1751. What is science for?

Comment #185576 by al-rawandi on May 28, 2008 at 5:41 am

ASM,






You sinveling coward. Perhaps you could bring yourself to answer the questions I posed to you at the end of the last page and the top of this page.


Of course you won't because it lays waste to your illogical hate and bigotry, which is precisely what you espouse. You have no point, you are an obsessive compulsive bigot. How do I know? Because you refuse to answer questions, posed directly to you.



Blake,



You too are a vile coward. I asked you a question, what do you do? You say you won't answer and in turn ask me a question. That is not how things work. Once you answer my very serious and legitimate question, I will be happy to analyze your question.

Until then you are nothing more than a wirey haired whacko holding a cardboard sign shouting about alien abductions.

1752. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185339 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 2:14 pm

ChewToy,







I was clear enough in the statistics I cited, and in the terminology I later used. African Americans, if that doesn't denote anything, perhaps you are in the wrong forum.

1753. What is science for?

Comment #185322 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 12:48 pm

All,




A little background on ASM. He is a Holcaust denier of Portugese extraction and an admirer of discredited scholar David Irving.... Here is what ASM had to say about Irving:

As November 2005 rolls to a close, David Irving, renowned historian of the Second World War sits behind bars in an Austrian prison. Prosecutors charged Irving with denying the Holocaust. In Austria, this thoughtcrime comes with a 10-year prison sentence if convicted.

http://theholocauststory.blogspot.com/2005/11/david-irving-and-holocaust-denial.html


Who is David Irving?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Irving#Criticism_by_historians


On March 15, 2007 David Irving delivered a speech to the neo-fascist rally of the Hungarian party Hungarian Justice and Lif Party. Irving has also been involved with the Institute for Historical Review, a Holocaust Denial platform frequented by the likes of which I have documented here numerous times (all liars and bigots, to a man).


Here is what Irving said of Holocaust Survivors:

More women died on the back seat of Edward Kennedy's car at Chappaquiddick than in the gas chambers at Auschwitz." [Applause] Now you think that's tasteless, what about this? I'm forming an association especially dedicated to all these liars, the ones who try and kid people that they were in these concentration camps, it's called the Auschwitz Survivors, Survivors of the Holocaust and other liars, A-S-S-H-O-L-E-S. Can't get more tasteless than that, but you've got to be tasteless because these people deserve our contempt.

As for his racism this is what Irving had to say:

I am a Baby Aryan
Not Jewish or Sectarian
I have no plans to marry an
Ape or Rastafarian.

This is a touching reminder of his care for humanity, and dedication to "truth". And if this weren't enough, Irving said:

I am not anti-colored, take it from me; nothing pleases me more than when I arrive at an airport, or a station, or a seaport, and I see a colored family there â€" the black father, the black wife and the black children….When I see these families arriving at the airport I am happy, and when I see them leaving at London airport I am happy. [cheers and laughter] But if there is one thing that gets up my nose, I must admit, it is this â€" the way…the thing is when I am down in Torquay and I switch on my television and I see one of them reading our news to us. It is our news and they're reading it to me.

As for AS Marques, here is a link to his contribution to David Irving's own website:


http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Neuengamme/Marques_050605.html



Signed: AS Marques, Portugal.





What a sick and disgusting fraud. He is nothing but a racist in fancy clothes, a man (I use the term loosely) dedicated to lies and hate. Disgusting.

1754. What is science for?

Comment #185317 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 12:27 pm

ASM,






Two final questions:


Are the Protocols of the Elders of Zion a forgery or not? Do you believe they are real or true?


Do you believe the blood libel to be true?

1755. What is science for?

Comment #185316 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 12:23 pm

ASM,







I will spend a little more of my precious time, showing that one of the most vile, cowardly, ways of carrying on a debate is to post from discredited sources, over and over and over, despite people pointing this out, and despite evidence to the contrary.

Another issue of note, is your allegiance to the cult of Ahmad Rami, Ernst Zundel, David Duke, Israel Shamir, and others of similar cloth. Why is it, do you think, that you share so much in common with these people, who are undeniably awful and often evil men? Is this merely a coincidence that Holocaust denial centers around bigots and exposed liars?


I have asked you this numerous times and have not once received anything that might be considered a reasonable answer.

That is the tactic of the truly duplicitous, dodge questions put directly to you, repeatedly, while continuing to forward the lies that would be debunked by you answering the question.

