Osama bin Laden imitating Kalki?

[Bhaktavasya 0]

 

In today's Toronto Globe and Mail(Globe Focus) there is a picture/painting of bin Laden where he is holding sword and riding on a white horse! Last night on the news the announcer said that bin Laden is rumoured to have left Afghanistan 'on his horse'(instead of by jeep or armoured car). I'm wondering if he is familiar with Vedic scripture, and has fashioned himself to be seen as the Vishnu avatar Kalki, who is supposed to come riding on a white horse, weilding a sword and wiping out most of the humans on the planet. Very wierd.

 

[jijaji 0]

He is simply a Jihad Maddened Fanatic fueled by the extreme intolerence Islam teaches!

 

Mohammed himself was a fanatic who taught his followers to conqure and divide in the name of Islam.

 

Think about .....Mohammed himself carried a sword that had inscribed 'My Message is PEACE'..

 

To Mohammed peace means something else than it means to us outside the fold of Islam.

Peace can be had by killing and by being killed. I the Muslim fanatic will chop off the head of the unbeliver and deliver him unto ALLAH....bullshit!

 

It is an insane desert religion that abuses humans as animals.

 

 

Q:"But how do ya feel about it jijaji?"

 

A: "Like I said dude, the changes are coming!"

 

 

------------------

STAND AND FIGHT

[jijaji 0]

ALL U NEED TO KNOW ABOUT QURAN

 

Quran tells Muslims to kill the disbelievers wherever they find them (Q. 2:191), to murder them and treat them harshly (Q. 9:123), slay them (Q. 9: 5), fight with them, (Q. 8: 65 ) even if they are Christians and Jews, humiliate them and impose on them a penalty tax (Q. 9: 29). Quran takes away the freedom of belief from all humanity and tell clearly that no other religion except Islam is accepted (Q. 3: 85). It relegates those who disbelieve in Quran to hell (Q. 5: 11), calls them najis (filthy, untouchable, impure) (Q. 9: 28). It orders its followers to fight the unbelievers until no other religion except Islam is left (Q. 2: 193). It says that the non-believers will go to hell and will drink boiling water (Q. 14: 17). It asks the Muslims to slay or crucify or cut the hands and feet of the unbelievers, that they be expelled from the land with disgrace and that “they shall have a great punishment in world hereafter” (Q.5: 34). “As for the disbelievers”, it says that “for them garments of fire shall be cut and there shall be poured over their heads boiling water whereby whatever is in their bowls and skin shall be dissolved and they will be punished with hooked iron rods” (Q. 22: 9). Quran prohibits a Muslim to befriend a non-believer even if that non-believer is the father or the brother of that Muslim (Q. 9: 23), (Q. 3: 28). Quran asks the Muslims to “strive against the unbelievers with great endeavor (Q. 25: 52), be stern with them because they belong to hell (Q. 66: 9). The holy Prophet demanded his follower to “strike off the heads of the disbelievers”; then after making a “wide slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining captives” (Q. 47: 4). As for women the book of Allah says that they are inferior to men and their husbands have the right to scourge them if they are found disobedient (Q. 4:34). It teaches that women will go to hell if they are disobedient to their husbands (Q. 66:10). It maintains that men have an advantage over the women (Q. 2:228). It not only denies the women's equal right to their inheritance (Q. 4:11-12), it also regards them as imbeciles and decrees that their witness is not admissible in the court (Q. 2:282). This means that a woman who is raped cannot accuse her rapist unless she can produce a male witness. Muhammad allowed the Muslims to marry up to four views and gave them license to sleep with their slave maids and as many “captive” women as they may have (Q. 4:3). He himself did just that. This is why anytime a Muslim army subdues another nation, they call them kafir and allow themselves to rape their women. Pakistani soldiers raped up to 250,000 Bangali women in 1971 after they massacred 3,000,000 unarmed civilians when their religious leader decreed that Bangladeshis are unislamic. This is why the prison guards in Islamic regime of Iran rape the women and then kill them after calling them apostates and the enemies of Allah.

 

 

------------------

STAND AND FIGHT

[valaya 0]

Heavy or what? Is the only solution to fight fire with fire and slaughter the lot of them? Are there any Muslims on the forum we might hear from? Also, does anyone know why so many American blacks take up this `religion`?

