Sean @spk22 ?active 2 years, 1 month ago
salem [salaam, other]
Thank you for attending the Inter-Faith Prophet Muhammad Day Conference.
And on behalf of Muslims For Peace I welcome you.
I’m sorry I could not be there in person, but I simply wanted to send a message in the spirit of peace and inter-faith dialog — because that’s essentially what Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) stood for.
And I think that’s something that people have to understand in this day and age of religious conflict and sectarianism — is that The Prophet, if you recognize him as a prophet — was carrying on the tradition of The Abrahamic Faiths — going back to Abraham and Moses — because having read the Old Testament, or the New Testament, as a young man, when I came upon [across] the Koran I was amazed to find how The Prophet drew upon the stories of Moses, he drew upon The Old Testament — Shariah Law was essentially Judaic law [Mosaic law] — and how much respect he showed also for Isa — Jesus.
There is something very important to understand in all this because people often ask me: ”Why did you accept Islam?” And I frankly never had a second thought about it: Why?
Because I believed that Moses, Abraham, their whole lineage is littered with prophets — and I believe that Jesus is a prophet — then how can I doubt that muhammad who comes and relates their stories and their same mission and their truth — how can he be any less of a prophet?
So to recognize this lineage and this work that Prophet Muhammad was doing is to become Muslim.
Whether or not you follow every ritual — it’s no different whether you’re Jewish or Christian or Muslim there are flaws in all people — there are flaws in every man, woman, child — but as people if we can recognize that which is best, that which is good, that which brings out our higher qualities, our higher nature, then we are tending towards God, towards understanding God.
And that is the true nature of faith. The truth nature of faith is to not demand that the world abide by our own will, but to have faith that God knows best, and despite all the conflict and tension that he may create in the world, and the difference people find within each other — we still have faith that God will order it and do as he wills with all people.
And it is not upon us —it is not left to us —to do God’s work — we do not have to condemn or punish people for their difference in faith, because our faith is so strong in God to do as he wills with them.
Towards this end I want to point out — unfortunately Prophet Muhammad is given a slightly ”negative bent” in this day and age, where many (even ”liberal”) people would say he is a ”terrorist” because he used violence to unify the people of Arabia.
And to look at The Prophet as a terrorist in the vein of modern terrorism is [not just] completely unhistorical but it’s also offensive. Because you can take for a case-in-point the constitution of Medina, which many people would point out is the first modern democratic constitution — as my friend ”sayyid amar” recently pointed out for me.
And we look at The Constitution of Medina. It is laid forth as principles by which people of a community that is not entirely Muslim are able to interact and operate under certain protections that are accorded to all believers —meaning Jews, Christians, and peoples of other faith.
And the most important, telling line of the document, the constitution, is the last — the forty-seventh principle — that says: God is the protector of the good and god-fearing men, and Muhammad is the apostle of God.
”God is The Protector of the Good and God-Fearing Men.”
It does not say ”God is the protector of Muslims.” It does not say God is the protector of what would become later Sunni or Shia — it says God is the protector of the good and god-fearing men!
And who are we? — in an age without a prophet — [today] there is no Prophet Muhammad, there is no Prophet Isa, there is no Prophet Moses — to lay down the principles or commands by which we should live — so who are we to assume THAT power?
Are we not attempting to be good and god-fearing men? I believe so.
But I think that the nature of being a God-fearing person is to never assume the power of God to condemn and judge absolutely.
We can judge within our inner consciousness and within the consciousness of our society that which we find reprehensible, that which we find immoral — but we can never condemn absolutely. That is where our faith in god must be strong.
We must know that God gives us all things, including Devils, for us to become better people.
So in that spirit of inter-faith dialog and the inter-faith day, I leave you with the message that Prophet Muhammad — as you know, Muhammad is a prophet — the lineage of the Abrahamic Faiths
And really that’s all it is to be a Muslim — beyond that we can debate, we can discuss — we can, even as Muhammad did, look to science [knowledge] as a guide, but we do not have to assume the authority of a God. Even Muhammad was more humble than that.
And that spirit of inquiry, of desiring knowledge, is the true essence of being a Muslim — I believe.
So I leave you with that message.
And please enjoy the day, in the spirit of peace.
I have been learning that in the world of ”information warfare” on-demand translation is very important.
Thank you friend.
The European languages: ”French” ”German” ”English” need more translation to Arabic, yes?
There is no replacing someone like you — who really knows how to translate!!
On surveillance and the future of the internet:
(the video in the comment is important too)
I’ll be Occupying Google from now on. Good bye to my friends here.
Here is one example of the posts or shares I have made on the Google Network:
The above link comes from:
* * *
(lots of good quotes here)
(lots of good quotes here)
* * *
Where am I?
Here’s a flashback from the past…
(even David DeGraw replied)
This may be renewed interest, now, after Lupe’s fiasco in late January….
If you are rational and scientific, take it as a figurative or allegorical description of how we ”incorporate” ”super-natural” things by way of ”magic”.
I guess I have a tolerance to bizarre sounds, thanks to my love of bizarre music
try this instead:
(it is the same thing, from the original source, with no bad noises)
(it should start at 1h 16m 00s)
The original one I linked has alternate editing and images, as well as that ”noise”.
I knew a little of Jan Irvin and his Gnostic Media venue, from my limited study of Richard Grove:
This is a good website:
some sub-pages I read:
What brought me there?
What brought me there?
What brought me there?
And what brought me there?
— Matt Prather (@m33t3r) January 9, 2013
…and that’s what I’m going back to now.
There are just so many mysteries and so little time…
bonus video, completely unrelated:
I can’t even begin to tell you what to think about what Manson said there.
I don’t know what to think, myself.
I do know that the mainstream, banker-dollar-loving, corporate, National Security State–endorsed media has put us all in a hall-of-mirrors from which we can hardly hope to escape.
And with that one precept in mind, I stop trusting my eyes and try to start feeling my way out.
Let it be known that there is a lot of evidence that says that Manson was a manipulative (and intelligent) liar.
A cult leader whom I would harshly indict and condemn, if I were near him and if he really led his followers as the prosecution said he did.
* * *
In this world, it is increasingly hard to tell the Norman Bates-es from the detectives….
* * *
It seems he also was connected to the secretive Scientology cult.
If there are any journalists out there who want to use the public (or even the non-public) information from this site to try to make sense to tell a story, I’d recommend you interview (video / text / whatever) the ”real” people who have been consistently posting here.
Interview them all, if possible.
The ”true” story is probably more confusing than the ”#1” most-watched / popular X-Files of all time: Jose Chung’s From Outer Space (written by Darin Morgan).
But I’ve never been privy (or really asked to be privy) to the non-public side of this .org
And I won’t be available for the indefinite future. I think.
I’m back now.
But it’s not a permanent ”back”.
I am visiting people and telling them the new things that I know.
My plans of where to go next are not set.
I will probably wind up with the Occupy San Francisco crowd, because San Francisco is just about the most important place in my home state of California.
I might also get invited to a farming community. Thomas Jefferson wanted America to be an enlightened agrarian society, with each community having food security first and exchange in commerce and knowledge second. Sounds like a good plan, knowing what I now know about the food monopolists.
Or maybe something else will happen.
Today I commented here:
I said (with the slightest of edition / ”editing”):
I think I followed the topic and discussion to this point.
Clinton’s measures were cut from the same cloth as Reagan’s, Bush’s, and Obama’s. They are ad-hoc measures implemented by warring supra-national elite persons and corporations under the supposed color of law.
I, for one, think there is no essential debate about whether or not the US Executive or even the whole of the Federal Government can impose gun bans on states. They can and probably will deny funding to states on any number of non-gun funding issues, which is a slightly different issue, even as it is just another tactic for accomplishing the same goal.
If someone wants to argue that the Federal Government already has established the precedent that it may impose such ”reasonable” measures as necessary for National Security or ”the will of the people” or whatever-reasons they can come up with, then I would say that the playing field is changed, and the people are re-examining their laws and their place in society and their ”social contracts”. They seem, to me, to like what The Second Amendment literally says. That Amendment will be considered a valid law by many such people who see a different playing field and who want a new social contract. Apart from the ”de iure” aspect mentioned above, it sure seems to me (based on my media inputs) that ”de facto” the Federal Government has no such authority to ban guns at the moment. (If anyone wants to quibble over whether or not The Feds are trying to literally ”ban guns”, I suggest to them that they are completely missing the point. The point is that the elites are using their media control to make us consent to giving up even the right for an individual person to use guns in defense of his state, municipality, or home.)
And if someone wants to argue that treaties under the United Nations can serve as law for such gun bans, then I would quickly remind them that the United Nations is just the United States of the Next World Order. Would we really want to accept the yoke of such an oppressive institution? No, not while the class of predatory criminals who subverted the United States government — of which George H.W. Bush was one amongst many — have set up the UN to be their next choke point of elite control.
It really all comes down to elite individuals at supra-national levels in the corporate ”world” who attack the nation-state, state, or municipality that is most objectionable to their world order at the moment. That target currently seems to be the U.S. with its aroused population, belief in a tradition of independence from monarchy, and its guns.
We can look to Greece, through our tainted media portals, for some suggestion of what happens when these super-elitists want to bring an educated Western country to fold in this day and age. (They fail, even in their ”successes” and they then retreat and try to attack again.)
I am currently studying the war that took place near Antarctica in 1982. (A place named ”Georgia” and Las Islas Malvinas.) (Alexander Haig’s ”Waterloo”?)
And if someone has read all I said, and is wondering what sort of ”solution” I envision to all the supposed problems, it’s simply a bottom-up revolution of thought and responsibility, rather than yet another telling of the same old story of people giving trust to far-off institutions that they shouldn’t have trusted.
I am okay.
I just take things really slowly.
I’ve been seeing signs of powerful architectural capture of seemingly independent networks, and of powerful cognitive infiltration and warfare (intended keep people fighting / in disagreement / incoherent by deliberate man-in-the-middle computer misrepresentation).
I, for one, have many questions for this man:
(people can laugh and make jokes if they want, but if you look at his résumé, and you know what I know about all those institutions, you’ll have questions for him too; the internet is not a cute and free place)
And I personally recommend to everyone that they get down to the very basics of whatever it is they personally think life should be about.
And question the hell out of everyone who is asking you to enslave yourself further to the old world order.
I’ll try to be back daily.
But seeing how effective a few opposing cognitive warriors can be at sowing disorder and preventing connection that would have otherwise happened is very disheartening. Very.
It keeps us all apart on the internet.
At least in real life I can know better who I am dealing with.
Recently someone asked me what my questions for him are. I am suspicious of all internet sites, but I will honestly explain my starting questions and contexts.
He has connections to many elite circles.
He seems to be a ”cyberneticist” or a transhumanist.
(Look up cybernetics and systems management and you will see that the goal of turning humans into slaves for a bigger system was a long-time dream or goal of many humans.)
Here are some suspicious circles that Vint Cerf has connections to.
IBM — had a CEO named ”Watson” who was amoral and pro-Fascist and who helped IBM Germany process the peoples for holocaust and genetic ”purity” testing
University of California + Stanford — elite top-down academic control; so-called experts
The Military Industrial Complex — (MIC)
NASA — great place to lie to people from; the space monopoly
WorldCom — related to Enron and the accounting scandals
(with false accounting, anyone can get away with anything)
Internet Architecture — only one who knows all the backdoors in machines and in program languages can be sure that no one is spying on him
Google — the MIC and NSA’s most public front company
(I think we can always turn any bad infrastructure to good, if the people who maintain that infrastructure want to)
ICANN — wants to assign numbers to everything, just like IBM did
Domain Name Servers — they are an important choke-point or control-point for information controllers; Vint Cerf has always had influential opinions about these servers
”Interplanetary Internet” — he’s even been consulted for internet architecture in space
World Leaders and World Academic Institutions praise him; I question the leaders and I question him.
Most recently, he tried to influence the debate in Dubai on the internet of the world. What (human) powers were influencing this debate and what were their goals?
(I am certain that what the media portrayed the 2012 WCIT as being is just lies for the public to be debating the wrong things.)
I got a letter from @unrelentingtruthseeker saying he misses me. I miss him and more than a few others, too.
I will be back.
First I am trying to reset all my computer Operating Systems to get out all the potential root attackers.
This is not being too paranoid, in light of all the facts.
I have been active on the main social networks listed on my website (well, not on YouTube any more, it seems to be dominated by the US (Digital) National Security Self-Appointed Corporate Conglomeration / Confederation of Assholes and 9/11 Insiders.)
Try reaching me through those social networks as well as this one, when I come back online again in 4-24 hours….
Hurry back, we need you here…
(lol haven’t started clearing my OS’s quite yet)
(all praise is to The One God, whose Will I accept, and who is most merciful, if I live it is ”his” will, if I die it is his will)
If you had to do 9/11 in order to be raptured, then Satan is your God. We must not let them that did 9/11 decide who goes. Choose Good.
from: NO TREASON: The Constitution of No Authority
Lysander Spooner, 1870
The Rothschilds, and that class of money-lenders of whom they are the representatives and agents — men who never think of lending a shilling to their next-door neighbors, for purposes of honest industry, unless upon the most ample security, and at the highest rate of interest — stand ready, at all times, to lend money in unlimited amounts to those robbers and murderers, who call themselves governments, to be expended in shooting down those who do not submit quietly to being robbed and enslaved.
They lend their money in this manner, knowing that it is to be expended in murdering their fellow men, for simply seeking their liberty and their rights; knowing also that neither the interest nor the principal will ever be paid, except as it will be extorted under terror of the repetition of such murders as those for which the money lent is to be expended.
[. . .]
And why are these men so ready to lend money for murdering their fellow men? Solely for this reason, that such loans are considered better investments than loans for purposes of honest industry. They pay higher rates of interest; and it is less trouble to look after them. This is the whole matter.
The question of making these loans is, with these lenders, a mere question of pecuniary profit. They lend money to be expended in robbing, enslaving, and murdering their fellow men, solely because, on the whole, such loans pay better than any others. They are no respecters of persons, no superstitious fools, that reverence monarchs. They care no more for a king, or an emperor, than they do for a beggar, except as he is a better customer, and can pay them better interest for their money. If they doubt his ability to make his murders successful for maintaining his power, and thus extorting money from his people in future, they dismiss him as unceremoniously as they would dismiss any other hopeless bankrupt, who should want to borrow money to save himself from open insolvency.
When these great lenders of blood-money, like the Rothschilds, have loaned vast sums in this way, for purposes of murder, to an emperor or a king, they sell out the bonds taken by them, in small amounts, to anybody, and everybody, who are disposed to buy them at satisfactory prices, to hold as investments. They (the Rothschilds) thus soon get back their money, with great profits; and are now ready to lend money in the same way again to any other robber and murderer, called an emperor or a king, who, they think, is likely to be successful in his robberies and murders, and able to pay a good price for the money necessary to carry them on.
This business of lending blood-money is one of the most thoroughly sordid, cold-blooded, and criminal that was ever carried on, to any considerable extent, amongst human beings. It is like lending money to slave traders, or to common robbers and pirates, to be repaid out of their plunder. And the men who loan money to governments, so called, for the purpose of enabling the latter to rob, enslave, and murder their people, are among the greatest villains that the world has ever seen. And they as much deserve to be hunted and killed (if they cannot otherwise be got rid of) as any slave traders, robbers, or pirates that ever lived.
”Here’s the trailer for the new comprehensive DVD covering the Toronto Hearings on 9/11 from this past September, which brought together expert witnesses to present evidence contrary to the official story to a distinguished panel, who will draft a report based on the evidence submitted.”
- Load More