*related=http://videosift.com/video/Muhammad-Ali-in-Candid-Camera-Show

Another tribute to Ali on the Sift

Muhammad Ali refuses to go to Vietnam. Powerful stuff has been added as a related post - related requested by bareboards2 on that post.

Arrogant ranting?? That hurt.
anyway... if you just google his dad, Muhammad Muhammad, I'm sure you will see he has a political agenda , ie : Islam acceptance.
Do you expect the whole thinking world to believe that the son of a Muslim activist whose whole agenda is to accept Islam , built a suitcase clock and took it to school and ignored his teachers advice (4 times)to get rid of it AND refused to explain to the authorities why he had done so. Do you expect us to believe this bullshit story?

Cenk: "You know he meant bigoted[not racist], stop nitpicking stuff like that.."

NO, thats a crucial fucking point. Its not bigotry nor racism, it is criticism of a RELIGION, not a race, not a people, not a population, not a country, not a skin color , not a sex, , not a language, not a philia, not a fuckin skull shape. A religion. There is a crucial difference. If you cant see the difference, then I'm sorry: Try again.

The thing is, criticizing a bad idea, or a collection of bad ideas can never be racist nor bigoted.

That not to say that some people aren't irrationally hating and bigoted towards muslims, or people who look like they might be muslims, but that is a COMPLETELY different thing.

Everyone understands this in politics: if you think the republican party sucks, that doesnt mean you hate people with a texan accent. Still, I'm sure some people think people with a thick texan accent are automatically to be considered as racist hillbillies who vote republican. That's stereotyping and bigotry. Being anti-republican is not.

BTW, anyone bamboozled by Reza Aslans fantasies about islamic countries being equality paradises shoud read Muhammad Syed and Sarah Haiders dismantling of his distortions right here : http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/10/05/reza-aslan-is-wrong-about-islam-and-this-is-why/

When a Muslim flies a plane into a building, they are not following a radical interpretation of the Quran, they are following a normative interpretation of the Quran. The Quran commands Muslims to kill Christians and Jews and to wage endless jihad against all unbelievers. The jihadists are the true Muslims whereas the peaceful Muslims are the ones who don't follow the Quran. The difference between violent Christians and Muslims is, violent Christians are going against the teachings of Jesus Christ, whereas violent Muslims are following the teachings of Muhammad.

The nation of Islam is not Muslims. Its a cult, they believe Elijah Mohammed is a messiah whose real name is Wallace D. Fard Muhammad who faked his death and came back as Elijah Mohammed.

They believe blacks are the lost tribe of Israel. That Arabs are not true Muslims. And white race was created by Lucifer.

They also have a suicide pact as well as they are organized crime lime mafia and have performed many assassinations.

Ice they assassinated Malcolm who was "2nd" they replaced him with Louis Farrakhan who has admitted he killed Malcolm.

The only thing that gives me hope is that sometimes people see the light:

Absolutely Uncertain (You Tube video by “Irina”)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgvMGLdc908&list=PLC2A32D103123C08E#t=73
18-minute mini-documentary follows the journey of Irina, a 23-year-old liberal, Jewish New Yorker who voted for Obama in 2008

Why I'm burning my last bridge with Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIMnIh10po0
Join me as I wreck my last artifact of support for the war criminal-in-chief!! *I figured out the fraud a while back, but recently found this shirt in my closet

The problem with this country is it doesn't read. It doesn't inform itself on the issues. I'd probably still be a major nigger hating racist if it wasn't for books. If you want the skinny on that go to my Facebook Notes and read my "Racism Speech" which really isn't a speech so much as it is part of my memoirs to my two boys.

I wasn't really into this Islam thing until I happened to read The Haj by Leon Uris and Because They Hate by Brigitte Gabrielle almost back to back. I'll submit the following to give you an idea of what happened.

“we may describe it, (jihad), as a surgeon's lancet and not a butcher's knife.” Mahmoud Mohammed Taha (I'm sure there are about 200 million dead people that would disagree with him. And this from the guy who's been called the Mahatma Ghandi of Islam.)

About two years ago I ordered some reading material, including Taha's "Second Message", and a “study” Koran to find out what this "Islam thing" was all about. When I was sixteen I was chanting nam yo ho renge kyo to a piece of paper, (gahonzen?), having NO idea what I was doing. A few years later, hair down to my ass and a knapsack on my back, I hitchhiked cross country, got saved in Nashville Tenn. and went to live on a Christian farm in Mansfield Ohio. (Not the prison.) My gra'mom called me a "seeker". As I said, there came a time when I wanted to understand this "religion of peace". It was Humaid's article on jihad I found in my Summarized Bukhari that decided “things” for me.

If Islam is the “religion of peace”, where in Sheikh Abdullah bin Humaid's article on jihad can I find the equivalent of “Love Thy Neighbor” and “good will toward men”? And explain its prominence, and significance almost as an “Introduction”, in a book that's described as “the most authentic and true among the books of the Prophet”: My Summarized Sahih Al-Bukhari. Also address “jihad” as it's defined in Reliance of the Traveller and answer the same question. (Chapter O-9.0: Jihad O: “Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada signifying warfare to establish the religion.” And explain why the “greater” jihad is only mentioned once here and never seen again in this “Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law”.)

Compare Humaid's “jihad” and Emmet Fox' Sermon on the Mount and tell me which one best represents a spirit of Love and “compassion”.

Lastly; would you pick Sheikh bin Humaid to sit on a Human Rights Commission? (That's a trick question by the way.)

Maybe you can throw in an explanation of the Jews are “monkeys, pigs and rats” on page 656 and the part where Mo says, “if somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him” on page 613 in the chapter on Jihad.

Also, explain why Humaid's “jihad” shouldn't be “Exhibit A” in refuting the “religion of peace” claim.

I've posted this many times to many Muslims and have yet to get a single response. Well, I did receive a response from some goofball named “Dr.” Mohsen El-Guindy asking me to read his books. Instead I downloaded a bunch of his articles. Which were pure rants. An Imam, sidestepped it by telling me I had to “study Islam” to gain a greater understanding.

Jihad in the Qur'an and Sunnah by 'Sheikh Abdullâh bin Muhammad bin Humaid
ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?233460-Jihad-in-the-Qur-an-and-Sunnah&s=4df3fc2e4e0596eb3b38115ef4b8f506 ),

Subscribe to Jihad/Campus Watch and the Middle East Forum/Quarterly, Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), Gatestone Institue, FrontPage Magazine, American Thinker,The Clarion Project, Cross Muslims: Muhammad unveiled, Religion of Peace (dot com) and read Raymond Ibrahim, Efraim Karsh, Patrick Poole, Caroline Glick, Bat Ye'or and others.

“She's Buried Chest High”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXdy5Fwwfzg

“An appeaser is one who feeds the crocodile hoping it will eat him last. Victory will never be found by taking the line of least resistance.” Winston Churchill

“What the horn is to the rhinoceros, what the sting is to the wasp, the Mohammedan faith is to the Arabs of the Sudan-a faculty of offence. All the warlike operations of Mohammedan peoples are characterised by fanatacism” Winston Churchill

“While Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Parsees and Jews, along with several million adherents of an animistic religion, all coexisted in relative harmony, one religion that would not accept compromise stood out from the rest: Islam.” Mahatma Gandhi

Bobknight33...not to be rude, but did you go to school? Did they teach science there? You seem to not understand the terms you are using in the least....
Evolution is a biology term, describing the changes in biology over time due to environmental pressures.
Multiple dimensions is theoretical physics, attempting to describe how reality works....not biology, no evolution here.
Quantum physics is a different, somewhat theoretical, physics, attempting to describe how reality works at the mico level (which oddly is completely different from how it works on the macro level)....again, not biology, no evolution.
There are no clear, accepted theories about what happened before the big bang...yet. Normal physics breaks down at the beginning/bang, so anything said about what happened before is a guess, an educated guess at best. This is also a physics issue, not biology, so evolution doesn't enter into it.
Do you truly not understand this? If so, I blame your education, and suggest you go to night school and learn some science, especially if you intend to comment publicly about it and don't want to look a fool.

EDIT: Your questions are analogous to a person asking why the Old Testament doesn't explain the works of Muhammad, or really closer to asking why Shinto doesn't explain the life of Jebus. They aren't related except loosely in the 'religion' category, just like your post mixed up ideas from the 'science' category to imply it's all the same and related directly and one should describe and explain the other...that's just not right.

The funny thing about the 'Muhammad in a bear suit' is that they had an earlier episode a whole bunch of gods acting like super heroes and he was in it. Nobody made a fuss, nobody got death threats, nobody cared.

Such hypocracy has got to make you laugh. Though I think the episode that got the most grief was the episode were a statue of Mother Mary bled out the ass lol.

The reason MMA fights are more likely ending with getting choked out than having your limbs broken is quite simple. If you are the guy who breaks everybodys shit, nobody will want to fight you anymore because broken bones take you out of fighting (the thing you do to make money), training (the thing that allows to compete on such a level in the first place) and the enjoyments of life (ever tried to masturbate with two broken hands?) for weeks. Weeks or erven months.
Nobody will book you or allow you in their competitions anymore because 30 second fights aren't that interesting (which is why proffesional boxing matches rarely turn out to be like Muhammad Ali vs random guy from the audience), getting qualified and equal fighters as opponents becomes next to impossible (see above) and "liability" would be the word promoters mutter in their sleep while having nightmare about faceless lawyers.
MMA isn't the Kumite from Bloodsport. MMA matches are a business and their cash cows are their fighters otherwise it would be just bum fights. You can't milk a cow with a broken udder. But you can choke its nipples until the milk flows, you just gotta have the right technique.

Congratulations! Your video, Muhammad Ali Avoids 21 Punches in 10 Seconds, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 11 Badge!

Tags for this video have been changed from 'cant touch this, muhammad ali, michael dokes, boxing, punches' to 'u cant touch this, muhammad ali, michael dokes, boxing, punches, slip' - edited by xxovercastxx

Your video, Muhammad Ali Avoids 21 Punches in 10 Seconds, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Your video, Jordan Vs Muhammad Ali Epic Rap Battle, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Somewhat ironic: Aslan is Turkish for Lion, and is also the name of the Lion in C. S Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia, a character who represents Jesus, at least in parts. COINCIDENCE? probably. but still!

I think the outrage is not that it paints Jesus poorly, but that the implication is that he is "merely" an extraordinary man rather than the Son of God and our Saviour. You know, kinda like how calling a stick figure Muhammad somehow diminishes his glory.