351. Muslims outraged at police advert featuring cute puppy sitting in policeman's hat

Comment #203642 by Fanusi Khiyal on July 3, 2008 at 9:40 am

The way this article looks is it makes all Muslims look bad

Oh, no, muslimlady it is Muslims who are making all Muslims look bad. With their eleven thousand plus deadly terror attacks since 9/11, with their huge support for those attacks, with the denial of basic rights to women, their fourteen hundred year history of genocide and aggression, with their sanctioning of rape, murder, theft, paedohilia and deceit, with their abject mental stagnation that they seek to impose on the world, with their racism, with their arrogance, their petulance, their bullying, their whining, their basic failure to operate except in one of two modes: useless thug and spoiled brat.

Get it? Some of us have had it up to here with your damn religion.

I believe that someone already made this point:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5-wgtoqFrk

Goldy on the subject of taxes, Muslims are disproportionately highly represented on the welfare rolls (as they are in other areas such as criminality, drug dealing etc.) for the simple reason that they see it as their due Jizyah.

Anyway, returning to your point that "Islam is only a religion" - no, no it isn't. Islam is way more than a religion the way we understand it. It's a Total System of Life, a regulatory framework that crawls into every nook and cranny of your life and privacy. It's totalitarian right to the root.

352. Muslims outraged at police advert featuring cute puppy sitting in policeman's hat

Comment #203443 by Fanusi Khiyal on July 3, 2008 at 12:03 am

8teist

Religion the opiate of the credulous

I prefer,

"If religion is the opiate of the masses, Islam is the crack!"

353. Muslims outraged at police advert featuring cute puppy sitting in policeman's hat

Comment #203439 by Fanusi Khiyal on July 2, 2008 at 11:48 pm

Philloph1978 a good way to understand the three monotheisms is to think of them in terms of human personifications. Judaism would be the quiet geek everyone hates and ends up succeeding ridiculously well. Christianity is a middle-aged guy who keeps switching between trying to pander to todays youth and complaining about 'kids these days'. And Islam? A big, drunken, beer-bellied lout, who's never had a job in his life, with tattoos crawling out of his sleeves, who responds to even the most cursory and involuntary glance with "WHAT'RE YOU LOOKIN' AT?"

354. Muslims outraged at police advert featuring cute puppy sitting in policeman's hat

Comment #203436 by Fanusi Khiyal on July 2, 2008 at 11:29 pm

decius it's worth remembering that Vin over here still denies that there are slaves being taken in the Sudan, never mind what the international criminal court and Amnesty and so on have to say. He also said the West should mind it's own business about the Sudan, which it has done, so that the Janjaweed could finish off killing everyone.

This 'racist' smear, not to mention the smears of Jihad Watch cannot ever be substantiated, nor can they be supported. It's just a way to avoid the problem. A way of rationalizing moral cowardice.

Not all Muslims are wahabis

True, Goldy but the problem isn't the Wahabis - it's Islam itself. Mainstream, orthodox Islam is an abomination.

As regards Islamic art, come on. If you look at that google image search, you find a couple of mosques, some arab writing, and, surprise surprise, a bunch of guys with rocket launchers.

Islam really hasn't produced anything new or original. The Mosque design they are so proud of is just copied from Byzantine cathedrals. "Arabic numerals" and the Zero originated in India.

Meanwhile Islam has been strangling the minds of over a billion people, destroying the classical heritage of Persia and Afghanistan, and generally trying to drag ever people back to the seventh century. The sooner this evil is eradicated, the better.

BTW, I'm not asking this as a challenge or trying to be insolent. I'm just genuinely curious as to where their thorough knowledge of islam comes from.

RamziD I can't speak for al, but mine comes from reading about Islam for the last three years (and pretty much exhausting the subject, which should tell you everything you need to know about the intellectual content of it - oh sure, there is this and that minutae, but the broad strokes of this fascist doctrine is easily glossed).

If you want to find out for yourself, just start with what I did: Read sites like jihadwatch.org, thereligionofpeace.com, faithfreedom.org. Check out Ibn Warraq's essay 'Islam, the Middle East and Fascism'. You can also try reading the Muslim apologetics, which I did at the start, the various 'reform' movements, like Irshad Manji, reform muslims, and so on. You'll very quickly find that there's no there there.

Seriously. It's not hard to find out this stuff. Read it for yourself.

355. Obama Wants to Expand Role of Religious Groups

Comment #203253 by Fanusi Khiyal on July 2, 2008 at 2:05 pm

Is it wrong for me to enjoy seeing the expressions as people twig to what the Obamessiah really is? Not that it wasn't patently obvious right from the start.

"Obama - he will heal divisions by giving us the worst of both worlds!"

The religious insanity of the right combined with the cowardice and pusillaminousness of the left.

Whoopee. Now, for the record, there is an actual war going on. With Iran building nukes, Obama's election would be a catastrophe.

356. Muslims outraged at police advert featuring cute puppy sitting in policeman's hat

Comment #203244 by Fanusi Khiyal on July 2, 2008 at 1:56 pm

*claws out*

?And anyway hasn't there been enough articles about muslims already? What more evidence do we need that their religion makes them do depraved things like the story of that teacher in Afghanistan whose limbs were pulled apart by being tied to motorcycles and whose crime was teaching to girls? There is lots more going on in this world and I'd certainly to read about it.

We need more, MANY more like this, until everyone begins to understand what Islam is and what the threat from it is.

If it were another article about some evangelical neanderthal, would you object? I doubt it. Let's see, why might that be? Hmmm... could it be because opposing Islam involves a modicum of risk? Requires knowledge of actual morality, not just vain posturing? Am I getting warm, Jiten.

