|
|
Ahmadinejad: Iran's fundamentalist 'street sweeper' (updated)
By: AFP on: 25.06.2005 [01:11 ] (3768 reads)
|
Iran is 'out of step' with region: US State Department
|
|
(10327 bytes) [nc]
|
|
Temporary offline
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 25.06.2005 [02:12 ]
|
|
|
"What they (Western countries) have is not democracy, but rule of trickery.
It's parties and capitalists who get the vote of the people in their own favor to fill their pockets," Ayatollah Jannati told worshippers at Friday prayers.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 25.06.2005 [02:13 ]
|
|
|
.
|
by Greekos-Έλλην on 25.06.2005 [04:33 ]
|
|
|
is that he will get Iran back to the days of the 80ies when couples would be arrested for being together in public, women for wearing nonconservative clothing, newspapers closig for critisizing the dictator a.k.a. grand Ayatollah. And of course the west has no democracy but come on..can you call what Iran has democracy??
|
by Yasis on 25.06.2005 [05:30 ]
|
|
|
Before we can discuss what is or what is not a "democracy". We must first define the meaning of the word "democracy". What exactly is democratic rule? What defines democratic rule. And lastly, what is so good about democracy that it is the so-called model of government rule?
For example, we can take the US. The "leaders" of the so-called "democratic" US ltold a bunch of cheap lies to start a war against another country. Now, it continues to send its citizens to die in that country without telling the actual reasons for doing so.
As usual, rubbish lies are told to continue this policy. Is the US an example of a "democratic" country?
The leaders of Iran did not tell cheap lies to start wars. Are they "demcratic" then?
|
by Yasis on 25.06.2005 [06:02 ]
|
|
|
.
|
by Yasis on 25.06.2005 [06:04 ]
|
|
|
.
|
by Yasis on 25.06.2005 [06:05 ]
|
|
|
.
|
by Dahni on 25.06.2005 [07:29 ]
|
|
|
There is no country in the world that is a democracy. Democracy was an ancient Greek experiment- rule of the people. What the majority of countries in the world have is an "elected" government. After the elections are over, the peoples participation in "democracy" ends. The ruling elite in many countries feel that elections are enough to legitimise their control of the populace and their hold on power. They make the decisions, and you either submit, or you are punished.
Only Allah, God, or whatever you wish to call Him can make you free. Everyone must serve someone or something. We can be either be slaves to serve the will of politicians, or we can serve Allah and be really free.
Rousseau wrote: "Man is free, but everywhere in chains".
|
by tigershark on 25.06.2005 [07:32 ]
|
|
|
To all you neocons-this not"Ukraine"!Since when does any nation need USA or Europes permission to do anything?Iran or anyone else is free to become what they want to become.Democracy-what a very vague word used along with the word freedom by the western media(Psywar really).Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won fairly.G.W.Bush was put in by the Electoral College.
|
by tigershark on 25.06.2005 [07:40 ]
|
|
|
More and more USA relies on immigration to maintain or build its population.The White segment of Americas population is barely growing but they try to hide it by adding hispanics to it.They may try to do the same with Asians later on.More&more the question will be-Not who is white but may become white in America?To my notion it would be better to describe the American people as being mixed with physical characteristics ranging from the African,European,Indian,Asian or any mixtures of these.Iran is growing on its own so there must be plenty of dating going on.USA leads in porn and has a low birth rate while Iran is the opposite of this.
|
by tigershark on 25.06.2005 [07:57 ]
|
|
|
And the clothing in USA looks like they're raising what children they do have to be prostitutes or thugs.Homosexuality is used as a false issue.If one is like that it was made by nature.Leave that person alone.But don't use it for porn,political litmus test or as proof one is "modern".What about the US gulag that holds 25% of the worlds prisoners?What kind of socio-economic system produces statistics like that?Ever seen the faces of those who lynched blacks?Checkout the website WITHOUT SANCTUARY to see those.Drug use?Unemployment?Wars all the time?Lies?Crime?Alienation?Hard work,little pay?And its much vaunted system lies in one of the most resource rich,favorable terrain with rivers&oceans and good weather but can't do for all its people and then yet needs resources and skilled people from the whole world yet touts itself as a model to follow.Please,for the sake of the American,Iranian and other peoples USA needs more leaders like Martin Luther King.
