Obama: 'I'm not a Muslim, I'm against Hamas and Arabs, and I'll protect Jews'

[HUSNAA]

There is a verse of the Holy Qur'an that says "There is no compulsion in religion". It is referring to ppl who chose not to accept Islam in the time of the Prophet Salaam and it still stands today. Islam is not a static religion it is very dynamic. The fundamental and basic Laws Laid down by God through the prophet (SAW) still stand and are operative especially those that can be found in the Holy Qur'an. e.g Muslims not eating pork, drinking alcohol or taking drugs as an extrapolation of that verse, committing adultery and fornication, lying, backbiting etc. Then there are other laws that fall under special circumstances like when a country is at war with its neighbors and especially as it pertains to the fact that it is the Islamic religion that is at stake. For example there is a verse in the Holy Qur'an which is a bone of contention with so many non muslims and they often quote it to show
that Islam is a violent and  intolerant religion.
The verse says:
'And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al Fitna is worse than killing. And do not fight them in the  Al Masjid al Haram (sanctuary at Makkah), unless they fight you there. But if they attack you, kill them, such is the recompense of the unbelievers'.
Firstly, the above verse is instructing the muslim soldiers to combat with the non muslim soldiers who are an ARMY and NOT civilians. This is something that all western and non muslims critics of Islam conveniently "forget" to mention when they are attacking Islam either verbally, or in writing.  There is nothing wrong with the instructions on how to go about a war, how many human generals have given similar instructions to their soldiers on war tactics?
What the non muslim critics also dont want ppl to know is that it was only after this verse was revealed that muslims began to wage war with the non muslim idolaters who did not want to see Islam established. Before that, the muslims had always been at the receiving end of atrocities commited on them by the Meccan idolaters, and they bore it all patiently. This in itself was not helping Islam because there might have been so many ppl who privately wanted to enter Islam but were detered from doing so when they saw the tortures inflicted on the muslims by the non muslims.

Besides we all know how human nature operates, if a human is too submissive and appears to be timid to another human, he is grossly misused and taken advantage of and oppressed.  Once the timid person stands up to his oppressors, he puts some element of diffidence in his oppressors and as a result, they back off. 
Thus in order for Islam to be established, the muslims had to fight back tooth and nail and as those mushriqs were not using kid gloves to handle the muslims, the muslims must use equal force to handle them and if it meant killing the non believers then so be it, since they were the perpetrators of the atrocities on muslims to begin with.

The word Fitnah means trial and it also means oppression. Thus the Qur'an viewed oppression as worse than killing. If we look at history we see how true it is. The Jews were an oppressed race in Europe until the mid 20th Century. Hitler killed them in their millions, by incarceration in concentration camps and gassing. The single most unfortunate thing that happened was that the Jews resigned themselves to the oppression. If they had resisted, who knows? At least millions would not have been exterminated. There were cases of minor uprisings at Treblinka and in Sorbibor. At Sorbibor concentration camp some Jews managed to escape from the concentration camp, and at Treblinka, Jews showed what can be achieved if more of them fought back. I cant remember what happened at Treblinka, but they caused the Germans a lot of discomfort and angst, which showed that the Jews could have prevailed, if they had persisted.
At present the single greatest fitnah in this world is George Bush. That verse of the Qur'an is truly justified on him. I am not going to start on about him here, but what I want to say is that I heard in the news yesterday that he wants to 'lend' US soldiers to Lebanon so that they can crush the Hisbullah.. I shake my head. If he wants to do some good with US soldiers, send them to Myanmar to wipe out the Burmese Junta who are on the verge of masterminding a  genocide on their citizens by not allowing proper aid to reach the victims of the natural disaster that happened in that country.

[bakangizo]

On a lighter note, consider this: Bush is easily the most hated person in the world now. I can count in scores the number of countries (Islamic or not), not to mention "fundamentalists, terrorists etc", that would gladly take him out if possible. But I can't recall Americans saying they fear for his safety.