And that item was verified when even a Muslim community leader of Scotland said that people getting irritated by this was ridiculous.

Al and Fanusi are usually spot on, if Fanusi is a bit too trigger happy with his incitement to violence and extreme measures, I can only assume it is because has a knowledge on Islam rivalled by few (one of the few being Al) and realises is potential (and actual) menace.

Thanks Thoughts. Though it's not hard to find out: start with reading Jihad Watch and continue from there.

357. Obama Wants to Expand Role of Religious Groups

Comment #203122 by Fanusi Khiyal on July 2, 2008 at 11:39 am

"Aaaand - another one down, another one down, another one under the bus."

Geeez - for someone who's supposed to be post-racial, he's lost any inhibition about showing his true colours.

358. Muslims outraged at police advert featuring cute puppy sitting in policeman's hat

Comment #203093 by Fanusi Khiyal on July 2, 2008 at 11:11 am

Cue the Muslim fake outrage machine, and our elites crawling on their bellies to apologise. Collection of dhimmis, the lot of them.

The regime change that's really necessary is in Europe.

359. It can be right to discriminate against the religious

Comment #202430 by Fanusi Khiyal on July 1, 2008 at 1:30 pm

Are there all these bigots out there saying, "I hate those Muslims ' but I love Sikhs?"

As a matter of fact, yes, yes there are. Even the racist BNP is trying to make nice with the Hindus and Sikhs.

Also, those decent politicians who get it about Islam - Pim Forturn, Geert Wilders, Ayaan Hirsi Ali - have no problems with any other immigrant group, probably because no other immigrant group wants them dead.

It's nice to see people, albeit slowly, get it. It isn't nice to see them feeling forced to dress it up in all this nonsense.

360. CFI-UN Hamid Karzai Letter

Comment #202134 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 30, 2008 at 11:46 pm

Usually I find myself in agreement with your necessarily forthright condemnation of Islam, but your above comment seems to go against your excellent '7 point plan' outlined on the McEwan thread, wherein you explicitly dismissed the 'military warfare' you are now defending and proposing here.

Styrer you are partly right - I sometimes have trouble controlling my ire. Why do you think I'm so active on right-wing blogs?

But the point isn't a contradiction. I still advocate the points I outline. And one of my reasons for supporting that program, instead of the neoconservative one, is that, in order to sort out Muslim states militarily, that is what would be necessary.

We have neither the resources nor the political will to do that.

So the sad conclusion is that there is no real way to sort out places like Afghanistan. My own advocacy of cultural imperialism will work best against those who have a long, non-Islamic history and culture, as well as those that have suffered hideously under the Arab supremacism of Islam. That's why Iran is such an excellent target. The Kurds too, as well as the North African Berbers.

I'd include the blacks of the Sudan except for the minor fact that, people like Vin were listened to, and his countrymen have now killed them all. It's too late there. They're all dead. So, Vin, out of the two of us, one is an enabler of genocide, and it isn't me.

Back to the point of Cultural Imperialism: it will be a very long, very slow process. Short of something much nastier, it will take decades to complete.

Anyway, think what your reaction would be, if massive Muslim armies attacked and occupied your country - would you say "Oh, I was wrong and you have shown me the light"? Doubt it, so why would you think Muslims would do so?

Of course not. But if you ask if 'massive American armies attacked and occupied...' I would say, yes, yes indeed, they have shown us the light. Because that is actually what happened with my country. I don't hold a grudge over the mass bombing of civilian centers, or the incineration of Dresden, or the torpedoing of civilian red-cross ships. I really don't, because I know what that spared us. That's war.

My point, to repeat, is that people are just underestimating what it would take to break this evil by military means.

So, the best possible option at the moment seems to be ensuring that Afghanistan doesn't house yet another centre of gangsterism: destroy any terrorist camps and anything used to support them.

What, like Afghanistan? Somalia? Like the notice one sometimes sees in a shop - if you break it, you buy it. We have bought Afghanistan - we can't just leave it in the corner hoping it will fix itself. We need to spend big to get it going again. Germany had the Marshall plan - not sure what the Soviets spent in the east but I am assuming it was less than the West (US) spent in the west. Same with Japan.

You already know which parallels I have cited. But have we the resources? At this point we need to knuckle down and seal ourselves off against the Muslim world. This war isn't going to be over by the end of my lifetime, nor yours. Do we have the resources for such an undertaking - the material, political, and ethical resources?

361. CFI-UN Hamid Karzai Letter

Comment #201992 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 30, 2008 at 2:42 pm

I don't disagree with any of that. But the problem is you are left with little choice other than mass genocide, and I don't use that term with any negative connotation, but be aware that is what you are advocating.

Not really. The utter destruction of Japan and Germany and the extirpation of the evil of those societies did not involve the annihilation of the entire race or people inhabiting that area. And a damn good thing too, given the treasures of Japanese art and of German literature. That would have been horrific beyond imagining.

Similarly, I am convinced that there are ways to break the terrible hold of Islam on the people, even in Islamic states.

However, while this does not entail genocide, it also doesn't entail this infernal 'softly, softly' approach. The state needs to be utterly broken destroyed to the point that the people realise that they are defeated beyond question. There can't be a situation, like in Weimar Germany, where they can say 'we were betrayed'. Nor can there be any hesistation in saying their defeat was just. The peaceniks have completely abolished any hope of that latter point; if this crowd had been around in the Second World War we'd be fighting Nazi insurgents and Imperial remnants to this day.

362. Stephen Hawking's explosive new theory

Comment #201932 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 30, 2008 at 12:37 pm

With respect - how the hell would they prove this? I know and you know that a theory is only a theory if it has testable predictions.

