Agence France-Presse reports:
Syria’s president decreed a vote this month on a new
constitution that would effectively end nearly 50 years of single party
rule, state media said, as troops reportedly stormed centres of dissent.
***
Bashar al-Assad called the ballot for February 26, in a move clearly
aimed at placating growing global outrage over the bloodshed.
Under the newly proposed charter, freedom is “a sacred right” and
“the people will govern the people” in a multi-party democratic system,
state television said.
***
The new constitution also … prohibits parties based on religion.
Assad, who in April lifted a state of emergency in force since 1963,
when his Baath Party took power, has made repeated promises of reforms
that have failed to materialise since a popular uprising erupted on
March 15.
The embattled president, who succeeded his late father Hafez in 2000,
has said the constitution would usher in a “new era” for Syria, SANA
state news agency reported.
This is what the U.S. and its allies have said that they want.
But – given that the U.S. government has been consistently planning regime change in Syria for 20 years (and dreamed of regime change for 50 years), and that the U.S., Britain, Qatar and other countries have already started a covert war in Syria – it is uncertain whether democratic elections and a new constitution can avoid a Syrian war involving the West.
Car bomb attacks which occurred this week in India, Georgia and Thailand are being blamed on Iran by the U.S., Israel and their allies.
If Iran, in fact, carried out the attacks, it will provide a justification for war against Iran.
But did Iran actually carry out the attacks?
Let’s put aside for a moment the fact that the U.S. and Israel support the terrorists which have assassinated several Iranian scientists (and see this).
And put aside for a moment the following facts:
- The CIA admits
that it hired Iranians in the 1950?s to pose as Communists and stage
bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its
democratically-elected prime minister
- American and Israeli officials admit that they have repeatedly carried out terrorism and then blamed it on Arabs (and see this)
- Ron Paul has warned of a “Gulf of Tonkin type incident” in Iran
- Ed Asner says
that members of the elite Navy Seal team told him that the U.S. would
carry out a false flag attack and blame it on Iran to kick-start the war
- The war against Iran has already begun. See this, this and this
India has become one of Iran’s most important trading partners, and has been increasing its ties to Iran since sanctions have been imposed by the West. Indeed, India has agreed to pay for Iranian oil with gold. See this, this , this and this.
Why would Iran carry out a terror attack on one of its most important
trading partners … one which has agreed to help help Iran escape from
sanctions?
As Finnian Cunninham writes:
What would Iran gain from such action, only grief and trouble?
This is especially true with regard to India and Thailand. Both Asian
countries have become major trading partners with Tehran in recent
years. India, along with China, is Iran’s biggest customer for its vital
oil industry.
Thailand is of growing importance as a trading partner with Iran for
oil, mining, heavy industry, services, technology and agriculture
especially after both countries set up a joint business council five
years ago.
For Iran to carry out such attacks, as is being claimed, would be
like shooting itself in the foot, particularly because both Asian
countries have refused to join in the US-led campaign to isolate Iran
economically and diplomatically.
Put the other way round, it is much more in the interest of
Washington and Israel to destabilize relations between Iran and its
Asian partners. The repercussions from the blasts in India would appear
to be having that desired effect.
Take this Reuters reports: Up to now India has not gone along with
new financial sanctions imposed by the United States and European Union
to punish Iran over its disputed nuclear programme. Instead, New Delhi
has come up with elaborate trade and barter arrangements to pay for oil
supplies. However, the president of the All India Rice Exporters’
Association said Monday’s attack on the wife of an Israeli diplomat in
the Indian capital will damage trade with Iran and may complicate
efforts to resolve an impasse over Iranian defaults on payments for rice
imports worth around $150 million. “The attack and its political
fallout have clearly vitiated the atmosphere. Traders who were already
losing money due to payment defaults will be extremely wary of
continuing their trade with buyers in Iran,” Vijay Setia told Reuters.
So add it up. Bomb teams with proven US/Israeli assassination
expertise and methodology; target countries that are major Iranian
partners; desired effect of further isolating Iran internationally; and,
to cap it all, a long sought-after pretext for Israel to attack Iran
with America’s blessing.
When logic and facts coincide like this, it’s usually more prudent to engage in reason than to indulge in lurid claims.
