₦airaland Forum

Seun, I need some sheet music apps in here so we can compose melody for the occassion.

Sing to the fool. . .

Give him Anita Baker's.


. . . You don't have to prove to me
You're beautiful to strangers
I've got loving eyes of my own
of my own

You belong to me

Why'd you tell me this?
Were you looking for my reaction?
what do you need to know?
Don't you know I'll always be your girl?
You do not have to prove to me
You're beautiful to strangers
I've got loving eyes of my own,
Of my own, I can tell
You belong to me
tell her you were fooling
You belong to me, baby

You belong to be
Can it be baby that you are not sure
You belong to me
Thought we'd closed the book
I thought we'd locked the door

baby you don't have to prove
You're beautiful to strangers
I've got loving eyes of my own
of my own, and I know darling

You belong to me
You belong to me, yes you do
Tell that woman something baby
I believe you know what I want you
to say to her, yes
Want you to tell her baby
Tell her that I love you,
Tell this woman, tell her,

O prophet! Strive hard against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be harsh against them. [Qur'an 9:73]
O you who believe! Take not the Jews and Christians for your friends and protectors [Qur'an 5:51]
Fighting is prescribed for you[Qur'an 2:216]

The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter; [Qur'an 5:33]

You don't debate facts, you debate opinions when it differs. The above quotations are facts, you have to deal with them.

Do you know what it means to be blind? You are asking for what has many times already been outlined by various individuals. Let me dumb it down to your level of comprehension.

Yes, it is true that Quran and Mohammed calls for those penalties and it does so regardless of the person or their placement. It has also been shown to you that these penalties are not exclusive to Quran alone. . . the scriptures before it gave similar warnings and exacted similar results. There is difference between a faithful and a tribe man. There is difference between a worship and a scripture. There is difference between religion and spiritualism.

As described in the Quran, Abraham (AS) took an oath with God committing his progeny to the service and dedication of obedience to God. In response, God said he will elevate his children and their children and the children that come from those seeds and their future generations to a position of respect and prosperity among mankind, except those of them that shall turn against God's message after the manifests are proven to them. For those unbelievers is a punishment greater than the soul can bear. It is a fact that Judaism, Christianity and Islam came from the descendants of Abraham and they were all localed in what today is the Middle East. Judaism, Christianity and Islam have each gone through stages of political evolution. What we loosely refer to today as religion, in the past was called "FAITH". So that you are either faithful or you are not. If you are faithful, then you are considered a follower of Abraham. If you are not faithful, then you are one of those excluded from the promised Grace in that covenant between Abraham and his God. For the unfaithful, the punishment is great.

Moses was given the LAW (Ten commandments). You can place Moses in two tribes, one his Hebrew ancestry and second is his surrogate upbringing in Egypt. There were Egyptians who opposed him and sought to kill him and against those God brought destruction. There were also Hebrews who hunted for him and were equally destroyed. But then there is a third part. . .the Jews. . .those who after believing in his teachings and had promised to live by the LAW were now defectors and had gone back to their age long worship of idol. These were those who made ornamental images of the COW - which in Jewsih tradition was a sacred animal in those days - and started to bow to these images instead of bowing in worship to God. Moses himself prayed for their destruction. So if the Quran condemn these people it is because of the earlier covenants and the fact that Abraham agreed that these set of people were not his followers and should be punished and Moses also called for their destruction.

In Christianity. . .its a similar story. Have you ever asked why the seat of Christianity is in Europe and not in Middle East? None of the Holy Scriptures was revealed in Europe or to any of the European ancestral blood. . .but why is world population of Christianity governed from Europe and the West?

In Islam. . .in case you do not know this, Sharia does not respect position or eminence when it comes to the law. In fact it says that if a Judge was sitting on a murder case where his own child (The Judge's child) is found guilty of murder, then that Judge must apply the law equally, to include execution of his child, if that would bring justice to the victim's family and the society. So the faith of Islam does not protect muslims against the penalties that it calls upon for others. You are either faithful or you are not. . .you can call yourself Jew, Christian, Muslim all day long, that is semantics. . .at the end of the day you are called to account for your faith and if you are not within the fold of Abraham's Grace, then you are condemned.