|
by ilia25 on 25.06.2005 [09:52 ]
|
|
|
.
|
by ilia25 on 25.06.2005 [09:55 ]
|
|
|
.
|
by Yasis on 25.06.2005 [10:01 ]
|
|
|
If this is accurate, then it really sucks.
|
by Mike-Malaysia on 25.06.2005 [10:30 ]
|
|
|
Current Democracy is a system of governance whereby the citizens of that country are given some choice as to who makes up the government of the country.
The principle of civillains having a say in how their country is great, but I feel that slippery paths have been created to actually minimise the say that civvies have over their governemnt, e.g. the political party system, the first past the post method, Inherited 'heads of state' like the queen Elizardbeth II. Each of those 3 things are present in the british electoral system.
In the US, its the similiar. The pres is either going to be a Republicon or a Democrit. The Galloways, Naders and Perot's of this world, no doubt know they would not be able to be the supreme leader of their country in the face of the party based organisation.
Constituencies also impact severely on people power.
The best implementaion of democracy actually does not involve politicians or parties, merely a body of civil servants that compile and organise the publics submitted views of various national policies. these get voted upon by the people of the land.. These tech rich days make such a system easy. Of course an independant body to oversee the pureness of the system is needed. This should consist of randomly chosen people (a bit like jury) who are not allowed to benefit themslevesm friends or amily from their work. I presented these ideas in the 'Get positive about Africa article'
This system at a local level (a county council level if you like) is also needed to that people directly involved can have a good say and can examine the problem. Local people vote on the compiled solutions formulates in their local area too.
That is real democracy, but, becasue it avoide corruption and manipulation, It will never happen.
So current democracy is, lets admit it, is a farkin joke. Even when between 1m and 2m people take to the streets demanding that the Govt doesn't go to war the Govt completely ignores them and commits treason by making that country more of a legitimate target for attack by the resistors that are having war inflicted upon them.
Current Democracy is like the swindling drinks maker, who only serves you water with the slightest flavour of coffee.
But simply distract the people with consumerism and rubbishy TV like 'You've been framed' then they dont care about having a say any more.
Current democracy is not better than any of the other non-tyrannical forms of government. Most people just arn;t intrested in getting involved with politics.
|
by Mike-Malaysia on 25.06.2005 [10:35 ]
|
|
|
You make the claim. Homosexulaity is made by nature. Please supply proof.
|
by Mike-Malaysia on 25.06.2005 [10:49 ]
|
|
|
If people wanna communicate about political or even sexual things then stupod software like that isnt going to work. Instead of spelling (in Farsi) you spell it demokracy, In china there symbol words are used there are still ways around it - You dont write the symbol democracy but a series of words to descrie it. Political and net savvy people have been doing this for quite some time. Look at french connection UK (fcuk) their sponerism of that word is obvious. If desparate, you can always dial up overseas connections.
At work we have sex, games and hacking filters on which filter out categories - not just words! This filter is quite agressive - It blocked out some legitimate academic research scans I was doing the other day. However yesterday I was able to access a hacking website containing many serials numbers and actuication keys for software becasue it corrupted the words 'serials'
where there is a will, there is a way.
|
by Nick_UK on 25.06.2005 [11:25 ]
|
|
|
....he had a few Beckham posters pulled down!! What a tyrant! ;)
I love the way this article 'accuses' him of being involved in a few spec ops against Iraq. Typical of western mainstreeam media. Sounds like the Americans when they 'accuse' non-iraqi mujihiden of being foreign fightrs haha. Such hypocrisy.
