to make that case is to show the arguments of top scholars, either pro or con on the issue. Do specialists on the 1930's all agree, on which issues do they disagree. Just throwing out a report from the war department in itself tells us little.
The Anglo-American establishment funded Adolf Hitler and the Nazi war machine; major industrial businesses such as Ford, Standard oil, IBM, the DuPonts, along with Wall Street were fundamental supporters of Nazi Germany.
You and those like you, do not want to know that such a machiavellian group of men, strategically spread throughout the world, really exists.
Carrol Quigley, the author of "Tragedy and Hope; a history of the world in our time", describes the network I have just described in elaborate detail- far too elaborate for most people.
Tragedy and Hope was published in 1966 and is clearly one of the most important books ever written. Professor Quigley was an extraordinarily gifted historian and geo-political analyst. The insights and information contained in his massive study open the door to a true understanding of world history in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
well, I am machiavellian myself and I have no problems with a foreign policy based solely on self interest. I just do not see how economic investment in germany in 1935 is somehow sinister. America is a capitalist nation. We believe in doing business with almost anyone. Prof Quigley does some good, but very dated work but you have to read much more than him to get a realistic view of the last two centuries. I like to require the use of at least five or six historians to establish a point. I am just as interested in where the disagree as i am where they agree.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pamela, paradise seeker gave you the correct answers and I swear by Allah on that.
Im afraid though this place is really not the best place to ask about Islam as you can see one has this idea, another has another idea, dalia is not even a muslim and ayisha is a muslim corupted by people like dalia, the others hate islam! generally all will divert you from the truth.
My advice is to keep searching and always look for the evidence, there really are alot of foolish people out there. I wish you all the best.
Posts: 49 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
"there really are alot of foolish AND delusional people out there."
Posts: 3773 | From: unfinished thought | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Keep searching for sure BUT a cult like Islam is not going to take you where you want to go. Islam is badly damaging young women. It is retarding the economic growth of amny of the worlds nations. Islam wants to take a position in opposition to the thread history has been on for the past 500 years.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Beba: Pamela, paradise seeker gave you the correct answers and I swear by Allah on that.
Paradise seeker gave the correct answers according to the salafi interpretation of Islam which relies more on Hadith and Tafsir invented and written by MEN and use the Quran, the Word of God, as a second reference. This is GLARINGLY CLEAR when you look at Paradise seekers post and in answer to question 1 gave a small portion of a verse from the Quran, being VERY careful not to give you the rest.
Paradise seeker said :
quote:Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“Allaah burdens not a person beyond his scope”
[al-Baqarah 2:286]
The whole verse: 002.286 YUSUFALI: On no soul doth Allah Place a burden greater than it can bear. It gets every good that it earns, and it suffers every ill that it earns. (Pray:) "Our Lord! Condemn us not if we forget or fall into error; our Lord! Lay not on us a burden Like that which Thou didst lay on those before us; Our Lord! Lay not on us a burden greater than we have strength to bear. Blot out our sins, and grant us forgiveness. Have mercy on us. Thou art our Protector; Help us against those who stand against faith."
so WHY on Gods Earth would the 'burden' on a Muslim be as great as all this BS you are 'told' is Islam? And what happened to this verse: 002.256 YUSUFALI: Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.
Did the 'scholars' MISS that one further back when they WASTED all that time deciding which body parts a woman can shave??
quote:Im afraid though this place is really not the best place to ask about Islam as you can see one has this idea, another has another idea,
Then that is the BEST way for her to learn as she can look at ALL the views and make her OWN MIND as the QURAN and ALLAH told her to!
quote: dalia is not even a muslim and ayisha is a muslim corupted by people like dalia,
excuse me?? who the hell do you think you are? I have a mind and a brain and I STUDY, I will not be slapped around by ANYONE about the most important decisions regarding MY soul and MY God. The more people like YOU bang on with this BS the more I KNOW which path I want and it is not the one you're on. Make of that as you will, any of you, I really dont give a toss.
quote: the others hate islam!
UT does, Americanparrot does, King does, actively. BUT I learnt a hell of a lot from haters in Islam chat and I am STILL Muslim. The one thing haters do is to MAKE you study.
quote:generally all will divert you from the truth.