363. CFI-UN Hamid Karzai Letter

Comment #201930 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 30, 2008 at 12:34 pm

al I was making apoint about the terrible power of Islam and the fanatacism that allows it to endure. If you want to defeat that kind of fanaticism, you need to utterly destroy the creed at it's root. Nothing else will stop this.

It is also a mistake to assume that we can, ever, do right by Islam. Not a chance, not now or ever. We're Infidels - they will never tolerate us.

After tearing out the Taliban, after supporting Afghanistan in all kinds of ways, after spending infidel lives to liberate it with the absolute minimum of casualties to the native populace - after all that, they still will not respect the most basic of human rights.

Either destroy Islam, or at the very minimum annihilate it's political ambitions, or don't be surprised if this comes boiling out.

Here's a very good article on the subject:

No Substitute For Victory
http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2006-winter/no-substitute-for-victory.asp

364. CFI-UN Hamid Karzai Letter

Comment #201914 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 30, 2008 at 12:04 pm

And this is the great liberation of Afghanistan. This is the result of the cretinous idea that 'freedom is the desire God planted in every human heart.

Might be time for Plan B: turn Afghanistan into rubble, smash it down to it's foundations and extirpate this evil at the root.

It worked against Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan (both theocracies).

365. Evangelical grunts

Comment #201604 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 29, 2008 at 10:06 pm

I knew that two million Christians and animists had been killed, I just din't know what the proportions were. But this comment by Vin really takes the cake:

Bitter as it is, the country is struggling to keep the fragile peace between North and South so just do us a service and keep your nose out of our business.

After what has been going on in the Sudan and Darfur, he has the nerve to say this? About sixty-seventy years ago, there were people who said similar things in my own Fatherland; I've always wondered what kind of minds they must have had - and today I know.

But don't worry Vin. This time the US decided to let you mind your own business, and do it the UN way, and send inspectors, and hold negotiations, and give you all the time in the world - and you know what? It's too late. They've all been killed.

So I hope that every UN fetishist, every fool like Vin, every single member of the 'peace' racket, every person who has done their damndest to deligitimize the only power in the world capable of stopping such monsters and to get them to bow to groups like the United Nations - I want every one of these to realise what they have sanctioned, and what they have allowed.

So, congratulations, Vin, you've been left to your own business, and we see what that's done.

366. Evangelical grunts

Comment #201210 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 29, 2008 at 12:39 pm

Why does that scare you? Christianity has befriended Islam, let Christianity deal with the beast it helped create.

TeraBrat excuse my frankness, but have you taken leave of your senses? Do you really imagine that we would escaped unscathed? Do you really think that Islam only has it in for Christians?

Sweetie, I have news for you. We're all in this. Like it or not, in a war like this, we're all involvde.

And can you really say that you don't care about the, what, million, million and a half Christians murdered in the Sudan? Or the persecuted Christians in Lebanon, Palestine and Iraq?

On this point, all kafirs and Infidels have to stand together. Period.

I've never heard a single apology from anyone of status in the Muslim world for the nearly 5000 servicemen and women who have died at the hands of the radicals of Islam.

Christopher, you said it. We're also not going to hear any apology from this lot.

Get home safely and send alot of those jihadi bastards to oblivion in small pieces.

367. 'I despise Islamism': Ian McEwan faces backlash over press interview

Comment #200823 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 28, 2008 at 9:26 am

Holocaust denial is not necessarily racism

Technically true. Travelling India I met a nice young lady who had never been taught anything about the Holocaust. She wasn't being antisemitic, but I have my views about her teachers (especially since we were often advised to haggle, but haggle honourably "not like jews").

However, Holocaust denial in the West, where the knowledge of the Endloesung is common, is a little different. Technically, you could not be anti-semitic and not think that the Holocaust never happened. But let's get real, shall we? In practice, what is the more likely scenario - someone just happening to think the Holocaust is wrong, or someone saying so out of rather nasty personal views?

One thing it is not possible to be is an honest Holocaust denialist.

368. 'I despise Islamism': Ian McEwan faces backlash over press interview

Comment #200307 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 27, 2008 at 9:33 am

advocatus you are now lying through your teeth. You said that there wasn't much to choose from between the glories of Western Civilization and Islamic barbarism. That is what you said. Period.

369. 'I despise Islamism': Ian McEwan faces backlash over press interview

Comment #200271 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 27, 2008 at 8:18 am

Your comparison is so completely ridiculous, it is making it hard to take you seriously

I wouldn't even try, al. This guy is obviously out there in cloud cuckoo land.

370. God hates Mars

Comment #200243 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 27, 2008 at 6:39 am

I appreciated this post. It's easy to forget just how insane some of the Christian perspective is.

371. 'I despise Islamism': Ian McEwan faces backlash over press interview

Comment #200241 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 27, 2008 at 6:37 am

Civilization as it currently stands is much too flawed and broken as it is. Replacing it with Islam would only make it worse by a few degrees.

And there you have it. A supposed atheist giving voice to opinions so lunatic that the worst snake-handler or creationist would shy away from them.

Have you not being paying any attention to reality? Haven't you noticed the rampant child-rape in Islamic societies? Or the practice of slavery? Or the total lack of freedom of speech and conscience? Or the total subjugation of women? Or the endemic violence? Or the fearful sloth and inshallah apathy that brings utter stagnation and poverty?

Idiots like this should have to spend a few months in the Sudan, or eking out a living on the rocks of Afghanistan. You'd soon learn to appreciate the amazing nature of our civilization, the greatest the world has ever known.

Which brings me to another point:

The basic question is, are you willing to fight, no matter what the cost, for the preservation of Western Civilization? If there's any hesitation in your mind you're part of the problem.

