Hahaha if this is true. Question, did he have the military use his village as an artillery practice range?
kylebisme
Diamond Member
- Mar 25, 2000
- 9,396
- 0
- 0
I hope that someday you come to terms with the fact that you attack me for being a truther because you are such a falser that you are unable to address the facts I present on issues completely unrelated to 9/11. Granted, first you will have to come to terms with why this is.
Ahmadinejad acknolages the fact of the Nazi genoscide against Jews. For example, from this interview
That exemplifies his dispute; which is not with the fact that the Nazis murdered millions of Jews, but with how that genocide of Jews has been exalted over that of all the other groups Hitler deemed "sub-human" and murdered off, along with all the other people who lost their lives in the madness which was WWII. Also, rather than denying the facts by any stretch; Ahmadinejad takes issue with the fact people are attacked for simply for being misguided in their understanding of the facts of the matter, and by people who are misguided in theirs too. It often turns into situations like Young Earth creationists debating atheists who have no actual understanding the science which disproves the literal interpretation of the Biblical creation myth; both sides arguing from positions of faith rather than demonstrating any semblance of actual understanding.
Unfortunatly, many Zionist do whatever they can to discredit any such postion, inluding branding Ahmadinejad a "Holocaust denier". Some even absurdly do the same to Norman Finkelstein simply for his postions on the matter, despite the fact he was raised by survivors and is well versed in the facts.
I read it back when it was presented and don't recall anything in it which support the argument you presented. I will reread it again shortly though just for refresher sake. In the mean time, could you please quote here specifically whatever statement(s) you believe best substantiates your claim?
One can make anyone say nearly anything with enough source material to a derive a crappy enough translation from. However, if you read a translation of the comments in question substantiated by quoting the original Farsi and providing the literal translation of each word, you will find that the wishes you have come to ascribe to him do not reflect his actual statements.
Your lack of doubt is apparently built on conflation. First, Ahmadinejad doesn't even have the authority to choose who to attack, but rather he simply serves an administrative position under those who do. Second, Iran is not attacking Israel, but rather supporting groups which do. Third, those groups are not only provoked by Israel's continuing occupation and colonization of their homeland and all the death, destruction and oppression which comes with it; they were formed in response to such provocation precisely.
No, as I don't conflate provocation with justification. For example sake; imagine had I lived a particularly rough life filled with violence, and someone came across me and decided him wanting to stand where I was gave him the right to push me out of the way. In such a case I might be provoked into pummeling him into the ground. Does that mean I would be justified in doing as much? Of course not, but that wouldn't absolve him from having provoked me either.
Others were certainly murdered during WWII for whatever reasons Hitler decided made them inferior, but the Jewish Holocaust is the most profound example of his genocidal tendencies. The fact that Achmadinejad can't admit or acknowledge that fact is very... odd.
To sit there and claim that his motives are altruistic, or done in attempt to shed light on the other people who died, is intellectually dishonest. You know damned well that's not his reason for questioning and denying the Holocaust.
No, i won't do your homework for you. Go read it "again."
Hell, even wikipedia paraphrases it. Quit being lazy.
bullshit. 100% Grade-A Bullshit. He wants Israel, as a country, gone from the map of the Middle East, and you damned well know that. He has said as much, exactly, on more than one occasion.
You're blowing smoke. If you know anything at all about the background and operational structure of Hezbollah, you'd know that Iranian agents directly control nearly every aspect of the group. FFS, Hezbollah leadership spends more time in Tehran than in Lebanon.
Hezbollah is nothing more than one more paramilitary arm of Iran's government. Period.
Iran never stood where Israel is now standing, therefore Israel has never pushed Iran out of the way, so your entire analogy is based on a false premise.