Ahmadinejad sounds like the kind of tough, dynamic nationalist that Iran needs. Not willing to bend over to Ameroisraeli demands. And considering that the barbarians are at the gate (having occupied iraq and afghanistan), Iran needs to remain resolute. If Iran was a more 'open' society, I'm certain the National Endowment for Democracy would have ensured the Iranian people 'democratically voted' for some pro-Zionist stooge (like in the Ukraine).
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 25.06.2005 [11:54 ]
|
|
|
What the U.S. has is a manufacture of consent by a disingenuous corporate media and groups like the Rand corporation.
Add to that the dubiousness of Diebold machines and the fact that the electoral college does not have to vote to reflect a representation of the elections, and you can't really even say that the U.S. has a representative democracy.
The Iranian people have freely chosen to have a government based on Islamic values. I'm very happy about that and I thank God for this blessed gift.
|
by Yasis on 25.06.2005 [12:19 ]
|
|
|
What is the point of elections when there is no one worthy to elect? That is the biggest problem I think with countries that have elections. Take the US. There is no person that is couragous enough to stand for election and undertake a massive reform. They need the rich-upper class for support and do not have the ability to undergo sweeping changes. That is why no matter who is the US president, their policy will not undergo drastic changes and most likely will be imperial.
|
by BlackPanther on 25.06.2005 [13:25 ]
|
|
|
"What they (Western countries) have is not democracy, but rule of trickery."
He is right. Remember what Malcolm X said about American democracy, it's nothing but "disguised hypocracy."
|
by BlackPanther on 25.06.2005 [13:29 ]
|
|
|
Shoud be "disguised hypocrisy." Though "Hypocracy" also works well as a description of Western democracy when you think about it.
It combines both Hype and Hypocrisy.
|
by Yasis on 25.06.2005 [13:50 ]
|
|
|
There is however one thing I like about the american two-party system. It provides political stability as most people think that they have a choice when in actual fact they are just getting played around.
Choice is an illusion created by those with power - Matrix
|
by Yasis on 25.06.2005 [13:54 ]
|
|
|
At least the Iranian system is honest. Whoever that is in power, he still needs approval from the supreme leader.
Not that much different from the american system, but the american one is an illusion.
|
by paul pawlowski on 25.06.2005 [15:41 ]
|
|
|
When we Brits will be free to vote for Head of State as the Iranians have just voted then I'll believe Britain is Democratic.
For One Thousand Years english men, women and children have been drawn, hanged and quartered at Tyburn Tree. Their cut up bodies were thrown into bogs which today is the Serpentine. When those
Martyrs of Britain be commemorated at Tyburn Tree — today Marble Arch — then I will see with my own eyes that Brit Human Rights is respected and we have Democracy.
But this is not the case — the ground from under Tyburn Tree was carefully removed and the most Holy of England Land turned into
underground car park — entrance to the car park is at Park Lane.
I want Human Rights respected in our Britain first before I think of others.
|
by adil_nazeem on 25.06.2005 [16:10 ]
|
|
|
One and the same.
Republicans are overtly aggressive and Racist(KKK) and cannot tolerate people of other culture and faiths.
Democrats are pro abortion(killing fetuses) ,pro sexist, pro gays and bring about destruction of moral system.
Which system do you prefer if u r USA citizen?
|
by observer on 25.06.2005 [16:56 ]
|
|
|
to the last three years of threats from the USA and their cronies.Go,develop the bomb,it's the best thing you can do to protect your country,which is now surrounded on all sides.
|
by Econ on 25.06.2005 [17:18 ]
|
|
|
This is yet another political defeat for the US brought on the neocon-Jews and their ill-fated war in Iraq.
NONE of the dumb ideas of the necoon-jews has produced a single benefit for the US. It is all a bloody and cost mess.
All of the US military, political, diplomatic, economic, financial and moral failures are being exposed.
Where is that stupid jew who coined the phrase 'axis of evil' NOW?
