I found this one. It is accurate.
You use live leak - Back at ya.
LiveLeak.com - Moderate Muslim calls for the Destruction of all Churches in the region.
Saudi Grand Mufti Calls for
Israel Warns Neighbors Over March To Jerusalem
- Thread starter Liberalman
- Start date
I found this one. It is accurate.
You use live leak - Back at ya.
LiveLeak.com - Moderate Muslim calls for the Destruction of all Churches in the region.
Saudi Grand Mufti Calls for
So? Bias is bias. I prefer to stay non-biased.
I don't care what MSM reports. Pretty much any news I take with a grain of salt. I look for corroboration. If multiple sources say the same thing, then I'm more likely to believe them, but not necessarily.
How would you know what I know that you can conclude that?
Like I said, I don't follow MSM news much. Local news is about it.
If you want to be taken seriously you have to use a more reliable source than a blog. Blogs are fine for discovering a news item, but they aren't reliable. I'll accept the WP as more reliable than MidnightWatcher's blog. No that's not eating crow.
In the WP's story you also find out that this senior cleric's statement is controversial in the Muslim community and according to other cleric's directly contradicts the Qur'an. Those clerics claim that :
The Koran establishes the principle that the origin of all religions is in divine revelation and that their Founders were divinely appointed messengers who must be equally respected. It further commands Muslims to defend all places of worship – churches, synagogues, temples, cloisters, etc – even with their own lives. Far from sanctioning any destruction, our faith instructs us to protect places of worship of all religions.
In fact, Islam goes even further. Muslims have also been made to promise to defend followers of other faiths from unjust and cruel attacks. In 628, the Prophet Muhammad delivered the Charter of Privileges to the monks of St. Catherine Monastery in Mt. Sinai. This charter protected the human rights of all Christians and remains a guide for all Muslim states’ relations with non-Muslim minorities. In this charter, the Prophet Muhammad made a declaration that nullifies the Saudi Mufti’s call to destroy all churches. The charter, still preserved in Mt. Sinai today, states: “None of their churches or other places of worship will be desolated, destroyed or demolished. No material of their churches will be used for building mosques or houses for the Muslims. Any Muslim doing so will be regarded as disobedient to God and His Prophet.”
So clearly the Grand Mufti is redefining the character of Islam. While he may be the highest authority in Saudi Arabia, he is expressing his opinion. The guy is 88 years old and likely senile. Certainly he isn't very tolerant or the sharpest tool in the shed:
In 1966, when Ibn Baz was vice-president of the Islamic University of Medina, he wrote an article denouncing Riyadh University for teaching the "falsehood" that the earth rotates and orbits the sun: "The Holy Quran, the Prophet's teaching and the majority of Islamic scientists prove...that the sun is running in its orbit and...that the earth is fixed and stable"
He's also the reason why women don't drive cars in Saudi Arabia:
Criticism of Ibn Baz includes his harsh and inflexible attitudes towards women[20] and for being a bulwark of restrictions on women's rights.[21] Commenting on the Sharia rule that the testimony in court of one woman was insufficient, Ibn Baz said: "The Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) explained that their shortcoming in reasoning is found in the fact that their memory is weak and that their witness is in need of another woman to corroborate it."[21] He also issued a fatwa against women driving cars, which may have been his most well known ruling.[22] He declared: "Depravity leads to the innocent and pure women being accused of indecencies. Allah has laid down one of the harshest punishments for such an act to protect society from the spreading of the causes of depravity. Women driving cars, however, is one of the causes that lead to that."
But if you think that all Muslims agree with this cleric, then why is Saudi Arabia the only place where women can't drive cars?
Do you believe that every Muslim must agree with this cleric? Does that also mean you believe all Christians must agree with all statements made by prominent Christian leaders?
Examples of similar off the wall statements made by a prominent Christian with millions of followers:
"I would warn Orlando that you're right in the way of some serious hurricanes, and I don't think I'd be waving those flags in God's face if I were you, This is not a message of hate -- this is a message of redemption. But a condition like this will bring about the destruction of your nation. It'll bring about terrorist bombs; it'll bring earthquakes, tornadoes, and possibly a meteor." –Pat Robertson, on "gay days" at Disneyworld
"(T)he feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians." –Pat Robertson
"I know this is painful for the ladies to hear, but if you get married, you have accepted the headship of a man, your husband. Christ is the head of the household and the husband is the head of the wife, and that's the way it is, period." –Pat Robertson
"It may be a blessing in disguise. ... Something happened a long time ago in Haiti, and people might not want to talk about it. Haitians were originally under the heel of the French. You know, Napoleon the third, or whatever. And they got together and swore a pact to the devil. They said, we will serve you if you will get us free from the French. True story. And so, the devil said, okay it's a deal. Ever since they have been cursed by one thing after the other." –Pat Robertson, on the earthquake in Haiti that destroyed the capital and killed tens of thousands of people, Jan. 13, 2010
My point is that stupid intolerant people exit in every religion and that's nothing new:
The Earth is degenerating these days. Bribery and corruption abound. Children no longer mind their parents, every man wants to write a book, and it is evident that the end of the world is fast approaching.
