2151. Character Attacks: How to Properly Apply the Ad Hominem

Comment #188157 by al-rawandi on June 3, 2008 at 9:31 am

j.mills,







I read the article. I have criticized him before for his Alan Dershowitz man crush. But thanks for keeping everyone on topic for these threads, what would we do without it?

2152. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188148 by al-rawandi on June 3, 2008 at 9:18 am

Now gays are smarter than homosexuals?



Wowowow.

2153. Character Attacks: How to Properly Apply the Ad Hominem

Comment #188147 by al-rawandi on June 3, 2008 at 9:17 am

scooternyc,






You mean Dershowitz the plagarist, or are you referring to a different Dershowitz?

2154. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188133 by al-rawandi on June 3, 2008 at 8:54 am

Appleby,







You are a slippery little bastard. Epeeist got you on that one.

Gays go to non Gay bars all the time. Why wouldn't they be happy in a normal "community" as opposed to one that is segregated? Are you suggesting that gays cannot stand heterosexuals? Or is it you that cannot stand gays.


*EDIT* more importantly gays can choose to go to a gay bar for a few hours, but wouldn't want to spend all their time there. Why would they be happy being permanently segregated?

2155. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188094 by al-rawandi on June 3, 2008 at 8:09 am

All of you are wasting your time. You are asking an irrational person to explain his irrational belief, on a rational basis. What a waste of time.


He simply wants to deny homosexuals rights and dignity, he will toss about any argument which he feels may make it harder to get to the bottom of the issue. It is deflection after deflection. He simply refuses to answer your questions.

Stop wasting your time with this pathetic loser.

2156. Mark Steyn vs. the 'Sock Puppets'

Comment #188074 by al-rawandi on June 3, 2008 at 7:42 am

Troll.



Marked accordingly.

2157. Mark Steyn vs. the 'Sock Puppets'

Comment #188052 by al-rawandi on June 3, 2008 at 7:20 am

brainsys,








I am talking about on this thread. Why don't you put a ball in play, or play with the one we have already put in play? Don't come here and bull shit for 6 posts then tell us you are bored and accuse us of ad hominems.


I will be more clear, post something or respond to something posted. It is really pretty simple, even you should be able to figure it out.

2158. Mark Steyn vs. the 'Sock Puppets'

Comment #188048 by al-rawandi on June 3, 2008 at 7:18 am

Fanusi,







I think he has gone to more "fruitful" threads. He didn't seem to have a grasp on the "course material" anyhow.

2159. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188044 by al-rawandi on June 3, 2008 at 7:12 am

elephant,







Were you here when Appleby was coming on to me yesterday? I am not so sure he doesn't have about a bakers dozen male cats running around his studio apartment.



I don't get it, why is it when you talk homosexuality someone immediately brings up bestiality.

Person 1: "I think gays should be able to adopt"
Appleby-like-person: "What, so is it ok to ass fuck a goat?"


It is a compulsion with these idiots.

2160. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188029 by al-rawandi on June 3, 2008 at 6:59 am

Quetz,








Unlike that cat, he better take me to dinner first. If he thinks he can open a can of Whiskis and get me naked, he has another think coming.

2161. Mark Steyn vs. the 'Sock Puppets'

Comment #188026 by al-rawandi on June 3, 2008 at 6:58 am

brainsys,






Cheap shots? What else do I have, you have not posted anything of value or substance. If you want to have a "fruitful" debate bring something to the table other than labrynthine posts that don't really say anything.

And for the record, Fanusi and I have the most fruitful debates on the site, IMHO.

2162. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188023 by al-rawandi on June 3, 2008 at 6:56 am

Appleby,







How did the vaginal sex go for you? Did your girlfriend like your vagina?

2163. Mark Steyn vs. the 'Sock Puppets'

Comment #188019 by al-rawandi on June 3, 2008 at 6:52 am

Fanusi,



Well I was reading an article on it yesterday, I didn't finish.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/06/02/080602fa_fact_wright?currentPage=all


I agree, I think he was saying, like al-Suri, that direct confrontation with the west isn't workable, because the Muslim forces will be crushed, and I think Fadl is saying that there must be political action to correct things in the Muslim world, while al-Suri is saying that the jihad must continue but just less well organized.