Nice try though. :roll:
kylebisme
Diamond Member
- Mar 25, 2000
- 9,396
- 0
- 0
I find it odd that anyone would think to use the term "profound" when referring to such diabolical events, and am at a loss as to how you could consider such a perspective a matter of fact. Your reaction is exactly what Ahmadinejad takes issue with when he refers to the Nazi genocide of Jews as a "myth"; not taking issue with the factual basis of the historical events, but rather the religious-like conviction with which many cling to a particular subset of them.
I also find it odd that anyone would think to use the term "holocaust" when referring to genocide. When speaking of the Nazi genocide of Jews in particular, I prefer "Shoah" as that is Hebrew for "catastrophe", and The Shoah was a man made catastrophe of undeniably horrific scale. Granted, I often avoid that term too when speaking around people I doubt would be familiar with it However, to call a genocide "holocaust" as if it were a ritual offering to God, I find outright disgusting. It seems consistent of the nutcases like John Hagee, who claims Hitler was doing God's will, which is a mentality I want no part of. Granted, but I do understand that many people are unaware of the theological significance of the term.
It is dishonest of you to suggest I ever did such a thing, yet you apparently prefer to remain too damned to know well from otherwise.
That is what I did when I provided quotes to demonstrate the fact that Ahmadinejad acknowledges the The Shoah, in dispute of your claim to the contrary. Supporting your claims is your homework, not mine.
Your referencing Wikipedia is lazy, and not even quoting it here is doubly so.
Please cite one specific occasion you are alluding to here so we can discuss the facts of it directly.
All of the facts i mentioned apply to Hezbollah. If you are attempting to suggest that what I have said is anything less than factual, then please state you contest directly, and I will be happy to substantiate my claims.
Lebanese, Palestinians, and Syrians once stood where Israel continues to occupy and colonize beyond its international recognized borders, forcing such individuals to their knees and worse; hence the analogy.
Again, I'm happy to substantiate any claim I make, as I have no interest making any I can't. I am always happy to provide a credible source when it is requested, and often do directly when presenting obscure facts. I'm not trying to win anything here or anything of the sort, and whatever you might be trying to do in ignoring the facts I present is something which I hope you might be willing to explain.
Now your just being a tool trying to sound more educated or intelligent than you really are. "Holocaust" is a universally acceptable term to describe the Nazi's genocide of the Jews during WWII. Jews and gentiles alike use the term without menace or ulterior motive.
Get over yourself.
uh huh. right.
So, have you found it yet? Or did what you found not "jive" with your supposed "understanding of Achmadinejad's positions"?
He does, in fact, believe that there is a global Zionist conspiracy to control international finance, and he said as much during his 2008 address to the UN General Assembly.
uhg. I really despise obtuseness. You know the quotes, and you know what he meant. You also know that his ultimate goal is to see a Middle East without an Israel -- either by vote following "the right of return," or by force. Either way, that is exactly what he desires, and exactly what he has stated on more than one occasion.
You attempted to grant Hezbollah an autonomy they do not possess. They are, in fact, a directly controlled military arm of the Iranian government. Iran created them and controls their every move to this day.
The question you attempted to answer using that analogy had nothing at all to do with the Lebanese, Palestinians, and Syrians.
I asked you what Israel had done to directly provoke Iran, not those other nations. I asked you to try and justify the decades of unprovoked Iranian attacks on Israel.
You're attempting to deflect or avoid the question altogether. Which is it?
You've produced no facts at all. None. Therefore, I have had none to ignore.
You know next to nothing about this subject, but you speak as though the rest of the world is ignorant. That's usually amusing, but with you it's getting boring.
There is one absolute test to prove whether he's Jewish. Take him to good kosher deli, and buy him a hot pastrami sandwhich. If he prefers it on white bread, or he puts Miracle Whip on it, you'll KNOW he's not Jewish. :laugh:
If he was born Jewish, and he wants to prove he's given it up, he could always return his circumcision and not ask for a refund.
The above is all the intellectual effort this entire subject is worth. :roll:
If he was born Jewish, and he wants to prove he's given it up, he could always return his circumcision and not ask for a refund.