1756. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185304 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 11:46 am

Frankus,







No no no. Mexico traffics in drugs, guns, criminals, and other forms of nastiness. The Mexican government is a corrupt group of fucks who not only allow this to take place, but actively participate in this criminal enterprise. The US actively attempts to stop crime unlike Latin American countries which simply seek to get a cut and help it along.


Like I said, banning guns in D.C. caused violent crime to sky rocket.

1757. What is science for?

Comment #185302 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 11:40 am

Blake,








Feel free to present your evidence here. But since you never answered my questions about why you think you share views with Ahmad Rami, Ernst Zundel, Israel Shamir and David Duke.


Why do you think you all share a common cause, citing the same discredited evidence? Yes the IHR is the most widely discredited organization purporting to "Study" the Holocaust. And yet this seems to be the only group (and its subsidiary non-scholars) that ASM cites, and my guess is this will be whom you cite.


But feel free to hijack this thread and overwhelm us with the evidence.

1758. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #185296 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 11:36 am

righton,





Don't forget his blatant distortion of the Azmi Bishara case.


I didn't even go into the money Bishara received from "dubious" sources, as he was never tried for this.

Honesty is the first to go with these types.

1759. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185294 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 11:33 am

MaxD,








The problem is many feel that they are never accoutable. Look at Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, any two bit thug murderer who happens to be black elicits a cry of support from these two "ministers". It is disgusting, one has to ask them if an African American is EVER actually guilty?

Like this most recent case where this drug dealer Bell, in New York tried to run down several police officers with his car, then the police used deadly force and now Sharpton wants the officers (one of whom was black) to be tried for murder. A drug dealer tries to kill police officers (a black one as well) and he is killed., and Sharpton defends whom???? The drug dealer. Go fucking figure.


When people are accountable for their own lives, shit starts going there way. People who blame others are doomed to wallow in their own misery. Just listen to Bill Cosby's views on the matter.


Another thing, look at all the African Americans who have laudibly turned their lives around for the better, who have made progress, who have taken ownership of their lives, who have tried to help their communities. Why aren't they examples? When Don Imus made a disgusting racist comment about Rutgers Womens' Basketball, calling them "Nappy headed Ho's", Al Sharpton came out swinging, yet Sharpton holds court with rappers (Black) on a regular basis who make millions degrading African American women and inciting young blacks to violence.


When this culture is destroyed, the Al Sharpton culture, there will be a great deal of social change.

1760. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185285 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 11:11 am

Frankus,






England is an Island, surrouded by industrialized and civilized nations. The US is connected to one of the most corrupt and criminal nations on the planet (Mexico) which is in turn connected to a string of corrupt and violent states all the way down the continent. It is not difficult to get guns over the US border with Mexico, as it is not difficult to get drugs over the border, or people for that matter.

Most gun crime in the US is carried out with illegal weapons anyway. So simply banning them hasn't helped. Most people who commit a crime with a gun are already felons, and are prohibited from having firearms. So this doesn't much help either.

Prevelance of firearms is not the cause, or countries like Switzerland or Israel would be wild west-like countries since guns are owned by everyone.

1761. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185284 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 11:06 am

Bugaboo,





No. I am concerned with the fact that violence surrounds and follows blacks. For instance, look at the number of professional black athletes, who making millions of dollars, still commit crimes of a violent nature.


1/3 of African American men are in some phase of the US corrections system.



And if they are poor, how come they are still poor. The Chinese were forced to build railroads and they have done alright. Why is it there is one glaring exception. There is no language barrier... what is the problem.


I am not saying they do commit or do not commit crimes because of their race. I am not even convinced there is an appreciable difference between whites and blacks genetically, certainly not enough to cause behavioral issues. But what about the culture is so permissive of this behavior? Why does it glorify violence?

And I have more than certainly supported my original statement of "It is mostly black people shooting one another". QED.

1762. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185274 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 10:45 am

Bugaboo,








I thought I should add, while 50% of murderers are African American, 13.1% of the US population is African American. There is the obvious conclusion to be made, whatever your opinions on race.

1763. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185273 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 10:38 am

Bugaboo,



http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/race.htm




US Department of Justice.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime#United_States



A Wiki article on the matter. Blacks are grossly over-represented in "Arrests".



Sex offenders in state prisons are about evenly divided between White and Black, despite the fact that Whites vastly outnumber blacks in the US population:


http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/soo.txt


50% of murders were committed by blacks (same study)



Trends in race 1976-2005, DoJ


http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm


Criminal victimization, includes demography (DoJ)


http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cvus0502.pdf




I hope that helps.

