It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Jimmy Carter Announces ban on Iranian Immigration to US

page: 2
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 12:58 PM
link   
a reply to: SkepticOverlord




Perhaps a bit more historical enlightenment might provide the context that inspired the attack on the embassy, and seizing of hostages.


I am well aware of this history surrounding it.

The UK, and the US 'plotted' to overthrow their government so the AIOC that now todays BP could get their oil.

The UK got the oil. The US got the blame.

And to get even American hostages got thrown in to the equation because they were mad at someone else.

Pretty much the modern day definition of terrorism.

A is mad at B so A goes and kills C.




posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Hi Muslim here .

ETA: I made a mistake by misunderstanding your OP.
The following below should give you a better understanding of the passages and how they are often misrepresented.


Whenever critics bring verses of the Quran to demonstrate that Islam is violent, that it sanctions Muslims to kill non-Muslims (as assumed by them), they do a cut and paste of a verse and try hide context of the passage. They don’t show the previous and the verses after, what it actually says.



According to critics (especially Christian missionaries), they say, ‘this verse approves the killing of non-Muslims anywhere at any-time.’ We know this is a lie spread by bigots in order to frighten people about Islam. This passage has always been quoted out of context, they never post other verses 9:1-14, for if they did, people would find out that it says opposite of what they have stated. Let’s read from 9:1 – 9:14,

9:1 [This is a declaration of] disassociation, from Allah and His Messenger, to those with whom you had made a treatyamong the polytheists.
9:2 So travel freely, [O disbelievers], throughout the land [during] four months but know that you cannot cause failure to Allah and that Allah will disgrace the disbelievers.
9:3 And [it is] an announcement from Allah and His Messenger to the people on the day of the greater pilgrimage that Allah is disassociated from the disbelievers, and [so is] His Messenger. So if you repent, that is best for you; but if you turn away – then know that you will not cause failure to Allah . And give tidings to those who disbelieve of a painful punishment.
9:4 Excepted are those with whom you made a treatyamong the polytheists and then they have not been deficient toward you in anything or supported anyone against you; so complete for them their treaty until their term [has ended]. Indeed, Allah loves the righteous [who fear Him].
9:5 And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.
9:6 And if any one of the polytheists seeks your protection,then grant him protection so that he may hear the words of Allah. Then deliver him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know.
9:7 How can there be for the polytheists a treaty in the sight of Allah and with His Messenger, except for those with whom you made a treaty at al-Masjid al-Haram? So as long as they are upright toward you, be upright toward them. Indeed, Allah loves the righteous [who fear Him].
9:8 How [can there be a treaty] while, if they gain dominance over you, they do not observe concerning you any pact of kinship or covenant of protection? They satisfy you with their mouths, but their hearts refuse [compliance], and most of them are defiantly disobedient.
9:9 They have exchanged the signs of Allah for a small price and averted [people] from His way. Indeed, it was evil that they were doing.
9:10 They do not observe toward a believer any pact of kinship or covenant of protection. And it is they who are the transgressors.
9:11 But if they repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, then they are your brothers in religion; and We detail the verses for a people who know.
9:12 And if they break their oaths after their treaty and defame your religion, then fight the leaders of disbelief, for indeed, there are no oaths [sacred] to them; [fight them that] they might cease.
9:13 Would you not fight a people who broke their oaths and determined to expel the Messenger, and they had begun the attack upon you the first time? Do you fear them? But Allah has more right that you should fear Him, if you are [truly] believers.
9:14 Fight them; Allah will punish them by your hands and will disgrace them and give you victory over them and satisfy the breasts of a believing people.