[Guest guest]

<a href="http://members.ozemail.com.au/~dbates/koran.htm" target="_blank">The Bible compared with the Koran

</a>

[Krsnacandra dasa 0]

Originally posted by valaya:

Heavy or what? Is the only solution to fight fire with fire and slaughter the lot of them? Are there any Muslims on the forum we might hear from? Also, does anyone know why so many American blacks take up this `religion`?

The vast majority of American blacks who call themselves Muslims are affiliated with "The Nation of Islam", or the movement by Farrakhan. They really don't even follow any of the Muslim rules or principles, it's just something they use to identify themselves. It's a countermovement to Christianity, which they believe contributes to the "slave mentality" that still exists among many blacks (again, Im just quoting their beliefs). They shouldn't be considered the same as Middle Eastern Muslims.

 

They see Christianity as the white man's religion and Islam as the religion for the men of color. Unfortunately, what they don't realize is not only did Muslims in Arabia enslave blacks (and they still do in the Sudan), but the Arabs would castrate the black males. So the Arabs treated black people much worse than American white people.

[jijaji 0]

Violence

 

Allah orders Muslims in the Quran to terrorize non-Muslims on His behalf

" I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips of them.It is not ye who slew them; it was Allah." Surah 8:13-17 (See also Surah 8:60 & 9:14)

 

Mohammed practiced violence to force people into Islam

Mohammed said, "I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, none has the right to be worshipped but Allah." Hadith vol. 4:196

 

Mohammed also said, "Know that paradise is under the shades of the swords." Hadith vol 4:73

 

 

Oh what a sweet peaceful sharing religion this Islam is...NOT!

 

jijaji

 

[This message has been edited by jijaji (edited 09-23-2001).]

[Gauracandra 1]

I agree with Krsnacandra's analysis. The whole Black Islamic movement in the U.S. is centered around the false idea that Islam is the religion of colored people and Christianity is the religion of white people. Never mind the fact that Islam has created so many attrocities in Africa. The fact is if you want a truly black religion it would have to be some tribal religion in Africa.

 

But I also think one of its appeals is not only is it not 'white Christianity' but it is also very disciplined and militant. If you live in the inner city and see prostitutes and drug dealers all around, a person who comes in with a militant message can be quite appealing. If you separate out their racist and conspiratorial views, many things they say are good. Like don't have children out of wedlock, stop abortion, work together to create capital formation and start businesses, clean yourself up and stop taking drugs. Many things they say are good, but they are also centered around racism and hatred of white people (actually also other races like Koreans etc...).

 

Gauracandra

[Guest guest]

From the February 1999 Issue of Chronicles VIEW <u>Multiculturalism and Islam: Liberal Fiction and Historical Truth</u> by Srdja Trifkovic:

 

"The beginnings of Muhammad's public career are little known to most Westerners. A non-Muslim reading the Koran, however, might conclude that Muhammad's career was marked by a long string of killings, armed robberies, and rape, interspersed by a series of inspired pronouncements of varying coherence. Outsiders--the Jews of Medinah, or Muhammad's Arabic kinsmen who were reluctant to accept his self-proclaimed divinity--could testify to his unique concepts of justice and mercy. When, in A.D. 626, for instance, six of Muhammad's henchmen murdered an elderly Jew by the name of Abu Rafi in his sleep, they argued afterwards whose weapon had actually ended the victim's life. The prophet decided that the person who owned the sword that still had traces of food on it was entitled to the credit. Abu Rafi had just finished his dinner before falling asleep, and the fatal slash went through his stomach".

 

===========================

 

Islam is not a religion of peace...

[Caitanyachandra 0]

What is the eye-witness testimony to O.B.L's existence and whereabouts...?

 

For all we know, it appears that he an actor in a stage in our tv's!

 

GGroovy.

[jagannatha das brahmachar 0]

INTENSE NATIONALSIM, FOR EXAMpLE, CAN LEAD TO DIFFICULTIES. NATIONALSIM is the sense of national consciousness that boosts the culture and interests of one country over those of all other countries. Strongly nationalistic countries, such as Iran and New Guinea, often discourage investment by foreign companies. In other, less radical forms of nationalism, the government may take actions to hinder foreign operations....