2164. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188016 by al-rawandi on June 3, 2008 at 6:48 am

Q, Irate,






You should have been here yesterday when Appleby was making homosexual advances towards me. He kept trying to convince me I was gay and all this other stuff. I was flattered, but I didn't know what to tell him.

2165. Mark Steyn vs. the 'Sock Puppets'

Comment #188010 by al-rawandi on June 3, 2008 at 6:39 am

Brainsys,






What the hell are you saying?


You are just popping off. There are criticisms you can make of Fanusi, the question is are you smart enough to make them.

2166. Mark Steyn vs. the 'Sock Puppets'

Comment #188002 by al-rawandi on June 3, 2008 at 6:26 am

One more thing,








The face of jihad is changing precisely because of the ideology espoused by al-Suri.


He has used the term Nizam la Tanzim... meaning a "loose system not an organization". He is advocating decentralized Jihad. Because rigid organization has found itself penetrated by western intelligence services, and loosely formed, unconnected cells of "jihad" will be more effective.

The only problem pointed out with this strategy is the need to recruit, and that the need to act (for these groups) will exceed the opportunity to act wisely. So if we leave Iraq, we will be doing our part to suck the oxygen out of this Nizam la Tanzim. Thus their recruiting will be damaged.

2167. Mark Steyn vs. the 'Sock Puppets'

Comment #188000 by al-rawandi on June 3, 2008 at 6:21 am

I was reading The American Interest Last night. There were several good articles. One of which was on Afghanistan and how the Pakistani military is basically selling us out, trying to allow the Taliban to operate to keep Afghanistan a country defined by religion and not Pashtun nationalism, which might spread to Pakistani Pashtuns. They also do this for strategic depth against the Indians.

Another interesting point made was that Iran could make our lives much worse there, and that in fact at the beginning Iran was helping us by supporting the Northern Alliance, but now are supplying various jihadist groups just to screw us. So I had an idea.

Why doesn't the US leave Iraq, then Iran can waste its money funding Shi'a groups in the coming blood bath versus Sunni (Saudi supported groups) groups. If we left Iraq there would be a flow of Sunni radicals into Iraq to fight the heretical Shi'a (most of these being of Wahhabi influence), and at the same time Iran would have a big job on their hands. That would give us the flexibility to provide the support to the Afghan government that they need, and the opportunity to negotiate a status of forces agreement.

Another article was discussing a book called "Architect of Global Jihad" on Abu Musab al-Suri who is this pseudo-rationalist Jihadi writer. A die hard pragmatist who has little religious training, but who remains very influential in the Jihadi movement. Expelled from Syria he married a Spanish woman and began writing, including a 1,600 page tract on Jihad.

I think the face of Islamic radicalism is changing somewhat. You have the hard core central al-Qaeda, but you also have the peripheral "Social al-Qaeda". Many of these peripheral persons are coming to Pakistan for training, and the scary part is many are English, and al-Qaeda is not using them in the war in Afhanistan, but is turning them around and sending them back to their European countries of origin, and this may well be the source of training for the 7-7 bombers.

Also Dr. Fadl (former al-Qaeda ideologue) wrote a tract rejecting violence from his Egyptian jail cell and has created a rift between himself and al-Zawahiri, as the two became friends in an Egyptian jail.

Interesting developments. My two cents since things were slowing down.

2168. Mark Steyn vs. the 'Sock Puppets'

Comment #187994 by al-rawandi on June 3, 2008 at 5:57 am

Fanusi,





As for Hobbes, the portion you quote, I like Robespierre... "Virtue without terror is nothing, and terror without virtue is nothing."

A great book by Slavoj Zizek is "Virtue and Terror". It's a collection of works by Robespierre on terror, and revolution.

I am not quite sure what your detractors are trying to say here. Are they actually making a point? Sometimes I have trouble deciphering liberal nonsense.

