Iranian Leader: We Must Prep For 'End Of Times'

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by munkey66

 

Anything can be read wrong when taken out of context especially if it is in a foreign language, anyone remember the Come alive with the Pepsi Generation slogan?. In Taiwan, it became "Pepsi will bring your ancestors back from the dead."

So because a mistranslation has occurred in the past that automatically makes all translations inaccurate? Way to cast aside an entire thread using logical fallacy.

I get accused of casting aside an entire thread because of the above quote and yet you cast aside an entire post because the most important issue which has been side stepped constantly which was,

what nukes? and what evidence of nukes?

word games are fun, the other game which is fun is, ignore the parts of a post you don't like

Originally posted by maes9
well you confused or maybe the muslims you have seen have confused Islam with Budahism or Hinduism !

Nope.. Its in the Quran -

4:34 (Asad) MEN SHALL take full care of women with the bounties which God has bestowed more abundantly on the former than on the latter, [42] and with what they may spend out of their possessions. And the right­eous women are the truly devout ones, who guard the intimacy which God has [ordained to be] guar­ded. [43] And as for those women whose ill-will [44] you have reason to fear, admonish them [first]; then leave them alone in bed; then beat them; [45] and if thereupon they pay you heed, do not seek to harm them. Behold, God is indeed most high, great! -

الرِّجَالُ قَوَّامُونَ عَلَى النِّسَاء بِمَا فَضَّلَ اللّهُ بَعْضَهُمْ عَلَى بَعْضٍ وَبِمَا أَنفَقُواْ مِنْ أَمْوَالِهِمْ فَالصَّالِحَاتُ قَانِتَاتٌ حَافِظَاتٌ لِّلْغَيْبِ بِمَا حَفِظَ اللّهُ وَاللاَّتِي تَخَافُونَ نُشُوزَهُنَّ فَعِظُوهُنَّ وَاهْجُرُوهُنَّ فِي الْمَضَاجِعِ وَاضْرِبُوهُنَّ فَإِنْ أَطَعْنَكُمْ فَلاَ تَبْغُواْ عَلَيْهِنَّ سَبِيلاً إِنَّ اللّهَ كَانَ عَلِيًّا كَبِيرًا (4:34)

No confusion... Its right there in the religious text.

Shall we go down the road of the clerics stating that not only is it ok to beat your wife, its ok to rapre them as well?

Originally posted by Atzil321
reply to post by nightbringr

 

Are government funded cyber attacks and multiple assassinations/bombings classed as crimes where you come from? These people created the most deadly computer virus ever conceived to attack the iranian infrastructure, computer security industry insiders even had to come up with a new name for it 'cyber super weapon'..... Sounds quite criminal to me.

Pretty small potatoes to the death and destruction caused by Iranian funding of Hamas, Hezbollah and more.

I find it laughable people often quote the ridiculous "Iran hasnt attacked anyone in xxx", which is bull. Every rocket, suicide bombing and terrorist attack against Israel has Iranian blessing, and 9 time out of 10, financial backing. An attack is an attack, even if it though your proxies.

Originally posted by nightbringr

Originally posted by Atzil321
reply to post by nightbringr

 

Are government funded cyber attacks and multiple assassinations/bombings classed as crimes where you come from? These people created the most deadly computer virus ever conceived to attack the iranian infrastructure, computer security industry insiders even had to come up with a new name for it 'cyber super weapon'..... Sounds quite criminal to me.

Pretty small potatoes to the death and destruction caused by Iranian funding of Hamas, Hezbollah and more.

I find it laughable people often quote the ridiculous "Iran hasnt attacked anyone in xxx", which is bull. Every rocket, suicide bombing and terrorist attack against Israel has Iranian blessing, and 9 time out of 10, financial backing. An attack is an attack, even if it though your proxies.

edit on 12-7-2012 by nightbringr because: (no reason given)

So, it doesn't matter the human rights violations/killings so long as it is under a "magic number"? How much exactly is "small potatoes"? You don't think governments fund terrorists? Have you heard of Al Queda? So the US trains Al Queda, Al Queda attacks Americans, does that equal America attacking Americans in your mind then? Please source "Every rocket, suicide bombing and terrorist attack against Israel has Iranian blessing, and 9 time out of 10, financial backing. ". Thanks.

REPLY TO Xcathdra

first you should be carefull about the correct translation. this is the reason why quran has been kept by it's original arabic sentences. the correct translation is here:
quod.lib.umich.edu...

"""[4.34] Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great"""

Quran is not just speaking to you but the backwarded tribes which would kill their girls just because they were girl !