In a hostile climate, a government may expropriate a foreign companies assets, taking ownership and compensating the former owners. Even worse is confiscation , when the owner receives no compensation. This happened during rebelions in several African nations during the 1990's.

 

Hare Krsna, jagannatha

[karthik_v 0]

While the Blacks are the largest followers of Islam in the US, there are many Whites too getting into it. I think the prime attraction Islam holds for them is a chesive family/community where disciplineand obedience are asstes. If you come from a fractured family, where you had all the freedom but no protection, and if are unhappy, probably the very opposite what have had all along may appeal to you. And that is what Islam promises.

[jagannatha das brahmachar 0]

Haribol ! !

Have you had enough prasadam today, spirit souls?

 

 

[This message has been edited by jagannatha das brahmachar (edited 09-24-2001).]

[Bhaktavasya 0]

Originally posted by jijaji:

He is simply a Jihad Maddened Fanatic fueled by the extreme intolerence Islam teaches!

 

Mohammed himself was a fanatic who taught his followers to conqure and divide in the name of Islam.

 

Think about .....Mohammed himself carried a sword that had inscribed 'My Message is PEACE'..

 

To Mohammed peace means something else than it means to us outside the fold of Islam.

Peace can be had by killing and by being killed. I the Muslim fanatic will chop off the head of the unbeliver and deliver him unto ALLAH....bullshit!

 

It is an insane desert religion that abuses humans as animals.

 

 

Q:"But how do ya feel about it jijaji?"

 

A: "Like I said dude, the changes are coming!"

 

 

Ignorance is no excuse, Jijaji. Millions of muslims and believers of Islamic faith have live in countries all over the western world, here in Canada and the USA for example, while abiding by the laws of their adopted country.

Where is there a recorded instance of a person of Islamic faith cutting off the hand of a person who stole from him or beheaded someone who didn't have the same beliefs, in USA, Canada, England, Europe, or any other country with laws that prohibit such retribution.

The Manu Samhita is a good example of a Vedic scripture that predates Islam by millennia, yet if some far-right Hindu fundmentalists ever got in political power somewhere and decided to revive the old laws, then if someone from the sudra caste or lower

spoke offensive or blastphemous words to a brahman, then the law of Manu dictates that his tongue can be cut out.

Fortunately, people of faiths all over the world are now coming together to listen to each other and work together to show the world how we can live together in peace. Perhaps later on, once there is peace on earth, the old, repressive laws can be disregarded as ineffectual, cruel and not in the spirit of love and peaceful co-existence.

 

 

[dasanudas 0]

Originally posted by Bhaktavasya:

Fortunately, people of faiths all over the world are now coming together to listen to each other and work together to show the world how we can live together in peace. Perhaps later on, once there is peace on earth, the old, repressive laws can be disregarded as ineffectual, cruel and not in the spirit of love and peaceful co-existence.

 

 

This sounds like a reasonable step in a progressive direction. What about the ones that may wish to hold on to the old ways, not prepared to adjust or search for a new synthesis of all of these previous Truths, won't they conflict with the new mob?

 

 

[jagannatha das brahmachar 0]

Originally posted by dasanudas:

This sounds like a reasonable step in a progressive direction. What about the ones that may wish to hold on to the old ways, not prepared to adjust or search for a new synthesis of all of these previous Truths, won't they conflict with the new mob?

 

 

Cooperatives are typically formed by people with similar interests, such as customers or suppliers, to reduce costs and gain economic power. The member-owners pay annualfees and share profits.

 

Cooperatives may be organized to provide just about any good or service, such as business services, child care, financial services, food, health care, marketing of agriculture and other products , and utilities and cable television.

 

Today, over 100 million people are members of 48,000 U.S. cooperatives with revenues of over $120 billion.