The above is all the intellectual effort this entire subject is worth. :roll:
The original article was bullshit, you know.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comm...adinejad-jewish-family
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comm...adinejad-jewish-family
JEDIYoda
Lifer
- Jul 13, 2005
- 33,986
- 3,321
- 126
There is nothing like a thorough rebukking of an article! The british do it as well as anybody!
IMO you would actually need to be crazy to have believed this--- Topic Title: The "truth" behind Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's attacks on Jews?
Topic Summary: Spoiler: HE'S A JEW!!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...-have-Jewish-past.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_wl943
Mon Oct 5, 8:15 pm ET
Over the weekend, a British newspaper published an item which claimed that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, perhaps the most vocal anti-Jewish leader of the modern era, was, in fact, Jewish by birth. Unfortunately for those who appreciate irony, it appears as though that that initial report was inaccurate.
In the Telegraph's original story, which sparked a mini-worldwide uproar, the paper claimed that a high-resolution photo featuring Ahmadinejad holding up his Iranian identity card in 2008 revealed that his family had once changed its name from Sabourjian, a Jewish surname that was reported to translate to "cloth weaver," to Ahmadinejad after he was born, renouncing Judaism and embracing Islam in the process. The apparent stunning revelation led many on the Web to guffaw in amazement and, of course, crack jokes on the irony of the whole scenario.
But today the Guardian, another British newspaper, thoroughly rebutted the claims made in the Telegraph's piece over the weekend. The paper spoke to Iranian/Jewish historian David Yeroshalmi, who emphatically disputed the Telegraph's claims about the interpretation of Ahmadinejad's former surname, which they claimed "derives from 'weaver of the sabour,' the name for the Jewish tallit shawl in Persia." Said Yeroshalmi, "There is no such meaning for the word 'sabour' in any of the Persian Jewish dialects, nor does it mean Jewish prayer shawl in Persian."
Further, the Guardian also consulted with one of their correspondents who has covered Ahmadinejad since his election in 2005, as well as an Ahmadinejad biographer, who stated that the Iranian president's parents were quite steeped in Islam. They both say that Ahmadinejad's father, Ahmad Sabourjian, was a religious Shia who taught the Koran, at one point even buying a house near "a religious club that he frequented during the holy month of Moharram," in addition to saying that Ahmadinejad's mother is a "Seyyede," a title given to a woman believed to be a direct blood descendant of the Prophet Muhammad.
As far as why Ahmadinejad's father changed the family's surname, the Guardian reports that it had more to do with Iranian class structure than any attempt to conceal a Jewish heritage:
When it became mandatory to adopt surnames, many people from rural areas chose names that represented their professions or that of their ancestors. This made them easily identifiable as townfolk. In many cases they changed their surnames upon moving to Tehran, in order to avoid snobbery and discrimination from residents of the capital. The Sabourjians were one of many such families. Their surname was related to carpet-making, an industry that conjures up images of sweatshops. They changed it to Ahmadinejad in order to help them fit in.
All of which means Ahmadinejad is free to continue being anti-Jew without being anti-self.
-- Brett Michael Dykes is a contributor to the Yahoo! News Blog.
Thread merge
Anandtech Senior Moderator
Red Dawn
IMO you would actually need to be crazy to have believed this--- Topic Title: The "truth" behind Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's attacks on Jews?
Topic Summary: Spoiler: HE'S A JEW!!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...-have-Jewish-past.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_wl943
Mon Oct 5, 8:15 pm ET
Over the weekend, a British newspaper published an item which claimed that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, perhaps the most vocal anti-Jewish leader of the modern era, was, in fact, Jewish by birth. Unfortunately for those who appreciate irony, it appears as though that that initial report was inaccurate.