If you need me to further dumb it lower let me know. . .

John 7:1
Jesus travelled round Galilee but could not travel round Judea, because the Jews were seeking to kill him

John 7:2
As the Jewish feast of Shelters drew near, his brothers said to him, "Leave this place and go to Judea, so that your disciples, too, can see the works you are doing; no one who wants to be publicly known acts in secret; if this is what you are doing, you should reveal yourself to the Jews."

To his brothers Jesus said:

John 7:7
"The Jews cannot hate you, but it does hate me, because I give evidence that its ways are evil"

Ikomi, Good Point!

There are several reasons why certain individuals in NL defend Jewish cause blindly. It has to do primarily with religion but there are also those in here who believe they are the lost tribes of Israel. For these two groups the word "Jew" is sacred. Telling them that Jesus was persecuted and subsequently killed by the Jews and that Mohammed condemned these Jews as enemies of the scriptures and the faithfuls makes no significant impact. . .it goes in one ear and transits out in the other. They are set in their blindness and no amount of word to the contrary will restore vision for them.

"An African-American President with Muslim roots stands before the Muslim world and defends the right of Jews to a nation of their own in their ancestral homeland, and then denounces in vociferous terms the evil of Holocaust denial, and right-wing Israelis go forth and complain that the President is unsympathetic to the housing needs of settlers. Incredible, just incredible." - Jeffrey Goldberg

. . . something caught my eye in passing and I just could not restrain myself from highliting it. Are those President Obama's own words. . . I mean, did he use the word "EVIL OF HOLOCAUST DENIAL" ? Please someone say he did not use these words!

Ola,

I don't want to spin away from subject here. I want to say that for every injunction you pull out of the Quran to support "prohibition on clapping", there is an opposite injunction calling for flexibility in human interaction. We will talk at length here about it and ultimately the subject of this post will be taken over by religion.

I would like to use a real life scenario to demonstrate for you the dangers of interpreting these injunctions rigidly. When faced with a life situation a muslim must use discretion to apply the principles of Islam. In certain situations, it is okay to do something that under a different circumstance might not be wise to do.

I was in high school in Kano and we were in a theatrical play hosted by the students of St Louis Secondary School. A girl had collapsed and the cry went out for anyone in the audience with cpr skill to come help resue this girl. There was this guy in his red cross uniform that showed up ready to give cpr. Two men in the crowd jumped out and complained that it is forbidden under Islamic law for a man to have physical contact with a woman that is not his wife or relative. They stopped him and threatened violence if he disobeyed the Quran. Meanwhile on the side, other women were already pouring cold water on the girl and fanning her. . . thank God, she was resuscitated safely. Now, this was a clear danger and the girl could have died or suffered brain injury. So I hope you can study the Quran again. . . on your own and get clarity about the purpose of life. . . rather than arguing what is allowed and what is dis-allowed. Nature was constructed on vibrant colors and flexible elements. . . it was not put in place for muslims or christians or jews. . . it was made for humanity. Instead of focusing on who is violating religious codes, we should instead be making sure that no human being is violated, regardless of his/her religion. Although the girl recovered safely, those two gentlemen, in the name of religious banner and whats in the Quran, violated the energy of life force within her soul . . .a great sin in the eye of Allah.

Like I always tell my African American friends. . .don't struggle through life fighting for rights, maybe you should instead "negotiate for your interests and needs". I wont say go round town shaking women hands but do not preclude it as a possibility if doing so builds goodwill and compromise. The muslims in that congregation in Cairo know the Quran and their action was in line with Allah's command to foster relationship and cooperate for the benefit of mankind. If it bothered their conscience, they will atone for the clap during their evening prayer.