2169. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #187760 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 2:43 pm

Fanusi,




I need to leave, but I will construct a quick response.


It was a land grab. No doubt in my mind. The question is why? Moshe Dayan himself said "this is not a war of necessity, it is a war of choice." Many would say, and I would concur that Israel grabbed the land for safety and security, which to some is acceptable and others not. I am really ambivalent at this point in my life. I used to fault Israel for this, but one has to remember that the Jewish/Israeli mentality is strongly shaped by near annhilation, so I can forgive more of their actions when I keep that in mind.


I understand your point about being less willing to criticize tactics in Israel. That is fair enough for me. But I think Israel has a decisive advantage at this point and isn't facing organzied and powerful resistance, it is facing weak and disparate resistance. And Israel is mainly using its power to maintain settlements it should abandon anyway.

I am still convinced that shooting journalists is wrong, and there is no excuse for it.


As for the Wikipedia article, like I said, it left out the part about the Egyptian vice president, the straits of Tiran being a non-Issue and Abba Eban's lies. Those are all tangential to my point that Israel was going to launch the war one way or another. The question is, did they have a right to conquer the territory for protection.

And if they did, then they are bound to treat the people there well and ensure their civil services and the like, under international law. The occupier assumes final responsibility for all civil matters. So Israel has obligations, and as a decent people the Jews should follow through there (decent because most are secular and not crazed bigots like the settlers).

2170. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187756 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 2:35 pm

Elli,



Lol, Sammy Davis Jr. Good one.

Are you left handed too? All you need are some fucked up scissors and life would be perfect.

I was about to say "Lawyer? Well I hate you too!" But then you said you kicked the habit. Do they have patches, or did you use the gum?

2171. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187748 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 2:05 pm

Elli,





Are you gay too? Ass clown must really hate you.

2172. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187740 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 1:52 pm

Mitchell,






My opinion towards people who are condescending to women is quite well known here. People who refuse to deal with their arguments and comment on photos or whatever are simply terrified of women, specifically intellectual ones, as Elli obviously is. It takes a true coward to behave in such a fashion towards a woman. Appleby certainly has to be uncomfortable with his own sexuality (or ability):


1) He cannot tolerate gays.
2) He cannot behave civily with women.
3) He has to sign off saying he is going to have sex with a woman.

All this indicates a serious psychological problem. Perhaps closet homosexuality, perhaps tiny genitalia.... who knows.

2173. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187736 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 1:43 pm

ooooh




Now he is busy and has to go, once evidence is demanded for the 50th time, he gets busy and has to go annoy his "girlfriend".

Classic dogmatist, get's busy when the heat gets turned up.

2174. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187734 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 1:40 pm

Appleby,







Let's be clear, you cannot provide one shred of evidence to support your conclusions. Which means you arrived at these conclusions without evidence. Furthermore this means you are irrational.

You are also against extending certain rights to homosexual couples, this is based on irrational assumptions, and lack any evidence. This means you are discriminating against these people simply because of their sexual orientation.


This makes you a bigot. If I am wrong, please show me where I am wrong, point to the place and tell me why.

2175. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187692 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 1:07 pm

Appleby,

Between homosexual and heterosexual parenting? Are you serious? Perhaps I should also assume being raised by orangutans is equal until proven otherwise.

A curious hyperbole. Are you suggesting that being raised by a same sex couple is at all analogous to being raised by a troop of primates?




Bonzai,



And how did people justify objections to interracial marriage, and parenting?


"It doesn't feel right."
"It doesn't look right."
"It doesn't seem right."


And now for gay parenting we get Appleby's "feelings" on the matter. I just don't get the problem people have with gays. I simply don't understand it. So they like the same sex, I don't really care. Get over it already.

2176. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187674 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 12:50 pm

Appleby,




Mitchell Gilks said:

I specifically said already that I was not saying that there is no difference, what I said is that there is no reason to assume different is bad. That is irrational.

Then you say three posts later:

Some idiot comes to me and says there's no difference between homosexual parenting and heterosexual parenting.

I ask him to prove it. He tries. I say it's not enough. He tries again. I still say it's not enough. Why? The idiot is trying to prove a negative.

