reply to post by logical7
yes new by definition but not much by the message. And you missed this
(5:15) People of the Book! Now Our Messenger has come to you: he makes clear to you a good many things of the Book which you were wont to
conceal, and also passes over many things. There has now come to you a light from Allah, and a clear Book
But Islam is descended from the tribe of Ishmael, and claim a heritage to the God of the Old Testament, so your argument is?
1) the OT was not written by the same "god"
2) throw out the Old Testament even though Islam venerates the Old Prophets and Patriarchs
"Freedom of religion" was granted by the Muslim conquerors. Conversions from Christianity and Judaism to Islam were allowed and encouraged.
Conversion from Islam to Christianity, however, were subject to the death penalty. This is to this day the practice in some Islamic countries.
I wonder why this is...how dare a Musilm convert...to a religion which predates Islam
arab spring happened due to Islamic principles.
Yeah really" You refuse to see the guiding hand of CIA involvement....
one example and there are many more docs available.
See eg stuartbramhall.aegauthorblogs.com...
Or how about going back further in time to Ayatollah Khomeini overthrow of the CIA back Shah of Iran. What did Khomeini do in power he kept the same
SAVAK had been the Iranian Shah (King) Mohammed Reza Pahlavi's feared security service, which routinely tortured and assassinated dissidents, and
spied on everybody. It had been created by the CIA after the CIA installed the shah in power in a 1953 coup d'état. As a dissident leader prior
to the Iranian Revolution of 1979, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini had been denouncing SAVAK. So why so much noise now about other ministries being full
of Shah agents and nothing in particular about SAVAK?
Earlier the same month, the Washington Post had published an interesting article with the title: “Khomeini Is Reported to Have a SAVAK of His
Own.”[1a] And what was Khomeini’s own SAVAK like? It was none other than SAVAK itself. Here is what the Washington Post writes (emphases are
“Though it came to power denouncing the shah’s dreaded SAVAK secret service, the government of Iran’s Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini has created a
new internal security and intelligence operation, apparently with a similar organizational structure and some of the same faces as its predecessor.
The new organization is called SAVAMA. It is run, according to U.S. sources and Iranian exile sources here and in Paris, by Gen. Hossein Fardoust, who
was deputy chief of SAVAK under the former shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and a friend from boyhood of the deposed monarch.
But go on keep thinking that popular uprisings and the overthrow of regimes is singlehandedly created by the masses without military and economic
support from outsiders. I mean it is as you say due to "Islamic principles"
Do you really think the Empire that perfected the art of military dictatorships in South America in the 50s somehow forgot the experience and lessons
and left the middle east to their own self rule. Egypt had a secular Govt Turkey likewise, do you see perhaps how radical fundamentalism recent callis
for an islamic state in those two countries may actually benefit Empires need for an enemy?
Zbigniew Brzezinski, from The Grand Chessboard calls for:
"The task facing the United States, he argues, is to manage the conflicts and relationships in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East so that no rival
superpower arises to threaten our interests or our well-being."
People may be answerable in the afterlife to Allah but it seems that Allahs Abrahams and Christs children are the ones suffering on earth right now
and the role of Religion has been infiltrated and subverted to be used in inciting foment to splinter humanity for furthering economic looting of
resources and controlling supply of key commodities.
To think there has ever been true Theocratic rule on this planet without the hidden hand of economics/hoarding of resources is to live in a sad to say
delusion or fantasy
BTW I have no wish to argue apologetics