In the Telegraph's original story, which sparked a mini-worldwide uproar, the paper claimed that a high-resolution photo featuring Ahmadinejad holding up his Iranian identity card in 2008 revealed that his family had once changed its name from Sabourjian, a Jewish surname that was reported to translate to "cloth weaver," to Ahmadinejad after he was born, renouncing Judaism and embracing Islam in the process. The apparent stunning revelation led many on the Web to guffaw in amazement and, of course, crack jokes on the irony of the whole scenario.
But today the Guardian, another British newspaper, thoroughly rebutted the claims made in the Telegraph's piece over the weekend. The paper spoke to Iranian/Jewish historian David Yeroshalmi, who emphatically disputed the Telegraph's claims about the interpretation of Ahmadinejad's former surname, which they claimed "derives from 'weaver of the sabour,' the name for the Jewish tallit shawl in Persia." Said Yeroshalmi, "There is no such meaning for the word 'sabour' in any of the Persian Jewish dialects, nor does it mean Jewish prayer shawl in Persian."
Further, the Guardian also consulted with one of their correspondents who has covered Ahmadinejad since his election in 2005, as well as an Ahmadinejad biographer, who stated that the Iranian president's parents were quite steeped in Islam. They both say that Ahmadinejad's father, Ahmad Sabourjian, was a religious Shia who taught the Koran, at one point even buying a house near "a religious club that he frequented during the holy month of Moharram," in addition to saying that Ahmadinejad's mother is a "Seyyede," a title given to a woman believed to be a direct blood descendant of the Prophet Muhammad.
As far as why Ahmadinejad's father changed the family's surname, the Guardian reports that it had more to do with Iranian class structure than any attempt to conceal a Jewish heritage:
When it became mandatory to adopt surnames, many people from rural areas chose names that represented their professions or that of their ancestors. This made them easily identifiable as townfolk. In many cases they changed their surnames upon moving to Tehran, in order to avoid snobbery and discrimination from residents of the capital. The Sabourjians were one of many such families. Their surname was related to carpet-making, an industry that conjures up images of sweatshops. They changed it to Ahmadinejad in order to help them fit in.
All of which means Ahmadinejad is free to continue being anti-Jew without being anti-self.
-- Brett Michael Dykes is a contributor to the Yahoo! News Blog.
Thread merge
Anandtech Senior Moderator
Red Dawn
That's nice. When I call you on your bullshit, you run like a little fucking girl.
Were my direct questions too tough for you to answer?
Ain't that a bitch! :laugh:
peonyu
Platinum Member
- Mar 12, 2003
- 2,038
- 23
- 81
Its kind of like throwing sand into the air to say that someone has Jewish ancestry in the middle east, or even Christian ancestors when discussing Muslims there. If you go back far enough in time most of the Middle east was a Christian area, and it also had *much* larger Jewish populations than today aswell. Add in a few hundred years of Jihad and being treated like second class citizens under Sha'ria law [if your a non-muslim] and most of them convert to Islam.
Anyways, Im not a fan of stereotypes...but he does have stereotypical Jewish features. Large nose for one [ut oh I went there]. No offense to anyone but it is what it is.
Anyways, Im not a fan of stereotypes...but he does have stereotypical Jewish features. Large nose for one [ut oh I went there]. No offense to anyone but it is what it is.
peonyu
Platinum Member
- Mar 12, 2003
- 2,038
- 23
- 81
Arab-Jew is what they really are, but for the anti-Israel crowd to call them that [including most arab-muslims] means that they have to accept the fact that once Israel was formed...Nearly all Muslim nations forced thier Jewish population to move to Israel.
Oh and once thier Arab jews moved to Israel, the Arab muslims were kind enough to announce thier hatred for Israel and how it should be wiped off the face of the earth since 'Palestine' is Muslim only soil. Very kind of them to do that.
kylebisme
Diamond Member
- Mar 25, 2000
- 9,396
- 0
- 0
Rather, when I called you out on your misrepresentation of Ahmadinejad's 2008 address to the UN General Assembly by asking you to quote exactly what you were referring to, you danced around waving your finger at me, making it obvious you are spewing bullshit here and have no interest in addressing the facts.