Then he tells me *I* have to prove there is a difference. Go figure.

You are truly a fucking idiot.

2177. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187653 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 12:25 pm

Appleby,







Feel free to ignore my posts. But don't be so self congratulatory as to confuse what you are doing with intellectual discourse.

You simply ignore all evidence. I will leave it to the rest of the crowd here to continue making you look like a totally bigoted moron.

Your feelings aren't evidence of anything other than your own irrational beliefs.

2178. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187646 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 12:19 pm

Appleby,




I am a very fair guy, as most people here will tell you. I usually give ideas, even the most bullshit ones, a chance. I was giving you such a chance, despite all my better judgement, then you go and say the following:

Simply on account of the children's likelihood of future unemployment and delinquency? That proves nothing and certainly doesn't point to gay adoptions as a solution.

No. You simply cannot read, that is your first problem. That or you refuse to read the evidence put before you. The fact is that those in "foster" care more often than not end up incarcerated. Incarcerated is fancy atheist talk for "in prison". Now that I have fulfilled my didactic duty for the day, I can move on to more general points about this crap you are attempting sell us here.

First, I have to ask, you don't think that the risk of being an unemployed criminal is greater than the risks associated with being teased over having homosexual parents? Choosing between a life of crime (yes a life, if you look at simple rates of recidivism for inmates) and some nasty teasing as a youth is so easy as to make me wonder if you are in fact a wilfull idiot and not one of those so handicapped by genetics as to be unable to comprehend simple points.

Second, your consistent willingness to ignore evidence and plain fact suggests that you are either the biggest idiot in the world (unlikely since I have already met wooter), or that you are such a seething bigot as to be unwilling to let your dogmatic hatred be shaken by obvious fact.


You are clearly a bigot. A bigot is someone who persists in his irrational hatred despite all evidence to contrary. A bigot usually adduces his feelings of "wrongness" to indict his victims, whom he always treats as a monolith. So the only question that remains is whether or not you are a complete bigot, or some of your nonsense can be accounted for with bungling stupidity.

I am going to side with the more modest, as I rarely attribute to malice what I can account for with stupidity.

2179. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187628 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 11:55 am

Peace,








These care homes, find over 50% of their products are imprisoned at some point and between 30-40% are unemployed. These homes are exceedingly poor at developing well adjusted children. The studies absolutely and undeniably bear you out. It isn't even close.

As for gay homes, I don't have the stats, but I would guess they are MUCH better than "care homes".

2180. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #187599 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 10:50 am

mark65,







Who said it was all Israel's fault?

Let me guess.... it was all the Arabs' fault, right?

And who exactly is an Islam apologist?

2181. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187596 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 10:46 am

Appleby,






Feel free to answer the questions that were put to you.


You are frustrated because we don't accept your "feelings" as a rational basis for dismissing homosexuals as parents. So can you provide some logical reasoning why you think they are unfit parents, which you have said already.


So get to the point or quit crying when people call you an irrational bigot, because that is precisely how you are behaving.

2182. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187569 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 10:18 am

Appleboner,

I never said we shouldn't. I just said I think straight parent adoptions are preferable.

Why are they preferable? Feel free to insert evidence.


Also, "homophobe" denotes a legitimate and defineable "phobia". And due to your habit of indicting homosexuals for all sorts of evils without adducing evidence, one can assume you suffer from the affliction.

As for "homo" it is short for "homosexual" and much like "spic" is a derogatory shortening of the actual term. So you either know this and are trying to lie and pretend you don't use derogatory terms and you twist the meaning of other words, or you are too stupid to comprehend the basic usage of the English language. Right now I weight the likelyhood there at about 50-50.

2183. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187565 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 10:13 am

mordacious,






I am a gay womanizing Jew loving anti-semite, Islamo-phobic Islamo-phile.

I don't really have time to go over all the accusations I receive. One of the above is true however. But I will simply eliminate the phobias and gay part and let the roullette ball come to rest where it may.