Simiarly, Arshin Adib-Moghaddam writes in the Guardian:
Let’s assume that sections of the military and security
apparatus in Iran are responsible for the string of bombings in Georgia,
Thailand and India. What would be the motive? The argument that Iran is retaliating for the murder of five civilian nuclear scientists in Iran is not plausible. If
Iran wanted to target Israeli interests, it has other means at its
disposal. It is hard to imagine that the Iranian government would send
Iranian operatives to friendly countries, completely equipped with
Iranian money and passports – making the case against them as obvious as
possible.
If the Iranian Revolutionary Guards are as professional, highly
trained and politically savvy as we have been told repeatedly by Israeli
politicians themselves, if they have successfully trained and equipped
the cadres of Hezbollah and other movements with paramilitary wings in
the region, then why would they launch such a clumsy and self-defeating
operation?
And why India, Georgia and Thailand, three countries that
Iran has had cordial relations with during a period when Iran is facing
increasing sanctions spearheaded by the United States? A few
days ago, India agreed a rupee-based oil and gas deal with Iran and
resisted US pressures to join the western boycott of the Iranian energy
sector. As a net importer of 12% of Iranian oil, India’s total trade
with Iran amounted to $13.67bn in 2010-2011. What would be the motive for damaging relations with one of Iran’s major trading partners and regional heavyweights?
For Iran it doesn’t make sense to risk alienating India by launching
an assassination attempt in the capital of the country. Similarly, Iran
has good economic and political relations with Georgia and Thailand. Why
would the leadership in Tehran risk a major crisis with these countries
during this sensitive period when IAEA inspectors are moving in and out
of Iran to investigate the country’s nuclear programme?
And Juan Cole points out:
India has suffered from both Hindu and Muslim terrorist
groups. So the attack on an automobile outside the Israeli embassy in
New Delhi could easily have been carried out by an Indian group.
Israel’s government, a master of spin and propaganda, immediately blamed
the bombing on Iran and Hizbullah. But there is no evidence for this
cynical allegation, which makes no sense. India is Iran’s economic lifeline, and Tehran would not likely risk such an operation at this time.
India gets 12% of its oil from Iran and sees an $8 billion annual
export opportunity in filling the trade vacuum left by unilateral US and
European boycotts of Iran. Contrary to a bad Reuters article, Indian officials denied Tuesday that the bombing would affect trade ties. (Logical because no evidence points to Iran.)
Indian investigators are first rate. Based on the modus operandi, their initial thesis is that the attack was the work of the “Indian Mujahidin” group.
It had used a similar remote controlled sticky bomb, placed by a
motorcyclist, in an attack on Taiwanese tourists outside the Jama Masjid
cathedral mosque in 2010. IM is a Sunni group, not connected to Iran,
and doesn’t like Shiite Muslims (Iranians are Shiites). IM like other
Sunni radicals support the Palestinians and they are unhappy with
increasingly close ties between India and Israel.
American media that just parrot notorious thug, Israeli Foreign
Minister Avigdor Lieberman in this unlikely allegation are allowing
themselves to be used for propaganda. Why not interview Indian
authorities on this matter? They are on the ground and have excellent
forensic (“CSI”) abilities. Stop being so lazy and blinkered; that isn’t
journalism.
Regarding Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, it would be un-wise to forget that he belongs to a minority sect of Shia Islam -- one of the mainstream teachings of Shia Islam is that the Prophet Mohammed's authority was inherited by a line of spiritual leaders known as Imams, and that in the 10th century the last of them, the 12th Imam, went into what's known as occultation - that is to say he didn't die, but he has been hidden from humanity ever since.
One day, the teaching goes, he will return, ushering in an age of justice and peace and, shortly thereafter, the end of times -- very much like the Christian doctrine of the Second Coming, and most Shia Muslims understand it in a similar way - as something that will happen .. in God's good time.
But AhmaDinnahJacket (ok, Ahmadinejad) belongs to a minority sect called the Hasteners; they believe that it is the duty of the faithful to prepare the way for the return of the Hidden Imam - or Mahdi - and perhaps even to create "propitious" conditions.
So there you go. Suddenly, M.A.D. - mutually assured destruction - isn't a deterrent .. it's a desired outcome. Anyone who is fond of breathing (and drinking, and maybe running around nekkid) would dismiss such facts at their peril. 'Cause ... who wants to streak nekkid through radioactive fallout?
Point taken, fukin insane, but point taken. He is mad as a Hatter if that's what he is willing to do for his religious beliefs. I heard that once before, but I took it with a grain of salt. So, Shoot the hostage comes to mind?