Sure, such being treated like second class citizens is exactly why people like Maimonides wound up converting to Islam. Oh, wait, he was a great rabbi to his death, after a long and affluent life in Islamic lands. He was also a fan of Islamic philosophy, but not found of the Christan kind, though I can't blame him on the latter considering demented nature of Christian establishment at that time.
peonyu
Platinum Member
- Mar 12, 2003
- 2,038
- 23
- 81
Oh yes, your one example of a Jew being treated like a human being in the Middle east certainly is convincing that the Middle east was a beacon of tolerance under Islam during the Middle ages. Im sure it was. Really.
Jews under Muslim rule in the middle east
Muslim Conquest
There had been, for some long but uncertain period, a significant number of Jews in Arabia. Some Arab historians claim that very large numbers of Jews ? as high as 80,000 ? arrived after the destruction of the First Temple, to join others already long established in places such as the oasis of Khaybar as well as the trading colonies in Medina and Mecca (where they even had their own cemetery). Another theory posits that these Jews were refugees from Byzantine persecutions. Regardless, Arab historians mention some 20 Jewish tribes, including two tribes of Kohanim. [3]
The Constitution of Medina, written shortly after hijra, addressed some points regarding the civil and religious situation for the Jewish communities living within the city from an Islamic perspective. For example, the constitution stated that the Jews "will profess their religion, and the Muslims theirs", and they "shall be responsible for their expenditure, and the Muslims for theirs". Rarely did Jews live with such freedom. After the Battle of Badr, the Jewish tribe of Banu Qaynuqa allegedly breached treaties and agreements with Muhammad. Islam's Prophet regarded this as casus belli and besieged the Banu Qaynuqa. Upon surrender the tribe was expelled.[4] The following year saw the expulsion of the second tribe, the Banu Nadir, accused of planning to kill The Prophet Muhammad. The third major Jewish tribe in Medina, Banu Qurayza was eliminated when the Muslims besieged their fortifications not long after the fall of the Banu Nadir, an event reported in Surah 33:25-27 of the Qur'an.[5]
In year 20 of the Muslim era, or the year 641 AD, Muhammad's successor the Caliph 'Umar decreed that Jews and Christians should be removed from all but the southern and eastern fringes of Arabia?a decree based on the (sometimes disputed) uttering of the Prophet: "Let there not be two religions in Arabia". The two populations in question were the Jews of the Khaybar oasis in the north and the Christians of Najran.[6] Other sources report the forced deportation of Jews and Christians occurring in 634 AD, with the last remnants of these two monotheistic religions being removed from the Arabian peninsula by the year 650.[7] From this point onwards the Holy Land of the Hijaz was forbidden to non-Muslims.[8] Only the Red Sea port of Jedda was permitted as a "religious quarantine area" and continued to have a small complement of Jewish merchants.
Ok so under Muhammed's words, Jews [and christians] are banned entirely from Saudi Arabia, either murdered en masse or forced out. Sounds real tolerant to me, especially as it was official policy and not random acts of violence.
Moving on..