Prohibitions for clapping, whistling etc as the Pagan arabs used to do when they are in the Precinct of Kaaba is right there in either Surat Hajj or Taubah. I almost believe it is in Surah Hajj. Islam remains in the heart of Muslims, inside and outside of Masajid. Now we must know that a true muslim keeps all the injuctions of Quran and Ahadith, as soon as he/she knows, as best as possible!

Nature is not stagnant. . .  When nature resonates a truth within one's soul then it should be acknowledged.  If the Imam gave a sermon that resonates truth, the congregation or Jamaa responses with Takbir - Allahu Akbar!  In the case of President Obama's speech, a clap, a nod. . .some kind of responsive acknowledgement is appropriate to feedback to him, the speaker, that we hear you and we bear testimony in our soul that you speak the truth.   Now, this is different from "group-clap", so to speak, where people clap to make the speaker feel good for his/her contribution but the speech itself did not have any memorable impact on the audience.  

Muslims clapping for President Obama can be taken as a congregation in the mosque responding to the Imam's sermon of spoken truth - it is soul inspiring.  On the other hand, a group-clap to a corny speaker is a consolation, not necesaarily acknowledging truth but a reward for effort and this, I think, is what you are condemning.  

Do I not shake the hand of a desirable young woman in the masjid, but do it outside masjid or away from the sight of any muslim? I am either a munafiq or ignorant of my role.

These are benchmarks for the society and a bad analogy to use to rebutt my response.  This analogy here is applicable if we were talking about eating pork.  In that case we would be comparing apple to apple.  


Ibime,

A lot of people are misguided in the principles of religious living.  Many believe they are faithfuls but in actuality they are sinners.  If I wanted to live my life strictly on the tenets of Islam, I would become a hermit and go into reclusion. . . far, far away from the poisonous contacts of human communities.  I will live one with nature and wake up and go to bed daily seeking the face of God.  But you see these people are too scared to be alone with God.  Your host exhibited an understanding and interpretation of Islam that is not supported by God.

Our media houses are so in the tank for Obama US that we now have to rely on foreign govts and media to let us see the larger picture.

This has been an ongoing problem before President Obama sat on the throne. Foreign govts and media are not a reliable source on American perspectives but at least they give a backdrop from which to draw analysis and conclusion. The article said the populace is dumbed down with pop culture and trendy attachments. Very true. When was a time you ever find an American with a world band radio? Never! It doesn't broadcast NFL or NBA games, no NHL or MBL, no American Idol, there is no ER, no CSI. . . Almost every American have used "Timbuktou" in a phrase, so they are conversant with its usage. Well ask one to point to Timbuktou on a world map and see where the finger goes. How can we call such an individual a 'free person"? Quick to claim world greatest but slow to point to where world is on a map.

Tayo, I understand your reason for the post but I will take that article with a grain of salt, . . . without spitting out the mouthful bite. . . and you know me, I don't take news report any damn serious any way.

Speaking at the end of a three-day visit to Russia, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said Tehran's nuclear program is the world's problem, not just Israel's, and that its Arab neighbors should be even more concerned about the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran than Israel is. He said other nations should not expect Israel to solve this problem for them.

Wow! I am shocked that an Isrsaeli Foreign Minister would make such a statement. Is Israel truly ready to play a major role in International affairs? This statement is too elementary from the foreign minister of a nuclear nation. This sound like some statement you would expect from someone like Idi Amin back in the days. It lacks strategy, it lacks focus!!!

@topic,

Obama is a consciousness. He is an awakener. He radiates divine presence. I admire his gift and I bow in respect to the influential power of this divine gift in him.

After all the reverence has passed, I still do not believe in his policies.

The muslims in the audience should have known that clapping is unIslamic.

Ola, that restraint will apply if this was delivered in a Mosque or a Holy grounds. However, this was a political call to duty and the speech was delivered in an academic campus. There is no prohibition for the muslims in attendance to express emotions or their approval with applause.