1764. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185270 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 10:17 am

bugaboo,







Well, violence is strongly correlated to a race. I am done playing PC over the issue with race and violence in this country of mine. Drugs and crime are, more often than not, centered in areas with lots of African Americans. Can you show me some data to suggest otherwise... something other than your aversion to singling out African Americans?

1765. What is science for?

Comment #185254 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 9:13 am

Tyler,









Wooter-face asks why evolution made the planets of perfect distance etc... Good point it isn't evolution, and wooter-ass must think that we are the only solar system in the universe. How many other lifeless solar systems are there in the universe, that didn't luckily have the appropriate conditions for life. These IDiots never even bother to look at it from that perspective. If the odds of a solar system supporting life are 1 in 1 million, and there are billions of solar systems.... well this just happens to be one of the few that do. Someone has to win the lottery.

1766. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185251 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 9:08 am

Keith,





That is interesting. I assume the statistics that show banning guns increases gun crime, won't mean much to you?


Washington D.C. banned hand guns and violent crime sky rocketed. The places in the US with the lowest rates of violent crime are the ones that make it easiest to carry fire arms. I have been in a bunch of disputes with people in the US, and I have never ended up dead (or with a broken nose). Most gun crime in the US is one black person shooting another over drugs or some other petty nonsense, and these guns are all illegal anyhow.


I can stop there.

1767. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185241 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 8:44 am

Keith,






I was defending guns.

Islam causes people to pull the trigger, Guns are the trigger. One is a cause the other isn't. These are totally unrelated, I can't imagine a world where someone would think these are the same, in any way.


Anyhow, I understand your attempt at an analogy between the two, I guess it is just so distant that I don't really think it helpful. And I don't like guns being compared to something as unpleasant as Islam.

1768. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185215 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 8:03 am

Keith,








Guns don't whisper "Kill Jews" to the owners. Islam causes (*EDIT* operating under the methodology that Fanusi uses) people to kill other people with Guns.

Guns are inanimate objects and don't encourage anything. People encouraged to violence would be bad gun owners.


The two aren't even remotely analgous.

1769. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185205 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 7:34 am

Fanus,





Fair enough.



Like I said, Islam is more the vehicle for Arab tribal ethos, but it has certainly spread beyond the Arab world, so my point may not really be that helpful at all.

1770. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185197 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 7:22 am

Fanusi,

Churchill saw alot of fascism up close and recognised the similarities between Nazism and Islam (in fact, he called Mein Kampf the New Koran). He knew of what he spoke.

Well he advocated the genocide of the Afghans long before there was Nazism. For instance near the turn of the century.



*EDIT* Also, as for causing violence. I may be wrong, but I feel that Islam simply articulates the violent tendencies already present in humans, and makes these easier to surface. But that might just be "causing" them to happen. I am not sure.

1771. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #185191 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 7:16 am

Quetz,







That was the best he could do. I wasn't lying. And he knows it. He is using some strange form of anti-logic to falsely interpret the posts.




Greek,





Ok. I said Israel is a racist state in determining citizenship and in the Occupied Territories. That doesn't mean it isn't a democracy, or even a democracy with regards to its Arab citizens.

As for the Jewish National Fund, in the United States there are plenty of race based programs, for instance "Affirmative Action" or, perhaps more importantly, things like "The United Negro College Fund", it is allowed to operate, and it only funds college education for blacks, whites cannot apply, whites cannot receive money. Does this mean the United States is an institutionally racist entity? That is a serious question.



A little of your dishonesty here:

a candidate that questions or denies the Jewishness of the state of Israel can't run or hold office. When longtime Arab Member of the Knesset Azmi Bishara did just that---campaigning for a state that treats equally all its citizens, not one that grants rights and privileges to Jews only---he was forced by Israeli police (Shin Bet) to resign, thus also losing his immunity from prosecution.

You leave out the fact that Azmi Bishara spoke at a memorial for Hafez al-Assad, and made glowing remarks about Hezbollah. How would a US congressman be treated if he/she went to a country that was de facto at war with the US and praised a group dedicated to the destruction of the US. A group that also said that the US spreads AIDS intentionally (as Hezbollah said of Jews)? This congressman would be instantaneously evicted from his/her seat. Should this happen, I don't know, would this happen, absolutely.