When we read from verse 1, it states that there was a treaty which the Pagan Arabs broke. Thus, Allah in the Quran says, that he gave them four months. Verse 9:4 states that Allah will punish those who broke the treaty, this verse is only aimed at those who broke the treaty, it did not affect those who abided by the treaty. When we read the passage (9:5), it is evident, it’s talking about a war with the pagan Arabs and Muslims. This was a historical event that happened in the lifetime of Prophet Muhammad (p). Furthermore, verse 9:13 provides proof that it was the Pagans who started this war, the verse states, “Would you not fight a people who broke their oaths and determined to expel the Messenger, and theyhad begun to attack you first?” This is proof that Prophet Muhammad (p) did not start this war, but it was those treacherous Pagan Arabs that started to expel and started fighting the Messenger.

Two non-Muslim translations of the Quran on 9:13,

John Medows Rodwell What! will ye not fight against those Meccans who have broken their oaths and aimed to expel your Apostle, and attacked you first? Will ye dread them? God is more worthy of your fear, if ye are believers!

And

N J Dawood Will you not fight against those who have broken their oaths and conspired to banish the Apostle? They were the first to attack you. Do you fear them? Surely God is more deserving of your fear, if you are true believers.

Factors of breakers of the treaty ”Will you not fight people who
A) broke their oaths
B) determined to expel the Messenger
C) attacked you first
Do you fear them? But God has more right that you should fear him, if you are believers Surah 9:13

As it is shown, in that context, those pagans who violated their treaties and attacked the Muslims first, basically, the Muslims were allowed to fight back in self-defence. Why is it that Islamophobes never show 9:6? Let’s read:

9:6 And if any one of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the words of Allah. Then deliver him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know.

The verse shows that if any of the pagans who broke the treaty and wanted protection, that they be granted protection and deliver him to his ‘place of safety’. This shows even when the pagan Arabs who broke the treaty and when they attacked the Muslims first, the Muslims were commanded by Allah to make peace if they asked. Hence, it’s evident reading the verses in its context that this was a war of self-defence against those pagan Arabs who broke the treaty and attacked the Muslims.



For thoes who want to deny ignorance you can educate your self here
discover-the-truth.com...
edit on 06/17/2015 by Kapusta because: (no reason given)

edit on 06/17/2015 by Kapusta because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 01:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: SkepticOverlord




Perhaps a bit more historical enlightenment might provide the context that inspired the attack on the embassy, and seizing of hostages.


I am well aware of this history surrounding it.

The UK, and the US 'plotted' to overthrow their government so the AIOC that now todays BP could get their oil.

The UK got the oil. The US got the blame.

And to get even American hostages got thrown in to the equation because they were mad at someone else.

Pretty much the modern day definition of terrorism.

A is mad at B so A goes and kills C.


BINGO!

The problem here is political correctness. You can't say anything about Islam without being labeled a racist and being accused of hating all Muslims.



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 01:00 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic


I guess Jimmy Carter is a right wing racist.

Stopping people from coming in from a nation that we have sanctions against is totally different than stopping people from coming in because of their religion. Why is something so simple too hard for some people to understand?


I think Obama and the left have created Trump.

No Trump was a pompous ahole before he got into politics.


The terrorist have an irrational, radical view of passages in the Quran. This is what needs to be addressed by Clerics and moderate Muslims.

Muslims have spoken out against radicals time and time again it would help if you payed more attention.



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

Trump's ban isn't relegated solely to immigration. People seem to be missing this point.

Trump is effectively proposing that family members of Muslim Americans, who live in Muslim countries, can't come to visit when their nieces/nephews/grandchildren/etc. are born, or when their loved ones get married, or for funerals....

It was so broadly worded, little wonder it's getting strong reactions.



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic




The problem here is political correctness. You can't say anything about Islam without being labeled a racist and being accused of hating all Muslims.


Political correctness is a problem, we should be able to criticise the phenomenon of violent Islamic extremism with out being branded as racist.

But there is a whole world of a difference between a discussion about tackling problems like ISIS and a all out ban on Muslims getting into the country just because they are Muslim.

That difference is called "Racism"



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 01:06 PM
link   
First of all he did not ban all Iranians, asylums seekers and those coming medical treatment were still allowed. However even if he had it is far far different from banning people of a single religion that come from just about every planet on Earth. Including allied like Canada, the UK, Australia, and Israel. Not to mention the first nation to recognize the United States, that protected out shipping from pirates in med when Europe refused and with whom we have our longest standing treaty, Morocco.