Yep, that hostage is done for.
I'm hatin' it. Even though I'm on the opposite side of the planet from this goon, I can hear the sabre-rattling .. and it's getting louder. M.A.D. kept us alive thru the Cold War. But, now? Some fruit-loop who is member of a sect -- called the freeking Hasteners?!? -- wants his own DO-NOT-TOUCH! Button -- who believes Jahweh/God/Allah will smile upon him if he helps end all life on the planet ... which Of Course will bring about the coming of .. the living descendant of Mohammad (who will ..then, what? Die along with all the rest of us?) ....
What the hell can you do? I think it's time for a b33r. And a smoke.
Memo
From: Hedgetard55
To: "George Washington"
Go fuck yourself, you stupid motherfucking prick.
Hedgetard... or Israetard?
Showing all the necessary characteristics. Ad hominem attack. No argument. Inflamed rhetoric.
I think you nailed it ABR.
1/10
You had me until you said "Ed Asner". Please... All Govts are fucked up. The US. Iran is just as fucked up. If they don't want trouble, drop the nukes and Aknadinijads talks of nukes.
Free market capitalism! If we can do it...
yep, I have to agree. I really find it hard to believe that 'Mr Grant' is palling around with SEALS, and that anyone who is a SEAL would be dumb enough to spill intel to ANYONE, let alone 'Mr Grant'.
That makes it almost onion worthy.
I wonder when it will finally occur to people -- We the People, They the People, Any People -- that their governments -- these huge territorial monopolies on the use of force -- are the problem and that until and unless they are eradicated, or at least whittled down to something resembling human scale, the human world will continue not only to groan under their weight but to do so to the point of extinction or the hope thereof.
Why, in other words, when the insanity of the nation-state is so fully on display every hour of every day the world over, is this question not even asked (except by libertarians) and not part and parcel of our political discourse?
Seriously. Why?
The Human species is being given numerous intelligence tests, and is FAILING miserably at most of them...
INTEL UPDATE: We have even less Intel on Iran than we do on Iraq!
INTEL UPDATE: How much was that?
INTEL UPDATE: The only thing we had on Iraq was an Iraqi taxi drivers hear-say... bascially fuk-all
INTEL UPDATE: Didn't we have CIA, sorry UN weapons inspectors crawling all over Iraq?
INTEL UPDATE: Yes but they came up with fuk all too. So we ignored the results.
INTEL UPDATE: So let me get this right Mickey Mouse. We've got even less Intel on Iran than Iraq, which was fuk-all. So we've got less than fuk-all on Iran right?
INTEL UPDATE: That's right Goofy
INTEL UPDATE: That's terrible!
INTEL UPDATE: That's right Mickey
INTEL UPDATE: What are we going to do Goofy.. the US President has a Nobel Peace Prize, we need to leverage the opportunity and start another false war?
INTEL UPDATE: Er, well last time our Intel demonstrated unequivicably to the entire globe we have no intelligence whatsoever. This time we could lie, fabricate shit, throw our toys outta the pram and be hysterical again... you know the usual inspired US foreign diplomacy based on political ignorance and zero intelligence
INTEL UPDATE: But last time we lied through our teeth about WMD we were found out to be lying through our teeth Mickey!
INTEL UPDATE: Yes, we do have a credibility problem. Nobody believes a single word we say!
INTEL UPDATE: But even though everyone knew we were lying before the war and found out we were indeed lying after the war nobody did anything right?
INTEL UPDATE: Yes that's the truth ... a rarity for you
INTEL UPDATE: So why not let's lie, cheat, fabricate, be hysterical again?
INTEL UPDATE: Why not. It worked last time
We are attacking Iran, you don't move 3 carrier groups to an area just to threaten. They mean to use them thats for sure. Also the only intelligence that we truly have on Iran is from Israeli sources and Israeli guarantees, thats it. What the US don't realize is Israel wants Iran weaken and/or taken over. They want them out of business as a regional power. So if it takes American lives doing it so be it, if it takes american ships and resources so be it. All they care about is they point and we go and attack.
Typically, there are two carrier battle groups in the area. (U.S. Central Command’s official naval posture is to have an average of 1.7 battle groups in the region annually.) the U.S.S. Vinson was shipped in to replace the U.S.S. Stennis, which will be rotating out of the Fifth Fleet. The U.S.S. Lincoln is sailing over from the Pacific to join the party -- and would normally be the 2nd carrier there, as the Stennis is scheduled to rotate out ... At-Any-Time-Now™. But as is obvious, the Navy is finding it 'convenient' to have 3 carrier groups 'about', so will apparently be delaying the the Stennis' departure.