There are so many facets to this story post that I don't know where to start.

Tayo, yep. . . I agree! On this topic, I know you have far more to say than just the few sentences below. I will be patient and let you tackle it on your own terms and I am sure your response will elicit good participation from the general audience. Go ahead!

Let's tackle the nuclear power first. Aint it funny that Obama said Iran has the right to use nuclear technology to produce power but won't let same be done in the US? Others can use the technology which is clean and cheap, but you have to subject your subjects, I meant citizens to the unreliable sources of power that costs even much more! I just don't get it.

Obama is using backdoor strategy to defuse the issue of Iran becoming a nuclear power. There are safeguards under the NPT and IAEA that are targeted to encourage nuclear seeking nations to willfully participate in a project syndication of the end-to-end process and these include incentives. For example, Iran might be made to buy its supply of uranium from France (who gets it from Niger). Iran will build its own plant but under the standards of a watchdog like IAEA. Then the reactor might be installed by Americans and the operations is left under the leadership of Iranian scientists. Then the spent fuel might be stored by the Soviets. This way any attempt by Iran to divert spent fuel to weapons grade material is defeated. . . and if for any reason it insisted in storing its own spent plutonium, the incentives are removed and the supply base from France is shut off.

So far, Iran has refused to these terms and has insisted in being the mastermind of the end-to-end operations. This is why the outside world is suspicious that Iran has other motives for refusing the syndicated option and unless there is something to hide, it should logically allow transparency. Iran says it has the sovereign right to be transparent or to be secretive without any unfair conclusion to an ominous agenda.

As to the gay issue. I agree that gays have the right to be gay, but I am against gay marriage. Period. Trying to make this a case of human rights is to use a back door way to call mariages between gays a human right issue as well. The former is, the latter is not.

Precisely! Any individual have the rights of privacy and this is both endowed in creation as well as in human protocols such as UNHR statutes. As part of that right, a gay person could do anything they want in their own enclosed privacy. No one cares. When they bring their acts into the public square, then they are inviting public opinion and feedback. For a society that is unwelcoming to acts or exhibitions of sodomy, this feedback could include physical violence. Now, in the context of Hillary's declaration, how would America respond to such a society? Is that considered human rights violation for lynching two men laying in each other's arms in Tinubu Square, caressing and kissing?

As to imposing American values on others, this is only an extension of the anomaly that the United States has become. The Federal Govt has become all too powerful and dictates its will on the States. That was never the intention of the founding fathers. The same FG is only extending the bullying beyond its borders to other countries. Granted this was not started by Obama, but he is obviously continuing in that footstep.

Tayo, you cannot do anything in America nowadays without a subtax. I dont anything I have done lately. . . beside sex, . . .that did not carry a tax surcharge. They are extending every value especially capitalism and democracy. . .the two are tied like twins!

They find every value and ideology that stand in the way of these two American ideas and give it the label "anti-American". War against communism. . . War against drugs. . . War against terrorism.

One of the problems I often have with America is their desperation to, almost force, everyone else to follow their own ways.

They seem to have a mentality that says: If you're doing things the American way, you're not doing it right!

Why must other countries be made to legitimize sodomy simply because Americans have bowed to sodomy?

Will it become right, if Iran was to become the next super power, for Iran to force Americans to kill gay people? or would it be right, if Afghanistan suddenly becomes the next world super power, to force/compel every nation to make women wear masks?
These western countries are setting precedents of enforcing their values on others which, if other nations embark upon later, will only lead to further chaos and destruction in the world. Its one of the reasons millions have been killed in Iraq.