2184. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #187560 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 10:08 am

Allanw,





Illicit arms deals you ask.... those are illicit... not legal. That is like indicting free market capitalism in the US because there is a bicycle thief in Los Angeles. There are always crooks, they cannot all be stopped..


Bear Stearns was bailed out precisely because its failure could have spread. Especially because the bank was fine, the balance sheet was solid, a culture of rumors drove a run on the bank.

Another point you could make against a free market, is where interests overlap. For instance can the government demand that a bank keep a certain amount of cash in liquid securities to cover demands for withdrawal. The consitution would not allow this, but what about people who have a right to retrieve their money. The government can often act as a mediator and assurer of contracts in the free market.

2185. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187557 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 10:02 am

To:Appleby
CC: Mordacious1

And al-rawandi must be a homo.

Deny, deny, deny, counter-accuse.

I don't really care if someone says I am gay, but to use some derogatory short hand like "homo" is just sad. What is truly offensive is that there were so many ways to make a humorous reference, or subtle accusation, but he comes up with "A-hyuck, you're a homo". It is offensive to me as a person with a sense of humor.

I mean seriously man, what is your obsession with gays?

I never denied there's an adoption problem. I'm just not sure the ONLY solution is to permit gay adoptions.

Ok, why shouldn't we allow gays to adopt? Do they molest children at a higher rate? Abuse them? Neglect them?

In short do you have any data to support your views, or just your general feelings of self hate?

2186. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187538 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 9:39 am

Elli,







I can't really stand bull fighting either, and my favorite online videos are when some drunken moron in Pamplona gets gored in the ass, or when the matador gets skewered.

I just like meat too much to avoid all hypocrisy!

Anyhow, I think my theory holds, Appleby experimented in college, scared himself and now is dedicated to anti-homosexual activities. He doth protest too much!

2187. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #187536 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 9:34 am

Allan,






If there is evidence of predatory practices by the CDO crowd, they should be prosecuted. The only way a free market works is if those that actively attempt to defraud others are punished. It is that simple. A country (or economy) that does not respect the rule of law will fail. So when you say all these lenders were ass holes or whatever, I say "Okay". But these people should be dealt with in the courts and forced to redress any losses they caused due to dishonesty or illegal business practice.

I notice you didn't answer my defense contracts comments.

Also if the government bails people out, this isn't a free market either. Ron Paul made a good point in these hearings when he said that "Some say government interference is what CAUSES the business cycle." Let some people fall on their faces. Fuck these remora like brokers, is often my attitude.

I do advocate free markets, I really do. But there is never going to be a pure free market, just like D'Arcy's fantasy world of fuzzy rabbits and raimbows won't happen either. Both sides (Absolute free marketeers and absolute socialists) basically say the same useless thing:


"When things are perfect, then they will be perfect."


Beasically saying once all the factors in my theory are perfect, then everything will be great. Well wonderful, I have an equally useless theory...

"Once we find a way to cure all social deviancy by treatment at birth then there will be no more crime."


That is a wonderful sentiment, but is it a rational approach to crime fighting?

2188. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187505 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 9:11 am

Elli,

well, actually we do, but I personally think certain forms of hunting is a form of unacceptable cruelty, as do many others.

I am going to have to make a brief digression. Hunting, in general, is far more humane. You take a wild animal, which has the chance to live its entire life in its natural environment, and you hunt it with a tool (let's say a rifle) that will kill it nearly instantaneously.

On the other hand you have a system of imprisoning formerly wild animals, in what can only be described as inhumane conditions (filthy pens, filthy food, and systematic execution methods). I find it the height of irony to say that hunting is inhumane while imprisoning animals is humane. I simply cannot fathom what kind of hypocrisy it takes (not you, but those who think hunting is inhumane yet eat meat daily) for someone to hold such obvioulsy ridiculous views.

How about fishing? None of these softies ever complain about tricking a fish into thinking it is eating food then jamming a hook through its jaw and dragging, attached to a virtually unbreakable line) it through the water until it is brought on board the boat, at which point it is either allowed to suffocate or is kept alive until it is disemboweled.