372. 'I despise Islamism': Ian McEwan faces backlash over press interview

Comment #200163 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 27, 2008 at 2:07 am

Her metaphysic was basically Aristotelian essentialism, her "solution" to the Problem of Induction merely a rehashing of the No True Scotsman fallac

I notice that you take refuge behind jargon. Rest assured, I've heard this nonsense before, and it is never substantiated. No critic of her epistemology, nor of her ethics has ever held water. No, I'm not interested in arguing this point with you - I've heard it all before, and the reason I cited Ayn Rand is that you came up with this idea that seizing the property of the enemy in wartime is somehow 'marxist'. I pointed out that this was rubbish, especially given that we are dealing with feudal regimes whose wealth is essentially stolen.

I was thinking of racially or ethnically distinctive groups, such as African Americans or (in my country) Maori, but when I think about it groups distinguished by age, socioeconomic status, and interests would illustrate the point equally well (students in my own town are an example, as are British "football hooligans").

So Hindus and Sikhs are not ethnically distinctive? Your argument boils down to: "any disadvantaged minority group is badly behaved, and we know they're disadvantaged because they are badly behaved." Hogwash. Britain has bent over backwards for the Muslims. Yet when did you last see the PM taking tea with a Sikh or extolling the virtues of Hinduism?

If I were an African American I would be incensed at being lumped in with the hideous crimes of the Muslim community. Nor for that matter does your vaunted casuistry explain why, in Muslim majority countries, it is the religious minorities who are best behaved, despite facing far worse oppression than Muslim immigrants in the West do.

No. The problem is the doctrine itself, and I can't believe I have to say this amidst unbelievers.

What do we do, ship it back to where it came from? Where the stuff is already piling up against our borders? Where it might go critical by itself and cause a serious breach? No, we spread it out, prevent it from clumping, let it decay below critical mass in safe lead containers. Allow "radioactivity" to stand for "Islam" -- the solution is integration. (The "lead containers" would be educated secular communities.)

Except this ugly thing called 'reality' rears its head. There is no evidence whatsoever that this works. However, if Muslims are confined to the dar al-Islam, their ability to cause trouble is drastically diminished.

You still haven't begun to address all the problems we already have, from the intifada in France to the push for Shariah law here.

As to your cretinous comments about teleportation devices, if someone comes forward, they get police protection. If someon threatens them, they are charged and prosecuted. If a Mosque is used to incite murder, it is seized and torn down.

We already have very brave groups speaking out, no thanks to our cowardly elites. Those who wouldn't come forward given the climate I have described are of no use whatsoever. That's their problem and not ours.

Now tatoo this in mirror writing on your forehead so that you get it:

Our goal is the survival of civilization. Helping Muslims break free of the mental prison of Islam is an excellent way of doing that, and a nice bonus, but it is not our primary concern. Our primary concern is to eliminate the Islamic threat to this civilization.

Got that?

373. Divine Impulses: Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #200109 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 26, 2008 at 11:17 pm

You're kidding, right? Tell that to the American men and women SERVING in Afghanistan and Iraq.

As a matter of fact, I will. Since I happen to know some of them, and there's not one who wouldn't agree.

I know that you don't have a problem with Iran building nuclear weapons, and launching them at Israel, and Israel retalliating with the Samson Option, as long as your pretty little hands remain clean. What an advanced sense of morality.

Fortunately, Israel appears to be taking matters into its own hands. Thank goodness for that.

In As'ad Abukhlil's blog www.angryarab.blogspot.com, someone was kind enough to translate a good portion of the (reliable) Dutch documentary (2006) on Hirsi Ali. Here it is:

.

Of course this piece of garbage - greek, that is - has no qualms about citing a jihadist propagandist and noted liar.

al and others, do you now see why I say that I find the company of Christian fundies much more wholesome than certain atheists?

374. Saudi Marriage Officiant : 'It Is Allowed To Marry A Girl At The Age Of One'.

Comment #199342 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 25, 2008 at 2:44 pm

I'm waiting for this line to appear in these threads one day ;-) (joke - but with a serious undercurrent. Sometimes I feel this sentiment is heartfelt in some of the comments I read)

Goldy, when people are frightened, and feel helpless, bad things can happen. This is one of the reason I keep saying act now before the unthinkable starts.

375. Band T-shirt draws charge

Comment #199256 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 25, 2008 at 11:55 am

Oh dear lord - as it were. It's a band called Cradle of Filth for crying out loud! What do you expect?

Although I would give them immense props if they had the guts to say the same thing about Muhammad.

376. 'I despise Islamism': Ian McEwan faces backlash over press interview

Comment #199164 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 25, 2008 at 9:01 am

I found the following article online, by the irreplaceable Bruce Bawer:

The Times, it Ain't a-Changin'
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/the-times-it-ain't-a-changin'/

Bruce Bawer is a must read for anyone who even vaguely thinks that Islam is no more of a problem than Christian fundamentalism.

377. Saudi Marriage Officiant : 'It Is Allowed To Marry A Girl At The Age Of One'.

Comment #199162 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 25, 2008 at 8:58 am

al if you want to see why we should all use the word 'Moslem', read this:

"A Religious War Would Be a Great Step Toward Ending Racism"
http://www.imao.us/archives/006532.html/#comments

Money quote:

"We'll have the white man, the black man, the china man, and the wetbacks all fighting side by side against the dreaded Moslem enemy."

Why start and stop at 2? That seems to be based on the "institution" of marriage as it currently is. I see no problem with 1 as long as they can be there for the child and know of no reason to cap it off at 2. My son has four parents (a daddy, a birth mommy, and 2 love mommies). I may have misread, you could be meaning at least 2, if so my bad. If not it really becomes a defense of the system we have conceded is flawed.

Which may explain a few things.