Justgood,

Brilliant response! This is one of the underlying problems why the Arabs push back on democracy. At least in the way it is defined by the West. They do not agree that democracy is just about civic and society. . .they see it as a wholesale packaging of American lifestyle that include such anomalies as gay and lesbian, liquor and nudity, guns and violence, capitalism and usury and so on and so forth. . . . and embracing these lifestyles can only mean one thing. . . abandon Islam! In fact they view America as a evangelical society, not as a christian society. Big difference! They abhor American presence on their soil for this particular reason.

there is nothing wrong with calling "on the world to stop discrimination and violence based on sexual orientation

Oyinda,

The keyword here is sexual orientation! The human anatomy and physiology at birth is a special endowment and as the individual grows so does these parts grow and mature, inwardly (hormones) and outwardly (sexual organs) and they serve as the fundamental definition of gender and social roles. When a child is born the gender is identified by the organ between its thighs. So under those terms there can be only one definition for sexual orientation.

When you seek gender alteration through surgical or hormone therapy process to grow breasts on a man or grow penniss on a woman then you are violating the birthright imposed by nature. When a man seeks sexual pleasure with another man, then indeed he has violated the protocol of human ethics as well as the aesthetics of beauty and balance or what in high circle is termed "Grace". Therefore it is better that you violate the rights of a few gay activists than have the rights of a multiple people in a sexually moral setting violated by the unethical acts of sodomites.

On the right of Iran to acquire nuclear technology:

. . . .Obama added that there is a danger "when the United States, or any country, thinks that we can simply impose these values on another country with a different history and a different culture."


But then Hillary Clinton said this on gay rights:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pledged Monday to fight for gay rights and called on the world to stop discrimination and violence based on sexual orientation.

"As secretary of state, I will advance a comprehensive human rights agenda that includes the elimination of violence and discrimination against people based on sexual orientation or gender identity," Clinton said in a written statement.


How does Clinton aim to win on this path against countries that vehemently oppose gay rights and refuse to acknowledge their cause? Will she introduce sanctions against such countries? Third, by pursuing gay cause as a human rights value Clinton is attempting to impose American values on other countries with a different history and a different culture. A complete contradiction to what her boss outlined above.

This will escalate suspicions of President Obama's intent around the globe. He says one thing but his foreign minister comes from behind and counter that idea. More disturbing is the fact that majority of the world population see gay cause as immoral and damaging to family life and they don't want it in their neighborhood.

In Nigeria's system, emphasis are laid on theory. Emphasis are laid on knowing shit by heart. Yet on comparison to here, emphasis are laid on actually understanding the concepts, emphasis are laid on hands on experience.

. . .application.  True talk!

Representation is also part of the problem.  When I say representation, I mean the social perception of what Nigeria stand for and the enhancements of those perceptions during personal contact with Nigerians.  

You can look at the orientals.  The public perception is that they are smart and are whiz kids and disciplined.  In contact, they promote that image of their public acceptance.   Same with the Indians.  They are everywhere in IT field and in science.  They penetrated into media and almost every city in America now has an Indian broadcaster on the tube - an easy access to further advance their cause.  They have political lobbyists who vett their interests in political circles.  They pool resources together to formulate a common enterprise approach to economic progress.

So we must ask. . .  how is Nigeria viewed in Canada and how can Nigerinas in Canada influence a positive image in that country so that Nigerian immigrants are valued and accepted as positive contributors to the society?


On another angle, academic degrees are tools of capitalism.  With it you go into the labor force to earn a living and promote the interests of capitalism.  So whether you are a cab driver or a medical doctor, you are an active participant in capitalism.  The doctor is no better a capitalist than the driver.  So from a commercial angle, the market could care less who you are. . .its what is in your pocket that carries weight and you are valued on account of that. So maybe instead of harping on professional title and degrees, we Nigerians ought instead to step back and go back to a time when we appreciated one another's humanity.  Then the world will again accept us for our values, as they did in the 60s, 70s and 80s.

@post

If you took the same path of hardship and struggle that Sotomayor took to arrive where she is and become who she is, then your view of the society and its institutions will not be disimilar from her's. The statements she made, repulsive as they may sound, if at all, are the summaries of her memories growing up in a society that labels and marginalizes her stock as "undesirable" and mock their achievements as a chance, rather than a deliberate act of excellence. She is fighting to change the status quo and introduce reformative ideas to balance the makeup of the ruling class.