But, truly -- 3 -- THREE carrier battle groups, in one region (..sort of), is a serious, serious force to be reckoned with. NO other country has an aircraft carrier as large. For a carrier to be considered a supercarrier, it needs to displace more than 70,000 tons of water. The Nimitz-class carriers displace 100,000 tons.
So that gives us:
U.S.S. John C. Stennis (Nimitz-class supercarrier) - to be leaving the Fifth Fleet ... sometime soon [location on Feb.14.12 - Western Pacific]
U.S.S. Carl Vinson (Nimitz-class supercarrier) - joining the Fifth Fleet, to replace the Stennis [location on Feb.14.12 - North Arabian Sea]
U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln (Nimitz-class supercarrier) - the 'to-be-second' carrier, joining the party [location on Feb.14.12 - Persian Gulf]
Now, they certainly aren't next to each other. But close enough to 'assist', perhaps. And let us not forget about the 'Carrier Strike Group' (formally Battle Group) that follows along with each carrier -- for the U.S. Navy, this would be 2 Guided-Missile Cruisers, 2 Anti-Aircraft Warships, and 1-2 Anti-Submarine Destroyers or Frigates. Oh. And the carrier's aircraft -- Stennis: 90 fixed-wing and helicopters. Vinson: 90 fixed-wing and helicopters. Lincoln: 90 fixed-wing and helicopters.
Can you say, "Air Superiority"? I knew you could.
So -- pass the popcorn?
Apparently the best license you can get to "war on, bro!" is a Nobel Peace Prize! DELICIOUS irony! I must say i read this stuff and suddenly feel an urge to "vote President 2 and O" a "2 and 0"!
Why would Iran attack or provoke anyone?
For the same reason they have actively funded and armed those who have obviously been against western interests since dirt turned brown.
Why support Abu Nadal? Why support Hezbollah? Why arm the Shia's in Iraq?
No reason, it wasn't really them anyway it was really the CIA and Mossad.
Why ignore the obvious war via proxy that has been taking place?
Either stupid or purposefully wanting it to continue, there is no other reason.
Keep up the good work, doing the work of Allah here standing up for some of the most oppressive, intolerant people currently residing on the planet.
Paneful - you are so consistent. Pathetic, but consistent, so that I don't need to read your scratchings anymore before I can in good conscience click the red.
Allah = God dumbass. quit spreading lies.
Actually, no. Strictly speaking, that is incorrect.
Pre-Islamic Arabian paganism used the term Allah to designate one of many gods as a creator. When Islam began, it was assumed by Muhammad that having one god would assist Arab traders in more effectively creating ties with the West, which tended to shun pagan traders. As a result, he chose the creator god as "The Sole God", and retained the name Allah.
There are actually many names for "The Sole God", all of which are meant to refer to distinct aspects of Allah.
To say Allah = God is lazy and accurate, but not precise. In fact, there are several aspects of God which do not distinctly make the two comparable or even necessarily the same. While Muhammad wanted Muslims to follow 'the same God' as the Jews and Christians, and the Quran stipulates Allah is the same 'god' which Abraham communicated with, the descriptions of Allah indicate a more powerful and less communicative deity. In addition, the Western God has particular interests and likes which are not similar to those described in the Quran for Allah. Islam instructs followers to seek Allah within themselves, it does not rely on the Quran or teachings to 'bring' or 'help reveal' Allah, as the Bible does for Christians.
CS Lewis had some particular views about this, which he described allegorically in the Tales of Narnia, with Aslan representing Christ and Tash representing Allah. God, in the Bible, undergoes a distinct metamorphosis throughout the Old Testament, one which is completed in the New Testament, from a vengeful God to a forgiving God. The Quran, on the other hand, does not share this distinction. While Allah is merciful, he is also vengeful, in particular toward heathens. To Muslims there is no differentiation between these two features....Allah can be both. Now, many fundamentalist Christians believe the same thing about God - but the best that can be said about them is that they are poorly instructed on the nature of God.
Could Allah = God? It's possible, but it's not absolutely, positively the case. One would hope in a well-informed world, with deep inquiry and discussion into both entities, they would be the same and both would be merciful and forgiving. But it's not a matter-of-fact answer to just say it is so.