No, sorry, I have seen too much of the devastation wrought by the sexual revolution to be at all comfortable with running experiments with children's lives. In a traditionalist, patriarchal society maybe, where the father has a strong sense of responsibility towards his children. In the West, it seems to be yet another example of exalting whim over responsibility, and I have seen too much of what can go wrong to trust it.

378. Saudi Marriage Officiant : 'It Is Allowed To Marry A Girl At The Age Of One'.

Comment #199080 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 25, 2008 at 7:07 am

Being deliberately confrontational is similar to praying: feeling you're doing something without achieving anything.

Actually, no. It's about showing these guys that we are willing to stand up to them. It's about cutting through the fog and deception so common today. It's about being able to say: this far and no further. It's about getting more infidels aware of the problem (Mark Steyn is an excellent example). It's about letting Infidels know that there is nothing wrong with standing up and being hear.

That's what it's about.

379. 'I despise Islamism': Ian McEwan faces backlash over press interview

Comment #199045 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 25, 2008 at 5:45 am

Barry Pearson, I know those guys. But the fact is, if you remove that much from the Qur'an, you've basically destroyed Islam.

380. Saudi Marriage Officiant : 'It Is Allowed To Marry A Girl At The Age Of One'.

Comment #199041 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 25, 2008 at 5:43 am

On the subject of marriage, I'm for it. Apart from anything else - love, devotion, commitment, minor things like that - it's a provable fact that children from married couples do better. Conversely, the skyrocketing rates of divorce and illegitimacy in the United Kingdom have had a devastating effect.

I don't accept that this sort of criticism is "cultural imperialism". (So I agree with Layla here). Accepting that term in this case both distorts the picture and adopts a confrontational tone.

Good. We could do with a little more confrontation. We want their evil, life-hating culture destroyed and replaced by our life-affirming culture. Let's not beat about the bush here.

381. 'I despise Islamism': Ian McEwan faces backlash over press interview

Comment #198999 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 25, 2008 at 2:13 am

Oh dear. And here I thought we were starting to understand each other. I have not addressed the point that Muslim immigration is pushing our societies towards extinction, because I don't think Muslim immigration is pushing our societies towards extinction

And here I thought that you had finally started to understand something about the nature and menace of Islam. With the small numbers we already have we see pushes for Shariah and terrorism. What the hell do we face if we have two, three, four, five times that number? Are we really going to have to experience a continent wide Bosnia with a dozen Milosevic's?

Large-scale immigration is, I admit, a necessary precondition for the latter scenario; but it's not a sufficient cause. Shariah communities can only become established in the first place if Muslim immigrants are left to their own devices by the host society out of fear, indifference, or misplaced sensitivity. That this is indeed happening should be of serious cause for concern.

And the larger numbers of Muslims there are, the more clout they can wield, and the more they can isolate their communities of faithful away from the rest of the host society.

The fact is that the only Muslim you can ever be sure to trust is either the apostate, or the near-apostate (e.g. Irshad Manji). There are millions who don't support jihad and shariah and who never will, but you can never tell which are which until it's too late. Especially since even those with a 'residual' Islamic identity can undergo fully fledged reversion to the real thing.

You could be describing any disadvantaged immigrant or indigenous group

No, I could not. This isn't just wrong, it's actually libelous. Hindu and Sikh immigrants don't pull this stuff. Nor are they as heavily represented in the heroin trade as Muslims are. This tired, shopworn marxist casuistry explains nothing. On the other hand, understanding the texts and teachings of Islam explains everything.

Hey, you were the one advocating Marxist trade barriers on Saudi oil sheikhs.

Nothing Marxist about that. Embargoes during a time of war are normal and natural. And Ayn Rand herself, the greatest defender of capitalism that has ever lived, said that we should never have allowed them to seize the equipment and institutions of our oil companies.

The Allies bombed them not to change their minds about their values but to dismantle their infrastructure for delivering and co-ordinating their attacks. After the war the Allies did not impose British or American political institutions on Germany, much less colonize them culturally. Germans are not Nazis, but they are still Germans, and so they should be.

As a matter of fact, the Allies laid down the law in very clear and very harsh terms to the defeated powers, extirpating the evil at it's root. Take a look at the terms dictated to Japan. Germany was thoroughly de-Nazified, and laws against antisemitism remain on the books to this day.

Here's a good article on dealing with Islam, and the parallels with Hirohito:

http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2006-winter/no-substitute-for-victory.asp

Not good enough. Potential apostates need to have an existing community support network ready to step into when they leave their shariah communities; people you've never met cannot be a community support network for you. You praise Christian missionaries for their effectiveness -- why are you so dead set against adopting their methods

When did I ever say I was? I have said that we should adopt and adapt them. One example I gave was supporting the ex-Muslim councils around the world, not to mention people like Ali Sina. Support groups and community protection for apostates are essential. What's difficult about this?

No-one's going to come to a protection system that demands they first endanger themselves.

Er - I have said time and time again that I support providing defense to anyone who asks for it, as well as throwing out any Shariah supporters, an action which would make it a lot less difficult for apostates to come forward.

What, exactly, is difficult here?

OK, I've read 'em. It's a guy who agrees with you, a guy who thinks you can outdo radical Islam at ruthlessness. Some hopes

Actually, he says nothing of the sort. And I'm not saying that we should try to outdo Islam at ruthlessness. If that were the case, I'd advocate the nuclear destruction of large sections of the Middle East and the killing of all Muslims here in Europe. Get it? That's outdoing them at ruthlessness.

What I advocate are stern but eminently just measures to keep our civilization from collapse. Yet you are dead set against the most critical one, the only measure that could prevent Europe from becoming Eurabia.

