Ahmadinejad's letter to Bush

[_Waziri_]

Well, I usually aptly respond to your takes here save my circumstances this time around that delayed it to a week.

Of course I have threatened to abandon you in this discourse severely cos of the tendencies I notice you share with Lionger that manifested and exposed your intention  - in my fair assumption - in the very 1st post you made that renewed this exchange. Here you said:

One of the apparently outstanding members of this forum espoused Holocaust denial theories and also claimed that Israel's alleged racist and violent basis could be found in their Torah, which he supported with a most bizarre example of scriptural hermeneutics. I'd like to find those threads, for I had wished to quizz him on his research and interpretative methods.

http://kanoonline.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=511b4bc8d704b1942ea249a8707b1cea&topic=3632.15

I do not really think a sincere quest of knowledge can be reduced to a quizzing which is simply a test of ones ability. This to me made you sound more like Lionger and his ill informed scholarship that  is bent on getting itself  on the top only. So I chose to mete you with the same treatment. Nevertheless, I keep coming back to reply you at least on certain notes that silently appeal to my conscience with a tickle of hope you may not be like Lionger. Whatever the case maybe, time will tell as this continues I will arrive at a clear template of judgment. Then I'll do what I want to do conveniently.   
 
I have noticed your contention with the issue of plagiarism which I have constantly said did not make for full meaning to me for the reasons I expressed. But if they mean this much to you let you carry them forward.

But when you question my interpretations of the Bible or Deedat's bear in mind that it is you who are intellectually challenged with these like Lionger not myself or Deedat.

The truth of the matter is, according to Christianity or its scholars of Bible, there is no difference between what Jesus, Paul, John or Mark or Matthew said. They are all of equal theological value in the eyes of any Christian. What is in the New Testament got the express approval of Jesus the Christ even if  it were written by John the Baptist or Paul. It is all word of God. And if John or Luke said something about the Jews rest assured it is the opinion of Jesus about them since he was only relating the Gospel under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and God who can be Jesus according to some.

So why the concern that it was said to have been from Jesus? He sure must have approved it so he is also responsible. Unless if you think otherwise. Then we will begin to separate the areas of disagreement between Jesus and his disciples, then we will conclude that what John said about the Jews was not true, he lied or fabricated or erred. We will also start to  look for where other Bible writers erred.

This is where I think Deedat surpassed you in his scholarship and myself, his disciple.  : :. At least we are able to know how Christians interpret their own scriptures.

So also Moses who was said to have written Exodus, he must have agreed and approved what God said about his people for him to have recorded it. No be so?

Yes, I answered Lionger the way I did because of the way the discussion was going and of course to show him how irrelevant it was for him to be asking about versions used. It is escapist of him to have done that.

This rested.

You thought it good to lecture me on what context means because of the verses  I quoted in my subsequent submission to show that when used disregarding contexts will give a very false representation of Christianity. But you only succeeded in affirming what I said with your  explanations that supposed to show I erred to your surprise.

What is the problem? Is it that you feel you just have to disagree with me? Or do you want me to believe you are not sincerely seeking for a fair dialogue contrary to your claims? 

Any fair reader of that post will see that I meant relativity in some verses and absoluteness of some others disregarding the environment or situation. Just as you admitted that the verses of violence cannot be used to paint Christianity in all absoluteness.

But the other quotes I used that gave the summary of Christian faith can be used to paint Christianity in all absoluteness and if you have problem with that let me hear what you believe is wrong in them before you start asking for any authority behind it. After all it is not always you need an authority to use your conscience. Let me hear what your conscience say about them.

Or are you only interested in disagreeing as it seems with the the issue of context in the other violent verses?

Also you claim that Jesus did not charge the Pharisees and the Scribes for altering the law as received by Moses! OK. All the disagreement that Jesus had with these Pharisees and Scribes were just to show they preserved the law and practiced it the way it was? Was that why they wanted him killed?

Why would Jesus want to say "Woe unto scribes", the writers charged with the coding or preservation of the law, if he didn't think they altered it and gave the masses the adulterated version? Or is the Talmud which is necessary for understanding the Torah according to Jewish tradition not an alteration? That is assuming the Torah we have today is the exact copy of what was obtained during times before Jesus?