Now I agree that bestiality is about abuse of an animal which cannot give consent. And frankly mentioning that in the same breath as anti-homosexual propaganda says alot about appleby.

2189. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187494 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 8:42 am

Appleby,






You need not be in support of homosexuality. Frankly I don't really give a damn what people support. But you certainly cannot deny them human rights, you cannot deny the fact that they are often competent members of society, far more qualified to raise a child than many dysfunctional heterosexuals.

So it doesn't really matter if you are for or against, but at least in a country where liberty is the law of the land, you have no right to deny them any rights.

If you want to spout of bigotry posing as an intellectual argument, go right ahead, I am more than happy to listen.

2190. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #187485 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 8:22 am

AllanW,

How do you account for the activities of the mortgage industry in the States during 2006 and 2007 without warping the words 'regulated' and 'highly'? Or the homeopathic remedies industry to this day? Or the activities of defense firms in the Middle East? etc etc

Your premise: "Trading of CDO's got out of control, therefore the market is unregulated." That logic would make the most devout theologist blush. In a free(r) market, new securities will come to market, they will be traded and utilized until the consequences are discovered. Then there will be appropriate regulation of the securities. Sometimes things have to turn ugly until the appropriate regulation becomes obvious. But the Monday morning quarterbacking by the anti-capitalist crowd is really just annoying and doesn't help, or add even the slightest sliver of value to the debate.


Defense firms in the Middle East? Even worse than your logic in the mortgage market. Who grants contracts to these companies? The US government, it is called "Corporate welfare" and is anti-libertarian. For instance, no bid contracts given to Haliburton, this isn't free market, in a free market bids are considered and the lowest bidder wins. So you have actually made my point, that the US is a "highly regulated" market. So I appreciate that.



Mixed economy? I am not for that? Have I not debated FF on the very topic? You are desperate to pigeon hole me, granted that will make your task easier, but it doesn't make it true. I have fairly criticized both socialism and Capitalism. And it remains that an economy dominated (although maybe not exclusively) by Capitalist theory and enterprise always fairs better than the sociliast dominated society.


So the rest of your post follows your attempt at a pigeon hole, doesn't refer to me or my arguments, and can be dismissed.

2191. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #187468 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 7:32 am

AllanW,






Not sure what I can say to that. As for my "Musings" perhaps you could evaluate those on their merits, more precisely the evidence. The facts rarely change, the weighting or interpretation often do. For instance my perception of Israel. The fact that it is a racist state doesn't change, the ire I feel towards that policy does change. So in that sense, my analysis of the facts doesn't change.


As for state ownership, that is what D'Arcy has said is necessary (although he couches this in terms of ownership by the people, but that is only acheived through a state). As for your interpretation of socialism, I will have to agree with Marx when he called this kind of thing "fake socialism".

If it weren't for pretty free markets in Scandanavia they couldn't fund their social programs. But if simply having a few social programs funded by the state makes you socialist, then I don't have a problem with that, because the country remains capitalist for all intents and purposes.


As for Fighting Falcon, don't lump me in there. His dogmatic capitalism is as blind as D'Arcy's absolutely ridiculous socialism. He ignores the fact that the government (to be libertarian) must defend against consolidation and abuse of power by any group.


As to my "binary" approach, that is far more relevant for interpretation. When I hear an opinion, I challenge it with evidence. People who are dogmatic (shockingly a large percentage of people here) they feel that I am being binary. simply because I am challenging them. This isn't so, I have provided some independent analysis on a number of subjects that are anything but binary. But just because I spread it around evenly doesn't mean that I am being binary.


As for western economies. Those are anything but unregulated. They are highly regulated, America being the prime example. There is nothing remotely free about this market, sounds like you are the one being binary.

2192. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187449 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 6:45 am

All,





I think Appleby is a case of someone who "experimented" in college, and wants to make doubly sure he didn't like it.

2193. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #187444 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 6:32 am

AllanW,







Says the guy enjoying the benefits of a free market.


You know you are free to move to North Korea or Cuba to experience the untiring beneficence of the state.