Americans are beginning to see how these irresponsible neocon-jews are wrecking our country with their bizzare '1000-year benevolent empire' in which the US cannot afford. All of this to support the futile 'greater Israel' plan.
With Americans having no desire to join the military to expand the ''empire" some stupid jew in Los Angeles calls for the creation of a US type foreign legion where we pay foreigners to fight our wars.
Where is the US likely to get the resources for THAT scheme when we are already deep in debt and need to borrow $2 billion a day.
Where are these stupid jews going to factor in the economic costs to their endless wars that are impoverishing Americans.
This stupid jew just don't understand empire. The reason the British was partially successful in building their empire is simply that the British were willing to spend their entire lives living in their colonies and never seeing Britain.
SOMETHNG NO AMERICAN IS WILLING TO DO.
The US simply lacks the clout to persuade anyone now that the US economy has all but collapsed.
Using the bloated, ineffective and inefficient US military for political change in Iraq has been a total failure.
The US military cannot reverse the US economic decline.
All of this comes at a time when we desperately need cheap for an economy built on cheap oil.
The Iraq war has been economically with oil prices skyrocketing past $60 causing Ford, GM and our entire transportation sector to go bankrupt.
It is only a matter of time before other industries dependent on oil all a similar path to bankruptcy.
The US has finally realized its greatest strategic and economic blunder of supporting the miserable jews in Occupied Palestine who have no resources the US needs.
The US has allowed Israel to become a crippling economic burden while creating endless enemies for the US by insisting on keeping the land stolen for the Palestinians Syrians and Lebanese.
|
by .antiestablishmentarianist on 25.06.2005 [17:52 ]
|
|
|
I suppose the autocratic and feudal absolute monarchies of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait supported by the USA are in step with the region? Have the people of those two countries ever had the opportunity to vote? No! The US rhetoric is only imperialistic dumbspeak.
The Iranian people voted for their leader. That's in step with Iran's people's wishes, but out of step for the US thieves and murderers.
All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.
George Orwell
|
by Yasis on 25.06.2005 [18:04 ]
|
|
|
Imperial actvities like lying to invade countries for hidden agendas is one thing, but when the US tries to claim that it is all for "democracy", then everything turns to a laugh.
|
by .antiestablishmentarianist on 25.06.2005 [18:13 ]
|
|
|
The royal family, whose some 7,000 male members control virtually all public activity, has used its thus far unlimited power to live lives of luxury and extravagance, which contrast starkly with the austerity that the mutawa’in (religious police) impose on the rest of the population, particularly the country’s women who are segregated from public life. The judicial system based on the literal application of the sharia (Islamic law), a labor market made up primarily of immigrants who live in semi-slavery, and discrimination against Shi’ites and other minorities place the country at the bottom of world human-rights rankings.
|
by ilia25 on 25.06.2005 [18:46 ]
|
|
|
Every single politician is by definition a public servant. There are always cynics, but they simply too dumb to understand that if your servant is not doing his job, you only have yourself to blame.
There always have been honest servants and those stealing silver tableware. And it is solely their master's responsibility to reward the good servants and to boot out the bad ones.
The real difference between a functioning democracy and a scam is that in the former people are making the choice, and in the former they are given the choice, like in Iran. And a false choice on top of that, because the real power will be always in the hands of self-appointed Guardian Council, no matter who the people vote for.
|
by turco on 25.06.2005 [19:44 ]
|
|
|
is a regime that allows for "change" with elections.
Any other system where there are elections but they are designed such that no real change may occur may properly be called trickery indeed. Wheter you have two parties defending the same ideas or all the politicians are linked to corporations which actually rule the country and elections are irrelevent, is not important.
So Spain showed us that they had democracy. Their system allowed for real change with elections.