On the other hand, Chief Justice John Roberts' judicial opinions is a reflection of his past and memories as well and he fights to keep the status quo. He is a minimalist and emphasizes respect for precedent and avoids reforms. Roberts' opinions reflects a view that the Court should almost always defer to the existing power relationships in society.

So they both are torch bearers for what they believe in and the direction they believe the country should head - for Roberts, a continous imbalance that sustain white rulership by keeping in tune with the existing law and their precedent interpretations, and for Sotomayor, introduce balance through new interpretations aimed at uplifting judicial trust for the underclass and do so using existing "entitlement" programms for cost evaluation.

If the republicans say she is racist and kkk because of these views, then Roberts is the embodiment of William Lynch.

On the whole we have been warned that sheeps should not mix with dogs, otherwise they will learn to bark.

. . . and dogs must not be allowed to assume the leadership role of Shepherds.

Thank you Ikomi for that reminder. Now, I can sit back and watch the dogs corral the sheeps into their pens.

Correction, I meant to say Ikomi.

Ikime,

Well, I believe we see this matter through the same mirror generally but there exist some divergence in our perceptions and the time relevance of the episodes. I will leave that alone and won’t harp on it unless forced to clarify.

In my mind and to answer why Ahmadinejjad is asking for a UN debate I wanted yesterday to submit some anecdotal evidence and could not get it here due to large size of the files. I offered to send copies to anyone interested in reading the reports but found soon after that I needed to clarify proprietary rights first before I circulate the materials. I regret making the offer and if you sent me email but never received any file, I am sorry for the disappointment but you will not be getting any file. However, I reviewed the document again (declassified memos) and analyzed it for relevance. It contains the facts and far more than is ordinarily released for media report. Below is my opinion and I think Iran wants to put America on the spot. I agree that these events started decades ago but trust me, they are as relevant today as they were back then.

I want to remind that Ahmadinejjad has three primary issues that he has repeatedly verbalized. They are not necessarily in these same exact words or order but they are consistent in sense and meaning: (1) concern for American Global Imperialism; (2) concern for first class-second class rights of superiority in the Middle East, and (3) self-sufficiency and exclusive rights of dominion over the sovereignty of Iran and its civilization.

Communism; Terrorism.
--------------------------------------

During the Cold War, American propaganda was a tool in an anticommunist crusade; today, it is a facet of the U.S. "war on terrorism." Now, as then, it is characterized as a remedy for anti-Americanism.

George W. Bush has described the conflict between the U.S. and those who resist its policies in the Middle East as a battle between good and evil -- those who "hate" the U.S. do so because they oppose freedom and the democracy for which the U.S. stands

In the version of reality projected by representatives of the Bush administration, and reflected in large measure in the U.S. news media, America's history of exploiting, for its own political purposes, the most conservative and militant interpretations of Islam, in the Persian Gulf region, in Pakistan, and in Afghanistan, is to be forgotten. So too is America's habit of looking the other way, when convenient, as allies accelerated their nuclear weapons programs (consider Israel and Iraq.) So too is U.S. aid and comfort for Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war (while also, on occasion, providing arms and intelligence to its adversary), thus helping to perpetuate a horrifically bloody conflict. So too is the Reagan administration's policy of downplaying Iraq's use of chemical weapons against Iran during that war. So too is the first Bush administration's decisions, after Iraq used chemical weapons against Kurdish Iraqis, to continue providing taxpayer-guaranteed financial credits to Saddam Hussein's government, and to seek "opportunities for U.S. firms to participate in the reconstruction of the Iraqi economy, particularly in the energy area." So too is the criminalization of anti-Semitism opinion or disputing the records on Holocaust on one hand but propagating Evangelism under the guise of freedom of speech and the spread of democracy on the other.