382. Saudi Marriage Officiant : 'It Is Allowed To Marry A Girl At The Age Of One'.

Comment #198974 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 24, 2008 at 11:31 pm

Vin, Vin, Vin...

You should know by know that when I make a point, I can always back it up. Thought I'm not sure it will help much with you; with respects to slavery, I cited eight different sources, and al added another four and you scated straight over them.

It's not just one member. I cited him as an illustrative example. Here's another: David Myatt, the former head and founder of Britain's National Socialist party is now known as Abdul Aziz ibn Myatt, who sings hymns of praise for the true Islam that is crowned by Jihad. The Aryan Nations have made a statement of official policy that they see their cause lying alongside the Muslim Arabs. French neo-Nazi leader Robert Faurisson associated with Ahmed Rami, a broadcaster on Stockholm's now defunct, anti-Semitic Radio Islam. Upwards of 500 neo-Nazis formed the "Freedom Corps" and shipped out to Iraq before the Gulf War, only to flee after the first night of bombing (finally, some comic relief). Neo-Nazis and Muslim fundamentalists share financiers in common and--file this under hide-in-plain-sight--meet at Holocaust denial conferences.

This isn't a new phenomenon. A minor fascist leader whom noone has ever heard of called Adolf Hitler lamented the fact that Germany wasn't Islamic.

What drives ME up the wall is the position that feminist and human rights criticism of Muslim countries is invariably nothing more than "cultural imperialism."

Layla but that's exactly what it is. Where they go wrong is in thinking that there's anything wrong with cultural imperialism. We should want our culture and values to supplant this primitive barbarism.

383. Saudi Marriage Officiant : 'It Is Allowed To Marry A Girl At The Age Of One'.

Comment #198877 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 24, 2008 at 3:37 pm

I was referring to the fact that Christ had some very stern words about those who harm children. And the Buddha preached the universal sanctity of life. What I am getting at is that it was possible to move beyond the moral status of Muhammad long before his time.

384. Saudi Marriage Officiant : 'It Is Allowed To Marry A Girl At The Age Of One'.

Comment #198817 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 24, 2008 at 2:14 pm

Sounds like a hell of a conversation. I fear this will get worse before it gets better

Of course. Because this can't just be fought via politics and law, it must be fought in terms of values. We have to be completely unashamed it saying, and saying LOUDLY, 'Our values are better, period.'

385. Saudi Marriage Officiant : 'It Is Allowed To Marry A Girl At The Age Of One'.

Comment #198789 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 24, 2008 at 1:33 pm

That statement is true,

Really. So Sam Harris is a vile racist, right-wing Xenophobe? Christopher Hitchens? Robert Spencer? Hugh FitzGerald? Ibn Warraq? Ali Sina? Ayaan Hirsi Ali? Wafa Sultan? Geert Wilders? Pim Fortuyn? Ann Cryer? Phyllis Chesler? Nonie Darwish? David Horowitz? Walid Shoebat? K.S. Lahl? Richard Dawkins?

Actually, and I've pointed this out before, the real fascists and white supremacists are turning toward Islam because it gives them the feeling of power they enjoy.

386. Saudi Marriage Officiant : 'It Is Allowed To Marry A Girl At The Age Of One'.

Comment #198768 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 24, 2008 at 1:06 pm

I'd fight to the death against this religion.

Excellent, irate! Welcome to the ranks.

Again, sites worth reading on this:

jihadwatch.org
thereligionofpeace.com
faithfreedom.org

387. Saudi Marriage Officiant : 'It Is Allowed To Marry A Girl At The Age Of One'.

Comment #198756 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 24, 2008 at 12:51 pm

THanks, Corylus. I appreciate that. Yet she also says what I've been saying:

http://www.anncryer.com/articles/11.html

The same "leaders" who were dragged kicking and screaming into recognising the realities of forced marriages seek to label anyone who dares challenge the status quo as Islamophobic or accuse them of "demonising" the Asian community.

388. Saudi Marriage Officiant : 'It Is Allowed To Marry A Girl At The Age Of One'.

Comment #198724 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 24, 2008 at 11:58 am

No, Thoughtsoncommontoad I will not 'change the record'. We anti-Jihadists have tolerated this crap for far too long. Remember this little comment of yours?

The only corners that criticise Islam are the very right-wing often racist vile xenophobes.

389. 'I despise Islamism': Ian McEwan faces backlash over press interview

Comment #198715 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 24, 2008 at 11:44 am

Here you go AlanW

His words, in an interview with an Italian newspaper, could, in today's febrile legalistic climate, lay him open to being investigated for a "hate crime

Not to mention the usual screams of 'racist!'

390. Saudi Marriage Officiant : 'It Is Allowed To Marry A Girl At The Age Of One'.

Comment #198712 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 24, 2008 at 11:37 am

Why exactly should we be tolerant of this crap? Religious approval of child rape deserves exactly what it gets; ridicule and condemnation.

Yes, this is utterly revolting. But in a way it's the apologists who sicken me more. These guys are monsters, period. They're brought up to think this stuff's okay. I think of them as rabid dogs; they need to put down - wiped out, exterminated - but there's no point in getting furious.

Yet there has been a defeaning silence from all those who are supposed to sound the alarm. Let's see now, where are the feminists? I mean, surely, surely they will raise hell about this?

*crickets chirping*

Yeah, I thought so. Of course, maybe I'm being unfair. Remember the huge outcry when the head mufti of Australia said that in 90% of the cases a woman's raped it's her fault? Funny, neither do I.

There has been a collosal failure on the part of those who say it's their job to stop this stuff. You can, and I have, search the website of NOW and find not one mention of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, nor any attempt to raise funds for her protection.