Also you said:

Now about the Talmud: Firstly, I must ask: what is the direct source of your Talmud quotations? I ask this question because I have seen some these quotations years before - the Balaam references especially. When I tried to trace their sources then, I discovered that these quotes were popular and only available word-for word in ultra-racist and anti-Jewish enclaves such as neo-Nazi and white supremacist forums. As such, I hope that a credible 'Jewish authority' stands behind yor work here.
 

Yes you must have also seen Biblical quotations from Muslim or other Nazi websites, but does that makes them to be from sources other than the Bible or Qur'an. Why won't you get the Talmud yourself and read to find those quotes? Balaam is known even in Muslim literature as I said before. Concerning credible Jewish authorities you want Cekenah, I am sure if you had known or conversed with any sincere one you wouldn't be here disputing what I am saying here about their books. Any way did you read the link I provided about the new book authored about Jesus in The Talmud? What was the response of the Jews in the comments that followed the article. Did they not concur with the facts of who Jesus really is in the Talmud?

You can go ahead and google search any verse or quote I use here from the Bible, the Torah, Qur'an or Talmud and others. You will certainly find them used in many different ideological websites but that will not make them any less authentic from the source. It is only left for you to use your analytical faculties to see the justification of their usage or not.

You also said:

If we accept your presentation of the Talmud as accurate, then our first logical conclusion is that the Talmud itself incites racial bias and aggression. Unless you can establish a connection between the Talmud quotations and the verses of the Deuteronomy passage, it is not sensible to extend similar conclusions to the book of Deuteronomy. Are any of your Talmud verses commentaries on the verses of the Deuteronomy passage? If so, then kindly demonstrate. Otherwise, the Deuteronomy passage should never have been brought up in the first place.

This brings up a final question. If you consider the Talmud to be the premier authority in Judaism, then doesn't it make better sense to rely strictly on Talmud evidence from the start, rather than just the 'secondary' Torah?

This part was answered years back before you joined this discussion, it has also been repeated again and again after your joining look again:

I this thread, http://kanoonline.com/smf/index.php?topic=2459.0 , on, August 18, 2006  in particular, #6 Post, I said to Lionger:

"I noticed also how you admitted of not knowing much about Talmud and Midnash. That in essence says how much you do not know about Judaism and its laws of nationalism. This is why I think you are only fit to ask question here not argue. I believe I can remain rest assured in my comfortable superiority on this subject matter. For I have perseverently laboured thru the Bible, the Qur'an and the Rabbinic Tradition which forms the bedrock of Jewish religion,  for over ten years now.

That is why I say from the onset that I am not debating this with you but rather writing something which I believe will prove beneficial to all.

Concerning the Tanakh, or the Old Testament and its place in Jewish religion hear what a modern encyclopaedia said:

"Although all forms of Judaism have been rooted in the Hebrew Bible (referred to by Jews as the Tanach, an acronym for its three sections: Torah, the Pentateuch; Nebiim, the prophetic literature; and Ketubim, the other writings), it would be an error to think of Judaism as simply the ?religion of the Old Testament.? Contemporary Judaism is ultimately derived from the rabbinic movement of the first centuries of the Christian era in Palestine and Babylonia and is therefore called rabbinic Judaism. Rabbi, in Aramaic and Hebrew, means ?my teacher.? The rabbis, Jewish sages adept in studying the Scriptures and their own traditions, maintained that God had revealed to Moses on Sinai a twofold Torah. In addition to the written Torah (Scripture), God revealed an oral Torah, faithfully transmitted by word of mouth in an unbroken chain from master to disciple, and preserved now among the rabbis themselves."

Microsoft ? Encarta ? 2006. ? 1993-2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved."
 

So you could see why according to Judaism, understanding the Torah requires the Talmud not as contradiction but rather as an elaborate commentary as such I do not think I am wrong in anyway to have used them before using the Talmud now after all I took the pains to show Lionger with quotes above that the verses in Deuteronomy alone did not inform my conclusion. I also consulted other materials.