During the 1950s, the U.S. sought to project an image of itself as a peace-loving nation, supportive of the United Nations and international law (an image not always strictly coincident with reality), but any attempt to convey a similar message by the current administration would be belied by America's denigration of the U.N. in recent years, its massive global arms sales (to the Middle East, in particular), and its preference for unilateral decision-making. Likewise, President Bush's statements of tolerance and respect for Muslims are contradicted by the powerful influence on his administration of those conservative Christians who deny the legitimacy of Islam, ridicule its tenets, and embrace the brutal Arab-Israeli conflict as a sanctified means to an apocalyptic end -- to include, as they envision it, the annihilation of Muslims, Jews, and all others who have not embraced a "born-again" version of Christianity. There is your “Good” and “Evil”!

In late 1983, during the U.S. intervention in Lebanon U.S. propaganda was no longer hobbled by the technological shortcomings of the 1950s. Under Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger noted in November 1983,The themes for domestic audiences were: "we will stay the course [in Lebanon] because it is in America's long-term interest" and "We do not envisage any change at this time in the size, role or mission" of the multinational force (MNF). Foreigners would be told that "None of the Middle East problems can be seen in isolation from each other . . . Cowardly, terrorist attempts to force the withdrawal of the MNF will not succeed . . . Political and strategic stability is a vital Western interest. Common efforts are needed to resolve potentially explosive issues, including the Arab-Israeli, Iraq-Iran and Lebanese crises."

In spite of these rhetoric, the U.S. withdrew from Lebanon in February 1984, the Iran-Iraq war lasted for five more bloody years, and the Palestine-Israel dispute is no closer to resolution today than it was 25 years ago. This was lessons learnt and is the reason that Obama has been warned about exiting Iraq prematurely or committing too much to Afghanistan and ending up with a protracted war that could distabilize the young democracy and erode all gains so far accomplished. In-between 1984 and today, there has been five American Presidents. Make no mistake about it their politics may differ…but do not be deceived into believing that their policy in the Middle East is inconsistent. Primarily, this explains why Ahmadinejjad continue to tell Obama that the offer of an extended hand is not good enough, actions and deeds departing from the old policy should be demonstrated by Washington.


The Energy Crisis
-------------------------

Is the control of global energy and resources an exclusive birthright of any one group of nations?

Kwarai! Baba na ya rasu amma mama na ta na nan a Ikko.

Kwana biyu, ina Gadol?

I hope this article of yours was not writing during the cold war era, if yes dont post abeg, chapter don change.

Am waiting for this article of yours dear Negro. We no go run.

Ikomi,

We are debating on foreign affairs and so you cannot treat the topic as an isolated idea. This is not a survey.

"Ahmadinejad wants to debate Obama at UN". Someone that thinks critically will want to know why. There is no fire without a smoke! The
"why" has legs and if you trace its footprints it could very well lead you back to cold war era for the answers.

The size of the document is more than the 200kb allowed.

The pdf doc is a basic framework of nuclear policy in Iran. There are hundreds of these documents discussing the various aspects of the US/Iran nuclear negotiations and I cant share them all. If anyone is interested in seeing them let me know and I will email to you.

I also want to point out that during the Yom Kippur war Iran was a back channell for US/Egypt contact. They acted as the go between for US with the Arabs. If Kissinger could not get an agreement out of Cairo they send an Iranian diplomat to talk to Sadat and it worked. Also as recent as 2002 when Bush invaded Afghanistan, Iran also served as back channel for diplomatic effort to converge support of the Mujaheddins around Hamid Karzai, who as it happened was handpicked for Washington by, guess who, Teheran. So the notion that Iran is fighting Palestine cause is misguided. Iran is jostling for political capital and it must earlier on conserve enough of those advantages that it will have sufficient bargaining power to trade at the end when push comes to shove. This is raw politics, nothing more! Anyway, I'm out.


I tried numerous ways couldnt get doccument in. email me if youd like a copy.

I think the debate on this topic should take a different theme. I will help with that later on this evening. I have some information you all should read.