This isn't the end. Bishara visited Syria once again, telling his audience that Israel may launch an offensive attack on Syria. His party (Balad, perhaps you could look up the connotations of this word in Arabic) made supportive statements of Hezbollah on visits to Lebanon.

Quoted in the Jerusalem post the Balad MK's Azmi Bishara, Jamal Zahalka, and Wasal Taha told Fuad Saniora that Hezbollah's resistance "lifted the spirit of the Arab people". This was a "solidarity mission". The same article notes the treasonous act of Bishara warning Syria of potential Israel attacks.

Not finished, Bishara also spoke of Syria' struggle to free "occupied Arab land" and praised Syrian support for "resistance to occupation". Syria the very same country that has sought to destabilize Lebanon. That has assassinated Lebanese politicians. The very same.

It has been a law, since 1948 in Israel to incite violence against that state, and to lend support (verbal or physical) to terrorism. This law has been around for a great long while.


Here is what you said:

Arab Member of the Knesset Azmi Bishara did just that---campaigning for a state that treats equally all its citizens, not one that grants rights and privileges to Jews only---he was forced by Israeli police (Shin Bet) to resign,

This simply isn't true, and here is what a member of Bishara's own party had to say about the matter:

MK Wasil Taha, of Bishara's own Balad party, called the accusations "nonsensical and false. Bishara denied them during investigation and we are denying them today. Their only purpose is to use Bishara as a scapegoat, to incite public opinion regarding everything dealing with Israel's failure in the [Lebanon] war, and to cover up those failings."

Haaretz, 4-25-07

He is saying this is a cover up for the failings in the Lebanon war. What did Israelis say, they cited his support for an enemy state.


In fact, in 2001 the Knesset passed a law making it illegal for MK's to visit an enemy state. 5 years later, Bishara did just that, he visited Syria, this was a violation of the law, and he was punished for this.

I am unsurprised that you cited the Bishara case, it is the best way to bewilder those who do not understand how the situation progressed. It is also a favorite of the anti-Israel crowd, because on the surface, someone might actually believe what you are saying.

Bishara committed treason under Israeli law, and was bounced for this. Although I do agree with him on the issue of the constitution, I cannot defend his treason.

1772. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185178 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 6:38 am

Fanusi you have been a busy boy,

Want to go back in history a little? Sir Winston Churchill, who saw the beast of Islam up close.

Churchill advocated using chemical weapons to exterminate the Afghans. Churchill wasn't motivated by a disdain fo Islam so much as a disdain for non-whites. This is a bad example for you to use, but the rest were pretty good.

They have failed to distinguish themselves. It isn't our business to do so.

Well they have distinguished themselves. Islam distinguishes between Muslim and non-Muslim. That is the sole distinction, in a legal sense. There is a Muslim community, and a non-Muslim community. I have long said that Islam doesn't cause violence. And it really doesn't, people are violent, however Islam facilitates violence because it creates dichotomies, and it reinforces these to the exclusion of almost all reconcilliation. This is what is distinguished.

1773. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185174 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 6:28 am

vinelectric,






Your link doesn't work.


It links to an Arabic page on Shariah, subset "Fatawa". And it says "error, please try again."

It looks like the section such a discussion would be found.

1774. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #185168 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 6:15 am

alvorin,




Health and education.



Government is responsible for the protection of the people. This includes from sickness and disease, thus it is the responsibility of the government to provide access to health care. I believe this falls into the free market. The government needs to ensure that those that cannot afford healthcare can get it in the free market... credits, cash payments, etc... The honest issue is that if they simply made cash payments, many of the people who fell in this category wouldn't pay for health care, but would rather by cigarettes and liquor. So the question becomes, "are they really serious about their own health situation?"


As for education, it is best ensured by a secular government. But the unionization of education has destroyed any hope. The teachers' union is the most destructive force on education. Teachers cannot be fired for the most part, due to lack of performance. They need to be responsible for the education they deliver. Bonuses and promotion for those that have good test scores and demotion and cessation of employment for the utter failures. No union has the right to endager children, that is unacceptable.


Your assertion about socialism is all wrong. It is always a massive bureacracy. Because in a free market, market forces allocate resource. In a socialist country, the government has to allocate all resources. For instance fuel, food, liquor, media, science funding, etc...

For instance fuel, food, and liquor are allocated by a free market. Fuel is used in accordance with needs and means. While in socialism, the government has to determine individual needs then tell the people how to use the resource.