"""[81.8] And when the female infant buried alive is asked
[81.9] For what sin she was killed,"""

so you can see that in that backwarded society Quran is preventing men from beating women while it was usual. """"(as to) those on whose part you fear desertion,1-admonish them, and 2-leave them alone in the sleeping-places and 3-beat them ; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them;""" so it was showing that backwarded society a procedure and insisting not to seek a way against them.

some rules in Islam were only for a period of time and concerning the situation of society at that time. so they became obsolete by the hand of Mohammed. like this:
"""[4.15] And as for those who are guilty of an indecency from among your women, call to witnesses against them four (witnesses) from among you; then if they bear witness confine them to the houses until death takes them away or Allah opens some way for them"""

in a society that men marry many women Quran were and is fighting with that and limiting that in helping ORPHANS AND advises not to:
"""[4.3] And if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards orphans, then marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you fear that you will not do justice (between them), then (marry) only one or what your right hands possess; this is more proper, that you may not deviate from the right course."""

[2.231] And when you divorce women and they reach their prescribed time, then either retain them in good fellowship or set them free with liberality, and do not retain them for injury, so that you exceed the limits, and whoever does this, he indeed is unjust to his own soul; and do not take Allah's communications for a mockery, ..
[2.232] And when you have divorced women and they have ended-- their term (of waiting), then do not prevent them from marrying their husbands when they agree among themselves in a lawful manner; ...........
[4.4] And give women their dowries as a free gift, but if they of themselves be pleased to give up to you a portion of it, then eat it with enjoyment and with wholesome result

MAKING A SOCIETY BETTER IS HARD AND IT IS GRADUAL YOU CAN SEE ADULTRY AND MANY OF IT"S PROBLEMS IN WEST AND STILL WRONG ATTITUDES TOWARDS WOMEN IN EAST QURAN IS NOT RESPONSIBLE OF WHAT SAUDY ARABIA SPREADS AS ISLAM IN THIS WORLD

I love when people abandon thread, just because it isn't on the front page anymore. Especially the creator of threads. Don't tell me I scared you all away?

Originally posted by superman2012
Don't tell me I scared you all away?

No, just the back and forth, provided NO real answers,or solutions.

I leave you this "prophets" picture, to cheer you up, though..........

reply to post by superman2012

Hey Sup.Baby, while the world falls apart, where have you been in the land of confusion.

reply to post by sonnny1


C'mon now sonnny1, you don't want people having a pic of you do you?

reply to post by rebellender


Just sitting on the sidelines watching people who "know" everything.

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by sonnny1

 

C'mon now sonnny1, you don't want people having a pic of you do you?

K, You got me.........

Im the guy, in the middle.............



Next to the Supreme Leader of Iran, on the right.

reply to post by seabag

And the point I'm trying to make is about the racist nature of your question.
Do I feel safer with Iran having the bomb?
I feel just as uncomfortable with their having the bomb as I do with Israel having it.
I feel Iran having the bomb would make the world just that much more dangerous to the same degree that Israel having the bomb makes it more dangerous.
It's as though I disapprove of people having guns and someone asks if we should stop blacks from owning guns.
You honestly can't see the racism involved?
Simple question. What Muslim nation do you believe could announce plans to build a bomb that would not be threatened with sanctions and invasion by the US/Israel mob.
What Christian nation would we treat the same way?
Would we threaten to bomb and invade Italy or Belgium if they began trying to build a bomb?
As I said, objectivity does not seem to be one of your strong points.
Just answer the question
Do you think black people should be allowed to own guns.....and everyone who is against anyone owning guns who answers no seems to suggest that it is just this one group that should be banned from gun ownership and they take their answers and say 'See, in this unofficial poll almost 90% of those people responding said gun ownership should be limited to white folks.
It's a rigged, racist question. Everyone who is against any country having nuclear weapons of course does not want Iran to have them. But you have phrased the question in such a way that they would appear to be objecting to Iran in particular.
Your not too cool with ethics either are you?

Originally posted by frazzle
And as you say, it is only a suggestion. Who is doing the suggesting is actually of more interest to me than whether there is some reason to believe its true. Iran hasn't attacked anyone in 200 years, so why now?

Firstly I didn't say that Iran is attacking anyone or would attack anyone, at least in the sense that Iran doesn't tend go off on regular military jaunts. There is a very good reason for that. It isn't that Iran is the land of sunshine and rainbows.

Iran is abominably mountainous.


Imagine trying to sustain a war and an immense logistics chain across that terrain. It isn't an attractive prospect to put it politely. Since Iran is not a naval power, in some respects its military is effectively contained by its mountains.

Of course Iran's geography contains it just as much as it would impede a potential enemy, and Iran is enormous as well as being extremely mountainous. It has a powerful military, perhaps the most powerful in the region, but it is very much geared for deterrence since it hasn't got the option of whimsically invading its neighbours en masse. It has invested heavily in land-based missiles and asymmetric warfare capabilities in order to make fighting a war with Iran seem too costly to be worth doing.

This is all a result of its geography, not a natural inclination towards peace and good. A notable strength of Iran is its soft power. It has a highly effective intelligence apparatus. In this respect it is no less aggressive than any other country. If you want an example of Iran pursuing an aggressive foreign policy, look at what it did in Iraq (where Iran is the dominant foreign power).

I'll reply to the rest of your post when I have time.