Son of Osama

[pocketfullofshells]

???? You do realize that 16-17 of the hijackers on 9/11 were from Saudi Arabia?. Do you realize that the Ibn Saud and Muhammad ibn Abd-al-Wahhab got together in 1740 and the house of Saud and Wahhabism have been joined at the hip ever since.

yes I do, that's why I said many nations....I did not say the house of Saud for that very reason. Even so, our backing of that dictatorship has still only helped push for more radicalization of Islam there. When People cant find change in there government, faith is often where they turn, and the radicals give them someone to Chanel there anger at...But you also know that the teachings of Mahammad ibn abd al wahhab are not the teachings that are the true basis for the current anti western thought and terrorist teachings...Ibn taymiyya, ibn al qayyim al-Jawziyyahm and Sayyid Qutb have far greater impact on the thought and movement Bin Ladin represents, while Wahhab did teach a strict and very conservative version of Islam, he also was very limited in his teachings about Jihad and other such acts of faith that he is held for by todays western media...

 

[jb_1430]

"Backing"? We buy thier oil, they buy our stuff. We have not bombed them. Is that what you mean by backing? House of Saud would be there regardless of our relationship. If we didnt buy their oil, someone else would. If they didnt buy our goods, they would buy somebody elses goods. And the the religion of the wahhabis and the terrorist are the same with one exception, the terrorist dont accept the deal that al wahhab and Ibn saud made back in 1740, giving the house of Saud authority over all political matters and the wahhab's authority over all religious matters. They made that part up. Contrary to the written doctrine.
The Ikhwan was formed in 1912, the Islamic religious militia which recaptured the Saudi penninsula from the Ottomans. By the 20s, Ibn Saud was having trouble keeping the Ikhwan's religious zeal for conquest in check. Ibn cracked down on the Militia, many fleeing to egypt and surrounding areas, those who stayed became the Saudi National Guard. Those who fled became the Muslim Brotherhood.
http://www.ikhwanweb.com/
Same ideological split continues today.

yes I do, that's why I said many nations....I did not say the house of Saud for that very reason. Even so, our backing of that dictatorship has still only helped push for more radicalization of Islam there. When People cant find change in there government, faith is often where they turn, and the radicals give them someone to Chanel there anger at...But you also know that the teachings of Mahammad ibn abd al wahhab are not the teachings that are the true basis for the current anti western thought and terrorist teachings...Ibn taymiyya, ibn al qayyim al-Jawziyyahm and Sayyid Qutb have far greater impact on the thought and movement Bin Ladin represents, while Wahhab did teach a strict and very conservative version of Islam, he also was very limited in his teachings about Jihad and other such acts of faith that he is held for by todays western media...

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Backing up aka, we give them funds, bail them out, don't call them on there attacks on Democracy in their states....if we treated more of the middle east like Iran...we would be much better off, and I think they would be as well in the long run ( and by like Iran, I don't mean the hyperbole we see today, I mean more the long term isolation and not supporting there leaders

 

[bewitched]

yeah House of Saud is the center of the universe. and they got there with trickery and some with power in the West sold their souls. what will be interesting are the consequences that we all have to suffer.

 

[bewitched]

now back to Son of Ossama.
what is he appealing to?
what is his purpose for going public?
it seems quite suspicious that he would come out with declarations... which contradict some of the basic principles of Islam. so what is he up to?

 

[jb_1430]

Backing up aka, we give them funds, bail them out, don't call them on there attacks on Democracy in their states....

We dont "give them funds", we buy their oil. We didnt "bail them out" and we have been the source of the overwhelming majority of the worlds criticism against the Saudis for their lack of Democracy.

if we treated more of the middle east like Iran...we would be much better off, and I think they would be as well in the long run ( and by like Iran, I don't mean the hyperbole we see today, I mean more the long term isolation and not supporting there leaders

I dont see anything to indicate the saudis would have been any different for the better without our relationship.

