Obama should know that Iran's leaders can't be trusted

AlwaysWrite

Well-Known Member
#1
As Barack Hussein Obama and John Kerry seem determined to reach a nuclear deal with Iranian leaders, they seem to be clueless as to the doctrines and desires of Islam.

Although apparently of the mindset that any deal is better than no deal, Obama and his advisors need to be aware that IRAN'S LEADERS CAN'T BE TRUSTED. That's because Muslims consider non-believers to be infidels, and Islam permits -- and even encourages -- Muslims to lie when dealing with infidels or when they feel that the tenets and goals of Islam are threatened.

When dealing with Muslims, it's important to realize that Muslims can communicate or negotiate with apparent sincerity, while in reality having the opposite agenda in their hearts. In regard to international negotiations, can Muslim countries be entrusted to faithfully adhere to any agreements they sign with non-Muslim nations? It's a religious tenet that when Muslims are weak, they may seem to agree with almost anything, but once they become strong, they have no problem in negating what they formerly agreed to.

Muslims may appear to be sincere while actually lying in the cause of Islam, and indeed, their religion grants them permission to lie. Without a doubt, Christians have also lied, but The Holy Bible doesn't grant them permission to lie. On the other hand, Muslims have no guilt because the Koran and Hadith permit deception, including gaining the trust of non-believers (infidels) in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.

With direct reference to Muslim doctrine:

* Sura (16:106) ... Establishes that there are circumstances that can "compel" a Muslim to tell lies.

* Bukhari (49:857) ... "He who makes peace between the people by inventing good information or saying good things, is not a liar." [In other words, lying is permitted when the end justifies the means].

* Bukhari (84:64-65) ... Speaking from a position of power, Ali confirms that lying is permissible in order to deceive an "enemy."

* From Islamic Law (as per Page 746 of Reliance of the Traveler) ... "[it is] obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory ... Whether the purpose is war, settling a disagreement, or gaining the sympathy of a victim legally entitled to retaliate ... it is not unlawful to lie when any of these aims can only be attained through lying. But it is religiously precautionary in all cases to employ words that give a misleading impression ..."

CONCLUSION: Iranian leaders can utilize such "loopholes" in their religion to absolve them from permanent and supposedly binding negotiations. Importantly, what Muslim activists SAY isn't important to them; rather, it's what's actually meant in their hearts with regard to the goals and concepts of Islam. And some Muslims feel that they are earning their way to heaven by lying to non-Muslim infidels.

Americans have enough trouble in attempting to filter through all the lies told by U.S. politicians, and everyone should conclude that ANTI-AMERICAN IRANIAN POLITICIANS CAN'T BE TRUSTED AT ALL, especially when their religion "sanctions" lies and deception in the cause of Islam.
 

AlwaysWrite

Well-Known Member
#2
Goddamn, who knew! They sound just our politicians, or Britain's, France's, Russia's, just about any government on the damn planet.
Dear Cool Rocking Daddy:

I don't hear American, British, French or Russian politicians issuing calls for "DEATH TO AMERICA" and/or "DEATH TO ISRAEL" ... so there is at least some difference. And the bottom line remains: Iran can't be trusted to live up to any nuclear deal or treaty struck with "infidels" (for reasons stated in my mini-editorial).

Thanks for reading it, by the way, and enjoy the rest of the weekend.
 

AlwaysWrite

Well-Known Member
#3
Political sloganeering to gain the attention of clowns like you. Where else do you post that junk?
Dear Cool Rocking Daddy:

I don't know about "political sloganeering" but I do keep extremely well abreast of current and world events, and even though you usually disagree with anything I post, you should admit that even though my opinions may be wrong (in your opinion) or objectionable (from your point of view), you should admit that my mini-editorials are well-written from a journalisticstandpoint.

And why would you want to know where else I might post my great Mighty Fish mini-editorials? Are you interested in going to any other venue in which I post such astute comments, opinions and observations?
 

AlwaysWrite

Well-Known Member
#4
Although I hadn't seen Judge Jeanine Pirro's opening statement (on FOX News) before I posted my mini-editorial, she obviously agrees fully with everything I stated on the subject ...

 

AlwaysWrite

Well-Known Member
#5
Dear Cool Rocking Daddy:

As usual, you refuse to comment on the substance of what I say and attempt to switch the topic to me (and your obvious dislike of me). And regardless of what you say, I posted my words hours before Judge Jeanine came on the air, so I wasn't "following in her footsteps" or being influenced by what she said BECAUSE I HADN'T WATCHED HER SHOW YET.

Did you take a few minutes to watch Judge Jeanine's opening statement, or did you even read (or comprehend) what I said in the original post?
 

AlwaysWrite

Well-Known Member
#6
As usual, you ignore the fact that the so-called "substance" of what you write is all I comment on while all you ever do is try to get comments on how you wrote it. Again, I could care less if some talking head agreed with your views or not.
Dear Cool Rocking Daddy:

You continue to put far more emphasis on ME than on what I write. Do you agree with the basic premise that, according to Islamic law and doctrine, it's OK to lie to infidels?
 
#8
She is featured prominently in the Bob Durst docudrama "The Jinx".



Who the fuck is she and why the fuck should I care. FAUX news has become the public relations firm for the Republican Party. Atta boy, Billy. Keep on having your thoughts formulated. You epitomize what Henry Rollins sang about in Disconnect Myself........