In the meantime perhaps you could contribute some evidence, original analysis, or something otherwise insightful, but I am going to guess that is asking too much of the socialist crowd. They spend most of their time hurling unisghted ad hominems at a general scarecrow of capitalism, all the while claiming that any instance of socialism isn't really socialism. Sort of like "That's not real Catholicism/Judaism/Islam.


Well that is a tired act. Your post should have been inserted 9 pages ago.



epeeist,



Fair enough. I don't really care for vultures either.



bhima,




You mean those Scandanavian countries with thriving stock markets? Oh those capitalist countries, that happen to have free medical care for their citizens?

Just an FYI, socialism requires state ownership of industry. A stock market is the most obvious evidence of capitalism ever. It is the legal equivalent of an unsolicited confession.

Good try though.

2194. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187432 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 6:17 am

Peace,

Then stop fucking your girlfriend in the ass, spazzing on her chest and wearing condoms.

This reminds me of the game show "Newlyweds" with Bob Eubanks, in the 1980's. So one of the couples gets asked a question and the answer is matched to an answer given ealier by the other spouse.

So for instance they will ask the woman, "When your husband is watching T.V. he wants you to bring him...???" She says "Remote" he holds up his pre-recorded answer "A Beer".


So the host asks the woman:

"Where is the strangest place you have wanted to make whoopie".

She says:

"In the ass Bob".


The guy holds up his sign: , it reads:

"In the car"


The host says:

"Uh ya, we were looking for a geographical location."

2195. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #187418 by al-rawandi on June 2, 2008 at 6:00 am

Fanusi,

But you are right, it does not change my views one iota. Becaue the basic issue remains the same - whether to back Israel or to back the Palestinians. And as I said, back the Palestinians and sanction genocide. Back Israel and support it's survival.

Fair enough. I usually take the following approach to the issue:

"Israel has nuclear weapons. If there had to be a nuclear power in the Middle East, who would you wish it to be, Israel, Palestinians, Saudi Arabia, Iran?"


I would simply rather those who have experienced genocide have the power, than those who have a large % of their population clamoring for genocide right now. My problem with your position is that you refuse to criticize Israel, you can support a cause or a country and still criticize it. I support my country (US) but I still criticize when it is in the wrong.

I have trouble seeing how important the aquifers of the West Bank can be to Israel, given they only captured them during the Six Day War (it's interesting that the occupied territories, evil, aggressive Israel occupies are only the ones it seize after the Muslim Arabs declared war and got their butts kicked).

Actually Israel started the 1967 war. Like in 1956 Moshe Dayan banged the war drums heavily, seeing that a display of force could endear Israel to the US, and show that the Jewish state could be an asset. Largely the Israeli pre-war claism were bunk and bull shit.

For instance Israel claimed Syria was massing its army on its border with Israel, this wasn't true, only 11% of the Syrian army was on the border and this was a tactic used by Syria to drain Israeli coffers. If it moved its army around Israel would mobilize its reservists, and this would cost money, thus the Syrians could use this to effect Israel economically. Of course Abba Eban simply lied and claimed Israeli radar picked up a flight of Syrian air force planes in bound. This was totally false.

Another bunk claim was the Israeli claim that the Arabs had blockaded the Red Sea port of Israel, and this was economically devestating. Less than 1% of Israeli imports and exports flowed through this port, and was simply a false pretext in order to start the war.

Israel started the war largely to make a land grab. One can discuss why they wanted the land, but to say the Arabs started the war is a lie. Quite the opposite, the Israeli surprise air attack on Egypt coincided with the Egyptian vice president's trip to Washington D.C. to negotiate a settlement to the stand off. Israel realized that their window to justify a land grab as "self-defense" was closing and they attacked.

One can argue about whether this was acceptable or not. What I tend to think is that the hawk Dayan was pushing hard for the war, he was well respected and a brilliant tactician and military mind. Israel was trying to make strategic decisions in real time, and did what it thought best.

However, there is no question that water played into the equation, even during the 1967 war. And your question "Why would they want the water" is irrelevant, because the settlements sit on top of aquifers, so who cares why, but the Israelis do seek to control the water.