 

[bewitched]

We dont "give them funds", we buy their oil. We didnt "bail them out" and we have been the source of the overwhelming majority of the worlds criticism against the Saudis for their lack of Democracy.




I dont see anything to indicate the saudis would have been any different for the better without our relationship.

sounds to me like more blame being directed at the West for being a consumer of goods and building economies of other countries... like that's a bad thing.
the fact is, and you and I seem to agree, Islam is a big excuse maker, as well as a troublemaker.

 

[jb_1430]

you are assuming I have hate of Islam and I do not.
maybe you are assuming other things too.
Christianity and Islam seperated when Mohammed considered himself the last prophet. the Quran divides the correct path very clearly.
as far as humans sharing virtue, principles and ethics... that doesn't belong to any religion. nor is it exclusive of one or the other.

and I am a she.

All religions espouse "virtue, principles and ethics". But not the same "virtue, principles and ethics".

Matthew 22:36"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'[c] 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

All the prophets until the last one-

Number 25: Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah's Apostle was asked, "What is the best deed?" He replied, "To believe in Allah and His Apostle (Muhammad). The questioner then asked, "What is the next (in goodness)? He replied, "To participate in Jihad (religious fighting) in Allah's Cause."

Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar:

Allah's Apostle said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity,

 

[jb_1430]

now back to Son of Ossama.
what is he appealing to?
what is his purpose for going public?
it seems quite suspicious that he would come out with declarations... which contradict some of the basic principles of Islam. so what is he up to?

His purpose is "to defend Islam", just like his father, but with different methods.

 

[bewitched]

His purpose is "to defend Islam", just like his father, but with different methods.

exactly.
the same way that tv, candidates, governments and other entities target consumers in certain demographics.

 

[jb_1430]

exactly.
the same way that tv, candidates, governments and other entities target consumers in certain demographics.

The West rejected Bin Ladens offers for a peace treaty so its being offered by his son. They are on the ropes and know that negotiations for a truce is their best chance, as opposed to a direct confrontation. Its really just seeking an opportunity for the Islamic Fundamentalist movement to regain strength after being beaten so severely on the battlefield.

the Khaleefah, when appointed, will never agree to permanent peace with any nation, rather its foreign policy is built on the basis of temporarily having ceasefires so long as Islam is allowed to be propagated in the other country, though once the time limit expires the Islamic State may advance and annex the land to implement the Shari’ah there without notice. The maximum ceasefire allowed in Islam being 10 years.
http://www.mituk.org/?p=64

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Buying oil is but a small part of how we support there piss poor tyrant rulers. When South Africa was using apartheid , we did not buy all we could from them, arm them with more and better military tech, and just public support of them. The Saud's have a apartheid of there own , against woman and the Shia as well. Is it justification for the attacks on the US? of course not, but it does not mean that our policy in the middle east had put oil first democracy 2nd for years. The only place we have not, is Iran....and anyone who looks at the population of Iran , we would see how our policy on Iran has netted us

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Also Just because he is his son, does not mean he must be and think the same. W Bush is a complete idiot who borders on fundamentalist....that does not mean his dad who I liked and respected was.

 

[Bunz]

PFOS,
I would agree with your sentiments about Father and Son Bush. The Ole Man aint to bad, the kid just cant hang.

So for OBL's son, I dont really care what he has to say, if I were him, I would be keeping a much lower profile.
One has to think if the thought of the reward money has crossed the kids mind.

 

[jb_1430]

Ah. So "support" means we have not yet placed under an economic boycott.

Buying oil is but a small part of how we support there piss poor tyrant rulers. When South Africa was using apartheid , we did not buy all we could from them, arm them with more and better military tech, and just public support of them. The Saud's have a apartheid of there own , against woman and the Shia as well. Is it justification for the attacks on the US? of course not, but it does not mean that our policy in the middle east had put oil first democracy 2nd for years. The only place we have not, is Iran....and anyone who looks at the population of Iran , we would see how our policy on Iran has netted us