When they are hectored enough by guys like David Horowitz, Robert Spencer and Mark Steyn they manage to bring out some sort of pro-forma denunciation, but it's always "Yes, of course we're against child-rape, honour killings, forced marriage and clitorectimonies, it's just not as important to us as the lack of female pipe-fitters. That's the issue we should be concentrating on!"

The hell with the lot of them. It's shame I'm going to be forced to save their goddamn necks in the process of saving my own.

391. Saudi Marriage Officiant : 'It Is Allowed To Marry A Girl At The Age Of One'.

Comment #198694 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 24, 2008 at 11:20 am

Oh, and because this seriously deserves mentioning :

The Islam's Not For Me song:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=89jHc4ysBkk

"He justified perversion in the name of Allah
When he married a girl too young for a bra.
She was playing with dolls when the Prophet came
Her childhood was stolen in Allah's name
Aisha was nine when he took her to bed
Don't tell me that guy's not sick in the head"

392. Saudi Marriage Officiant : 'It Is Allowed To Marry A Girl At The Age Of One'.

Comment #198691 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 24, 2008 at 11:16 am

I'm going to point out that some of us have been mentioning little details like that and recieving nothing but outcries from certain people - you know who you are - outcries of of 'Fascist!' 'Racist!' 'It's all due to American foreign policy!' for quite some time.

Way back when when human life expectancy was much much lower and most people did not get an education it made sense for them to get married and start having children as early as possible from a reproductive AND evolutionary point of view. The longer you waited the less chance you had to pass on your genes. I'm quite sure most people married at adolescence in those days.

Sorry, that doesn't fly. That logic explains why Romeo and Juliet were written to be so young, but it doesn't explain this kind of perversion. Long before Muhammad there were those who had understood that this was bullshit. Christ did so. I'm pretty sure that the Buddha also did.


Oh, and just in case anyone thinks that this is confined to Saudi Arabia, the mosques in Britain preach the same thing. And they are on videotape as having said it.

393. 'I despise Islamism': Ian McEwan faces backlash over press interview

Comment #198688 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 24, 2008 at 11:15 am

AlanW didn't you notice that they want to charge him with a 'hate crime'?

advocatus and al if you can't understand that the minor incident of six million murdered while the world stood around doing nothing justifies a state for jews, then I'm not going to even bother.

394. 'I despise Islamism': Ian McEwan faces backlash over press interview

Comment #198597 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 24, 2008 at 9:32 am

Advocatus - don't make me come over there.

If Israel wanted to wipe out the Palestinians, it would have done so and the UN would have hopped up and down and done nothing. And for the record, there are a few people who are beginning to reach the end of their tether with respect to the Palestinians.

Now, back in the real world, the last time there was a continuous rain of rockets on the capital city of a major nation, the response was to completely level the enemies cities and send hundreds of thousands to their deaths. That was during World War Two, when London was bombarded, and the British retaliated by flattening vast numbers of German cities.

And your gratuitous insults and vile swearing in that last post were absolutely out of order.

I wouldn't say that Israel is necessarily "One of us", it does have its unsavory aspects (such as race based citizen laws, among others) but it is certainly a better bet than trying to talk to Hamas which only today finds itself in violation of the not even week old truce with Israel.

Cut it out, Al. They're one of us. I remember Bill Maher saying rather heatedly: "Everyone's on Israel's back because they dropped too many bombs on Lebanon, but what if a terrorist gang took over the country on our northern border? What if Hezbollah took over Canada? George Bush would nuke them before breakfast!"

It is very, very easy to criticize when you are not surrounded by enemies who want you dead. But that situation is changing very rapidly for us in Europe. In one of the perverse twists of fate, we're all Israelis now.

395. 'I despise Islamism': Ian McEwan faces backlash over press interview

Comment #198534 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 24, 2008 at 8:12 am

al on the subject of East Timor, here's a good commentary on the subject of Islam in Indonesia:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/015505.php

Punkt aus basta, as we say in the fatherland.

When looking at the Tanakh and Qu'ran I see few differences save choice of wording

Except for the minor fact that the Tankh doesn't have fourteen hundred years of aggressive warfare and genocide and slavery and degradation to its name. That might suggest that there's a few differences.

Seriously. Read the Qur'an. Yes, I know it's a wrist-slittingly boring book, but the N.J. Dagwood translation is as readable as possible. And also read some of the Hadith and commentaries on it. Here's a good place to get started:

http://jihadwatch.org/articles/bloggingtheq.php

A blog of the Qur'an, surah by surah, by an expert in the subject, with reference to the Hadith, Sira, and Tafsir that explain everything. Seriously. Take a look. This is very, very different from any other religion.

As regards Israel, I've made my position clear time and time again, and have little else to add. The bottom line is this: Israel is definitely one of us. It's a portion of Western civilization and it's on the front lines of the Jihad. We could learn alot from them. It deserves to be backed to the hilt.

Here's a good article I stumbled across on the subject:

http://jihadwatch.org/articles/bloggingtheq.php

Money quote:

Look: Possibly there would be some abstract justice in closing down the settlements, I don't know. I don't see it myself, I must admit. Why should Jews not live among Arabs? Lots of Arabs live in Israel, and do very well there. There are rich Israeli Arabs; there are Israeli-Arab pop stars and comedians; there are Israeli-Arab intellectuals, teachers, writers, businessmen, athletes. Why, when the whole thing gets sorted out, should there not be Jews living in Arab territory �" as there were for centuries past? What, exactly, is wrong with the settlements? I don't see it.

