« College graduates who become farmers | Main | NY Times article about Stuyvesant and cheating »

September 26, 2012

Comments

Return of the 12th Imam is like the glorious era without racism.

The only people that are stopping Islam from outright conquest are the Christians and Jews. We understand religion. If it weren't for Christians, in particular, Franks, we might all be living in Islam dominated countries.

There is definitely a desire to conquer the world at the core of Islam. I know that some deny it but it isn't really debatable.

The question is, what to do. Iran isn't doing much, if anything, to conquer the world right now. There are only two likely courses of action for the US:

1) continue to leave Iran alone

2) invade Iran and attempt to turn them into a western democracy.

Plan #1 has worked pretty well so far, and will probably (no guarantees) continue to work reasonably well. Plan #2 is guaranteed to result in Iran being ruled by people who want to actively Jihad against the west. Plan #3 (genocide followed up by sending non-Muslims to settle the land) would create lasting peace but isn't going to happen. The political support for genocide just isn't there. So clearly the best course of action is to continue with Plan #1: not invading Iran.

[HS: or 1.5: just bomb them and destroy their military toys. 1.7. install a secular pro-western dictator if there's an Iranian general who is like that. I think that 1.7 is best, and 1.5 is second best.]

Yes, Yom Kippur? What about it?

Are you fasting, dear Sigma?

"He will come to grant kindness, hope, freedom and dignity to all humanity..."

The Great Pumpkin will rise over the pumpkin patch he judges to be the most sincere too.

Half, I found much to like in the speech and much that you surely would agree with. To wit,

"-Poverty is on the rise and the gap is widening between the rich and the poor.

-Total foreign debt of 18 industrial countries has exceeded 60 trillion dollars, whilst the repayment of half of this amount is sufficient to eradicate poverty in the world.

-Economies dependent on consumerism and exploitation of people only serve the interests of a limited number of countries.

-Creation of worthless paper assets by using influence and control over the world's economic centers constitutes the greatest abuse of history, and is considered a major contributor to global economic crisis.

-It has been reported that only 32 trillions of paper assets were printed by one government alone.

-Development planning based on capitalist economy that runs in a vicious circle, triggers unhealthy and devastating competitions and is a failed practice."

To bad the US sat this one out. The administration might have learned a thing or two...

Of course Protestant Evangelical Christians are able to understand the 12 Imam stuff. It is a mirror image of their own eschaton beliefs. I.e. War and chaos followed by messiah appearing to bring an eternal period of peace and prosperity. To Christians though, the 12 Imam sounds like the Anti-Christ figure because he is a human being. Thus making it eeevil-bad-scary.

Iran IS a theocracy so to a certain extent the government sees itself as a servant of Allah's divine providence blah blah blah, but like others stated in the Iran thread it has rational and secular reasons for continuing its nuclear program. Pretending that they are too ideological for diplomacy will result in huge Iraq-style blunders and obligations.

If Israel wants bomb nuclear sites, let THEM do it and deal with the consequences. They can defend themselves. It probably won't be the end Iran's animus towards Israel or its ambitions. Just a guess. Nothing sort of regime change will accomplish that.

But fuck regime change. The Middle East will be an underdeveloped cesspool of stupid, squabbling assholes basically forever. The US just doesn't need to be involved. When you fall head first into a hornet's nest you need to take out, not shove it further in. East Asia is where the US should concern itself. Most of the countries there actually WANT assertive US foreign policy.

I see the speech partly as conquest, regardless of whether Ahmadinejad actually believes what he says or not.

You see, in 2012, the only religious utterances from the UN pulpit are Islamic.

Back in the day that would have been our people voicing our religious utterances, even if not everyone was a believer.

"The task will be hard. There may be dark days ahead, and war can no longer be confined to the battlefield, but we can only do the right as we see the right, and reverently commit our cause to God. If one and all we keep resolutely faithful to it, ready for whatever service or sacrifice it may demand, then with God's help, we shall prevail. May He bless and keep us all."
(The King's Speech of September 3, 1939)

Only now, there is no God but Allah in the great halls of the West.