Waziri

[Jack Fulcher]

You know, this was a very interesting thread when it started, but it degenerated quickly into another forum for Mr. Waziri to show off what he learned in college once again.  This is what was happening in 2003 when I was on this board before.  He has primarily two agendas:  Show his knowledge of scripture, and defend holocaust deniers.  Quite frankly it's exhausting because his English is so confusing (at least it is to me).  I kind of like it when he DOES plagiarize other writings, because at least I understand what's written there.  Cheap shot, I know, but he writes pages in order to distract us from the point, and poor Lionger goes out of his way to be polite and respond to Mr. Waziri's scriptural points.  However, the letter from Ahmadinejad's writers is remarkable for these reasons:

1.  He continues to deny the holocaust.  This guy's nuts.  Eisenhower and the British made sure that the death camps were well photographed because they new that people like Ahmadinejad would come along and say "oh, come on, they weren't all that bad, were they?"  I even watched some stupid show from Iranian Television where the guy said that all those jews (and gypsies and Russians and homosexuals and communists) died from typhus, not by being shot and gassed.  (I saw this on MEMRITV.org, which is a great site showing what the Iranians and Saudis and Palestinians are being shown on their government controlled televisions)  The problem is that the Germans documented everything down to a gnat's eyebrow, and they didn't document all these typhus deaths.  There are thousands of witnesses to the gassing and shootings and hangings.  This isn't something you can just get a whole lot of people to get together and keep to one lie - a 10,000 person conspiracy just doesn't happen.

2.  Ahmadinejad has repeatedly said that Israel will be wiped off the map - not just here but in speeches since then.  Just use Google to find these speeches, or use Youtube to see them live.  Shame on you, Dave, for suggesting that Bush is lying about what this little Hitler is saying.  Your irrational hatred for America causes you to take some silly positions.  Maybe you're just jealous you don't live in the workers' paradise of San Francisco and have to hang out with all those drunks in Scotland (just kidding, of course, but if you're going to call someone's country "evil" you'll have to be able to take a couple of punches).

3.  This is why he wants nuclear energy.  Why doesn't he just get the Iranians to learn how to refine oil?  They're surrounded by clean crude.  No, he wants the bomb and wants to use it.  First Saddam tried to be the new Saladin, and now little Moumood thinks he can go down in history as the Persian hero.  This is why he needs to be stopped, and the Europeans need his oil and won't do anything to tick him off.  So guess who is nominated to stand up to him?  Come to think of it, the Europeans have a habit of not standing up to tyrants.....

4.  The little creep also suggests that 9/11 was an "inside job."  What nonsense.  Even bin-Laden (remember him?) admits that his thugs did the deed.  Conspiracy theories come up after every major event for some reason.  "Experts" come out of the woodwork to say that something just couldn't have worked the way people are saying.  I'm an expert.  I testify in court all the time.  Believe me, experts can see the same evidence and come up with many different explanations.  However, minority positions are just that, and that's what we need to recognize - they're on the fringe.

5.  However, the silliest thing I've read here didn't come from little Hitler (easier to spell than Ahmadinejad) or from Mr. Waziri.  It was from our dearest friend Husnaa, who said the jews owned "everything worth owning" in the US.  And that they run the country.  Good grief!  I know who owns stuff around my country, and for the most part it's the Christian Protestants (like Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians) and the Catholics.  I've seen these statistics before (because this was a legitimate issue once - about 70 or 80 years ago in the 1920s!), and the jews constitute about 2% of the poplulation and own maybe 12-15% of the wealth and capital stock.  They don't own the media, they don't own the universities, and they certainly don't run the government.  It is true that their political organizations wield a lot of power, but that's because they vote in large blocs, occasionally enough to influence the outcome of some local elections here and there.  But they're not as powerful as, for instance, the National Rifle Association which Dave will tell you is responsible for making sure Americans can buy and keep guns.  They also vote in blocs.  Muslims are trying to do this through their Council on Arab American Relations (funded largely by Saudi Arabia), but they have a lot of work to do if they want to match the jews.  The jews came here, worked hard, studied and became doctors and lawyers, and as a result they own more than the 2% population they represent.

6.  And one more thing to wrap up.  You know I love you dearly, Husnaa, but how did you get the idea that America is the promised land?  The people who wrote the Bible, Qur'an, and the Talmud didn't know that the Earth was round - that is why they don't reveal this in these scriptures.  But if America was the promised land, why didn't God or Allah say their promised land was on the other side of the world?  Certainly God knew that the world is round, didn't he?

It's late here and the wife wants to go to bed, so good night.  I hope your day is productive and satisfying.  Jack

[_Waziri_]

You know, this was a very interesting thread when it started, but it degenerated quickly into another forum for Mr. Waziri to show off what he learned in college once again.  This is what was happening in 2003 when I was on this board before.  He has primarily two agendas:  Show his knowledge of scripture, and defend holocaust deniers.  Quite frankly it's exhausting because his English is so confusing (at least it is to me).  I kind of like it when he DOES plagiarize other writings, because at least I understand what's written there.  Cheap shot, I know, but he writes pages in order to distract us from the point, and poor Lionger goes out of his way to be polite and respond to Mr. Waziri's scriptural points. 

Hello  Mr Fulcher,

At least you should know I have been wondering why you did not steal your way into this thread in order to get at me as is usual. Remember our encounter in 2003 here started when you ascribed a quote to me banking on the possibility that others may not go back and check what you said I said. But I have since forgiven you since you had  apologized when I apparently exposed your mischief.

Now you are back on a different horse to pinch on my flesh again. Ride on and good luck but I only wish your were able to say all these you are saying now, then,  instead of the much you took the pains to respond to what you are now referring as confusing English.  Then you used to say my posts were sometime excellent or intelligent! Or what happened to your intellectual development since five years back?

Waziri

[HUSNAA]

Jack that was a riveting riveting post!!  keep it up!!
Wish I had time to delve into a reply, but tell u what, I'll do exactly what u did. I'll take a rain check on it and  let it simmer till i have time...
PS Waziri, Jack's just trying to take my advice of letting loose a few punches, but its still a bit awkward somehow, but an enjoyable read nevertheless he's not over doing it, he's not underdoing it, but he still aint doing it like KING (thank God!, like most of what he wrote is tongue in cheek.......

[_Waziri_]

PS Waziri, Jack's just trying to take my advice of letting loose a few punches, but its still a bit awkward somehow, but an enjoyable read nevertheless he's not over doing it, he's not underdoing it, but he still aint doing it like KING (thank God!, like most of what he wrote is tongue in cheek.......

Husnaa, I am referring to the part he directed at me as in what I quoted from him, BTW Mr. Fulcher has been with us since 2003 here and we have debated a lot and as such I find it strange that he is threading this path now and only now. All what we did and his fabricating statements to attribute to me are reserved here.

I know him among the believers in the art of war which stipulates that once you can kill the leader in whatever way - even against the rule of war -the followers will be the re to follow. This is all about what is happening here hence the extreme mischief.

These are the threads we took to lengthy discussions, at least if I had taken him to be  like Ete, Lionger or King I wouldn't have followed him along:

The first encounter

http://kanoonline.com/smf/index.php?topic=154.0

The second encounter

http://kanoonline.com/smf/index.php?topic=125.0

The debates were so popular then that someone serialized them in one of our dailies here in Nigeria


Waziri

[_Waziri_]

And I always wonder why some of these alien posters do always want to tell one that he is intelligent, he made an excellent post and what have you. They like sitting on their high chairs judging people, dashing compliments as if anybody needs them for their good feelings.

This inform the way I treat some of the here too. In spite of all odd Mr. Fulcher has established a reputation of speaking to people from this sort high heels.

I do not think he has taken to your advice Husnaa for we've struggled with him like that since he made his first post here. He believes his America to be better than anywhere so also his people as compared to others.