In a capitalist society bureacracy can be reduced, but it is not always so. All governments are inefficient, this is why their role in humans' lives should be limited.


There are two types of people generally:

1) Those that believe in liberty and allowing people to live their lives according to their own free will, able to succeed to the best of their abilities.

2) Those that believe people are not the best at this, and that people need to come together to create some entity (government) to manage resources and allocate those to people. People will be told how to live.



I prefer to have more control over my own life, not less. How do you feel?

1775. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185154 by al-rawandi on May 27, 2008 at 5:50 am

Fanusi,

Not one single sect of Islam that rejects the idea of the Qur'an as the uncreated word of God has survived. Not one.

This is a striking and important point. The battle inside Islam took place near the very beginning. The Mihna was the first battle fought over ideology. The literalists versus those who felt that the Qur'an could be interperated in other ways (figurative). The literalists won outright.


Then there was the battle over the Mu'atazila who forwarded the idea that the Qu'ran was created, and that otherwise, it would be in direct contradiction to the verse of the Qur'an that says only Allah is eternal. The Mu'atazila relied heavily on reason, and this was an affront to the Ashari school that felt literalism was the best manner of interpretation along with the Qur'an being the uncreated word of god. And Fanusi, you will be unsurprised to learn that the most notable of these Asharis was Imam Abu Hamid al-Ghazali.

Indeed any attempt at Islamic rationalism has been made and has failed in the face of overly animated fanatics.

Furthermore, the Mu'atazila had number of apostates to their name (Ibn al-Rawandi being the most famous and most effective in his critique). Reliance on reason led many to disbelieve, go figure.

1776. What is science for?

Comment #184166 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 8:10 pm

Frankus,






I am curious as to whether ASM is in fact David Irving, David Duke, Israel Shamer, or some other whackjob.


A great clue is chanced upon when you look at what other deniers believe in addition to the "hoax" business. As I pointed Israel Shamer actually believes the blood libel is true.

See here:

http://www.israelshamir.net/English/blood.htm

That is so completely ridiculous that I can't really think he is a serious human being. He was born to Jewish parents, so I assume he is an Israeli agent sent to discredit Holocaust deniers further.

Being a Holocaust denier, while claiming to be rational, must be like a person who hears voices in his head, and the only people that believe him are his fellow patients in the psych-ward. I mean really, look at the company you keep. Ernst fucking Zundel.


Then the ever sunny Ahmad Rami, twice convicted of hate speech in Sweden, and regular speaker at Swedish neo-Nazi forums. Now this ass clown runs Radio Islam, labeled "One of the most right wing anti-semitic" outlets in all of Europe. What book is in complete form in the library (online) of radio Islam?

That's right the discredited forgery, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The hilarious thing is that he cites "Elders of Zion"as the authors! Ha, instead of "Czarist secret police" as it should be. These are ASM's friends and compatriots!


Let's not forget the other lodestar of anti-semitic bigotry... Mein Kampf.


On this site Rami claims that Ataturk was Jewish.



This is what Holcaust deniers are. This is the face of the true Holocaust denial, unmitigated hate and bigotry. Irrational and dishonest hate.



All of the above links run right to the despicable site itself. Go there and see the face of denial. The cartoons of hook nosed Jews, riding Uncle Sam like a horse. Bah.

1777. 16% of US science teachers are creationists

Comment #184156 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 7:54 pm

muhammads_horse,





It is next to impossible to fire an America teacher. Thuggish unions make it impossible. Thus we produce near retarded children.

1778. What is science for?

Comment #184148 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 7:34 pm

Blake,






Several people here have posted with regards to specific evidence.


The man you so pathetically worship, ASM, has only posted nonsense, from the websites of bigots and discredited non-scholars. When you find yourself in the company of Ahmad Rami and David Duke, you should check yourself. You claim you are a rationalist, why then do you find your co-religionists (yes Holocaust denial is a religious position) are irrational, to a man?

This doesn't perturb you? Does not the desultory nature of denial make you uneasy?

You will need to answer a few questions before I take you serious, if you answer them I can certainly begin to take you serious and won't dismiss you, but your friend the untiring village idiot ASM, has not answered....


If the Holocaust is a myth, hoax and fabrication, how come the only people to discover this have been bigots, discredited non-scholars, the mentally deranged, Islamic militants, and other assorted whackos? And many of these were more than one of these things. Let's take Israel Shamer, he is a denier, he also believes the blood libel to be true... this is on par with believing in Santa Claus. Do you also accept the Blood Libel as truth?