CS Lewis had some particular views about this, which he described allegorically in the Tales of Narnia, with Aslan representing Christ and Tash representing Allah. God, in the Bible, undergoes a distinct metamorphosis throughout the Old Testament, one which is completed in the New Testament, from a vengeful God to a forgiving God. The Quran, on the other hand, does not share this distinction. While Allah is merciful, he is also vengeful, in particular toward heathens.
__________________________________________________________
Made me laugh.
Tales to explain other tales.
In the new testament, god is forgiving toward heathens?
In the times when supposedly Jesus walked the Earth, there were two kinds of heathens in his country: heathens that could be subdued and heathens who could not be subdued (id est Romans, Greeks)
In the new testament, heathens are killed just like in the old testament.
How forgiving is this?
There is no transformation other than the one dictated by the historical conditions.
In the old testament, heathens are plentiful, of multiple sorts and run big civilizations. They are everywhere.
Easy to find them, easy to kill them.
In the new testament, heathens are much less numerous in the surrounding areas(because most of them were previously eliminated) They either live in camps or come from abroad.
There is no transition to explain because there is no transition.
Cheap propaganda. That requires US citizenism suspension of disbelief to accept. Especially when one considers what would be the treatment of heathens at the hand of Christians.
When Islam rose, based on Christians achievements, no writer had a ground to depict the Christian god as forgiving toward the heathens. On the very contrary.
I hope they don't let you out in public.
Ah, yes, the concluding part
since the socalled transition is just merely wishful thinking that disregard biblical texts and events reported in it, the distinction between Allah and the other Abrahamic gods is moot.
A good, informative post. Thank you. Milestones
john39
Allah = God dumbass
Maybe to Islam, but Allah, and the I AM are not the same.
Please grow up:
Bill O’Reilly Is Right: It’s Unfair To Call the Norwegian Mass Murderer
a Christian … And It’s Also Unfair to Call Arab Terrorists Muslims
They weren't anti-Muslim, but if you read some of their quotes -like martin Luther -they weren't too fond of the Jews. They pretty much wanted this to be a Christian nation - Not Christians like the right wing deluded nuts we have running around today supporting serial wars banksters and a police state - just nice, normal, friendly Chsristians -those that believed in the Golden Rule and go to church on sunday, but pretty much leave everyone else alone during the week.
Huh?
Did I miss the reason a country would arm and fund attacks vs another if it wasn't already at war?
Yea please grow the fuck up already and walk down your local muslim country with a hate mohammed sign and walk through the bible belt with a hate jesus sign and report back of the state of religious zealotry of both experiences.
Why would a sane, caring person do either?? Why go out of your way to be so callous? I see humanity is a distant memory with you.
walk down your local muslim country with a hate mohammed sign and walk through the bible belt with a hate jesus sign
Good links. Thanks. hard to argue with this sort of common sense.
The shores of Tripoli refers to our first war as a nation against Muslim pirates. Jefferson bought a Koran so he could understand his enemies.
As fanatical as you may consider American leaders, they have never advocated stoning homosexuals or adulterers, or have advocated killing all of those that would not convert to Christianity.
The Norwegian mass murderer was not a church goer.
The jihadist that kill innocents around the world are first and foremost Muslims.
the 9/11 hijackers used cocaine and drank alcohol, slept with
prostitutes and attended strip clubs … but they did not worship at any
mosque. See this, this, this, this, this, this, this, and this.
they found porn in OBL's compound, guess that means he really wasn't repping radical islam, how stupid of all those followers believing otherwise.
OBL's compound? you mean 2002 in Torabora where he really died? or that bullshit US gov staged propaganda piece from last year... as far as "repping" radical islam, he only did what his CIA masters told him to do. radical islam and terrorism are zionist/CIA/MI6 creations:
http://metaexistence.org/fakewar.htm
time to expose the lies.
Achemd the Great.
tell me...ahem..."George Washington"...just exactly who (other than the current variant which repulse the bulk of the American electorate btw) are these so called "religious fanatics" to which you speak? Adams? Jefferson? Lincoln? Roosevelt(s)? Name a SINGLE PHRIGGIN' ONE.
According to French President Chirac, Bush told him that the Iraq war was needed to bring on the apocalypse:
Riiight. And my name's Rip Van Winkle. No, it is. Really.
