Tuesday, September 6, 2016

Sputnik International — Top Saudi Imam Calls for Killing Shia, Jews, Christians in Prayer Broadcast

“Grant them victory over the treacherous Jews, and over the spiteful Christians, and over the untrusted hypocrites,” the imam intones. “O Allah, grant them victory, help and strength.”….
Meanwhile, back in the USA.
Earlier this month, the Obama Administration proposed the sale of another $1.15 billion in tanks, machine guns and other US military equipment to Saudi Arabia, leaving many lawmakers asking who the regime would kill with the weaponry.…
WTF?

Sputnik International
Top Saudi Imam Calls for Killing Shia, Jews, Christians in Prayer Broadcast

17 comments:

Matt Franko said...

Well at least I can't blame this one on Darwin....

John said...

Don't speak too soon Matt! Apparently there are very good evolutionary reasons for believing in God, and all that comes with. If, that is, you want to give credence to this kind of evolutionary thought. There might be something in it, so I'm not dismissing it completely, in the same way I dismiss the natural selectionistas, who lead a double life as celebrity atheists. Whether evolution can mould human minds such a way for some preference towards religious belief may be asking too much of evolution, but its interesting that people like Stephen Jay Gould and Scott Atran do give it credence.

Evolutionary psychology, or what used to be called "sociobiology", has an answer for everything, from believing in God to your preference for smooth or crunchy peanut butter, and of course how racism and race preference (preferring your tribe over others) is perfectly normal, so what the Wahhabi loony tunes is saying is perfectly "natural" according to the sociobiologists. In my opinion, most of evolutionary psychology is pseudoscience and rightwing propaganda.

Life is too complicated and messy to be explained by the simplistic mechanisms and simplistic thinking we are taught. And human beliefs are currently unfathomable scientifically. The simpletons who have come up with evolutionary psychology will have none of it: they really do believe they can explain everything that goes on in every human head. It's all to do with genetic endowment, not social environment.

Matt Franko said...

John I think they are trying to reach an understanding thru a more like "active" process or something..

Like "active learning" vs. "rote learning"...

"evolutionism" is an "active learning" method or something... its a process ... they need a process in this... so they come up with "evolutionary psychology"...

When they bring in the word 'evolution' its like an action word for them... so they are attracted to these action/process oriented words...

the Wahabies to me just look dogmatic (rote learning)... ie the book depicts some types of people killing other types of people so they think they should just imitate that behavior or something depending on what cohort in the book they see themselves as belonging to... rinse and repeat...

Its like AA here always harping on the OT stuff related to paying interest because "they did that in the bible!" yada yada... stoning homosexuals, etc... "Ten Commandments!",etc..

This may actually transcend knowledge and truth as imo, in the whole "Peter vs. Paul" thing in Christendom, I see Paul using "rote" methodology while Peter uses "active" methodology...

So this whole conflict (maybe?) between "active learning" vs "rote learning" in mankind might be a very significant and revealing dichotomy in some larger way... you see it all the time... or maybe better it is "active learning" vs. "rote teaching"...

Ralph Musgrave said...

So a Muslim preacher tells other Muslims to kill. What a surprise.

Wait for the deafening non-reaction and non-disapproval from leftie journalists.

John said...

"Wait for the deafening non-reaction and non-disapproval from leftie journalists."

These preachers are a tiny proportion of imams, let alone the 1.5 billion Muslims, but I suppose that's neither here nor there. And how about all those preachers who tell people not to kill? That's not a sensational headline, so it goes straight into the trashcan.

These preachers would be screaming in the wilderness were it not for largesse from the House of Saud, who we keep in power, and who have decided to raze Syria to the ground and massacring hundreds of thousands of innocent people. If there's any complaint to be made, it's to our own countries for supporting these genocidal bigots. We are accessories to the crime by keeping the House of Saud in power. Their crimes are our own crimes. By criminological standards, we are accessories in knowledge of the crimes (in foresight), accessories through aiding and abetting of the crimes, and of course through conspiracy. After the Chilcot report, you'd know about our crimes before and during the occupation of Iraq. The evidence is overwhelming about our roles in the wider Middle East.

In any case, you mean from all journalists in the mainstream media. Unless it fulfils some wider foreign policy objective, the media stays docile. When Downing Street or the White House says jump, the docile lapdogs suddenly metamorphosise into rabid dogs. Wahhabi preachers in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and elsewhere get a pass if they concentrate on the causes that are in keeping with our own objectives.

The real left, not the absurd bootlicking Blairite Guardianistas that for some reason passes as the left, always cast a light on these monstrosities. And why does the mainstream media behave in this revolting fashion? Because we sell hundreds of billions of dollars of arms to these maniacs as a way of recycling petrodollars. Trillions of dollars that could have developed these economies has instead made its way to the arms industry, Wall Street and the City. That explains why nobody complains: to do so would mean casting light on our own crimes, and we, by definition, do not commit any crimes because we are so intrinsically good, perhaps because we are made out of good molecules and good atoms.

Tom Hickey said...

What about the significant number of preachers (and their many followers) in the US that are pro-Israel for only one reason: They hope to provoke Armageddon in their own lifetime so as to be witnesses to the Second Coming.

Matthew Franko said...

"What about the significant number of preachers (and their many followers) in the US that are...."


They are "active" learners Tom.... not "rote"... imo they are learning "the hard way...." we just dont want them to us us down with them.... which isnt unreasonable...;)

Matthew Franko said...

'take us down with them...'

Bob said...

I can't be bothered with the god botherers. I don't want to hear about your religion any more than I want to hear about your sex life.

Matthew Franko said...

And another thing Tom, if that is what those idiots believe, then imo that's probably a tip-off that its never going to happen that way...

You have to fade those people....

Tom Hickey said...

They are the people that the US is banking and who are running Wahhabism out of KSA to promote jihad. The US backing them. knowing full well what is up. HRC admitted it.

It's about the oil and has been since FDR stole Churchill's thunder by sailing directly to the Gulf after Yalta to make a deal with King Saud, effectively shutting Britain out. With the American Empire rising, the US need to control oil resources, and as long the American Empire exists the US will have to continue to do so, regardless of the associated costs. It's not just economic, either. There is no US reporting about Christianity being eradicated in this area by the Saudi-backed jihadis. That's a lot of people.

John said...

Looks like 9/11 wasn't a loud enough wake up call. These religious nuts can't be controlled. Washington's willing to take the risk that New York or Los Angeles will look like Baghdad or Aleppo. They never expected the twin towers to melt and collapse.

Given the chance, these jihadi freaks will happily turn their guns on their purported masters in Washington and Riyadh and take out whole cities. They've attacked Saudi Arabia recently, so they're not averse to attacking the hand that feeds them. Time to cut these crazy jihadi fucks loose and start aiding the Syrian and Iraqi armies put these freaks in mass graves. That'll mean a 180 degree turn around in foreign policy. It's either that or wake up one morning to watch a nuclear power plant in meltdown or some other horrible atrocity that makes 9/11 look like a nice day.

John said...

Tom: "With the American Empire rising, the US need to control oil resources..."

Exactly right. It's all about CONTROL, not access. Declassified papers from State and the Pentagon say exactly this, but nobody pays any attention! It's like the Pentagon Papers: when Vietnam comes up, who ever refers to the Pentagon Papers revelations?

You have to wonder what the point of freedom of speech and freedom of information is in a state that allows huge corporations to control the information and denies access to the truth? Well, yes, these freedoms are from another time and they're not easy to dispense with. The do serve a very good purpose in today's society and culture: they make a good illusion of freedom.

Matt Franko said...

Looks like some new corporate media entities are forming as we speak John....

John said...

Matt, are you alluding to the rumours of Trump creating a "news" channel to rival Fox when he loses the election?

Trump versus Fox! Now there's a fight I'd pay good money to watch, although all that'll happen is a race to the bottom. Imagine a more vulgar and idiotic channel than Fox? With a rival, it'll push standards ever lower.

The US has the best alternative media there is (with the best writers and the best analysis), from antiwar.com and the American Conservative on the right to CounterPunch and ITT on the left, but the number of readers is low. Even Democracy Now has puny viewership numbers. It's long past time for Americans of all good will, from right and left, to come to the aid of their country...

Bob said...

That remains largely a television audience doesn't it? I no longer watch TV...

Matt Franko said...

It will probably form even if he wins he just won't be part of it... Your Farage will be in too...

Breitbart, Alex Jones, Ann Coulter (who Mike kicked off his show one time) Nigel Farage, Roger Stone, Tucker Carlson, many others