- Assyrian Stone Tablet, c.2800BC
In the WP's story you also find out that this senior cleric's statement is controversial in the Muslim community and according to other cleric's directly contradicts the Qur'an. Those clerics claim that :
The Koran establishes the principle that the origin of all religions is in divine revelation and that their Founders were divinely appointed messengers who must be equally respected. It further commands Muslims to defend all places of worship – churches, synagogues, temples, cloisters, etc – even with their own lives. Far from sanctioning any destruction, our faith instructs us to protect places of worship of all religions.
In fact, Islam goes even further. Muslims have also been made to promise to defend followers of other faiths from unjust and cruel attacks. In 628, the Prophet Muhammad delivered the Charter of Privileges to the monks of St. Catherine Monastery in Mt. Sinai. This charter protected the human rights of all Christians and remains a guide for all Muslim states’ relations with non-Muslim minorities. In this charter, the Prophet Muhammad made a declaration that nullifies the Saudi Mufti’s call to destroy all churches. The charter, still preserved in Mt. Sinai today, states: “None of their churches or other places of worship will be desolated, destroyed or demolished. No material of their churches will be used for building mosques or houses for the Muslims. Any Muslim doing so will be regarded as disobedient to God and His Prophet.”
So clearly the Grand Mufti is redefining the character of Islam. While he may be the highest authority in Saudi Arabia, he is expressing his opinion. The guy is 88 years old and likely senile. Certainly he isn't very tolerant or the sharpest tool in the shed:
In 1966, when Ibn Baz was vice-president of the Islamic University of Medina, he wrote an article denouncing Riyadh University for teaching the "falsehood" that the earth rotates and orbits the sun: "The Holy Quran, the Prophet's teaching and the majority of Islamic scientists prove...that the sun is running in its orbit and...that the earth is fixed and stable"
He's also the reason why women don't drive cars in Saudi Arabia:
Criticism of Ibn Baz includes his harsh and inflexible attitudes towards women[20] and for being a bulwark of restrictions on women's rights.[21] Commenting on the Sharia rule that the testimony in court of one woman was insufficient, Ibn Baz said: "The Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) explained that their shortcoming in reasoning is found in the fact that their memory is weak and that their witness is in need of another woman to corroborate it."[21] He also issued a fatwa against women driving cars, which may have been his most well known ruling.[22] He declared: "Depravity leads to the innocent and pure women being accused of indecencies. Allah has laid down one of the harshest punishments for such an act to protect society from the spreading of the causes of depravity. Women driving cars, however, is one of the causes that lead to that."
But if you think that all Muslims agree with this cleric, then why is Saudi Arabia the only place where women can't drive cars?
Do you believe that every Muslim must agree with this cleric? Does that also mean you believe all Christians must agree with all statements made by prominent Christian leaders?
Examples of similar off the wall statements made by a prominent Christian with millions of followers:
"I would warn Orlando that you're right in the way of some serious hurricanes, and I don't think I'd be waving those flags in God's face if I were you, This is not a message of hate -- this is a message of redemption. But a condition like this will bring about the destruction of your nation. It'll bring about terrorist bombs; it'll bring earthquakes, tornadoes, and possibly a meteor." –Pat Robertson, on "gay days" at Disneyworld
"(T)he feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians." –Pat Robertson
"I know this is painful for the ladies to hear, but if you get married, you have accepted the headship of a man, your husband. Christ is the head of the household and the husband is the head of the wife, and that's the way it is, period." –Pat Robertson
"It may be a blessing in disguise. ... Something happened a long time ago in Haiti, and people might not want to talk about it. Haitians were originally under the heel of the French. You know, Napoleon the third, or whatever. And they got together and swore a pact to the devil. They said, we will serve you if you will get us free from the French. True story. And so, the devil said, okay it's a deal. Ever since they have been cursed by one thing after the other." –Pat Robertson, on the earthquake in Haiti that destroyed the capital and killed tens of thousands of people, Jan. 13, 2010
My point is that stupid intolerant people exit in every religion and that's nothing new:
The Earth is degenerating these days. Bribery and corruption abound. Children no longer mind their parents, every man wants to write a book, and it is evident that the end of the world is fast approaching.
- Assyrian Stone Tablet, c.2800BC
Last edited:
Yes it is eating crow. As to others dissenting - no problems with that - But he is the Senior Iman in the Saudi Govt. Does that not carry any weight? Not to you.
As to you fessing up - well you and reality are poles apart.
Meanwhile, I posted raw evidence showing an angry mob of Israeli settlers carrying out a pogrom against innocent Palestininas. As a result many Palestinian homes were damaged. The settlers set Palestinian cars and homes were set on fire. They smasked windows and damaged property. A settler even shot three unarmed Palestinians. As a result, one one settler was charged, and that was only after the Israeli Humans Rights group Btselem posted a video on the internet showing the Israeli settler shooting the three Palestinians. Normally Colpy supoports the right of people to defend their property. But he has posted here in this thread several times and not once did he defend the right of Palestinians to defend themselves or their property from attack. Why is that Colpy?
You want to talk about bias LG? Notice that not a single person besides myself has condemned that incident. Even the Israeli PM condemned that rampage. I can recognize and condemn crimes and atrocities by either side. Except CB, none of the other Israeli apologists have done that. When one of them posts something bad about Palestinians, everyone here has been conditioned to accept that without question. Look at all the challenges and lack of belief when I post something which doesn't portray Israel as a shining beacon of freedom and democracy. The Israeli apologists can't even believe what they have witnessed with their own eyes.
Which proves Orwell was correct:
George Orwell Quotes
The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.
You want to talk about bias LG? Notice that not a single person besides myself has condemned that incident. Even the Israeli PM condemned that rampage. I can recognize and condemn crimes and atrocities by either side. Except CB, none of the other Israeli apologists have done that. When one of them posts something bad about Palestinians, everyone here has been conditioned to accept that without question. Look at all the challenges and lack of belief when I post something which doesn't portray Israel as a shining beacon of freedom and democracy. The Israeli apologists can't even believe what they have witnessed with their own eyes.
Which proves Orwell was correct:
George Orwell Quotes
The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.
"...everyone here has been conditioned to accept that without question"
Everyone? That's a bit of a stretch.... And you wonder why I dismiss you as propagandic?
Everyone? That's a bit of a stretch.... And you wonder why I dismiss you as propagandic?
Do you honestly think anyone on this froum agrees with what happened. Do they have to send you a Yes we hate that incident sort of post. Really lame.
OK correction. "Nearly" everyone here has been conditioned to accept the simplistic "Israel=good" "Palestine=bad" paradigm.
If I post something which challenges this commonly accepted paradigm regarding this conflict, nearly everyone here still maintains the same simplistic paradigm. Israel still = good, Palestine still = bad...regardless of the facts as supported by irrefutable evidence. New information contradicting existing paradigms continues to be ignored or disbelieved.
This thread is a good example. It really doesn't matter how overwhelming or conclusive the evidence I give to support my statement that on December 4, 2008 and angry mob of Israeli settlers committed a pogrom against innocent Palestinians. If my statements contradict or challenge preconceived ideas, then my statements are rejected or ignored regardless of supporting conclusive evidence.
In this case I have provided evidence, which taken collectively proves my statements to be true beyond a reasonable doubt:
1) A report by Israeli Human rights Group describing the event
2) The BBC reporting that Israel PM condemned the event as a pogrom.
3) A video of the event, where you can see the rampage with your own eyes
That level of proof would stand in a court of law, but many people continue to dismiss my claims about this event as biased propaganda, anecdotal, conjecture, anecdote, hearsay, and lies..
How is that possible given the above evidence? That would mean the Israeli PM and Btselem are lying about Israeli settlers and Btselem got a group of Israseli settlers to participate in a staged video. That's the only other possible scenario other than this event happened.
Yet here is what people on this thread wrote about this event:
My point here is to prove that we aren't getting all the information about this conflict in our MSM. Our MSM selectively gives us information, which supports the Israeli narrative of this conflict.
So far the posts on this thread indicate a continued disbelief that this event happened.
Most people don't have a problem condemning an angry mob on a rampage. I could reference the thread about the post Stanley Cup riots in Vancouver. Did anyone ignore or dismiss those reports about the Vancouver riots as anti-Vancouver propaganda?
I provided the same level of evidence proving this December 4, 2008 event riot occurred and yet got a completely different reaction.... which proves a very high level of perception manipulation regarding this conflict.
Seems to me Muddled East BS is all drama that intensifies relative to whatever world attention they get or don't get. Trouble-makers on both sides in this sandbox scuffle are equally guilty of poking the hornet's nest then blaming the hornet for the sting.
While that may be true, that's not my point. My point is that most Canadians have a pro-Israel perception of this conflict which is the result of deliberate manipulation of information rather than the actual facts.
Do you react to every post on a terror attack. No - So why are we required to be any different. Just beacuse a person does not post does not equate to that person supporting that attack. Your logic is flawed.
You are hyper focused on Israel in a very unstable way. Like hating Jews would come to mind. What is the name for that?
If the marchers were to drag nat gas pipe across the border they'd be welcomed with open arms instead of opened up on with arms.
It's kinda odd the alleged two biggest nuke threats are involved in nat gas deals the west oppose isn't it?