Posted on 04/01/2011 1:34:31 PM PDT by cripplecreek
That’s correct, as along as its’ fruit source fructose, vs corn source fructose. The best source being fruit itself.
I bought some fruitcose Pepsi the other day to check it out and I liked it but I have no idea where the sugar came from.
I would like some fructose with my caliphate.
Caliphate is too bitter. Maybe smothered in ice cream with raspberries on top.
...a large number of suicide bombers used against US and UK troops in Iraq came from Eastern Libya?
--Has anyone noticed the number of times they can be heard saying "Allahu Akhbar", and has anyone noticed practically all of them sport the Islamic beard?
--Does anyone know that in Libya they are referred to as "the bearded ones" and that they hate Muammar Al-Qathafi because he has called the Islamic veil "a tent", because he has spoken out against the stoning of women, because he has spoken out against the death of Homosexuals.
Definitely high fructose corn syrup. Pepsi is actually switching back to sucrose later this month due to all negative publicity about HCFS. Of course they are both unhealthy. If you want to have arthritis, heart problems, eye problems, dental problems, etc...drink lots of Pepsi.
I saw today’s show, and Beck is on a real roll on explaining Islamism. I wonder what News Corp’s Saudi shareholder thinks?
He’s been doing it for a while now so the saudi share holders must not have a lot of influence.
From an article, or rather, a book-review and summary by Daniel Pipes, guest on Glenn Becks program this evening, of Professor Timur Kuran's indispensable study, "Islam and Mammon" [ http://tinyurl.com/3hk5rso ]: "Islamic economics increasingly has become force to contend with due to burgeoning portfolios of oil exporters and multiplying Islamic financial instruments (such as interest-free mortgages and sukuk bonds). But what does it all amount to? Can Shari'a-compliant instruments challenge the existing international financial order? Would an Islamic economic regime, as an enthusiast claims, really imply an end to injustice because of "the State's provision for the well-being of all people"? To understand this system, the ideal place to start is "Islam and Mammon," a brilliant book by Timur Kuran, written when he was (ironically, given heavy Saudi backing for Islamic economics) King Faisal Professor of Islamic Thought and Culture at the University of Southern California. Now teaching at Duke University, Kuran finds that Islamic economics does not go back to Muhammad but is an "invented tradition" that emerged in the 1940s in India. The notion of an economics discipline "that is distinctly and self-consciously Islamic is very new." Even the most learned Muslims a century ago would have been dumbfounded by the "Islamic economics." The idea was primarily the brainchild of an Islamist intellectual, Abul-Ala Mawdudi (1903-79), for whom Islamic economics served as a mechanism to achieve many goals: to minimize relations with non-Muslims, strengthen the collective sense of Muslim identity, extend Islam into a new area of human activity, and modernize without Westernizing. As an academic discipline, Islamic economics took off during the mid-1960s; it acquired institutional heft during the oil boom of the 1970s, when the Saudis and other Muslim oil exporters, for the first time possessing substantial sums of money, provided the project with "vast assistance." Proponents of Islamic economics make two basic claims: that the prevailing capitalist order has failed and that Islam offers the remedy. To assess the latter assertion, Kuran devotes intense attention to understand the actual functioning of Islamic economics, focusing on its three main claims: that it has abolished interest on money, achieved economic equality, and established a superior business ethic. On all three counts, he finds it a total failure. 1) "Nowhere has interest been purged from economic transactions, and nowhere does economic Islamization enjoy mass support." Exotic and complex profit-loss sharing techniques such as ijara, mudaraba, murabaha, and musharaka all involve thinly disguised payments of interest. Banks claiming to be Islamic in fact "look more like other modern financial institutions than like anything in Islam's heritage." In brief, there is almost nothing Islamic about Islamic banking which goes far to explain how Citibank and other Western majors host far larger Islam-compliant deposits than do the specifically Islamic banks. 2) "Nowhere" has the goal of reducing inequality by imposition of the zakat tax succeeded. Indeed, Kuran finds this tax "does not necessarily transfer resources to the poor; it may transfer resources away from them." Worse, in Malaysia, zakat taxation, supposedly intended to help the poor, instead appears to serve as "a convenient pretext for advancing broad Islamic objectives and for lining the pockets of religious officials." 3) "The renewed emphasis on economic morality has had no appreciable effect on economic behavior." That's because, in common with socialism, "certain elements of the Islamic economic agenda conflict with human nature." Kuran dismisses the whole concept of Islamic economics. "[T]here is no distinctly Islamic way to build a ship, or defend a territory, or cure an epidemic, or forecast the weather," so why money? He concludes that the significance of Islamic economics lies not in the economy but in identity and religion. The scheme "has promoted the spread of antimodern currents of thought all across the Islamic world. It has also fostered an environment conducive to Islamist militancy." Indeed, Islamic economics possibly contributes to global economic instability by "hindering institutional social reforms necessary for healthy economic development." In particular, were Muslims truly forbidden not to pay or charge interest, they would be relegated "to the fringes of the international economy." In short, Islamic economics has trivial economic import but poses a substantial and malign political danger."
Daniel Pipes is an honest-to-goodness heaviweight:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Daniel_Pipes
http://twitter.com/danielpipes
His cred is screaming street underneath all the academe.......
Not a terribly humorous guy but considering what he knows about the world its understandable.
Bump to the man.
Newscorp should divest itself of ME investments. Fences make good neighbors.
It's not that Newscorp owns ME properties. Newscorp is partially OWNED BY a Saudi prince.
I caught a few minutes of Sister wives. Nothing about that situation interests me in the least.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.