Waziri 

[Jack Fulcher]

Mr. Waziri is right - I started posting here in 2003 when some people convicted poor Amina Lawal of adultry and they were going to KILL this woman for that, leaving her young child motherless.  All she wanted was for the man to take responsibility for the child, just as they are required to do in my country, but under Shari'ah law apparently that's not required as long as he denies that he's the father and she doesn't have the required four muslim men who can witness for her.  Good grief!!  So he was going to get away, and they were going to stone her to death.  Are we living in the ninth century?

I found this board and started to post some pretty indignant questions about this.  Some suggested strongly that I mind my own business.  I even got a private email from the Admin guy saying that I need to watch what I say or I might be banned.  Apparently free speech is not an important goal, at least to the Admin people.  Some, like this guy Al-Hamza, thought my ideas should be deleted and he said to just leave them alone, ending his posts with "jihad! jihad! jihad!"  Others, like Mr. Waziri, was patient and tried to explain how different muslim thought is from Western thought, and how the technicalities of Shari'ah law limits what the people can do.

One of the more interesting exchanges with Mr. Waziri was on the question of "how can that guy get away with fathering a child by just saying he didn't do it?"  I said that in the West we use forensic science like DNA testing to determine who the father is, and once a "paternity test" establishes paternity, the father must pay the mother child support as determined by the court.  Mr. Waziri explained that Shari'ah doesn't allow for forensic evidence, that it's all based on eyewitness testimony.  How is that possible?  Is that true even in more modern countries like Pakistan, Iran, or Indonesia?  It varies, apparently, but my position is such a system is biased strongly against the woman - what four men can witness such an act as adultry (or rape)?  Mr. Waziri was so nice as to write an article and publish it as an answer to my question - I found this article once when I (humbly) Googled my name.

So Mr. Waziri and I go way back.  I dropped out of circulation, Mr. Waziri, not because I was fed up or anything, but because I got sent to Mexico City to open a branch office for my company for a couple of years.  My job just sucked my brain out through my ears and for several years I really haven't done much except it and playing bridge with my dear wife.  By the way, we ran into a couple of good bridge players from Lagos - Bart Starink and Marek Poproch.  Ever heard of them?  They play at the Bonny Bridge Club, so if you play bridge and find yourself in Lagos, look them up and say Lisa and I say hi.

Bridge is a great game, but it's a real time sucker if you play in tournaments.  It make you wish you were smarter.

I like to tease Mr. Waziri about unimportant things.  For instance his writing.  Here's the funniest thing I found in his recent post in this thread:

"Now you are back on a different horse to pinch on my flesh again. Ride on and good luck but I only wish your were able to say all these you are saying now, then,  instead of the much you took the pains to respond to what you are now referring as confusing English."

I'm sorry to use this quote, but it was so funny I couldn't resist it.  I guess you're saying I shouldn't have complimented you on your writing in 2003, but, believe it or not Mr. Waziri, I was sincere.  You have a lot of knowledge but have a hard time expressing it.  I learned a lot from you about Islam and the Shari'ah, something I knew nothing about when I barged into this forum back then.  And I must admit your English is a million times better than my Hausa.  But I strongly disagree with your holocaust denial tendencies, and your strong resistance to modernity.  There is no good reason to oppress women with such a biased system, unless you're a man who wants to get away with shenanigans. (I like that word - hope I spelled it right)  You even have quoted David Duke, the Ku Klux Klan Grand Dragon, in order to support your position on the holocaust - the Klan would have all the black people in the world removed if it could.  I just want to try to show you that the lessons of the Enlightenment are ones all should adopt in order to make their lives more productive and rational.  If you read Arabnews.com regularly as I do, one recurring issue is that the Saudi youth don't like to work.  This is because the Saudis hire foreign people to do everything for them, even extract the oil out of their sand.  This is bad for the kids - they need to see their parents work hard every day, as they do in the West.  They need to learn to be problem solvers, and they need to be able to exchange their ideas freely and without fear from the government.  I know this is a cultural change, but think what's going to happen to Saudi Arabia when we figure out how to create energy without oil - it's really only a matter of time before we figure this one out.  Poor SA will not have any of its own work force that can support an economy.  All of the billions they're getting now won't be supporting an economy with machines and thinkers as you have in the West.  Israel will have a larger and more vibrant economy that SA, and it doesn't have to be that way.  Is Nigeria going to suffer the same fate?  If you don't develop a culture of hard work and investment now, all of that oil you're allowing Western companies to extract and pay you for will have been wasted. 