Let me put is this way, when somebody like Netanyahu says Trump is wrong for wanting to ban all Muslims then you know you have gone over the rails. Doing so not only is an act of fear, against every value America was founded on but, literally is aiding abetting the enemies of the United States and creating new enemies. It is basically treason.



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

First off Trump isn't going to ban all Muslims. It's amazing to me how Trump plays the media and the establishment. It's just brilliant. He says these things because he gets tons of free media.

For the last few days every network has been all Trump all the time. He's been trending on twitter for like 3 or 4 days now. All other campaigns have to talk about Trump.

Trump broader point is about Political correctness. This can be seen because people have become completely unhinged after Trump's comments.



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 01:11 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic




First off Trump isn't going to ban all Muslims




So whats he saying then?
edit on 11-12-2015 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 01:13 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

You don't think Jimmy knew he was fighting the GOP for the next election during this? You don't think that, in the inner circles of that level, people didn't know that it was an operation run by Bush to get Reagan elected?

Maybe they didn't...who knows. But Im thinking this is more apples and oranges than anything. He was simply dissolving diplomatic ties with a rogue government. "Iranian" is not a race. Its a nation.



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

First off Trump isn't going to ban all Muslims. It's amazing to me how Trump plays the media and the establishment. It's just brilliant. He says these things because he gets tons of free media.

For the last few days every network has been all Trump all the time. He's been trending on twitter for like 3 or 4 days now. All other campaigns have to talk about Trump.

Trump broader point is about Political correctness. This can be seen because people have become completely unhinged after Trump's comments.


I could get "free media" too. It isn't hard. Just act outrageous and reprehensible, and camera's get pointed at you. Ask Fred Phelps.

Thing is, the public usually is revolted by outrageous and reprehensible. For some reason, they are embracing the madness.



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 01:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: neoholographic




First off Trump isn't going to ban all Muslims


Well lets hope thats true, lets hope he the republicans see sense and drop him.


There not going to drop him and he has a good chance of winning.

At the end of the day, Trump is playing the media and it's working. He gets tons of free media everytime he says something.

It's amazing to me how liberals say Hillary Clinton will easily beat Trump and if Trump wins the Democrats will win the House and Senate yet they're working overtime to defeat Trump now.

That makes no sense.



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: starwarsisreal
a reply to: neoholographic

What's next after Trump?


Kanye and Kim probably, a further continuation of Idiocracy



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

In Canada it was language ,. French / English that was used as a divide . ...Ireland was Catholic / Protestant .... In the Middle east it's Sunni / Shia ....US has a Black/ White thing going on ...



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 01:19 PM
link   
there is a difference between what carter was dealing with then (approx. 35 years ago), and what is happening in today's world. I lived through it.



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 01:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

I think you misunderstood my comment - I was just saying that this is another topic which has been compared to talks of banning Syrian Refugees, Muslims, etc.

I don't support ANY of it. I don't see why such a large number of people (people I know even) have been jumping on the "ban Syrians/Muslims" bandwagon.

It's disgusting
edit on 11-12-2015 by FamCore because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 01:26 PM
link   
So....it this just using a Jimmy Carter video to create another 20 pages of arguing over Donald Trump???



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 01:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
So....it this just using a Jimmy Carter video to create another 20 pages of arguing over Donald Trump???



No, because if you read my OP it's much more than that.



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 01:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
So....it this just using a Jimmy Carter video to create another 20 pages of arguing over Donald Trump???



yup....

getting kinda dull eh?



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 01:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
So....it this just using a Jimmy Carter video to create another 20 pages of arguing over Donald Trump???



No, because if you read my OP it's much more than that.


I did read your OP. The "much more than that" boils down to a comparison of Carter breaking diplomatic ties with a nation to racism. Except Iran isn't a race.




top topics



 
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join