Middle Ages
In the Iberian Peninsula, under Muslim rule, Jews were able to make great advances in mathematics, astronomy, philosophy, chemistry and philology.[9] This era is sometimes referred to as the Golden age of Jewish culture in the Iberian Peninsula.[10]
During early Islam, Leon Poliakov writes, Jews enjoyed great privileges, and their communities prospered. There was no legislation or social barriers preventing them from conducting commercial activities. Many Jews migrated to areas newly conquered by Muslims and established communities there. The vizier of Baghdad entrusted his capital with Jewish bankers. The Jews were put in charge of certain parts of maritime and slave trade. Siraf, the principal port of the caliphate in the 10th century CE, had a Jewish governor.[11]
Since the 11th century, there have been instances of pogroms against Jews.[12] Examples include the 1066 Granada massacre, the razing of the entire Jewish quarter in the Andalucian city of Granada.[13] In North Africa, there were cases of violence against Jews in the Middle Ages[14], and in other Arab lands including Egypt[15], Syria.[16] and Yemen[17] Jewish population was confined to segregated quarters, or mellahs, in Morocco beginning from the 15th century. In cities, a mellah was surrounded by a wall with a fortified gateway. In contrast, rural mellahs were separate villages inhabited solely by the Jews.[18]
The Almohads, who had taken control of much of Islamic Iberia by 1172, were far more fundamentalist in outlook than the Almoravides, and they treated the dhimmis harshly. Jews and Christians were expelled from Morocco and Islamic Spain.[19] Faced with the choice of either death or conversion, some Jews, such as the family of Maimonides, fled south and east to the more tolerant Muslim lands, while others went northward to settle in the growing Christian kingdoms.[20][21]
In 1400, the Jews of Aleppo were herded into their synagogues and slaughtered to the last man by soldiers of Central Asian Islamic conqueror Tamerlane; the young women were raped.[22] These actions taken by Timur's army do not necessarily exemplify a hatred towards Jews by Timur though, but rather an unfortunate casualty of war. Despite Timur's ill reputation as a brutal conqueror, there is evidence which asserts that Timur exhibited tolerance towards Jews residing within his empire. [23] In 1465, Arab mobs in Fez slaughtered thousands of Jews, leaving only 11 alive, after a Jewish deputy vizier treated a Muslim woman in "an offensive manner." The killings touched off a wave of similar massacres throughout Morocco.[24][25]
In 1492, Askia Mohammad I came to power in the previously tolerant region of Timbuktu and decreed that Jews must convert to Islam or leave; Judaism became illegal in Mali, as it did in Catholic Spain that same year.[26]
So Jews were treated well at first by thier Muslim conquerors. Great, but then a hundred or so years pass and that 'kindness' evaporates. Jews are forced to live in Ghettos, are slaughtered in many cities, banned from practicing thier religion etc. Once again not as rosy as you think. And Im sure there would be a equal if not greater number of opression cases against Jews from Muslims than from Christians, if the historians covering that subject looked at the Middle east/N.Africa Jewish situation as closely as they have to the one in Medievil Europe.
Also here is Sharia for Non-Muslims [practiced to this day in most Muslim nations] from Wikki[/b]
Sharia and non-Muslims
Main article: Dhimmi
Sharia attributes different legal rights to different groups. Sharia distinguishes between men and women, as well as between Muslims, "people of the Book" such as Jews and Christians and other non-Muslims.
Under 'Sharia' law non-Muslims must pay tax called Jizya if they want to live safely in Muslim states, otherwise the state refuses to protect them, even though it protects the Muslim citizens. Recently a minority community of Sikhs was forced to pay Jijia to live safely[82] in a Pakistani region controlled by Taliban.
Under Sharia a non-Muslim is worth half that of a Muslim (see Diyya) under certain circumstances; however, the dominant school of thought?the Hanafi school?is of the opinion that a non-Muslim is equal to a Muslim in worth in terms of Diyya.
That was in practice during the middle ages to. Sounds awesome doesnt it, and completely tolerant of other religions. I would love to have had to pay people money for not being part of thier religion, and if someone commited a crime against me? Great, my word is worth next to nothing. Sounds bliss.
But yea your right though, certainly life was grand under Muslim rule in the Middle ages, im sure Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia today are just as great since they also practice Sharia'law.
kylebisme
Diamond Member
- Mar 25, 2000
- 9,396
- 0
- 0
I've read much from Maimonides directly, and much commentary on his life and his work as well. I simply posted the Wiki link for those who might never have heard of the man.