In any case, if the West can keep Salman Rushdie safe, even with the publicly declared fatwa hanging on his head, I expect the leader of the most powerful country in the world to be safe as well. ;D

[Cekenah]

At present the single greatest fitnah in this world is George Bush. That verse of the Qur'an is truly justified on him. I am not going to start on about him here, but what I want to say is that I heard in the news yesterday that he wants to 'lend' US soldiers to Lebanon so that they can crush the Hisbullah.. I shake my head. If he wants to do some good with US soldiers, send them to Myanmar to wipe out the Burmese Junta who are on the verge of masterminding a  genocide on their citizens by not allowing proper aid to reach the victims of the natural disaster that happened in that country.

What would be the difference between your proposed campaign and the 'shock and awe' putsch of 2003 that removed another despot in Iraq?

[HUSNAA]

Come on Cikenah, dont be obtuse lol! I will tell you some differences between invading Iraq and getting rid of the junta in myanmar... intent and will. The intent for invading Iraq was selfish and the reasons given for doing so were not real, they were lies and only apparent  to Bush and his cohorts because they wanted to believe them or make believe them. The US went to Iraq becos of its oil, bcos it was planning to de peg its currency from the US dollar and tack it on to the Euro, which would have caused  massive damage to the US economy. Saddam may be a despot according to you, but by God I'd rather live in his Iraq than the Iraq the US fashioned out now. Besides Saddam CARED for his subjects. He was mean to his enemies (who isnt?). There was electricity, water, education, housing food and health care under his regime and this is INSPITE of the horrid sanctions imposed by the same US on that country. (It is much more than u can say for us in Nigeria with a govt which is in canoodles with the US and yet we are much worse off than the iraqis who lived under a US hating despot) There was this very little incident that occurred in Iraq which is really not worth a photon of light shone on it, but for me who is starved of such a thing it made a massive impression ever afterwards and I still remember it. It was after the first round of air raids and strikes by the Bush admin and the city of Baghdad was plunged in darkness, after an hr or so...hey Presto! the electricity was back!! (Lord!! Nigeria we hail thee but quo vadis?)

Now to Myanmar, we can see what is happening in that country on our TV screens, we hear about the lack of care and concern for its citizens in the aftermath of the cyclone. The country cannot cope with the disaster on its own, but it refuses to let aid workers either into the country or freely move about. It is only starting to accept aid after much pressuring, but it is refusing to distribute the aid so far. Ppl are in danger of dying from starvation, lack of potable drinking water and the threat of dengue fever is very real. Dengue fever is a mosquito transmitted disease which is worse than malaria, in case ppl dont know. The reason why Malaria is more infamous is because it attacks more ppl, but dengue fever is by far more serious than malaria. With Dengue fever, one's immune system does not improve from an initial attack. A second attack often times proves fatal rather than  mild which goes against the grain of conventional wisdom regarding most forms of viral disorders. So given the ripe breeding conditions for mosquito larvae there is a possibility for an epidemic.
The head of the Junta is incommunicado, the UN secretary and his envoys have tried to get in touch with him but to no avail.
I believe that the strength and test of a caring leadership is how it mobilizes iand manages its resources under a  crisis condition. Look at the China, which a few days ago had a massive 7.8 richter scale earthquake, so far over 12000 ppl have died and 40,000 are buried some still alive. The govt estimates that over 1 million (or 10 million cant remember) ppl are affected by the earthquake. In the aftermath, the Chinese were impressive. The govt sent out thousands of soldiers to the affected areas to begin rescue work. Wen Jia bao personally camped out in the devastated area and is seen everyday on TV moving about the victims, supervising work and giving out words of encouragement and solace to them. It makes me like him immensely honestly, though at the back of my mind there is this niggling doubt of whether this isnt in a way a PR campaign to offset the negativity of the Tibet issue. I push down all such horrid thoughts, cos I am really not a cynic, I believe in humanity and I have great faith in the human spirit  ;D ;D.