Pretty cool, huh? Ahmadinejad stands on our summit, notices there is no flag and plants his own. We sure as hell aren't able to plant our flag on any Iranian summit...

"-He will come to grant kindness, hope, freedom and dignity to all humanity as a girl. "

What on earth does this mean? Is the Imam going to be a girl or is humanity a girl?

"The Occam’s Razor explanation for why Ahmadinejad uses his one chance each year to address the world to talk about the 12th Imam is because he actually believes that the 12th Imam is coming."

Probably, but another reason is to curry favor with the clerical establishment back home.

The 12th Imam may come after a period of war and chaos, but that doesn't mean you can start war and chaos and make him show up. God doesn't work that way, and the Iranians know it. So they won't start a war. But if they do things that make it certain someone will start a war against them, like build nuclear weapons, that's not forcing the issue.

I was flipping through "God's Crucible" by Daniel Levering Lewis- who I have to assume by the name is a Jew, couldn't find a biography though- that Islamic rule in Spain was just about the most wonderful thing ever and the dirty, stupid, superstitious, intolerant Christians ruined everything by opposing Islamic invasion and fighting against the occupation. Through *most* of history Moslems and Jews have gotten along famously, and Jews seem to be cool with Islamic rule over everyone and everything except Israel. But, as Bartleby said, "I would prefer not to" (be ruled by Moslems).

"Hijo de trueno, caballero en carcel blanco, hijo de trueno, guianos y haznos vencer".

Why does anyone care what babble he spouts off with?

"(1) Reporters are all atheists, and therefore they don’t understand religious belief."

Atheism rates are higher among elites than the general population, but they are by nowhere close to all atheists.

"(2) The MSM avoids any sort of reporting that might make American readers distrustful or fearful of Islam."

That's ridiculous. Islam has been dragged through the mud by the MSM; no religion has taken such an extreme public relations beating.

Let's face it: Islam is a threat to Israel and the MSM is largely Jewish, so arguing that the MSM is pro-Islam is contradicted by both common sense and the last decade of media coverage.

"Return of the 12th Imam is like the glorious era without racism."

lol, his harping on "racism" is funny. I like how these supposed anti-American radicals can't do any better than ape Western elite fads. Like when Bin Laden was talking about global warming.

Everywhere muslims exist there is conflict. If they're not fighting other religions then they're fighting other Islamic sects. Ethnic and religious conflict isn't uncommon. And every religion has had it's share. But muslims have been at it for 1500 years.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQEkY4dYmEU

Nutjobs like Ahmedinajad make it clear that the West was right to give up religion (excluding of course backward regions like Latin America and the interior of the US). We should go back to invoking our own particular Sky Fairy just to match this medieval twit? No thanks.

Wilson Jones: the US is more religious than ever. What do you call a group that has a belief in original sin, has a system of dietary restriction to attain purity, an apocalypse, and a completely pointless ritual that is supposed to stave off that apocalypse? I call that a region. Original sin = racism, dietary restriction = organic (also vegetarian/vegan/gluten-free/local/raw), apocalypse = global warming, ritual = recycling. The problem with Christianity is that a human-shaped/human-centric god doesn't seem plausible given modern knowledge of astronomy and evolution. Abrahamic religion doesn't hold up well in a world with free speech and science. The modern SWPL religion seems more believable to the man on the street.

@Wilson Jones --

Cute in theory but there is the minor problem that atheistic societies are completely spineless, infertile, old, a rats nest of PC and innovate primarily in ways to have themselves conquered and replaced demographically and culturally. Oh, and they are sometimes really, really gay. And the women are really unattractive because they acquire the nature of men.

But other than that the west is peachy.


you buy into this 12th imam theory of iranian behavior? come off it, that's stupid talk. the iranians are hyper-rational geopolitical players and the religious drivel is for the large mass of illiterates in their provincial areas.