But US has no democracy. A system where the ruling ideology (the pro-war bipartizan system) gets %95+ of the votes, is no democracy. Saddam had elections too, but he also got %98 of the votes. He was foolish, because if he let for example one of his trusted buddies run against him each getting %50 and alternating to rule the country, noone would think he was a dictator. Althought he would still be imposing whatever he wanted.
|
by turco on 25.06.2005 [19:44 ]
|
|
|
democracy is a regime that allows for "change" with elections.
|
by USAn on 25.06.2005 [20:05 ]
|
|
|
.
|
by Skander on 25.06.2005 [20:14 ]
|
|
|
The discussion is a little boring. The "westerners" are accusing their opponents in the lack of democracy, the islamists say - you yourself have no democracy! A kind of childish dispute - "You are an idiot!" - "You are an idiot yourself!"
The fact is that the western "democracies" are not democracies but a society ruled by an oligarchic group of very rich people who control all governments, all medias, all finances.
The other fact is that islamic countries have the same oligarchic structure where the whole power belongs to a small group of people. The example is Saudi Arabia. The difference is that in islamic countries the elite controls the minds of their citizens using the religion. In the west, they are using the mass-media.
In the modern world religion can not be any more a fundament the society is based upon. That is why islamic societies, in their conservative religious shape, do not have a long future.
|
by Greekos-Έλλην on 25.06.2005 [23:12 ]
|
|
|
is that if you tell them that they do something wrong they will start telling you that someone you know does something wrong too... For you blinded because of your fanatism:
I replied to the first comment titled as "Ayatollah Jannati says that Western nations do not have democracy"
I said that Iran does not have a democracy and I obviously didn't disagree with the statement above. I am very much anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist but also anti-fanatic of any kind. The fact that USA have a fascist regime doesn't dissallow me to recognise that so does China and that Iran has a dictatorship of the grand ayatollah and the guardians' council that vetoes every reform passed by the parliament or the president.
The fact that I am a leftist does not dissallow me to see the murderous war that the Russians are waging in Chechnya and neither the fundamentalist regimes and murderous tactics of the "mujahedeen" that are fighting the Russians. I know how hard it is to be objective but when we start applying the moto "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" without judging both sides, we end up being as fanatic as our enemies.
Peace
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 25.06.2005 [23:34 ]
|
|
|
One of the many untrue accusations made against Iran is that the Gaurdian Council holds all of the power.
That is simply not true.
The Gaurdian Council does not have the abillity to make laws. They are a Judicial branch that can find laws to be unconstitutional and vetoe them.
Having a system of checks and balances does not make a country undemocratic. So far, I've yet to hear a single argument that would logically demonstrate that Iran is not a proper representative democracy.
Iran found some candidates to be unqualified. Every country has criterion to determine which candidates are qualified and which are not. These qualifications can include such things as age, residence in country, loyalty to the constitution, etc.
In ancient Greece, for instance, slaves were not allowed to vote. That was one of their rules for qualification. In the USA, candidates have to be born in the USA. Every country has qualifications. So does Iran.
Iran does not cease to be a democracy for disqualifying unqualified candidates, nor does it cease to be a democracy because it has a system of checks and balances.
But Iran's presidential candidates were more different and offered more choices than the U.S. candidates. By any objective measure, Iran offers a better example of a democracy than the U.S. offers.
Besides, the U.S. Neoconservatives' complaints against Iran are mere crocodile tears. The U.S. neocons don't care about democracy. The U.S. government has usurped democracies all over the world.
The U.S. Neoconservatives merely want an Iranian state that is subservient to their whims, as the Saudi and Kuwaiti governments give obsequience to the U.S. demands. No matter what kind of government Iran has, the U.S. will always whine about it if the U.S. doesn't get the policies that they want.
|
by turco on 26.06.2005 [00:01 ]
|
|
|
Democracy leads to rule of masses. So It is a horrible thing if you have country full of uneducated/uninformed people. Bad for US. Bad for Iran.
So in a democracy whoever can control the masses (in social engineering sense) has the ability to impose their will.