No we will give her the views of different Muslims and of different non Muslims, which is the best way to look for yourself.
quote:My advice is to keep searching and always look for the evidence, there really are alot of foolish people out there. I wish you all the best.
quote:Paradise seeker gave the correct answers according to the salafi interpretation of Islam which relies more on Hadith and Tafsir invented and written by MEN and use the Quran, the Word of God, as a second reference. This is GLARINGLY CLEAR when you look at Paradise seekers post and in answer to question 1 gave a small portion of a verse from the Quran, being VERY careful not to give you the rest.
because I got off track and cant be bothered to edit, but will add:
In paradise seekers answers, question 1 had a small part of a verse which I gave above and the rest of the long reply was from MEN which was in no way referenced to the same verse. In question 2, this was given:
“and eat and drink but waste not by extravagance, certainly He (Allaah) likes not Al Musrifoon (those who waste by extravagance) [al-A’raaf 7:31]
the bold is again added. This is the verse: 007.031 YUSUFALI: O Children of Adam! wear your beautiful apparel at every time and place of prayer: eat and drink: But waste not by excess, for Allah loveth not the wasters.
notice the bold? means men AND women.
the rest of the long reply was again from MEN
Question 3 about make-up there was NO Quran reference and again the rest of the long reply was from MEN
Question 4, again a portion of a verse from paradise seeker: “ ‘and indeed I will order them to change the nature created by Allaah’”[al-Nisa’ 4:119 – interpretation of the meaning]
The whole verse: 004.119 YUSUFALI: "I will mislead them, and I will create in them false desires; I will order them to slit the ears of cattle, and to deface the (fair) nature created by Allah." Whoever, forsaking Allah, takes satan for a friend, hath of a surety suffered a loss that is manifest.
yet as Dalia said, these same people that follow this also cut off the clitoris of a girl 'for her own good' and say that is 'sunnah'.
the rest of the long reply again from MEN
question 5, “And let those who oppose the Messenger’s (Muhammad’s) commandment (i.e. his Sunnah __ legal ways, orders, acts of worship, statements) (among the sects) beware, lest some Fitnah (disbelief, trials, afflictions, earthquakes, killing, overpowered by a tyrant) should befall them or a painful torment be inflicted on them”
[al-Noor 24:63]
The verse: 024.063 YUSUFALI: Deem not the summons of the Messenger among yourselves like the summons of one of you to another: Allah doth know those of you who slip away under shelter of some excuse: then let those beware who withstand the Messenger's order, lest some trial befall them, or a grievous penalty be inflicted on them.
reading of 24:62 first gives a different meaning which is nothing to do with eating with the right hand.
the rest of the reply AGAIN full of words of MEN.
-------------------- If you don't learn from your mistakes, there's no sense making them. Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
1. Special Claims The members of the harmful faith system make claims about their character, abilities, or knowledge that make them "special" in some way
a. The Claim of a Special Anointing or Calling b. The Claim of Special Powers from God
2. Authoritarianism The leader is dictatorial and authoritarian
3. An "Us Versus Them" Mentality Religious Addicts are at war with the world (flesh and the devil) to protect their terrain and establish themselves as godly persons who can't be compared to other persons of faith.
4. Punitive Nature Harmful faith systems are punitive in nature. The minister addicted to power punishes and purges the system of anybody who would upset the status quo.
5. Overwhelming Service Religious addicts are asked to give overwhelming service. Deep depression, extreme anxiety, and a general numbness are common in overwhelmed religious addicts.
6. Followers in Pain Many religious addicts in the system are physically ill, emotionally distraught, and spiritually dead. Denial becomes a quick and easy tool to live a lie until both physical and emotional trauma break the religious addicts' facades of perfection.
7. Closed Communication Communication is from the top down or from the inside out. With an attitude of spiritual superiority, religious addicts reinforce that they are always in greater touch with God's truth, more sensitive to God's will, and more worthy of being listened to than anyone else.
8. Legalism Rules are distortions of God's intent and leave Him out of the relationship. As new people come into the hurtful faith system, they are indoctrinated into the rules rather than strengthened in a relationship with God. It becomes a faith system based on "don'ts" rather than a faith centered on God. What you do is valued more than who you are.
9. No Objective Accountability Religious addicts have no system of objective accountability. If religious addicts were in healthy, accountable, relationships with others, hurtful faith would not be allowed to flourish. A person accountable only to God is a person out of control.
10. Labeling The technique of labeling is used to discount a person who opposes the beliefs of the religious addict. Labeling attempts to dehumanize persons so that dismissing them or their opinions is much easier. Labeling allows religious addicts to define truth, uphold that truth as defined, and destroy anyone else who would dare to question that truth.
Posts: 2803 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- If you don't learn from your mistakes, there's no sense making them. Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
This was a funny tread - too bad people stopped posting in it. Arent there more stuff we can laugh and argue about?????
Not to people replying to me with more than 10 lines it will NOT be read. I have better things to waste my life on...... Posts: 1325 | From: For tooti http://www.csa.gov.uk/ | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
You will NEVER destroy peoples faith no matter how hard you try.![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Oh and you dont use inches, you use centimetres, someone only told you they were inches. 12cm = just under 5 inches, nothing to brag about ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic