Guess What I Got For Christmas? The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran

This was a complete and total surprise that my parents got me this book.

The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran

Amazon Review : From The Inside Flap :

The Koran:

It may be the most controversial book in the world. Some see it as a paean to peace, others call it a violent mandate for worldwide Islamic supremacy.

How can one book lead to such dramatically different conclusions?

New York Times bestselling author Robert Spencer reveals the truth in The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran: not many Westerners know what's in the Koran, since so few have actually read it -- even among the legions of politicians, diplomats, analysts, and editorial writers who vehemently insist that the Koran preaches tolerance.

Now, Spencer unveils the mysteries lying behind this powerful book, guiding readers through the controversies surrounding the Koran's origins and its most contentious passages.

Stripping out the obsolete debates, Spencer focuses on the Koran's decrees toward Jews, Christians, and other Infidels, explaining how they were viewed in Muhammad's time, what they've supposedly done wrong, and most important, what the Koran has in store for them.

I am currently as well reading one excellent book of Bob Woodward’s (Watergate) about the C.I.A., called ”Veil : The Secret Wars of the C.I.A. 1981 – 1987”. So far it is a fascinating book and an excellent cross-reference to the material within the previous book I’ve mentioned, as well as a few others I will reference later.

Veil: The Secret Wars of the CIA, 1981-1987

Amazon Review :

Woodward's books on Watergate, the Supreme Court, and John Belushi were not so controversial as Veil.

His deathbed visit to William Casey, former CIA head, has been disputed by Casey's wife.

What Woodward knew about Casey's Iran-contra role was apparently withheld from Congress.

All this smoke has drawn attention from the fire.

Woodward's tale of attempted murders, payoffs to foreign leaders, covert contra aid, covert aid to Britain in the Falklands War, and anti-terrorist squads is formidable.

He presents Casey's CIA as a dangerously illegal loose cannon on the deck of U.S. foreign policy.

Richard B. Finnegan, Stonehill Coll., North Easton, Mass.

Copyright 1987 Reed Business Information, Inc.

And I’m reading ” Terrorism Today's Biggest Threat to Freedom”, another excellent book.

Terrorism Today's Biggest Threat to Freedom

My family has been connected to the Government and or Military since before I was born, and since I am always reading about "terrorism", Government, the Military, and the many covert Intelligence Agencies, this is most likely why I got the book for Christmas.

I am a middle ground person who has been researching both sides of conspiracy theories since I was the age of six years old, because my stepfather was a Vietnam era Marine, and I was taught how to see through Government cover-ups, conspiracies, and crimes through reading between the lines in newspapers, history books, and religious books utilizing the Hegelian Dialectic and the Art of War, which I have resoundingly succeeded into turning in the Art of Peace, through my usage and seeing the conflict, and negating it.

I see there are always two sides to a conflict, not just one, because you need a balanced view to get the entire picture, or you are taking a one-sided view, and could be led astray by Government propaganda, political party doctrine, or foreign policy that is hidden within a veil of political double-speak.

Truth : The First Victim, The Last to Be Un-Buried, Never to Rest...

From what I’ve read so far in this book it speaks of the Koran as if the Middle Eastern culture holds the book as sacred, and while I respect books themselves, I’m not so sure about any book being sacred, not even the Bible, meaning I hold books as written by men and women, with a message, directed by a certain religion towards an end goal. I respect books because they can teach you many a great thing, but they can be twisted by men and women with warped perceptions of the content, context, and intent within them, especially books like the Bible and Koran, which were written many thousands of years ago, so the original author cannot come back and claim a certain person is quoting incorrectly, or mis-quoting, or erroneously quoting certain sections and or passages, because like the Bible, the Koran was written by men, on printing presses.

The book also speaks of President Barack Obama quoting, or in the case of the book, mis-quoting, the Koran for his political motivations overseas and here in America, or if you will, selectively quoting a certain passage and ignoring the next.

I am not professing to be an expert on the Koran, because I am not, however according to this book, which is showing the inside of the Koran and the mis-quotes of other people, as in political extremists, the author is as well stating Barack Obama is mis-quoting the Koran, and no I am not stating this is correct or incorrect, only stating what the author believes.

Barack Obama speech in Cairo - 6/4/2009


Text – Obama’s Speech in Cairo – Text – NYTimes.com


Truth and Lies of 9/11 : Mike Ruppert, C.I.A. Drug Running, and Your Government

For those who know me it should come as no surprise that I've been looking into the September 11th attacks, through a middle ground approach, because there were far too many details not given to the public, which leads back to the Al Saud family of the great sandy deserts of Saudi Arabia.

Think Joshua and the walls of Jericho and you will understand the warfare aspect.

Battles BC - Joshua Epic Slaughter 1/5


Battles BC - Joshua Epic Slaughter 2/5


Battles BC - Joshua Epic Slaughter 3/5


Battles BC - Joshua Epic Slaughter 4/5


Battles BC - Joshua Epic Slaughter 5/5


Or even David and Goliath, you can see the implications of warfare, and conflict.

Battles BC - David The Giant Slayer 1/5


Battles BC - David The Giant Slayer 2/5


Battles BC - David The Giant Slayer 3/5


Battles BC - David The Giant Slayer 4/5


Battles BC - David The Giant Slayer 5/5




[edit on 28-12-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

As well it is my belief that to understand the Bible or Koran you must understand Hegelian Dialectic as well, because without it, in conjunction with the Art of War, you might miss something important about the warfare nature of history, within these books., they have the Art of War, in a way through the teachings of the conquering of many different lands in the Bible, and from what I understand so does the Koran. With that being said, I believe you must know the It is my belief that no one can fully understand and comprehend books like the Bible or Koran, through spirituals teachings alone, because they religious tones of the books have so much more in them then just peace. Am I saying that they are completely warfare in nature? No, I am not only that they both demonstrate warfare applications within them, but warfare was one of the many ways in which Biblical figures conquered throughout the Old Testament.

Hegelian Dialectic- Problem, Reaction, Solution explained 1/3


Hegelian Dialectic- Problem, Reaction, Solution explained 2/3


Hegelian Dialectic- Problem, Reaction, Solution explained 3/3

Quote from : Wikipedia : Dialectic : Hegelian Dialectic

Hegelian dialectic, usually presented in a three-fold manner, was stated by Heinrich Moritz Chalybäus as comprising three dialectical stages of development: a thesis, giving rise to its reaction, an antithesis, which contradicts or negates the thesis, and the tension between the two being resolved by means of a synthesis.

Although this model is often named after Hegel, he himself never used that specific formulation.

Hegel ascribed that terminology to Kant.

Carrying on Kant's work, Fichte greatly elaborated on the synthesis model, and popularized it.

On the other hand, Hegel did use a three-valued logical model that is very similar to the antithesis model, but Hegel's most usual terms were: Abstract-Negative-Concrete.

Sometimes Hegel would use the terms, Immediate-Mediated-Concrete.

Hegel used these terms hundreds of times throughout his works.

The formula, Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis, does not explain why the Thesis requires an Antithesis.

However, the formula, Abstract-Negative-Concrete, suggests a flaw in any initial thesis—it is too abstract and lacks the negative of trial, error and experience.

The same applies to the formula, Immediate-Mediated-Concrete.

For Hegel, the Concrete, the Synthesis, the Absolute, must always pass through the phase of the Negative, that is, Mediation.

This is the actual essence of what is popularly called Hegelian Dialectics.

To describe the activity of overcoming the negative, Hegel also often used the term Aufhebung, variously translated into English as "sublation" or "overcoming," to conceive of the working of the dialectic. Roughly, the term indicates preserving the useful portion of an idea, thing, society, etc., while moving beyond its limitations.

(Jacques Derrida's preferred French translation of the term was relever).

In the Logic, for instance, Hegel describes a dialectic of existence: first, existence must be posited as pure Being (Sein); but pure Being, upon examination, is found to be indistinguishable from Nothing (Nichts).

When it is realized that what is coming into being is, at the same time, also returning to nothing (in life, for example, one's living is also a dying), both Being and Nothing are united as Becoming.

As in the Socratic dialectic, Hegel claimed to proceed by making implicit contradictions explicit: each stage of the process is the product of contradictions inherent or implicit in the preceding stage.

For Hegel, the whole of history is one tremendous dialectic, major stages of which chart a progression from self-alienation as slavery to self-unification and realization as the rational, constitutional state of free and equal citizens.

The Hegelian dialectic cannot be mechanically applied for any chosen thesis.

Critics argue that the selection of any antithesis, other than the logical negation of the thesis, is subjective.

Then, if the logical negation is used as the antithesis, there is no rigorous way to derive a synthesis.

In practice, when an antithesis is selected to suit the user's subjective purpose, the resulting "contradictions" are rhetorical, not logical, and the resulting synthesis is not rigorously defensible against a multitude of other possible syntheses.

The problem with the Fichtean "Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis" model is that it implies that contradictions or negations come from outside of things.

Hegel's point is that they are inherent in and internal to things.

This conception of dialectics derives ultimately from Heraclitus.

Hegel has outlined that the purpose of dialectics is "to study things in their own being and movement and thus to demonstrate the finitude of the partial categories of understanding"

One important dialectical principle for Hegel is the transition from quantity to quality, which he terms the Measure.

The measure is the qualitative quantum, the quantum is the existence of quantity.

"The identity between quantity and quality, which is found in Measure, is at first only implicit, and not yet explicitly realised.

In other words, these two categories, which unite in Measure, each claim an independent authority.

On the one hand, the quantitative features of existence may be altered, without affecting its quality.

On the other hand, this increase and diminution, immaterial though it be, has its limit, by exceeding which the quality suffers change.

[...] But if the quantity present in measure exceeds a certain limit, the quality corresponding to it is also put in abeyance.

This however is not a negation of quality altogether, but only of this definite quality, the place of which is at once occupied by another.

This process of measure, which appears alternately as a mere change in quantity, and then as a sudden revulsion of quantity into quality, may be envisaged under the figure of a nodal (knotted) line".

As an example, Hegel mentions the states of aggregation of water:

"Thus the temperature of water is, in the first place, a point of no consequence in respect of its liquidity: still with the increase or diminution of the temperature of the liquid water, there comes a point where this state of cohesion suffers a qualitative change, and the water is converted into steam or ice".

As other examples Hegel mentions the reaching of a point where a single additional grain makes a heap of wheat; or where the bald-tail is produced, if we continue plucking out single hairs.

Another important principle for Hegel is the negation of the negation, which he also terms Aufhebung (sublation): Something is only what it is in its relation to another, but by the negation of the negation this something incorporates the other into itself.

The dialectical movement involves two moments that negate each other, a somewhat and an another.

As a result of the negation of the negation, "something becomes an other; this other is itself somewhat; therefore it likewise becomes an other, and so on ad infinitum".

Something in its passage into other only joins with itself, it is self-related.

In becoming there are two moments: coming-to-be and ceasing-to-be: by sublation, i.e. negation of the negation, being passes over into nothing, it ceases to be, but something new shows up, is coming to be.

What is sublated (aufgehoben) on the one hand ceases to be and is put to an end, but on the other hand it is preserved and maintained.

In dialectics, a totality transform itself, it is self-related.

To understand the attack of September 11th you must understand that our own Government had ties, albeit covert ties, with the Mujahideen during the Cold War, and that we assisted them through covert funding during Operation Cyclone in order to give them the ability to kick Russia out of Afghanistan and via indirect assistance we kept the Cold War from turning into a “Hot War”, making this our repayment for Vietnam and Russia’s assistance to the Vietcong.

Quote from : Wikipedia : Operation Cyclone

Operation Cyclone was the code name for the United States Central Intelligence Agency program to arm the Afghan mujahideen during the Soviet war in Afghanistan, 1979 to 1989.

Operation Cyclone was one of the longest and most expensive covert CIA operations ever undertaken; funding began with $20–30 million per year in 1980 and rose to $630 million per year in 1987.

[edit on 28-12-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

Operation Cyclone is referenced in its entirety in this book :

Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/f75932d4680a.jpg[/atsimg]

Amazon Review :

Steve Coll's Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001 offers revealing details of the CIA's involvement in the evolution of the Taliban and Al Qaeda in the years before the September 11 attacks.

From the beginning, Coll shows how the CIA's on-again, off-again engagement with Afghanistan after the end of the Soviet war left officials at Langley with inadequate resources and intelligence to appreciate the emerging power of the Taliban.

He also demonstrates how Afghanistan became a deadly playing field for international politics where Soviet, Pakistani, and U.S. agents armed and trained a succession of warring factions.

At the same time, the book, though opinionated, is not solely a critique of the agency.

Coll balances accounts of CIA failures with the success stories, like the capture of Mir Amal Kasi.

Coll, managing editor for the Washington Post, covered Afghanistan from 1989 to 1992.

He demonstrates unprecedented access to records of White House meetings and to formerly classified material, and his command of Saudi, Pakistani, and Afghani politics is impressive.

He also provides a seeming insider's perspective on personalities like George Tenet, William Casey, and anti-terrorism czar, Richard Clarke ("who seemed to wield enormous power precisely because hardly anyone knew who he was or what exactly he did for a living").

Coll manages to weave his research into a narrative that sometimes has the feel of a Tom Clancy novel yet never crosses into excess.

While comprehensive, Coll's book may be hard going for those looking for a direct account of the events leading to the 9-11 attacks.

The CIA's 1998 engagement with bin Laden as a target for capture begins a full two-thirds of the way into Ghost Wars, only after a lengthy march through developments during the Carter, Reagan, and early Clinton Presidencies.

But this is not a critique of Coll's efforts; just a warning that some stamina is required to keep up.

Ghost Wars is a complex study of intelligence operations and an invaluable resource for those seeking a nuanced understanding of how a small band of extremists rose to inflict incalculable damage on American soil.

--Patrick O'Kelley

Conversations with History: Steve Coll


As well, Steve Coll wrote the book ” The Bin Ladens: An Arabian Family in the American Century”, another fascinating look into the Middle Eastern culture, and specifically the Bin Laden family, and their complex history starting with Mohammed bin Laden, and when he began building for the Al Saud family, then passing on to the eldest son, Salem bin Laden, once the patriarch died, and the complex nature of the Bin Laden family’s desire for all things of the Western world, while living in the Middle East, and Osama bin Laden and some of the family that saw him as weird to want to stay with only the Eastern world, while they jet-setted across the globe.

The Bin Ladens: An Arabian Family in the American Century

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/df5dc657613c.jpg[/atsimg]

Publishers Weekly : Amazon Review :

The bin Ladens are famous for spawning the world's foremost terrorist and building one of the Middle East's foremost corporate dynasties.

Pulitzer Prize–winner Coll (Ghost Wars) delivers a sprawling history of the multifaceted clan, paying special attention to its two most emblematic members.

Patriarch Mohamed's eldest son, Salem, was a caricature of the self-indulgent plutocrat: a flamboyant jet-setter dependent on the Saudi monarchy, obsessed with all things motorized (he died crashing his plane after a day's joy-riding atop motorcycle and dune-buggy) and forever tormenting his entourage with off-key karaoke.

Coll presents quite a contrast with an unusually nuanced profile of Salem's half-brother Osama, a shy, austere, devout man who nonetheless shares Salem's egomania.

Other bin Ladens crowd Coll's narrative with the eye-glazing details of their murky business deals, messy divorces and ill-advised perfume lines and pop CDs.

Beneath the clutter one discerns an engrossing portrait of a family torn between tradition and modernity, conformism and self-actualization, and desperately in search of its soul.

(April 1)

Some interesting movies I’ve watched which were directed around the Middle East and the conflicts overseas were ”The Kingdom”, ”Traitor”, and ”Rendition”.

The Kingdom


Traitor


Rendition


So, I have to ask you here on ATS, what exactly are your thoughts on the Middle Eastern conflict and how it might have been a part of foreign policy which eventually and unfortunately led to the events of September 11th, because I know I see both sides of the conflict, more towards the middle, seeing our foreign policy in regards to stabilization of the Middle East, and the Middle East not necessarily wanting us ”Infidels” on their sandy deserts.

Divide and Conquer : Political Ideology of the Power Elite, Selling The Peace, War Is The Motive

Just how close as well do you think Hollywood comes to the truth within their movies?

The Men Who Stare At Goats : Secret Missions, Movies, and Propaganda

[edit on 28-12-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

Looking back on the events of the 1993 World Trade Center Bombing, the events of the Oklahoma City Bombing, the U.S.S. Cole Bombing, the Embassy Bombings, and the September 11th Attacks, we have to look at these and see if these were actual terrorist attacks, or False Flag Operations.

Hoist the Flag : False Flags, Agent Provocateurs, and Black Box Operations

Is the recent event of the Nigerian "terrorist" in reply to Osama bin Laden's call to Jihad, or a suspicious connection through coincidence seeing as how Michigan was being scouted as a potential location for relocation of the Guantanamo terrorists?

More On Internment Camps!

Obama to Close Guantanamo and Foreign Prisons, Limit CIA Methods

Alex Jones Thinks "Swine Flu" Is Mass Conditioning For F.E.M.A. Camps and the United Nations?

[edit on 28-12-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

Maybe I have missed a detail... but I assume you don't believe in the idea of an inside job?

Originally posted by SteveR
Maybe I have missed a detail... but I assume you don't believe in the idea of an inside job?

No, I never once stated that, sorry if you missed something.

There are a lot of links within speaking along the middle lines.

I am right in the middle between an inside job and false flag operation.

Meaning of course that it was not just one side, but both sides, our Government and the collusion of Osama bin Laden, this would mean through the covert nature of Operation Cyclone this gave many people many different ideas towards colluding and conspiracy in not only criminal actions, but crimes against humanity.

So, basically stating strings were pulled on the inside, and as well cut-outs used.

It is difficult to make out the actual circumstances.
Inside false flag made to look like a fifth column movement, it doesn't matter the threat exists. Some one is responcible, be it a group of religious zealots or a shadowy fat cat gaggle or any combination of two.

Very impressive collection of info.

I am going to have to go over what is presented and get back to this thread.

Another fine thread

thoughts on the Middle Eastern conflict and how it might have been a part of foreign policy which eventually and unfortunately led to the events of September 11th,

Did we make mistakes? yes. For many years the US wanted to dictate the terms when it came to the Middle East and had very little consideration for what the middle east thought. A similar agenda can be seen in the US treatment of Latin American countries.

With the reemergence of Russia and China emerging into a stronger country, the game is on. The competition for oil and other resources are getting very competitive. Middle east leaders realize that they now have more power and the terms from Washington aren't as forcible as they use to be.

But all that aside, I think the biggest thing that led to 9/11 can be linked to the leaders of the middle east. Leaders who sided with the US in secret, but blasphemed the US when it came to dealing with their people. In the eyes of most of the citizens, the US was to blame for most of their problems, not the dictators who lead their country.

Just how close as well do you think Hollywood comes to the truth within their movies?

Just don't have too much faith in Hollywood. They usually tend to make movies leaning to the popular view. Add the sensationalism they add to the movie and one could get lost in what truly is going on.

9/11- Still not convinced by either side. I feel we need a new investigation.

If Osama was so upset at the way we were treating Muslims, Arab world, and the fact that we abandon Afghanistan after the Russian-Afghan war, why did he take so long to retaliate?

Seems to me that had been going on for quite some time.

On the other hand, I could see where some of our foreign policy could lead to such an event. People get tired of being pushed around sooner or later.

Well, I ordered The Complete Infidel's Guide To The Koran so I'll be able to discuss this in 7 - 28 days.

I have been reading up on Hegelian Dialect. To sum it up, would you say the principle lies is offering an argument, offering a counter argument which is intentionally weak or false to lead to a false conclusion which suports your original argument?

Originally posted by ADVISOR
It is difficult to make out the actual circumstances.
Inside false flag made to look like a fifth column movement, it doesn't matter the threat exists. Some one is responcible, be it a group of religious zealots or a shadowy fat cat gaggle or any combination of two.

Very impressive collection of info.

I am going to have to go over what is presented and get back to this thread.

Thanks ADVISOR.

Indeed the events are confusing but only if you do not research it extensively.

You are of course correct that no matter whether Osama bin Laden pulled it off completely acting with Al Queda, or if someone like former Vice-President Dick Cheney were ordering certain strings to be pulled behind the curtain.

Man Behind The Curtain: Zbigniew Brzezinski - Part 1 of 2


Man Behind The Curtain: Zbigniew Brzezinski - Part 2 of 2


The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives

Kirkus Reviews : Amazon Review :

The former national security advisor is still a believer in geopolitics after all these years.

Like most foreign-policy aficionados weaned on the Cold War, Brzezinski (Out of Control, 1993) has been forced by the disintegration of the Soviet Union to broaden his perspective--but not very far.

He sees the US as the only global superpower, but inability to maintain its hegemony indefinitely means that ``geostrategic skill'' is essential.

To what end is not specified beyond the vague shaping of ``a truly cooperative global community'' that is in ``the fundamental interests of humankind,'' but in this genre, goals are commonly assumed rather than examined.

In any case, Brzezinski casts Eurasia as the playing field upon which the world's fate is determined and analyzes the possibilities in Europe, the former Soviet Union, the Balkans (interpreted broadly), and the Far East.

Like a grandmaster in chess, he plots his strategy several moves in advance, envisioning a three-stage development.

Geopolitical pluralism must first be promoted to defuse challenges to America, then compatible international partners must be developed to encourage cooperation under American leadership, and finally the actual sharing of international political responsibility can be considered.

The twin poles of this strategy are a united Europe in the West and China in the East; the central regions are more problematic and, for Brzezinski, not as critical in constructing a stable balance of power.

This updated version of East-West geopolitics is worth taking seriously but it is also an amazing example of how a perspective can be revised without actually being rethought.

(Radio satellite tour) --

Copyright ©1997, Kirkus Associates, LP.

All rights reserved.

The Pentagon's New Map: War and Peace in the Twenty-first Century

Amazon Review :

This bold and important book strives to be a practical "strategy for a Second American Century." In this brilliantly argued work, Thomas Barnett calls globalization "this country’s gift to history" and explains why its wide dissemination is critical to the security of not only America but the entire world.

As a senior military analyst for the U.S. Naval War College, Barnett is intimately familiar with the culture of the Pentagon and the State Department (both of which he believes are due for significant overhauls).

He explains how the Pentagon, still in shock at the rapid dissolution of the once evil empire, spent the 1990s grasping for a long-term strategy to replace containment.

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Barnett argues, revealed the gap between an outdated Cold War-era military and a radically different one needed to deal with emerging threats.

He believes that America is the prime mover in developing a "future worth creating" not because of its unrivaled capacity to wage war, but due to its ability to ensure security around the world.

Further, he believes that the U.S. has a moral responsibility to create a better world and the way he proposes to do that is by bringing all nations into the fold of globalization, or what he calls connectedness.

Eradicating disconnectedness, therefore, is "the defining security task of our age."

His stunning predictions of a U.S. annexation of much of Latin America and Canada within 50 years as well as an end to war in the foreseeable future guarantee that the book will be controversial.

And that's good.

The Pentagon's New Map deserves to be widely discussed. Ultimately, however, the most impressive aspects of the book is not its revolutionary ideas but its overwhelming optimism.

Barnett wants the U.S. to pursue the dream of global peace with the same zeal that was applied to preventing global nuclear war with the former Soviet Union.

High-level civilian policy makers and top military leaders are already familiar with his vision of the future—this book is a briefing for the rest of us and it cannot be ignored.

--Shawn Carkonen

Pentagon's New Map 1/13


Pentagon's New Map 2/13


Pentagon's New Map 3/13


Pentagon's New Map 4/13


Pentagon's New Map 5/13


Pentagon's New Map 6/13


Pentagon's New Map 7/13


Pentagon's New Map 8/13


Pentagon's New Map 9/13


Pentagon's New Map 10/13


Pentagon's New Map 11/13


Pentagon's New Map 12/13


Pentagon's New Map 13/13

reply to post by jam321


I agree.

A completely new investigation, independent of political ties, and special interest groups.

A civilian investigation would do, but we all know the White House would never go for that.

Many mistakes, many cover-ups, many collusive events behind the scenes.

Originally posted by OZtracized
Well, I ordered The Complete Infidel's Guide To The Koran so I'll be able to discuss this in 7 - 28 days.

I have been reading up on Hegelian Dialect. To sum it up, would you say the principle lies is offering an argument, offering a counter argument which is intentionally weak or false to lead to a false conclusion which suports your original argument?

Yes, I would agree with and concur with your assessment completely.

Abstact ideas, like "terrorism", negative threats, like "Terror Alerts", threats of attacks, remembering events through the media, and concrete actions, like 9/11, 7/7, and the laws that get changed due to them.

The goals of events like September 11th is to force our monetary system to collapse.

The TRUTH behind the Total Economic Collapse in the U.S


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/27ced99bc1e5.jpg[/atsimg]

By collapsing the fiat money system the ushering in of the Verichip and Digital Angel device, a bio-chip, a cashless society in other words, making tracking everyone's movements around the globe mandatory because of "ease of use", the threat of "identity theft", and pushing credit card systems and information data-mining to completion of the goals of the World Bank.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7c49045f0b3d.jpg[/atsimg]

The Creature from Jekyll Island : A Second Look at the Federal Reserve

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/2ebb93f8315e.jpg[/atsimg]

This all links back to Oliver North and the Iran-Contra Scandal.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ab5e2c8cddec.jpg[/atsimg]

Iran Contra Coverup: 1 of 8


Iran Contra Coverup: 2 of 8


Iran Contra Coverup: 3 of 8


Iran Contra Coverup: 4 of 8


Iran Contra Coverup: 5 of 8


Iran Contra Coverup: 6 of 8


Iran Contra Coverup: 7 of 8


Iran Contra Coverup: 8 of 8

Quote from : Wikipedia : Information Awareness Office

The Information Awareness Office (IAO) was established by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in January 2002 to bring together several DARPA projects focused on applying information technology to counter asymmetric threats to national security.

The IAO mission was to "imagine,,, , develop, apply, integrate, demonstrate and transition information technologies, components and prototype, closed-loop, information systems that will counter asymmetric threats by achieving total information awareness."

Following public criticism that the development and deployment of these technologies could potentially lead to a mass surveillance system, the IAO was defunded by Congress in 2003, although several of the projects run under IAO have continued under different funding.

Was Congress Briefed About the Warrantless Wiretap Program?

Quote from : Wikipedia : Information Awareness Office : History

The IAO was established after Admiral John Poindexter, former United States National Security Advisor to President Ronald Reagan and SAIC executive Brian Hicks approached the US Department of Defense with the idea for an information awareness program after the attacks of September 11, 2001.

Poindexter and Hicks had previously worked together on intelligence-technology programs for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.

DARPA agreed to host the program and appointed Poindexter to run it in 2002

The IAO began funding research and development of the Total Information Awareness (TIA) Program in February 2003 but renamed the program the Terrorism Information Awareness Program in May that year after an adverse media reaction to the program's implications for public surveillance.

Although TIA was only one of several IAO projects, many critics and news reports conflated TIA with other related research projects of the IAO, with the result that TIA came in popular usage to stand for an entire subset of IAO programs.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/654347875bb9.jpeg[/atsimg]

[edit on 28-12-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas


So you don't believe any one has any grudge against the US to carry an attack to harm its citizens the same way the US has harmed many other nation's citizens through its foreign policy.

Keep it simple... What goes around comes around.

You can't expect the US to keep intervening in other nation's internal affairs and get away with it. That is like me messing up with your family and causing unrest in your home for my own interest and get away with it.

I would follow revenge since revenge is sweet. And you can't tell me it's not.

So far in "The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran" the author has spoken about Muslim's and their faith in the Koran, and as well about jihad, and is explaining that the way Muslim's think is their religion is the only "true" religion.

Quote from : Wikipedia : Muslim

A Muslim (Arabic: مسلم‎), pronounced /ˈmʊslɪm/, is an adherent of the religion of Islam.

The feminine form is Muslimah (Arabic: مسلمة‎).

Literally, the word means "one who submits (to God)".

Muslim is the participle of the same verb of which Islam is the infinitive.

Muslims believe that there is only one God, translated in Arabic as Allah.

Muslims believe that Islam existed long before Muhammad and that the religion had evolved with time from the time of Adam until the time of Muhammad and was completed with the revelation of verse 3 of Surah al-Maeda:

This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion.

The Qur'an describes many Biblical prophets and messengers as Muslim:

Adam, Noah (Arabic: Nuh), Moses and Jesus and his apostles.

The Qur'an states that these men were Muslims because they submitted to God, preached his message and upheld his values.

Thus, in Surah 3:52 of the Qur'an, Jesus’ disciples tell Jesus, "We believe in God; and you be our witness that we submit and obey (wa ashahadu bil-muslimūna)."

Muslims consider making ritual prayer five times a day a religious duty (fard) (see the section on Ismāˤīlīs below for exceptions); these five prayers are known as fajr, dhuhr, ˤasr, maghrib and ˤishā'.

There is also a special Friday prayer called jumuˤah.

Currently, the most up to date report from an American think-tank has estimated 1.57 billion Muslims populate the world, representing 23% of an estimated 2009 world population of 6.8 billion.

With 60% in Asia and 20% of Muslims living in the Middle East and North Africa.

Muslim Demographics


Obama: "My Muslim Faith"


Barack Obama Mocks And Makes Fun Of The Bible—No Christian Would Do This


I'm slightly concerned here, not that I see Muslim's as a threat through breeding at a fast rate, because the Chinese breed faster, but because what I am finding Obama having said about the Bible, and that America was founded on Christianity.

Quote from : Wikipedia : Jihad

Jihad (pronounced /dʒɪˈhɑːd/; Arabic: جهاد‎ [dʒiˈhæːd]), an Islamic term, is a religious duty of Muslims.

In Arabic, the word jihād is a noun meaning "struggle."

Jihad appears frequently in the Qur'an and common usage as the idiomatic expression "striving in the way of Allah (al-jihad fi sabil Allah)".

A person engaged in jihad is called a mujahid, the plural is mujahideen.

A minority among the Sunni scholars sometimes refer to this duty as the sixth pillar of Islam, though it occupies no such official status.

In Twelver Shi'a Islam, however, Jihad is one of the 10 Practices of the Religion.

According to scholar John Esposito, Jihad requires Muslims to "struggle in the way of God" or "to struggle to improve one's self and/or society."

Jihad is directed against Satan's inducements, aspects of one's own self, or against a visible enemy.

The four major categories of jihad that are recognized are Jihad against one's self (Jihad al-Nafs), Jihad of the tongue (Jihad al-lisan), Jihad of the hand (Jihad al-yad), and Jihad of the sword (Jihad as-sayf).

Islamic military jurisprudence focuses on regulating the conditions and practice of Jihad as-sayf, the only form of warfare permissible under Islamic law, and thus the term Jihad is usually used in fiqh manuals in reference to military combat.

Now, I have been through many religions, and so far just about all of them, or the followers at least, claim that they are the "true" religion.

I find it odd though that according to this book and a lot of things I've found online, that President Barack Obama is quoting Islam a lot, but claims to be Christian.

What religion is he, Muslim or Christian, because so far I've found nothing other than speculation?

I'm asking someone, anyone, to show me something that specifically shows, tells, or documents which religion Obama is because I have found no official site claiming anything, yet.

Nonie Darwish - Jihad Culture


Why I left Islam - Nonie Darwish (1 of 2)


Why I left Islam - Nonie Darwish (2 of 2)

Quote from : Wikipedia : Nonie Darwish

Nonie Darwish is an Egyptian-American human rights activist, and founder of Arabs For Israel.

She is the author of two books: Now They Call Me Infidel; Why I Renounced Jihad for America, Israel and the War on Terror and Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law.

Darwish's speech topics cover human rights, with emphasis on women's rights and minority rights in the Middle East. She is the director of Former Muslims United.

Born in Egypt, Darwish is the daughter of an Egyptian Army lieutenant general, who was called a "shahid" by the Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser, after being killed in an Israeli raid.

Darwish blames "the Middle Eastern Islamic culture and the propaganda of hatred taught to children from birth" for his death, which she describes as an "assassination".

In 1978, she moved with her husband to the United States, and converted to Christianity there.

After September 11, 2001 she has written on Islam-related topics.

I have not gotten past the first chapter of the book, yet, but so far according to the author Robert Spencer, he is claiming a mixture about the book, but over all nothing good about the Koran, other than the Obama quoting it, and I have to wonder if the author is a Christian conservative, because so far he is claiming Obama has been mis-quoting or selectively quoting the Koran.

Quote from : Wikipedia : Robert Spencer

Robert Bruce Spencer (born 1962) is an American blogger and author of articles and books relating to Islam and Islamic terrorism.

He has published nine books, including two bestsellers, and also is a contributor to the FrontPage magazine, directed by David Horowitz.

He created Jihad Watch, a blog that focuses on Islamic terrorism-related events and various Jihad-activity worldwide.

Robert Spencer - The Crusades, Fact & Truth (Part 1/5)


Robert Spencer - The Crusades, Fact & Truth (Part 2/5)


Robert Spencer - The Crusades, Fact & Truth (Part 3/5)


Robert Spencer - The Crusades, Fact & Truth (Part 4/5)


Robert Spencer - The Crusades, Fact & Truth (Part 5/5)


Spencer speaks about the Middle Ages, a time in our history also referred to colloquially as the sinister sounding "Dark Ages".

Quote from : Wikipedia : Middle Ages

The Middle Ages of European history (adjectivial form: medieval or mediæval) is a period of international history covering roughly a millennium in the 5th century through 16th centuries.

It is commonly dated from the fall of the Western Roman Empire, and contrasted with a later Early Modern Period; the time during which the Reformation and the rise of humanism in the Italian Renaissance unfolded are generally associated with the transition out of the Middle Ages, with European overseas expansion as a succeeding process, but such dates are approximate and based upon nuanced arguments.

More specific starting and ending points are sometimes adopted by scholars to suit their respective specializations or current focus.

In particular, in British history, the Middle Ages are often understood to start at the Norman conquest of 1066 and continue through to about the end of the 15th century (the era between the fall of the Roman Empire and the Norman conquest is referred to as the Anglo-Saxon period).

"Periodization issues" are discussed in later section of this article.

The Middle Ages included the first sustained urbanization of northern and western Europe.

Many modern European countries owe their origins to events and trends in the Middle Ages; present European political boundaries are, in many regards, the result of the military and dynastic outcomes during this period.

Sinister?

No, but the reference to it being the "Dark Ages" was about the lack of education, the short-changing of the people via the suppression of knowledge, at least as an over all outlook over the entire time period.

One thing that I know, about my own family, is that it can be traced back to England, to 1066.



[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8437e212b888.jpg[/atsimg]

That's my family crest above, and the family motto is Nosce Te Ipsum, or Know Thyself.

[edit on 29-12-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

I am a Catholic so I do not know much about the Koran. However, I have been learning a lot since my boyfriend is Muslim. I do know that there are extremists in every religion. Look at what the Bible has done. For years and years there have been wars due to beliefs. Whether it is the Bible or the Koran. The world will never see eye to eye and there will always be hatred and problems due to religion. There is even hatred within the Muslim religion. The extremists think that all Muslims should be in line with them, however there are Muslims that don't believe there are virgins waiting for them in heaven. This problem will never be settled!!

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

What religion is he, Muslim or Christian, because so far I've found nothing other than speculation?

LOL don't you believe after demonizing the Muslim community all accross the world that the US president's least expectation would be to find some common grounds?

You are analysing the information you are finding in the wrong way. Try communicating with other member, not me because I have too much beef against members such as you.

Good luck fella.

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

 

So you don't believe any one has any grudge against the US to carry an attack to harm its citizens the same way the US has harmed many other nation's citizens through its foreign policy.

Keep it simple... What goes around comes around.

You can't expect the US to keep intervening in other nation's internal affairs and get away with it. That is like me messing up with your family and causing unrest in your home for my own interest and get away with it.

I would follow revenge since revenge is sweet. And you can't tell me it's not.

I never once stated that no one has a grudge against the United States.

Foreign policy is written so as to do things in other countries that many people do not like, of that I am sure, my questioning of the official facts about September 11th however, are about the details which were left out, on purpose.

No, I do not care for revenge, it's not something I do lightly.

I do see America has a lot of actions overseas, and I do believe we need to focus on our own country first, and focus less on other countires, stop giving out aid to everyone else in the world, a few things like N.A.F.T.A. needs to be repealed.

[edit on 29-12-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

Originally posted by Victoria 1
I am a Catholic so I do not know much about the Koran. However, I have been learning a lot since my boyfriend is Muslim. I do know that there are extremists in every religion. Look at what the Bible has done. For years and years there have been wars due to beliefs. Whether it is the Bible or the Koran. The world will never see eye to eye and there will always be hatred and problems due to religion. There is even hatred within the Muslim religion. The extremists think that all Muslims should be in line with them, however there are Muslims that don't believe there are virgins waiting for them in heaven. This problem will never be settled!!

I realize there are "extremists" in every religion.

That's one of the reasons I am neither "left-wing" nor "right-wing", but middle ground, because I was raised under many different religions.

So far, I have not found one better than any other, but all claim to be the one and only faith and correct one, which I find as a little silly.

I've noticed how all these religions are divided, and while some are along the same vein, the divisions usually cause conflict of some sort, in some way, shape, or form.

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

 

What religion is he, Muslim or Christian, because so far I've found nothing other than speculation?

LOL don't you believe after demonizing the Muslim community all accross the world that the US president's least expectation would be to find some common grounds?

You are analysing the information you are finding in the wrong way. Try communicating with other member, not me because I have too much beef against members such as you.

Good luck fella.

I never said I did not expect Obama to find a common ground, that's to be expected, any politician would do so, if they intend on succeeding.

I was asking someone to point to something about Obama's religious beliefs, that's all.

Members such as me?

And what exactly does that imply?

So, you think I might not learn something, or think along similar lines as you?

Well, I guess we will see, won't we.