Same French who pocketed billions in the corrupt food for oil program while they swore up and down sanctions were working?
Quick Paneful ... Who is Mark Rich??
Also, conservative Christians were the biggest backers of the Iraq war.
Churchgoers were more likely to back torture of suspected terrorists than atheists (and see this).
One of the top Pentagon officials involved in the Iraq war - General William Boykin - literally:
Jeremy Scahill describes Boykin as:
Boykin's crusade is also important because one of his assigned jobs was:
Moreover, the U.S. military has just been busted trying to convert Afghanis to Christianity (the same thing happened in Iraq).
As Scahill notes:
The bottom line is that - while torture was ordered by the highest level Bush administration officials in order to create a false link between 9/11 and Iraq - it seems like many of those who enthusiastically rallied around torture looked at it, literally, as a religious crusade.
The Officials Who Created the Torture Program Used The Old Playbook
The godfather of the Neoconservative movement - Leo Strauss - taught that religion should be used as a way to manipulate people to achieve the aims of the leaders. But that the leaders themselves need not believe in religion.
As I have previously written:
Therefore, it is unknown whether the Bush administration officials who created the torture program actually believed that the brown-skinned people they wished to torture were Satan-worshippers who needed either to be converted or destroyed.
More likely, they just followed the old Straussian playbook in creating a threat which didn't exist - Satanic Muslims who wanted to take over the world - and using religion to rally the mid- and lower-level participants in the torture program to carry out their orders.
NOTE: NEOLIBS ARE JUST LIKE NEOCONS!Judism, Christianity and Islam. all the same Diety, though so much has been done to confuse the issue. then again, its not entirely clear that there is only one 'god' described in the old testament, so think for yourself:
http://www.godallah.com/jews_and_christians.php
and to anyone else who thinks that true Islam is anti Christian, here again is Achmadinajad's Christmas message from a few years ago:
http://youtu.be/FF_CEtv5jpA
Jesus is a revered prophet in Islam, not an enemy.
The image of Islam is written upon the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, on the Dome of the Rock. It says ''God has no Son''. This claim of dominion declares who the bastrads are. LMAO. The Jewish claim is equal with ''God has no Son''. All bastards lack the mercy of the Father in Christ. The Antichrist is one hell of a bastard ...and the Suicide Vampire Squid of the Great Wal Mart of China.
P.S. If you do not accept the mercy of our Father in Christ you are the murder suicide bastard, and there is no possible defense for you, when the time comes for our Father in Christ to provide you with ...THE BLACK HOLE ...bitchez. Your dusty arse better wise up, fear not, stand fast and do no harm ...quick, before you find out that the mercy you lost is ....at the end of something ...like ...the smoking gun that killed the Son of Man with your hand. You don't want to cross that river. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtzIWPeun7c&feature=fvsr
Yep. What is it with the "book people" that makes them so crazy, blood-thirsty and willing to kill each other to the last man over which side of their face is supposed to be black and which side white ?? Oh, right, their whole religion is based on the supremacy of a War God that convinced an entire people that he was the only one out of the entire pantheon of fertility Goddesses, moon Goddesses, craftsman Gods etc, that was real.
Worship a war God, have endless war... Who knew?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oi97fXRkgss&feature=related
Family Guy said it so succinctly. 'Religion', and 'getting along', in 19 seconds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmwBPsB0oaE
yeah, sad. but I guess i should clarify. I don't mean to imply that all muslims are after peace. far from it, radical islam is as bad as radical judaism or christianity. what is really hard to understand is how anyone could claim to be a Christian and yet back all of these immoral and illegal wars that the U.S. government has engaged in over the years. The New Testament didn't leave much wiggle room that would permit these wars. And think about this, until a few hundred years ago, Christianity, like Islam, forbad usury. Unlike Islam, which has not bent much on this issue, the Catholic church and Christianity generally, flipped on this. Without usury the zionist machine could not function... the history of how the Catholic church was infiltrated and how this ban on usury was lifted is rather interesting... and it should come as no surprise that Islam, which still forbids usury, has become such a target of zionist hate.
Usury: the practice of charging excessive, unreasonably high, and often illegal interest rates on loans.