2196. That's it. Texas really is doomed.

Comment #186553 by al-rawandi on May 30, 2008 at 3:10 pm

FF,






I don't have time to go through that now. But I will ask if you answered epeeist when you he asked why you would trust a corporation more than a government. You said the "Government can steal my property" but you never answered the question in full.

2197. Senate bill allows display of Lord's Prayer, 10 Commandments

Comment #186548 by al-rawandi on May 30, 2008 at 3:05 pm

njwong,






Uh he may have said that, but I am not sure where. I know for a fact he said "amphibious fraud" in "The Age of Reason":


http://libertyonline.hypermall.com/Paine/AOR-Frame.html

http://www.uoregon.edu/~rbear/reason1.html


In fact searching the text, I see no instance of "impious" being used in "The Age of Reason".

2198. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #186518 by al-rawandi on May 30, 2008 at 1:31 pm

D'Arcy,





Don't fret I am here to set you straight.


Let me see.... Engels.... ok, here is what that says, once things are run perfectly, they will be run perfectly.


Of course the huge gap you keep falling into is that attempting to implement this system always fails. So when I say "look at North Korea" and you plug your ears and start shouting "they are capitalist pigs" you miss the point that countries like that are the result at the attempt at the ridiculous Utopia Engels describes. It doesn't lead to utopia it leads to dystopia.

When you understand attempts at socialism lead to death and misery, you will understand why we keep saying what we do. It isn't that we don't wish people well, we just get it that socialism has been attempted and has failed, because people simply cannot form a government that will do what it takes. No one here wants there to be poor people, no one... but no system has created more poor people, more famines, and more death than ATTEMPTS at socialism.



epeeist,



Come on, out with it, do you hate rich people? I know I hate some of them.... the ugly ones with hot girlfriends. I am just being honest.

2199. That's it. Texas really is doomed.

Comment #186516 by al-rawandi on May 30, 2008 at 1:24 pm

FightingFalcon,







Argument died at 1:13 PST, causes:

1) Demanding proof of alternate system instead of admitting flaws in own system. Smoke screen.

2) Summarizing my position dishonestly.

A brief memorial service will be held in the restroom before argument is flushed. Any bugle players in the crowd, we need someone to play taps.


Anyhow, I will humor you.

I don't think government regulation is the answer to everything, quite the opposite. So when you say:

But don't worry - continue to think that government regulation is the answer to all of our problems...

You are just flailing around now. Logic has left the building. I find it doubly humorous that when I say "where does that appear in the constitution" you call me "childish" then you proceed to post something like the above. I mean is the irony totally lost on you?


Now my theory is to create a free market. However any person who infringes on the liberty of another or seeks to implement some deceitful plan to trample the liberty of others should be punished. The point of my posts on Insider Trading, Market Manipulation and the like is to say these things should be punished. You have yet to say "Corporate greed is bad", despite the fact that it is a recurring theme and common salvo against your argument.

I would like to see most things privatized, in probationary fashion to see if it works, once it does (as it often will) the government can close those offices and the work force can move to the private sector.

Things that aren't acceptable... letting people die in the damn streets because they don't have money. A minimum safety net must be in place for those who through mental or physical defect cannot compete in the market.

You comically said that I should donate to some charity that takes care of poor people and the government should never be involved. I quite disagree with that. Moral compulsion is enforced by the government, for instance murder is prosecuted and any number of other things are enforced, I don't see why helping the few in society who are truly unable to compete is a bad thing, even from a standpoint of government administration of the system.

Did you also want to privatize defense?

2200. That's it. Texas really is doomed.

Comment #186470 by al-rawandi on May 30, 2008 at 10:23 am

Oh and finally:




You demand laws stop the crime in real time... my rejoinder?:


How do your laws stop muder in real time? Can't do it, those laws are a waste and shouldn't be enacted. How do you know murders are being committed? I guess lack of real time knowledge makes the laws superfluous.


You punish the crime. It shold be a crime to cheat people through dishonesty. Only libertarians think abusive lies should be legal.

I guess all we have left is speeding tickets.