But, okay, let's suppose there is some valid moral objection to the existence of the settlements; and let's suppose my reader's plan were to be carried out, and all the settlements were removed, their populations transferred back to metropolitan Israel, their buildings razed, their fields ploughed with salt. Does anybody think it would make a damn bit of difference? There was no such thing as settlements, no such thing as "occupied territories," before the 1967 war. There were no such things in 1960, for example, when Adolf Eichmann was abducted from his hiding-hole in Buenos Aires by Israeli secret agents, an event recorded by Saudi Arabia's principal government-controlled newspaper as: "ARREST OF EICHMANN, WHO HAD THE HONOR OF KILLING 6 MILLION JEWS".

The problem of the Middle East is not the settlements. It is not this piece of land or that piece. It is not the Golan Heights or East Jerusalem or Temple Mount. It is not oil, or land, or water, or history, or geography, or metaphysics. The problem is in plain sight. You know what the problem is, and so do I. The problem is that the Middle East hates the Jews.

396. 'I despise Islamism': Ian McEwan faces backlash over press interview

Comment #198492 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 24, 2008 at 6:25 am

Had your "nation" not instigated most if not all of what it is currently getting I'd say by all means fight back. But given the circumstances the only amount of compassion I can muster for you people is, you've made your bed now lay down in it.

It's hard to make out what the heck this guy is on about, but it sounds suspiciously like 'Islamic jihad is a response to American foreign policy'. If so *flexes muscles and extends claws*

What did the two million non-Muslims of the Sudan have to do with American foreign policy to deserve murder?

What about the Hindus in the subcontinent? And what about the sixty to seventy million that were killed during the Mughal rule?

What about the violence being directed towards Hindus, Sikhs and Jews by Muslims right here in Europe?

What about the genocide in East Timor?

How is the islamic practice of child rape caused by American foreign policy? Or the 75% of women in Pakistan's jail who are there because they were raped? And what, pray, do the slaves in Khartoum and throughout the dar al-Islam have to do with American foreign policy?

No. The problem is Islam, and Islam only. Period.

397. 'I despise Islamism': Ian McEwan faces backlash over press interview

Comment #198445 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 24, 2008 at 1:27 am

I'd like to add one other thing. There's no easy or soon answer to this. There's no way this will be settled in a few years, or even a few decades. This war will continue to rage for the rest of our lives.

Better get used to it. Better get ready to man the barricades and watch the sky. Hugh FitzGerald has a good article on the subject:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/019411.php

And, NC, if you want to see where muslim immigration is taking us, read the following short story:
http://www.dansimmons.com/news/message/2006_04.htm

Read the follow-up message to. It will make your hair stand on end.

398. 'I despise Islamism': Ian McEwan faces backlash over press interview

Comment #198444 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 24, 2008 at 1:20 am

NakedCelt you still haven't addressed the point that Muslim immigration is pushing our societies towards extinction. I'm sorry, but our first duty must be to hold the line. If we keep letting Muslims into our nations, we may as well just cut our own throats.

Increasing numbers of Muslims in our societies means increasing levels of gang-rape, increasing weakness on the part of our politicos to deal with this problem, increasing abuse of women, increasing intimidation - no. This has got to stop, and it has got to stop right now.

You called me naive once for implying that Muslims might convert out of sheer appreciation of the benefits of the West.

This isn't just through sheer appreciation. This is a situation where those who were deceiving us would be forced to hide their faith and keep it under wraps. No Da'wa, no preaching, no nothing. Seems like a win-win to me.

You can't destroy one culture and replace it with another without gigantic misery

Even if this were true, my response is: So goddamn what? My country was bombed flat, with entire cities full of civilians consumed by phosphorus incindaries, in order to rid it of the demented culture that was causing trouble. Japan wouldn't turn away from its ideology of conquest and tyranny until two of its cities were destroyed by nukes.

I'm not advocating either, merely a continual barrage against this madness. It has worked before, it can work again.

Marx wasn't wrong about everything, you know.

I'm not going to get into this. His writings caused over one hundred million deaths, and enslaved a third of the planet in the most lifehating hell imaginable. Discussion closed.

Unfortunately many of those women will themselves be "supporters" of shariah, in that they'll teach their families to abide by it, out of sheer concern for their safety if nothing else.

In which case they need to be expelled. Period. I don't care why someone supports Shariah, they get to renounce it or get out. If we have strong protection systems in place for apostates, then more of them would be willing to abandon this view. If they don't, they need to get out and stay out.

Like I said, we need to help people over that difficult first step of confronting their own beliefs.

Which is why I advocate a continuous program of cultural imperialism.

399. 'I despise Islamism': Ian McEwan faces backlash over press interview

Comment #198230 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 23, 2008 at 12:02 pm

Remove from Islam typical religious topics of a god and mystical aspects (Allah, jinns, angels, satan, houri, miracles, heaven, and hell) and there is a lot remaining.

I'm afraid that's simply not true. Two thirds of the Koran is about the pefidity of the unbelievers (honestly the way that thing goes on. Fifty verses about how unbelievers, suck, a few wierd dietary prohibitions, "but NOW - why unbelievers suck so much!") Much of the rest is explicitly political. Remove that and you will have reformed Islam. You will also have destroyed it. In fact, even removing one verse from the Koran would destroy Islam, as its entire claim to fame, its whole selling point is this view that, unlike Christianity or Judaism, is that it's the final, perfect revelation. Subtract anything from that and Islam falls.

Further, while Muhammad was just an irritating preacher, he barely made fifteen converts. Islam only started to spread when he became a warrior. This is an utterly unreformable religion. We shouldn't even try.

400. 'I despise Islamism': Ian McEwan faces backlash over press interview

Comment #198196 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 23, 2008 at 10:54 am

It wasn't a criticism of you, it was one of Irshad.

As regards the whole spiritual thing, the problem is that you can never be sure when, whether it's under the influence of the right Imam or just spontaneously, it goes horribly not-spiritual.