 

 

<u> co-existence</u>in the pure sense of gaining solely from what is known asintentional living i.e., communally. If they incorporated under state and federal laws which give them rights like small businesses, they can <u>co-existence</u>... for as long as there is a profit e.g., corporations foreign, allien.<hr>

<hr>

 

the Catholic law professor whose view that radical Islam should not be legitimized was used by the White House in crating President Bush's speech to Congress last week, points out "the lack of American Muslim leaders making the case themselves." For instance, the story notes, even though Saudi Arabia yesterday declared that the Taliban is 'damaging the good name of Muslims all around the world,' the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations declines to take a position. "‘Obviously, people who crash a plane into a building are not following Islamic beliefs,' spokesman Ibrahim Hooper said. ‘But as far as governments, we don't get into these issues. That's just not our mandate from our community.'"

 

 

[This message has been edited by jagannatha das brahmachar (edited 09-26-2001).]

 

[This message has been edited by jagannatha das brahmachar (edited 09-26-2001).]

[Caitanyachandra 0]

Gcc:

 

As far as I know there is no eye-witness testimony to OBL's whereabouts. If he is in Afghanistan then I belive America or India could eliminate him with their missle-satelite war weapons.

 

Unfortunately this has not been done but Clinton striked a few innocent civilians in Afghanistan while visiting India. Interesting.

 

This whole enchilada looks like a continuation from WWII. Note WWII ended with billions in funding to Europe and Japan. WHY? According to US. History, most of it was not paid back!

 

Very interesting now.

 

<AJAY SHAH>

[jagannatha das brahmachar 0]

Originally posted by Caitanyachandra:

Gcc:

 

As far as I know there is no eye-witness testimony to OBL's whereabouts. If he is in Afghanistan then I belive America or India could eliminate him with their missle-satelite war weapons.

 

Unfortunately this has not been done but Clinton striked a few innocent civilians in Afghanistan while visiting India. Interesting.

 

This whole enchilada looks like a continuation from WWII. Note WWII ended with billions in funding to Europe and Japan. WHY? According to US. History, most of it was not paid back!

 

Very interesting now.

 

<AJAY SHAH>

<hr3>What kind of war...</hr3>

<u>

 

On Sept. 15, Congress declared "war" on terrorism. Was the declaration a formal war declaration, and what powers does it give the president?

 

The Use of Force Resolution is not a formal declaration of war. The joint resolution, adopted unanimously in the Senate and 420-1 in the House, authorized President Bush to "use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks" as well as against anyone who "harbored" them.

 

The wording was substantially changed from the draft version sought by the White House, which would have granted the president authority "to deter and prevent any future acts of terrorism against the United States." That second clause, giving Bush open-ended authority to fight any future terrorism, was removed from the final resolution.

 

The legal effect of the joint resolution is unclear. For one thing, the White House takes the position that it doesn't need congressional permission to protect and defend the United States and that the War Powers Act, which allows Congress to check the president's war-making authority, is not constitutional. History supports his claim. While the United States has waged about 125 military actions, war has only been formally declared five times. This resolution gave the president a victory of appearances, offering him a broad grant of congressional authority, without forcing the issue of whether such a grant was constitutionally necessary.

 

What's in it for Congress? On its face, the Use of Force Resolution looks like a blank check (although it came with a signed check, in the amount of $40 billion). The resolution does not define "terrorism" or "harbored" or any other key terms. It passed with almost no debate. But while the resolution appears almost absurd in its vagueness, it's most notable for what it is not. It is not the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which really was the blank check that arguably allowed President Johnson to unilaterally escalate the war in Vietnam. Thus, while the wide-open wording of the joint resolution appears to give congressional approval to any act of war undertaken by President Bush, it contains several important checks on his powers: by omitting the language sought by the White House, the resolution does not authorize Bush to use force to deter and prevent future acts of terrorism. It also expressly invokes the War Powers Act to subtly remind Bush that--at least on paper--he must answer to them once any military action is undertaken.

</u><hr>Intelligence, knowledge, freedom from doubt and delusion, forgiveness, truthfulness, self-control and calmness, pleasure and pain, birth, death, fear, fearlessness, nonviolence, equanimity, satisfaction, austerity, charity, fame and infamy are created by Me alone.

 

(Gita-gan Ch10 ver4)

 

 

Jagannath das

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by jagannatha das brahmachar (edited 09-26-2001).]