Eagerly awaiting reply.


Thanks.

1779. What is science for?

Comment #184145 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 7:22 pm

Listen here,






You keep citing IHR and JHR, do you understand the authors of these pieces, the people that contribute to IHR, are mostly discredited. For example Ernst Zundel was exposed precisely as a fraud, in a Canadian court. Not only was he shown to be a denier of the Holocaust (bad enough) but he was shown to be a fraud and was humiliated (I am not sure deniers even feel shame). He is below a laughing stock, as are you.


You are obviously a total idiot, there is no doubt in my mind, my only questions are:


1) Do you hate Jews?
2) Why do you come here and post, you have not won any converts, sympathizers, or even one inch of intellectual ground?


It was simply amusing when teratornis made a fool of you regarding the Dresden bombing, other than this I find you pitiful and wretched.

1780. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #184141 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 7:10 pm

MaxD,




Can you get a restraining order online?


I am just going to tell him I am quite pleased with my current relationship, and I need no new paramour.

1781. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #184090 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 2:55 pm

Bonzai,






The micro management was a necessary consequence. If Marx didn't see that, he was a far larger fucktard than I originally thought.


How else does one centralize things



Notice what exactly is centralized.

1782. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #184089 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 2:53 pm

righton,








Got it. I will make the correction ASAP.


Shit, i don't proof read those things :-)

1783. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #184088 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 2:52 pm

Bonzai,






Now that is just being totally dishonest. Totally. You sneak in a sly attack on capitalism but you do it in such a dishonest way. How would people "purchase" freedom? They don't live in democracies, how can they vote for freedom. It isn't about capitalism, it is about democracy. Nice try though.

And religious nuts win for a lot of reasons, one of which is lack of corruption. But they never stay popular for long.

1784. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #184083 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 2:37 pm

Bonzai,







Well I feel it may have been more ambiguous than that. But certainly every state guided by Marxism did quite a lot to shut down freedom of all kinds. Marxism requires such repression (as does socialism) because the system is unnatural, it is anti-liberty, and it is just plain oppressive. As we have demonstrated here repeatedly, it requires the state (run by whomever) to tell other human beings exactly what they can and cannot do with themselves and their own lives. This is the fatal flaw, above and beyond all other flaws. No person wants such detailed micro-management, humans are too independent for that, as a species.

1785. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #184078 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 2:25 pm

Thanks,







Let me try THIS

1786. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #184077 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 2:23 pm

Let's not forget Marx's simply stupid suggestions, like moving people from urban areas to rural areas. Wht is he going to do, make everyone a farmer?


His attack on freedom of the press was another disappointing comment.


Let's be real clear here, Marx's suggestions were not practical, then or now.

1787. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #184071 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 2:15 pm

I cannot maximize the posting guidelines to be able to see the instructions, that is why I asked. Can you copy those guidelines and post them up?

1788. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #184065 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 2:04 pm

Bonzai,






Let's be honest, Marx espoused nasty and vicious doctrines, full stop.

1789. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #184061 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 2:02 pm

Ok how do you nest a website link into a simple word, like you did in:


"here"



to your blog? I would love to know how to do that.

1790. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #184055 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 1:55 pm

mordacious1,




You can see how logical that is.


M1: "I really don't read his posts"
LGS: "You are a maggot on shit"



We should be paying for this education in logic.

1791. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #184049 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 1:40 pm

Quetz,





Yes I noticed he lumped all the quotations into one blockquote, it took me a minute to figure out the context, and I fucking said it...


My guess is right now, he is digging through some posts from January, when I felt Islam wasn't inherently violent. Now I don't feel the same, but my guess is he will post it. Along with some of my earlier commentary on American foreign policy, much of which I still agree with in fact, but not analysis.

So I agree to facts, those don't change, but I do not even agree with myself (from 4 weeks ago) about some of the analysis I provided. And we won't even talk about the posts where I simply wanted to piss someone off (apologies to Ofir).

I am flattered, I have had two male devotees, _riverrun_ and "lastgreekstanding".


Hey lastgreek, just so we are clear I am NOT gay. Just an FYI.

1792. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #184044 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 1:29 pm

righton,






I had exactly the same suspicion.


Just like _riverrun_ the "greek" refuses to answer direct questions, cannot stay on topic. Cannot help unrelated ad hominems.


If everything he said about everyone here WERE true, it still wouldn't change the fact that he is a dishonest little worm who has made some serious assertions and can't back them up. His mouth is writing checks his 10 horse power intellect cannot cash.

1793. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #184034 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 1:12 pm

Quetz,





I linked as popular usage (which Wikipedia is good for). And if changing your mind makes you a hypocrite (which I suppose it does to some degree) count Christopher Hitchens and myself in. I guess all the people that were once religious are hypocrites too. I change my mind about topics weekly, not only monthly. As I read something (which I do daily) it strikes me in one way or another, and then my opinion shifts. It must be an extremely special mind that is impervious to evidence, opinion, and reason.


I really don't understand his rant on my aversion to Chomsky. I have long been talking about wrongs done by the United States, but Chomsky is simply dishonest in his attempts to highlight everything as an American misdeed.

If you look at what the greek has cited from me. You will notice that I call attention to the difference between a suicide bombing and a missile strike. The suicide bombing is objectionable because the perpetrator is killed, it seems more desperate while the missile strike is less objectionable because it seems more "rational". Independent of cause and independent of effect, the acts themselves carry different weight for people.

And as regards for my position on Israel, I find its racist policies objectionable, I simply want the greek d-bag to show my why it is domestically apartheid, he couldn't do it, so instead he launches into the greatest ad hominem assault (full of decontextualization) ever mounted on the internet.



P.S.
New blog post on jihad for your reading enjoyment...

1794. Five Things Humans No Longer Need

Comment #184018 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 12:17 pm

#6 Religion.

1795. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #184004 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 11:43 am

MaxD,







Marx was a vindictive, nasty toad. No Capitalist I have ever read has shown such contemptuous disdain for a group of people, based solely on their economic condition.

Socialism produced evil because Marx espoused evil.

1796. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #184003 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 11:41 am

epeeist,






Those are all sources I read.

1797. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #183988 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 11:15 am

Tez,








Marx was a spiteful little man, as evidenced by his little rant on the Jews. He felt similar animosity to those who had found success in the material world (many of whom were Jews). Marx had a certain pathology about him, and he made connections between the abstract and what he considered "Bourgeouis" society.


For instance he (not in the Manifesto, but in his other works) decried freedom of the press as a "Bourgeouis" notion. One thing can be certain, that Marx despised the Bourgeouisie, and that, in every instantiation, "Bourgeouis" is a pejorative term. Thus freedom of the press was an evil. Marriage was "bourgeouis" evil.


D'Arcy spoke of the end of private property, Marx never sought the end of private property. He only sought the end of "bourgeouis" property. He sought to punish those who held more than what he considered a "fair" amount (whatever that amount was, I will leave the destruction of that silly notion to the Sorites Paradox). If D'Arcy feels that an end to private property (all of it) would create a just society, Marx did not share this view completely.


When Marx says "Bourgeouis" he says it with absolute spite and malice. the Manifesto was a seething missive (I would have used screed, but no matter) against Marx's own enemies. Another enlightening read is his dissertation, a great window into a failed and tormented psyche.

1798. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #183979 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 10:49 am

epeeist,






The Daily Mail is a tabloid, but what they said happened to be true. Like if Bin Laden told me the earth was round, I would have to agree. Benefits fraud is a problem? Understatement of the new century. There was a former terrorist (plane hijacker) living on $150,000 per year... in government benefits. Then he got a job at Heathrow checking bags. No further comment.


If people understood what their taxes were used for, and that these should be called "dues" and would help instill a sense of ownership. Also the government and its employees (read: incompetent, condescending bureaucrats) should be in the service of the people and fucking act like it. They work for the people of the country that elected them and/or pay their salary. Once these issues get rectified, people will be more encouraged to be positive participants in society. And if this were the case, tax evaders could be punished more severely.

1799. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #183975 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 10:44 am

MaxD,




I have long said (on this forum) that corporate welfare is the antithesis of liberty. It is anti-libertarian, anti-American, and down right stupid.


Read the Manifesto, read the part on marriage where he claims that marriage is Bourgeouis form of communalism, which makes little to know sense. The Manifesto should be online for viewing.

1800. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #183970 by al-rawandi on May 23, 2008 at 10:37 am

masterslrig,






What an unctuous little comment.


But I would love to know how you know it is the truth? I am also a seeker of truth, so any information you have on the matter would be much appreciated!


Thanks.