If it is the media that can effect the public viewpoint then it is the media, if some people has the ability to tell what god thinks and most people are religious then it is those "servants of god".
I would have liked to agree with grekos on that Iran is no democracy either.
But I think it actually is somewhat democratic. It can change in the direction that most of its people wants.
The problem is, in a fundamentalist "society" (and it is not the regime that I call fundamentalist here but the people), democracy leads to fundamentalism. Because religion in Islamic countries is the strongest element in terms of assuring its will on people.
So If there is nothing that balances the overwhleming pressure of islam, then all the islamic countries will become "Shariah" if they are democratic. (Unless of course a miracle happens and all people are educated all of a sudden)
Note that, here I am not talking about informed and educated people like Iranian shiite, who nevertheless prefers "shariah" over other systems, but uneducated masses, who are taught that islam is the only truth. They are the majority, and they make the choice.
This is even true for Turkey, the more democratic we become, the more islamic we become too. Because Islam (unlike christianity) still detemines how masses think/behave/vote.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 26.06.2005 [01:22 ]
|
|
|
I agree in part with what you're saying because it partially resembles what Plato (Aflato) said in the Republic.
Plato also opposed demcoracy because it was the demos that voted to kill Socrates (Soghrat).
Plato argued that democracy leads to sophist demagoguery based on the whims of the people.
Ironically, the type of government that Plato advocated in his Republic was similar to Sharia. Indeed, it was even more intense than Sharia.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 26.06.2005 [01:33 ]
|
|
|
I think that religion of the masses is better because it is more from the heart and more intense.
Nevertheless, there is also the academic philosopher's religion which is, in my opinion, more interesting much like mathematics and music (real music like Mozart).
I believe that knowledge is the right of the people; and I think that knowledge leads to God as demonstrated in the book, "The Physics of Immortality," by Frank Tipler. In other words, I don't fear the masses leaving religion because of education.
Far be it, the scholastics of the Iranian seminaries is very intense in modern science and classical philosophy. For example, I first learned about Hegelian dialectics by reading Ayatollah Beheshti.
So, I don't worry about an educated mass forsaking Islam. On the contrary, I encourage an educated mass, unlike the Neoconservatives like Leo Strauss who have stated that the masses should be kept ignorant.
I also think that the Neoconservative, Leo Strauss misunderstood what Socrates meant by the "noble lie" in Strauss' Machiavelian interpretation of the Republic. I say that incase anyone should bring that up as an attack against Socrates the great.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 26.06.2005 [01:47 ]
|
|
|
I ultimately envision an open society where secularists and believers can live in harmony as they did in Muslim Cordoba. There, Jews, Christians, Muslims, and athiests lived side by side and aided each other in research and study.
For now, though, I believe that an open society is impossible because of U.S. meddling. That is why Castro in Cuba can not allow the freedoms that he would like to allow. We've all seen how the U.S. takes advantage of freedoms to destroy that country and enslave it through economic hit men and CIA coup d'tats.
I firmly believe that Islam is the only force that can stand up to the U.S. imperialist onslaught.
I think that a tight Sharia is temporarily necessary until the world can be freed from U.S. hegemonic oppression. I hope that secularists like yourself will help us to bring about this world where everyone can be free to pursuit knowledge and worship as they please.
|
by IraqiScot on 26.06.2005 [02:16 ]
|
|
|
This man is the business. Notice that he looks directly into the camera lense. This man will confront. He is ruthlesly honest, and of course very brave. He reminds me of Putin.
It is to be a duel between a man who rose to the top from the ground up versus a man who fell from a giddy hight into their respective positions.