I believe a lot of people have bought too deep into the falsehood and fail to see that this middle east peace process is nothing but a strategy for American capitalism. If America was that enthusiastic about peace around the world Apartheid should have ended far much earlier than it did, Kashmir dispute should have been resolved, Nort and South Korea should have reconciled and the DMZ tore down like they did with Berlin wall when East and West Germany reunited. Get out of the darkness and into the floodlight.

Oh yeah? From ignorant to eloquent, hmmm!

I don't deate serious issues from sensational reports.  Unlike you, I subscribe and invest good money to obtain top analysis report direct from government archives.  I don't do 25cents newspaper.  That's what you don't get!   As many times as Ive told you, what you report and what I report are not going to be the same.  I give facts, not sensations.  If I want sensation I go to romance section and partake in entertainment.  This is Politics, I take it serious and so I invest good money to enjoy it.  So when you start investing money in analysis then you can face me in a fact based debate.

On another point, I noticed evrywhere you see me you take it upon yourself to get my attention.  I hope you know  only date girls. I have no interest in men so you are best advised to go hawk yoursef elsewhere and stop stalking me about on NL.

Tayo, your turn.  Now, what is your problem?

Tayo,

Line behind David. I will attend to you in turn. I'm waiting on David's response for now.

answer my question. where do you get these information?

Ikomi, I agree that it should not be an eye for an eye.


David, where did you get your information? I suspect news article.

I think David is mixing Palestinian issue with Iran vs USA. Separate, read my response again.

Exactly!  It sounds comical that he wants a debatewith Obama. He is trying to underline the root of the problem and suggest that Obama look inwardin the archives ofpast administration.  If I were him I would achieve that through the media, call a press conference.

Tayo,

I know zionism did not exist back then, at least not in name, but it existed in principle and ideology. It was neither Hamas, nor any Muslim group that betrayed and killed Jesus (A.S.W.S), it was not the Palestinians either; the Jews in their zealotry did. I can counter your quotes of what the Quran said and back it with numerous verses where it decreed that the people of the Books are fellow faithfuls with the muslims. In fact, muslims believe and revere Jesus far more than Christians do. Stop parsing quotes from the Quran to frame your argument.

On the subject of discussion, the problem is not Palestine or Arabs or Israel, United States is the instigator and the barrier to peace. In 1973, Henry Kissinger suggested in passing to Golda Meir to violate the cease fire agreement and attack Egypt and Syria in the dark of the nights and US will look the other way. They say one thing in public to convince opponent to lay down arms but then scheme for a surprise hit at their time of vulnerability. Any wonder why Ahmadinejjad is cautious about embracing Obama's offer for reconciliation? In fact,since the topic is about Iran and US, Nixon and , again, fucking Kissinger, started the mess trying to bait Shah to face West and away from USSR's courting.

Look, I dont want to talk, Id rather sit back and just observe here.

Tayo,

I have no comment on the topic of debate but I need to correct the idea that Jewish is "HOLY".  What is HOLY is their scripture, The Torah, not the Jewish tribe itself.    

The people back then referred to as Jews are what today is called Zionist.  So replace the Hamas' call for death to Jews, with death to Zionism.  Here is why,

At the time the Quran was revealed to Mohammed (A.S.W.S), he was commanded to wage war against three groups of people and not to take them for friends - the Jews, the christians and the idol worshippers.  The idol worshippers were the Arabs.  God commanded Mohammed to seek alliance and friendship with the people of the scriptures.  

So in essence, God is commanding him and his followers to step beyond ethnic identity and seek support only with people of Faith - the people of The Law (Ten Commandments) and the people of The Testament (Bible) - against the interest and security of the Jews (replace "Zionist"), the Christians (replace "Crusaders") and the idol worshippers (replace "Fundametalists").

If you make sense of this interpretation then, then the decree to wipe out the zionist will equally apply to the fundamentalist (in this case, Hamas).