[HS: The illterate masses aren't watching his UN speech, and talking about the 12th Imam is DIVISIVE within Islam because not all believe in it, even the original Ayathollah Komeini didn't, and it probably scares Sunni Muslims.]

"Islam has been dragged through the mud by the MSM"

Only in the same sense that blacks are dragged through the mud by the MSM. i.e. even with a lot of media white-washing, they come out looking pretty bad.

But let's do this: Show me a couple examples of the MSM "dragging Islam through the mud."

I would like to hear your opinion on the attacks on the First Amendment from writers on the left that are starting to increase.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2012/09/the_vile_anti_muslim_video_and_the_first_amendment_does_the_u_s_overvalue_free_speech_.html

I expect this from leaders of Mohammedan hellholes in the Middle East as we have seen again and again this week on the floor of the United Nations, but this is a new low, even for leftist academics. I guess this is just the next logical step after hate crime laws, once and for all criminalizing any words that they don't agree with.

The speech was not about the 12th Imam. What you cited was not even 20% of the transcript.

To conclude that "it logically follows that Ahmadinejad hopes to trigger a war that will bring forth the 12th Imam" is completely unwarranted.

You also ignore the wider context of the speech. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is currently chairperson of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), and Shiites across the Middle East have been in more trouble than usual during the last five years.

If anything, the mentioning of the 12th Imam is a shout out to fellow Shiites. Everything else is just an Iranian understanding of NAM goals and principles.

Iran has promoted and exported an Islamic version of Third World liberation theology for 30 years. It is mild compared to the Sunni Wahabbist movement.

@half

Oh please, i wonder if you are trolling now. You cannot possibly believe this. First, in the age of digitial technology, his speech can easily be propagated by means other than live television.

Second, if he is so hellbent on bringing on an apocalyptic war, why did Iran not fire the first shot at either israel or the us in the past 6 years when we gave him plenty of chances? the us even floated the damn uss enterprise right into the gulf. sunburn bait. why is he not firing the first shot now?

i agree with comrade. this is a play for the loyalty of shiites in syria and much more importantly in IRAQ.

[HS: I most definitely believe that people believe stupid crap. Look at all those Islamic suicide bombers. They really BELIEVE they are doing to go to Paradise by martyring themselves.

I also most definitely believe that Ahmadinejad is not exempt from believing in stupid crap just because he's the president of a nation.]

"I was flipping through 'God's Crucible' by Daniel Levering Lewis- who I have to assume by the name is a Jew"

Daniel Levering Lewis is a very light-skinned African American. It's likely he thinks the way he does about the Moorish occupation because he sees them as an extension of himself.

Plus it is a standard progressive belief that Moorish rule was good because Islam is inherently tolerant. Bad behavior on the part of Muslims is due to external forces. Lewis is a progressive.

Well the end result sounds pretty nice. But it doesn't necessarily mean he believes that shit. Surely the people back home see his speech and it is imperative to his future that they think he believes and is serious about his "beliefs".

Its probably helpful to keep in mind here that Shia Muslim beliefs look very different to Christians than they do to Jews.

****But it doesn't necessarily mean he believes that shit. Surely the people back home see his speech and it is imperative to his future that they think he believes and is serious about his "beliefs".****

It seems that you and Kurtosis are proving Sigma's point for him: that oftentimes smart atheists can't grasp that there are intelligent people who *really* believe their religion.

Ahmadenijad is not ruler of Iran. That role belongs to the "Supreme Leader", who is called that for a reason. The Supreme Leader doesn't like Mahmoud, and only tolerates him to some extent because he has a lot of supporters (the real reason he was re-elected, with important positions being unelected). He has had about a dozen of Ahmadenijad's friends arrested, sometimes accusing them of dabbling in the occult due to the 12th imam talk. The Iranian theocracy are of course orthodox "Twelver" Shi'ites (as distinct from Zaydis or Ismailis, some of whom continue to have actual living imams in the Aga Khan dynasty), they just don't harp on about the imminent return of the hidden imam (just as most Christians don't talk too much about the rapture & end of the world). Rather than reading Christian websites that (while possibly better than a totally ignorant secular MSM) will try and fit something rather unfamiliar into terms they understand, you should try reading some Iranians more familiar with how people think about the 12th imam in Iran.