You need to learn to post outside of what you quote, and link to the sources you quote from. Also, if you expect me to bother reading your posts, you'll need to get over your compulsion for excessive bolding.
It was just one notable example which contradicts your claim, and I'd be happy to provide more if you are interested, but won't bother as you seem so hostile to anything of the sort.
peonyu
Platinum Member
- Mar 12, 2003
- 2,038
- 23
- 81
You said Christian behavior was demented during the Middle ages, but Islamic behavior wasnt ? Thats what you were alluding to in your first reply to me. I have simply refuted that. Muslims butchered [and oppressed via Sharia'law] non-Muslims as often, if not more often than Christians in Europe did.
And as far as hostility goes...I dont see any Christian majority nations forcing people of other religions to pay taxes to them in the world TODAY for being a non-Christian, or having laws that strictly target different religions to oppress them. That stuff is still the norm in Muslim lands today, and I see no reason to believe it wasnt as bad in the past for non-muslims in muslim majority areas.
kylebisme
Diamond Member
- Mar 25, 2000
- 9,396
- 0
- 0
I said the mentality of the Christian establishment was particularly demented at the time. I also alluded to the fact that this is reflected in Christian philosophy from the period, which only arguably even merits the name. Of course there were demented Muslims at the time too, like any grouping of people have some share of demented individuals at any point in time. However, in comparing Christian and Islamic establishments as a whole during the period, the former was a cesspool of ignorance while the latter was a beacon of reason.
Not even close.
You don't see a lot of things, which can be said for all of us, though some of us respect that fact far more than you apparently do. Furthermore, unlike some of us, you also see a lot of things which have no basis in reality.
kylebisme
Diamond Member
- Mar 25, 2000
- 9,396
- 0
- 0
Rather, you lie in citing Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan today to dispute of my comments regarding Islamic civilization centuries ago. Not that I think you intend to be dishonest here, as rather I get the impression you simply don't know better than to avoid doing so.
peonyu
Platinum Member
- Mar 12, 2003
- 2,038
- 23
- 81
In your words, Islamic civilization in comparison to the Christian West was a beacon of reason. Sharia law was pracitced during that time, just based on that alone, what about Sharia law has any ounce of reason to it in regards to other religions ?
That was the basic law of the period and still is for many Muslim nations and regions. Cite some compassionate and tolerance coming from Sharia towards Jews/Christians, go for it.
That was the basic law of the period and still is for many Muslim nations and regions. Cite some compassionate and tolerance coming from Sharia towards Jews/Christians, go for it.
O'really? Alright you lazy little fucktard, I'll do your g'damn homework for you. Don't worry, you're not alone. Google confuses a lot of people... :roll:
Excerpt from Achmadinejad's 2008 address to the UN General Assembly (23 September 2008):
Source (PDF)
How does that "jive" with your supposed "understanding of Achmadinejad's positions"? Just when you though you knew everything... ain't that a bitch?
Wait... let me guess.. was it translated wrong again? Damn those UN linguists! :laugh:
Now, would you care to respond to any of my previous questions, or are you going to try to deflect and run away again?
kylebisme
Diamond Member
- Mar 25, 2000
- 9,396
- 0
- 0
Why would you even think to try to make a comparison by looking at one side alone? If you have any intrest in being reasonable here, you could start here.
Sure enough, he only suggested Zionists control a key portion of Western finance, which you embellished to accuse him of claiming they were conspiring to control all international finance.
Rather, I've long been comfortable with the fact that I'll never come close to knowing everything, and hence am not compelled to imagine knowing more than I do.
Dance much? :roll:
You're fucking ridiculous. I think I'll leave it up to the rest of the folks here to read Achmadinejad's words at the UN, in their entirety, and derive from them what they will.
Here it is again:
You were so busy moon-walking backwards and away from the point that you never even answered my other questions; so please, ah heck off troll and let the adults talk for a bit.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter