Lamps doesn't miss Big George

The Koran is much like the Old Testament, violent, bloody and filled with commandments to kill the unbelievers (after you give them a chance to convert). It is what it is, and I'm sorry I'm not politically correct enough to tell you what you want to hear.

Sura 9:29 in the Qur’an says, "Fight those who believe not… even if they be People of the book [Christians and Jews] until they have willingly agreed to pay the Jizya tribute in recognition of their submissive state."

"Second, violence is intrinsic to Islam, reflected in the bloody campaigns and massacres of the Prophet Muhammad, and enshrined in the verses of the Sword in the Koran. When Muslims commit acts of violence they are acting canonically, because the Quran and the Hadith, the defining texts of Islam, and the Jurists tells them to. There is no difference between Islam and Islamic fundamentalism." -- http://bookwormroom.wordpress.com/2006/06/27/the-koran-a-book-of-peace-not/

Even scholars who deliberately set out with an agenda to 'prove' that Islam is really a religion of peace often have to make excuses for verses that have NOT been abrogated. These muslim scholars have a very difficult time finding a way to make the religion itself seem as if it's not commanding direct violent action against unbelievers, for no other reason than that they are unbelievers. And the prescriptions for what to do to Muslims who have renounced the religion, holy **** it gets brutal.

I'm a card carrying member of the ACLU, I believe in respecting everyone and anyone who respects me, but the more I've read about the religion the less I like it, and I came into it with an open mind. The problem isn't that Islam is being interpreted incorrectly, the problem is in how the Koran instructs believers to act. The larger problem over all that is organized religion in general.

 

Yep
Loved GF as a commentator.

 

Foreman was awful. His biggest problem was that early in every fight he would settle on a set of talking points, after which everything that happened would have to be distorted to conform to those points.

That's what gave us Hopkins/Trinidad, probably the worst commentary ever on HBO. It's one thing to flub a line or generally be vacant like Lennox Lewis, but Foreman spent 10 rounds trying to re-write the narrative of the fight. He should have been fired that night.

I also think Lampley — and clearly, I'm a big fan (cough cough) — should have stayed away from the Allah stuff, but Hamed set himself up for it and it's his own fault. For a non-believer like me, people like Hamed and Tim Tebow make me ****ing sick.

 

foreman is like oscar, they're both fakes. foreman makes out like he's this old peaceful very religious guy smiling all the time, well trust me, that old peaceful guy would still give you a look that could kill, and punch you in the face.

 

Well Hamed was so extreme but there are many boxers that are extreme with their religion, some even put it in their nicknames but usually don't make a circus act like Hamed (which I enjoyed very much).

Is it fair to joke about a fighter losing a fight if he always talks about Jesus Christ and God and then to say something about that belief as he is losing?

It was a bit over the top from Lamps but I thought George was more over the top in responding, it wasn't worth it.

I really enjoy George and Lamps as commentators and Merchant too. I dislike Max, Papa and Lewis. Bernstein is excellent too. I also like Rich Marotta's commentating.

 

Foreman was an awful commentator, but provided some unintentional comedy. On occassion he would bring some insight, such as De La Hoya's jabbing of Mosley and saying it can hurt your back. Next thing you know, Mosley had a stiff back.

But so often, he was just out there. I think he just liked to separate himself as the "expert" that he'd say some outrageous things. Like no one being the best pound for pound without beating James Page. Saying Shane Mosley would be distracted by Adrian Stone's leopard trunks. Or claiming that HBO brought us The Beatles on Ed Sullivan.

Roy Jones was the more insightful commentator. He wasn't the most professional as he burned bridges at HBO by missing meetings, nor was the most articulate, and he frequently talked about how great he was. But beside that, he actually did what an "expert" analyst is supposed to more so than other "expert" analysts.

 

I'm intrigued by this statement.

May I ask did the Prophet say 'anyone' or 'any Muslim'?

If it is indeed 'anyone' are their penalties against those who do draw the Prophet that are not a part of your religion?

If indeed it is 'any Muslim' why are Muslims interfering with other countries, countries who aren't bound by Muslim dogma.

 

Hmmm, looked to me like "Big" George was calling Lampley out on some of his bias. Good for him, someone should keep Lamps in check about that from time to time.

 

I was just re-watching Hamed-Ingle.

Foreman said "he did something stupid, that's what he does best".