The problem with Bush is that he is a warmonger. He is a single bloody minded warmonger who cannot not see the overall picture. In his so called fight with terrorism he has managed to make the lives of millions of ppl miserable. He got rid of the fledgling Islamic militia in Somalia, when after it established itself, it brought some modicum of sanity to the lives of the ppl through law and order. Now any sensible man would consider the two score years of lawlessness which prevailed in Somalia  against the foreground of a semblance of normalcy and just let the ppl be.  No not Bush, he has this idea that any Islamic govt is a terrorist govt and must be got rid of. Now the country is in a the worst shape than its ever been. The western recognized govt is so ineffectual becos its not what the ppl want, and given the chaos that is the norm, the govt cannot impose itself on the citizenry. In the mean time Ethiopian soldiers are having a field day slaughtering innocent civilians abattoir style.

He keeps pressurizing Iran over its uranium for electricity programs. He has threatened, blustered, monkeyed gone red in the face and all that has stopped him from actually carrying out his intention of an Iranian invasion is the fact that he doesnt have more resources.. the available are being expended in Iraq. Meanwhile, he treated North Korea with kid gloves.. North Korea, who didnt deny its real intention of arming its self with nuclear weapons, he kept vascillating in his dealings with Kim jung ill. I dont recall once a mention or a threat of invading North Korea. Is it bcos North Korea is not in the middle east and has no interest in the affairs of Israel what so ever?
So there is a lot of difference between getting rid of the junta in Myanmar and getting rid of Saddam Hussein. The first case will be for altruistic reasons and the second case was selfish willfulness on the part of Bush and Blair

[Dave_McEwan_Hill]

Great post, Husnaa

[Jack Fulcher]

Oh good grief, Husnaa!  I generally enjoy your posts and consider you one of the best researchers on the board.  However, good research is not the same as repeating everything you read on the internet.  Google is a tool that needs to be used carefully and discretion.  I don't know where you got the following, but you really need to think about this stuff before you copy it here:

1.  "The US went to Iraq becos of its oil, bcos it was planning to de peg its currency from the US dollar and tack it on to the Euro, which would have caused  massive damage to the US economy."  I don't know what you were doing in 2003, or what you were reading, but I'd Google some US newspapers from that time period.  Saddam had WMDs at one time (because he used them in the 1990s against both the Americans and his own people).  He got whipped by the first President Bush and was required to get rid of them.  He wouldn't let the inspectors come in and search freely, so the UN issued resolutions that we used to go after him.  Everyone (including the Americans, British, French and the Russians) believed he still had those weapons - Bush didn't lie about that.  Where did they go?  Syria?  Still hidden?  After all this time we still don't have the documentation showing they were dismantled.  If he had them, or if he got nuclear weapons, he'd be the most destablizing influence in the region.

And let's hear your analysis of how pegging their own currency to the Euro would cause "massive damage to the US economy."  How does that work, again?  I'm an economist, and I have no idea what you're talking about.  In the first place, even if their central bank could do such a thing, there's nothing about pegging a currency to something else that can damage another country's currency.  Imports from Iraq represented far less than .001% of US GDP.  Besides, the Iraqui currency was never pegged to the dollar in the first place.

However, the next one takes the cake:

2.  "Saddam CARED for his subjects."  What planet were you writing from when you penned that sentence?  The only people he cared about were his own Sunni Baath Party members.  Don't you know about the Kurds he murdered en masse?  Don't you know about the thousands of Shia he killed?  What they have in Iraq now is the beginnings of a democracy.  Why are the Arabs so slow in creating democracy?  This will make exactly two democracies in the area - Iraq and Israel.  (You can't count countries that don't allow opposition parties, as in Egypt and Iran).

3.  Yes, he was able to get some infrastructure built, but remember that Iraq was one of the larger producers of oil (not that they produced anything - they just let foreign companies come in, extract the oil, and got paid billions for it). 

The bottom line for Saddam was he was a madman who killed thousands OF HIS OWN PEOPLE.  Sanctions were imposed in an effort to get the Iraquis to replace this dictator, because he was such a destabilizing factor in the area.  This was partly to keep the oil flowing (which helps not just us, but the rest of the world too), and partly to protect Israel. 

I agree that Myanmar is a tragedy and I'd fully support an invasion with out troops.  I suspect we won't because what happens there doesn't affect us much, but that's the way of the world, isn't it?  I'd like to invade the Darfur region because genocide should be stopped, and I would have liked to invade Rwanda, but I guess those places aren't high on our list of areas of strategic importance. 

The problem is that, no matter what we do, we'll be blamed by one side or the other.  That's the problem with being the big dog - everyone takes a bite as you go by.  We can't win in the court of public opinion.  So we might as well just do what we think is best, not what others think we should do. 

Jack (who CARES for his subjects).

[sheriff 05]

Jack, on the case of the WMD Hans Blix, the chief UN weapon's inspector at the time of the war will strongly differ .. Afterall, what happened to the expression "innocent until proven guilty".. Or maybe Iraq is as guilty as Iran (Who the CIA just confessed have had no weapons program since 2003?).... No one especially in the UK even brings up the issue of the WMD anymore because it is absolutely clear that it was a hoax ... (stick to the moral argument, in my experience, that tends to do better)

On the legality of the war, just ask Kofi Anan till this day he says without mincing his word,that it "according to all international laws, is absolutely illegal"... Curiously, John Bolton the UN secretary general during the war (he followed John Negroponte) was asked to sum up the tenure of Kofi Anan and he remarked "I'll pass" . A genuine remark from a tough man of war about a Nobel prize winner and a tough man of peace.. (the tale of two worlds eh!)

I apologise for being brief Jack, I do not intend to get dragged into this debate, but I just feel like many of my very good American friends, you risk being extremely myopic, making your mind up without having the luxury of seeing that their is a lot more to the world than America .... I mean no disrespect and please take no offence but truthfully, I have to say.. open your mind!!..

For a self learning student of strategy, history and economics like myself, the sad unfolding reality of this scenario as evidenced throughout Mankinds over 3000 years of nation building is that the "denial", "myopism", "non-inclusivity" and "blindness" of America's foreign policy, was the beginning of the end for all the previous world powers (including the Turks, the Brits and especially the Soviets) .... A fact highlighted even in the earliest texts of Sun Tzu (The art of war 544 BC).. While previous super powers could be excused for living in a world of "Zero sum" solutions. Globalisation and rapid economic and technological change have altered dynamics significantly, making the best solutions for everyone mainly "Non-zero sum" solutions.... (As an economist, I'm sure you'll understand, but then again, our schools of thought may be different!!) .... My advice, travel the world, meet its people (not the one's in hotels but in the markets and villages) then open your eyes.. (My travel agent has some facinating deals if you're interested .. lol!!)

Hajia Husna, while I wouldn't say Sadam was pure evil, I don't think he's as innocent as you paint him to be either .... Like all leader's he had his faults and I feel justice should be done by accepting his limitations as well... But I do say that for the approximately 450,000 civilians killed in the fighting so far, (Iraq body count group, I thought I should reference before I am also accused of relying on google!!), and not to mention all that have been displaced, the seemingly philosophical question (depending on if you're sunni, shi'a or kurd) would always be... was it worth it?

[HUSNAA]

At the risk of sounding pompous, let me first of say that my source of info on the iraqi currency depegging from the US dollar is NOT the internet. It is personal communication with someone whose judgement I trust. Secondly, 95% of my information if I need to consult the internet, comes from peer reviewed journals which have nothing to do with what I write on this board by the way. My source of information believe it or not is listening to the news as I work on my laptop, from the BBC mostly, I also listen to DW both TV and internet. I watch 20/20 and 60 miniutes and I get some American current affares from that. I love listening to kowane gauta as well as... so hilariously funny! That is where I get my aperitif or appetizer of Nigerian politics.  I dont read online newspapers what ever their denominations.
I dont really like making arbitrary assertions simply bcos I dont want to be caught out. Many of the things I write  are my conclusions on matters as I see them with the help of the input I get from the various news channels I listen to. I'd like to read prolifically, but I need to finish what I am doing at the moment. Oh BTW, I just bought a book called Jews of Islam, which is a series of lectures strung together as a book by Bernard Lewis. The interesting thing about this book is that its author is Jewish and all the ppl whom he consulted in its genesis were Jewish, right down to the typist. I dont agree with some of the stuff written but to be honest, the book was written in a fairly unbiased way and I believe the bits I dont agree with were not written as propaganda, but from the Jewish perspective of the Islamic religion since they dont believe everything about Islam. So Jack next time you hear something that jars your senses, remember, its sources are impeccable and not culled from wikipedia ;D ;D ;D ;D.
To answer both you (Jack and Mallam Sherrif) on the subject of Saddam Hussein. I still reiterate that Saddam cared for his ppl. All one had to do is not oppose him that is all and keep a low profile and everything will be nearly alright and tight. Of course he was responsible for the death of a lot of Iraqis. But isnt that what Bush has done for the past 5years?  Honestly, I cant see any difference between Bush and Saddam except the method of execution (forgive the pun!) of their atrocities! If Saddam didnt care for his ppl, then the same can be said of George Bush, becos he doesnt care that American soldiers are being killed in iraq and Afghanistan. If he did, he'd order the withdrawal of the troops. He doesnt care about the FEELINGS of the families of the killed soldiers. Heck I think at the start of the war, he didnt even show any personal gestures of condolences to the families of the berieved, except to hand them some silly flag as a token of gratitude for the loss of the life, and even that is officially done, by someone 95 degrees removed from Bush. So if a life is precious then the hundreds of thousands of the iraqi lives killed under Saddam are equivalent to the plus-minus 4000 american soldiers killed so far, and to make it exponential, there are the 600 to 800 thousand iraqis killed as a result of the current iraqi war. So where is the difference between Saddam and Bush.. one was an overt despot and the other is a closet despot.
PS I know Saddam murdered the kurds, I saw pictures of them in Times or Newsweek when I was in the habit of reading those news magazines. I dont condone it ofcourse, but wasnt it the US who instigated them to uprise against him and then left them in the lurch? How typical of the US and the west in general! Its like Mugabe and the west at the moment. They have imposed crippling sanctions on that country to the extent that its on its last legs economically and the worst hit are the innocent citizens and the west has turned round and pointed an accusing finger on how Mugabe has let the country go to the dogs.. when the west was the one who released the dogs in the first place...

[Muhsin]

Excellent post, my ever lasting Aunty! You are certainly a reservoir of knowledge.

Nice posts Jack and Sheriff. And welcome back to KanoOnline (Sheriff).

[Muhsin]

Obama wins Democratic nomination. Just read on Yahoo web page. And Bush congratulates him, they added.

[Dan-Borno]

Hillary is supposed to win the primaries, she is my candidate
Obama is a failure.

[HUSNAA]

Hillary is supposed to win the primaries, she is my candidate
Obama is a failure.

EAT YR HEART OUT DB! HE'S ALREADY WON! SHE'LL BE HIS RUNNING MATE

[Dan-Borno]

Husnaa we have not yet make our intentions known,
we were eyeing the White House as President not
Vice President - However, series of meeting will be
held with her advicers.

I just hope zaku iya haye wa at the General Election.

[gogannaka]

The republicans might just help themselves and opt out of the race if there's an Obama-Clinton ticket.

[Muhsin]

Hillary is supposed to win the primaries, she is my candidate
Obama is a failure.

You feminist, you've choosen a gigantic failure! Neither Obama nor Hillary is my candidate, DB. Yet, I prepare sosai-sasai Democrat to win this upcoming election, wallahi, than Republican. The latter manifestation is more outrageosly dengerous to  world than the former.

And to tell you what I keenly believe would happen; Democtrat won't win this election. Kai whoever, among them (Obama and Mrs Clinton) win. Its not yet time for a woman to lead world most powerful country and neither for a black to  do so. Period. You see; at the end of the day, that old crook MC Cain would be summoned as winner ko da rigging kuwa.