"But let's do this: Show me a couple examples of the MSM "dragging Islam through the mud.""

Examples of anti-Muslim bias in the MSM include constantly harping on what a threat to "the world" it would be anytime a Muslim country makes even the smallest move towards nuclear technology (particularly Muslim countries that are hostile to Israel like Iraq and Iran); meanwhile if a journalist so much as hinted that there was something wrong with Israel having nuclear technology, they would be branded an anti-semite and never work in the MSM again.

Constantly linking acts of violence by Muslims to Islam, while not drawing the same religious link to violent acts by Christians and Jews.

Constantly exposing the brutal behavior of Muslim countries against their own citizens (all the news stories about Saddam Hussein torturing people) but if anyone so much as hints that Palestinians are mistreated they earn instant pariah status (even if they're a Nobel Peace Prize winning former president like Jimmy Carter)

Constantly showing Muslim extremists acting crazy on TV while ignoring the HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of moderate Muslims who do not share such extreme views, and then asking "where are all the moderate Muslims?"

Excluding Muslims from being positive characters in movies and TV shows.

Constantly complaining about the foreign aid to Egypt, but never mentioning all the foreign aid Israel gets and that U.S. foreign policy (prior to Obama) was virtually dictated by Israel, or for that matter, that the aid to Egypt is for Israel's benefit.

So clearly the MSM is UNBELIEVABLY biased in favor of Israel and biased against Islam, and it's because American Jews have the verbal IQ to dominate virtually all forms of media (including this blog)and cleverly use their influence to Israel's advantage. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Any ethnic group that has been historically oppressed uses whatever power it has to pursue its ethnic interests, it just so happens that Jews, because of their genetically high verbal IQ, can do this far more efficiently than everyone else.

"- He will come to grant kindness, hope, freedom and dignity to all humanity as a girl."

Correction: "... to all humanity as a GIFT."

Source:
http://www.ibtimes.com/mahmoud-ahmadinejads-speech-un-general-assembly-full-text-796241

(Click the printer icon to see the speech on a single Web page.)

You certainly can't believe this nonsense? Have you gone all Glen Beck on us with his talk of the caliphate?

For at least 8 years we have heard that Israel or the US or both is about to attack Iran because the nukes were just over the horizon. Hasn't happened. Won't happen.

Mahdism is not only a Shi'ite belief, as your commentary incorrectly implies, but also a Sunni one, too.

I know quite well two young devout Sunni Muslim uni students in California who are devotees of Mahdism.

Interestingly, Mahdism comes from Christian and Judaism, particularly the latter.

As always, Jewish messianism has a lot to answer for.

And you left out reason number 3, why it isn't reported:

3. The idiotic reporters probably think Achma-whatever might be an evangelical Christian, because he mentioned the return of Jesus Christ. Since they've been taught that Evangelicals are the face of the evil GOP, they naturally shun him. BUt, nevertheless, as they sip their cocktails, they must be scratching their heads about the Muslim who believes in Jesus...

"But... I thought Muslims and Christians didn't like each other.... I didn't know Muslims believe in Jesus.... I thought that was Billy Graham's bag.... WoW! The Iranians are a bunch of right wing GOP types! Dang!"

Posted by: bigboy | September 27, 2012 at 09:29 AM

"Daniel Levering Lewis is a very light-skinned African American. It's likely he thinks the way he does about the Moorish occupation because he sees them as an extension of himself.... Lewis is a progressive."
---------------------------------------

What Lewis is, is an Afrocentric who is espousing the latest proto-Marxist myth about how blacks invented time travel and everything else while the whites were still eating raw meat and bugs. But yes, that also makes him a progressive

The comments to this entry are closed.