This position is why Mr. Waziri says I think that America is better than any other country.  I may not think it's necessarily better, but I do know that it's much more productive than most others (the Japanese and the Germans seem to work pretty hard, too, so their economies are gigantic).  I do know that people are knocking down the doors to get in and live here.  I do know that Kay (my colleague from Lagos who does utility auditing) is not going back to Nigeria, and neither are his sons.  That's a shame and a big loss.  I know that we're clumsy and loud and we're not very diplomatic, and this gives us a bad reputation; however, the world depends on our production, machines, and ideas to solve some of their problems, and as a result they hate us and say we're making them victims.  But that's what happens to all successful cultures and peoples.  Doesn't this happen in Africa sometimes?

I also don't really think many people hate us.  Maybe the middle class in some countries who can't move here, like Dave.  Certainly the ruling classes in many countries like to use us to blame for their own bad decisions.  And Israel (those darn Zionists cause all the trouble).  But at the end of the day, it's right to get your children inoculated against disease and it's right to kill those mosquitoes to get rid of malaria; and if your leaders say not to do this, that it's a Zionist or American plot to cause genocide or steal your land, you need to say "no" to them and to insist that you and your neighbors do the right thing.

Whew, I write a lot when I get going, don't I?  I'm sorry.  And it's good to hear from you, Mr. Waziri.  And what does the remarkable Husnaa think about my position regarding forensic science and the oppression of women under the Shari'ah?  And please be patient with me.  Have a good Friday, folks.  Jack

[King]

And Husnna, I am not sure why I had to be dragged into this exchange. I wasn't aware that my postings troubled many of you that much. How sad!!! True, Jack Sparro (fulcher) is quite the gentleman, but me, I am feisty and cut through all the crap to deliver my opinion. I will say I am with Jack on this one though. Sure, I ruffle feathers and all, but goodness, I am not demented enough to deny the holocaust when even the accused Germans admit and accept responsibility. This is why I am baffled by some of the lengthy yet pointless essays on this site. Even when facts are so obvious to the point of slapping one in the face, some dubious 'geniuses' attempt to spin falsehoods in the hope that they become truths.
Anyway, I'll let you all continue with this circus. Have a good evening.

[HUSNAA]

Lol Jack the 'remarkable husnaa' is incommunicado and will be for a few weeks to come. I've read yr interesting post and itching to write something, but not a good idea cos its almost suicidal to deviate from my course at the present moment

King king king!! I salute ooooo
have a good evening also...
PS stop sounding high and mighty.. I'm in a relatively good mood at the mo.. so i can afford to overlook the 'circus'. At any rate u do have a merry go round with the 'circus' otherwise u wouldnt bother with it...

[_Waziri_]

I'm sorry to use this quote, but it was so funny I couldn't resist it.  I guess you're saying I shouldn't have complimented you on your writing in 2003, but, believe it or not Mr. Waziri, I was sincere.  You have a lot of knowledge but have a hard time expressing it.

Well, Mr. Fulcher,

In civilised worlds we don't find reasons to xpress our scorn on people who write in our language no matter how bad we feel they do. But still I'll wish you well in that. You know you are a civilised American and you do nothing wrong. But if you feel I had wanted all along to earn your praise in anyway by what I have been writing here, be content to know it has never been so.

I have seen you struggling to gain my attention since you came back. Know that I have never cared about what you've been doing in the years you absented yourself from this forum.

The issues you said we discussed earlier are carefully preserved here so it is not on you to tell people what I said then. I have never trusted you to report my wordings to others because you have a reputation of doctoring them. You will do well by giving others the reference where they can find my opinions.

Again, I believe I have discussed the subject matter you are bringing back thoroughly in a way that I don't have anything to add now so please do not take it personal if I am unable to respond to you in full measure.

Thanks

Waziri