A battle between a special forces officer, heroic in battle...and a coward.
|
by Greekos-Έλλην on 26.06.2005 [03:39 ]
|
|
|
cannot be applied in a capitalistic, money-run, power monger society. Democracy can only be applied in an equlitarian, fair, just society where everybody has a critical and educated way of thinking. Utopia? Maybe... But aren't utopias that actually drive us?
|
by BlackPanther on 26.06.2005 [15:03 ]
|
|
|
"Democracy" as peddled by the Western nations is a mask for Western imperialism, whether that be the USA, Greece, etc... Thus, you see nonsense like their current crusade for "global democracy," which is just a pretext for overthrowing governments that oppose the US, NATO, Israel et al.
You don't see developing nations--in this case Iran--trying to front as crusaders for freedom and democracy, and "regime change" Western countries that it doesn't like, though these nations surely would deserve it.. This is an arrogant conceit that the West holds.
This is because the West has hijacked supposed Englightenment ideals like liberty, freedom, human and civil rights to justify their subjugation of the world. This subjugation is designed to maintain their economic way of life and standard of living, which are the basis for all the power, privilege, and "freedom" they possess. (I.E. They want to maintain the gap between the First vs. Third Worlds, the Global North vs. Global South).
For them, "Democracy," is not about their 'concern' for the rule of the people (that's just a pretext), but a self-serving ideology to legitimize a Western-dominated world order and broader capitalist system that they disproportionately benefit from.
Creating true democracy would mean reclaiming this ideal from those that have hijacked and perverted it.
|
by Mike-Malaysia on 27.06.2005 [07:12 ]
|
|
|
A knowledgeable Muslim told me not to listen to orientalists becase they can twist things and screw up your idea of Islam. However. I disagreeded with him. If Islam is true, I thought, thenb it will defeat any challeger, which of course would be based on fakery and deception. However I know what he was saying.
There is a danger that education may lead to a loss of religious belief becasue at some point, people often stop questioning the alternative view being put forward. After a few 'yeah thats right' empathic moments in the jouney through a philosophy, the mind is drawn to wards that view, and persual of fact becomes in irrelevance.
So, education can be dangerous. The danger dissapates when one can see oneself ceasing to question. Not many can do this though as it is human tendance to adopt a philosophy, an ethic of life, a code for living.
This is why a 'good lier' (LOL - if that isn't a contracticion in terminology) always encompasses elements of the truth. Mimmicry and perversion is the way to do it. Have you ever noticed how total innovation in lying means the lie is so obvious.? Thats what a lot of philosophies do to lend credibility to themselves and attract followers.
ous if you dont recognise that fact.
Also people trying to speak out about Islam. When disecting Islam in English for example, they alter the transaltions of quranic verses and give discourse on that alteration. I particularly noticed this on thewatchers website in their answering Islam web-branch.
In Islam itself divergence of views are present even though the exact same verse is quoted. The divergence is becasue of interpretation. Interpretation of an unadulterated text is absolutely the most difficult situation in which to accept one position or reject the other. This would be the untimate form of lying and is essetially whats called 'spin'. When ones interpretations are promoted as being fact.
But in consideration of Islam, Islam is unique in that being from the Creator, God Almighty, The Quran (a book of pure truth) enables all true interprtaions of it to be valid. No other source of informatuion can have this property. Thats also why its impossible to successfully create lies against the interpretion the Quran. What the observer has to do is realise when a true interpretation is not being made and the fake accusations against the Quran is aparent.
So by all means question Islam and implementation of Islam (the implementaion will will be found to contain some wrongs if people do not follow the tenants of Islam). Question the Quran. Never stop questioning. Surely we cannot sin against God by questioning, in fact, sure questioning is our obligation.
So when seeking knowledge about anything... NEVER stop questioning.
Ilia. I never said Politicians are not civil servants. I was advocating the removal of Politicians from the governmental system, leaving behind the civil service to run the daily affairs of government.
And actually, now that you mention it: Civil servants are not politicians and I don't think politicans are civil servants. Civil servants support and implement, the will of the Governemnt, whereas politicians make up the Governemnt. Civil servants are not involved in draughting of legislation, politicians are!
|
|
RSS feed for articles and news