However -- originally, when the charging of interest was still banned by Christian churches, usury simply meant the charging of interest at any rate (as well as charging a fee for the use of money, such as at a bureau de change). In countries where the charging of interest became acceptable, the term came to be used for interest above the rate allowed by law. The term is largely derived from Christian religious principles; Riba is the corresponding Arabic term and ribbit is the Hebrew word. [Ribbit .. who would have thought?? :o ]
The pivotal change in the English-speaking world seems to have come with the permission to charge interest on lent money: particularly the 1545 act "An Acte Agaynst Usurie" (37 H.viii 9) of King Henry VIII of England.
Usury (in the original sense of any interest) was at times denounced by a number of religious leaders and philosophers in the ancient world -- but one must always consider that usury, in historical context, has always been inextricably linked to economic abuses - the main moral argument is that usury creates excessive profit and gain without "labor" which is deemed "work" in the Biblical context. Profits from usury are argued not to arise from any substantial labor or work but from mere avarice, greed, trickery and manipulation. In addition, usury is said to create a divide between people due to obsession with monetary gain. Most importantly, usury is the derivation of profit from biological time, which is linked to life, considered sacred, God-given and divine, leading to excessive worrying about money instead of God, thus subjugating a God-given sanctity of life to man-made artificial notions of material wealth.
As the Jews were ostracized from most professions by local rulers, the church and the guilds, they were pushed into marginal occupations considered socially inferior, such as tax and rent collecting and moneylending. Natural tensions between creditors and debtors were added to social, political, religious, and economic strains. (!!)
...financial oppression of Jews tended to occur in areas where they were most disliked, and if Jews reacted by concentrating on moneylending to non-Jews, the unpopularity — and so, of course, the pressure — would increase. Thus the Jews became an element in a vicious circle. The Christians, on the basis of the Biblical rulings, condemned interest-taking absolutely, and from 1179 those who practiced it were excommunicated. Catholic autocrats frequently imposed the harshest financial burdens on the Jews. The Jews reacted by engaging in the one business where Christian laws actually discriminated in their favor, and became identified with the hated trade of moneylending. (!!) {..ya learn something new every day..}
Peasants were forced to pay their taxes to Jews who were economically coerced into becoming the "front men" for the lords. The Jews would then be identified as the people taking their earnings. Meanwhile the peasants would remain loyal to the lords..
In England, the departing Crusaders were joined by crowds of debtors in the massacres of Jews at London and York in 1189–1190. In 1275, Edward I of England passed the Statute of Jewry which made usury illegal and linked it to blasphemy, in order to seize the assets of the violators. Scores of English Jews were arrested, 300 were hanged and their property went to the Crown. In 1290, all Jews were expelled from England, and allowed to take only what they could carry; the rest of their property became the Crown's. The usury was cited as the official reason for the Edict of Expulsion. However, not all Jews were expelled: it was easy to convert to Christianity and thereby avoid expulsion. Many other crowned heads of Europe expelled the Jews, although again conversion to Christianity meant that you were no longer considered a Jew.
Huh.
I call that a pretty fair rendering. You could have included issues/abuses around paying the temple tax in coin w/o the Roman emporer on it. The money monopoly enjoyed by the temple is a distant echo of the Fed's money monopoly today.
I am sorry to rain on the mosque brothers.
Aslam Alekem anyway.
Anytime George, Achmed or anyone else who wishes to test their off base grasp of reality,
I will pay,
walk down Main St Teheran with an anti Mohammed sign and I will do the same with an anti jesus sign in the bible belt.
and we can test this gross misportrayal of what you don't know.
You have no answers for the rest as usual.
This supposed planned war has already been taking place as both Syria and Iran have funded and armed attacks against US interests for decades on end including most recently opposing sides in Iraq.
Good to dodge motive, because afterall since posting Daffy was killed for threatening to create a pan african currency, pretty much shows the depths your delusions will go to deny reality. The US dollar has been under perpetual attack for at least 40yrs and all the while it's importance as a standard bearer in the world has hardly diminished, you know using a fairly standard measurement-commerce conducted in dollars.
and again, excellent work doing the bidding of some of the most oppressive, intolerant people on the planet. How many people were tortured in Iran in the last 12 months? Fixated on the US torture of eight people, how many folks were tortured in Iran and the rest of Islamic empire? Oh you don't know because they have no free press and are therefore are accountable to no one
Honestly keep up the good work!
are you being paid to write this shit?
Re. is he being paid to write this shit?
Probably not much. More likely, he is, in a misguided way, fulfilling what he considers his tribal duty.
Abdul next time you see someone offering to pay please post it.