Too damn bad if at the end of the day the only thoughts
In your brain are all the things that they say, what a waste
Too damn bad if at the end of the line you got no idea
What's on your own mind, you got no one to blame but yourself
Too much to know, too much to see
It might mean something to you but it's nothing to me
Its just another ad for someone's version of how they think it should be

Fits you to tee, Billy Boy. No, Billy, I wouldn't want to go to any other site you belong to. Just curious to find out if you're just looking for clicks off a website, you just donate this pap to any organization's website or newsletter, whatever. Again, Billy, like the lyrics above prove about you, its about the content not how its delivered. Every post you make is an empty bottle, a vacuum surrounded by page borders.
 
#9
...so, the last paragraph just blew the entire comment out of the water.

"Americans have enough trouble in attempting to filter through all the lies told by U.S. politicians" = Yeah, that's not one-sided.

The whole point is, regardless of nation, we have to be able to trust and setup negotiations or there wouldn't be any way to push for change. If American's can't even trust their own "Christian" politician then how can you sit and argue about a "muslim" (he isn't, but the sake of this post) one?

You can never trust any country.....because no matter what, a country will look out for itself.
 
#11
... and when Iran goes nuclear, it's a different and ultra-dangerous scenario, because that country won't hold back in its use of nuclear weapons (or the providing of them to terrorist organizations).
I believe mutual destruction keeps people from doing most stupid things.....and here we go back to the whole idea that only a few states are allowed to have nuclear weapons....no one else can have them. :rolleyes:

I know, I know, you're going to go all "Iran wants to wipe out Israel" on me b/c that's the narrative you buy, but remember, Pakistan and India aren't all BFF (both nuclear and the world still exists). ;)
 
Last edited:

AlwaysWrite

Well-Known Member
#12
I believe mutual destruction keeps people from doing most stupid things.....and here we go back to the whole idea that only a few states are allowed to have nuclear weapons....no one else can have them. :rolleyes:

I know, I know, you're going to go all "Iran wants to wipe out Israel" on me b/c that's the narrative you buy, but remember, Pakistan and India aren't all BFF (both nuclear and the world still exists). ;)
... but with Iran's track record of support of worldwide terrorism, are you really prepared to trust Iran with regard to nuclear weapons?
 
#13
... but with Iran's track record of support of worldwide terrorism, are you really prepared to trust Iran with regard to nuclear weapons?
ohh ohh. Were the Americans terrorists? Rising up against the King....

To quote Rand: "....those who oppose the idea of containment — or living with an Iran with nuclear weapons — ignore that such an outcome has been necessary in the past. They said containment will never ever, ever be our policy,” Paul said of those who oppose Iran getting nuclear weapons at any cost. “We woke up one day and Pakistan had nuclear weapons. If that would have been our policy toward Pakistan, we would be at war with Pakistan. We woke up one day and China had nuclear weapons. We woke up one day and Russia had them.”

“The people who say ‘by golly, we will never stand for that,’ they are voting for war,” he added.

VERY well stated.

We don't need to have an alarmist worldview, we don't have to forever be aiming our guns at someone somewhere demanding they follow our orders.

Don't be a war-hawk Bill, don't be a Dick Cheney. Have a nice evening.
 
Last edited:

AlwaysWrite

Well-Known Member
#14
Dear Good Times Good Times:

I'm far from a "war hawk" but I'm a realist, and there are a lot of other realists who recognize the extreme worldwide "game changer" that will take place at the time Iran goes nuclear.
 
#16
GTGT,


On one hand you say leave Iran be, but on the other you supported BHO. The same BHO who destabilized Egypt, failed to support the uprising in Iran (right after Mr. Hope / Change was elected, ironically), Libya and Syria. Do you agree BHO is picking and choosing where to police?
 

AlwaysWrite

Well-Known Member
#17
GTGT,


On one hand you say leave Iran be, but on the other you supported BHO. The same BHO who destabilized Egypt, failed to support the uprising in Iran (right after Mr. Hope / Change was elected, ironically), Libya and Syria. Do you agree BHO is picking and choosing where to police?
... and do you agree that BHO might not have any idea of how to conduct foreign policy?
 
#18
Oh, I believe he does. See his brother's deep connections to the Muslim Brotherhood. Explains what was attempted in Egypt. But as we see, BHO pours the kool-aid and so many willingly lap it up.



... and do you agree that BHO might not have any idea of how to conduct foreign policy?
 

AlwaysWrite

Well-Known Member
#19
Oh, I believe he does. See his brother's deep connections to the Muslim Brotherhood. Explains what was attempted in Egypt. But as we see, BHO pours the kool-aid and so many willingly lap it up.
... and perhaps, Cool Rocking Daddy is lapping up some of that Kool-Aid right now.
 
#20
GTGT,

On one hand you say leave Iran be, but on the other you supported BHO. The same BHO who destabilized Egypt, failed to support the uprising in Iran (right after Mr. Hope / Change was elected, ironically), Libya and Syria. Do you agree BHO is picking and choosing where to police?
Of course I disagree with the President on a lot of things.

To quote your boy (and mine?): “We woke up one day and Pakistan had nuclear weapons. If that would have been our policy toward Pakistan, we would be at war with Pakistan. We woke up one day and China had nuclear weapons. We woke up one day and Russia had them.”

“The people who say ‘by golly, we will never stand for that,’ they are voting for war,” he added. (that sounds like the REAL policing of the world).

Here's what I know, I'm not going to change anyone's opinion on this site (even with what is quoted above). I accept that. I really do.
 
Top