401. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250718 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 20, 2008 at 7:12 am

It was a simple question, Steve.

402. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250713 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 20, 2008 at 7:03 am

Out of interest, STeve, what is your degree in?

403. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250712 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 20, 2008 at 7:02 am

Steve ~ 36-40% of British Muslims want Shariah and ~ 36% think apostasy should be punishable by death. Those that don't will have no other effect except to make the push for Shariah easier.

I love the way you sitched together bits from two different paragraphs, btw.

As for gay right, the Christians' opposition to gay right consists primarily of denying them marriage. Muslims want to have gays beheaded. In case you think this is surreal, look at the very real persecution of homosexuals in Islamic countries. In all Islamic state being gay is a criminal offence and in quite a few it warrants execution.

Forget about the Islamic countries - just look about what's going on in Holland.

404. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250704 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 20, 2008 at 6:48 am

ljirving, you're pushing at an open door with me regarding Catholicism in Africa. But I still can't agree with this:

Admittedly, Islam is just as bad. Heck, they had just about wiped out Polio in Africa before the Muslim clerics started lying about the polio vaccine, claiming it was an American ploy to sterilize Muslim women. But hey, I think all religions are bad

It's not true. Sam Harris points out that there's a scale with Jainism at one end and Islam very much at the other. Islam is by far the greatest threat in the world today.

If Islam were only as bad as the Christian fundies in America, I'd sleep alot sounder. Unfortunately, that's not the case. Even moderat Muslims often hold beliefs thatwould make Robertson and Falwell pale in comparison.

--------------
EDIT: Yes, Titania, Lee Harris's "Civilization and its Enemies" and "The Suicide of Reason". Both first rate.

405. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250701 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 20, 2008 at 6:43 am

I don't treat people as clones. Unless you have specific detailed statistical evidence that those who want Shariah business

Excuse me, in the debate in question we were talking about those who wanted to live under Shariah as a political system, or who had said so in a poll, nad you were saying that there was no evidence that they'd vote that way if it came down to it.

That is true and I think Fanusi casts his net too wide in accusing all Muslims asking for some kind of Sharia as terrorists or Islam supremacists

Bonzai, they're pushing for Shariah. What other grand explanation is there?

And even if there is - we've reached the point where Shariah courts in Britain are legally binding. You make the point about "where do we draw the line". Wherever we draw it, it seems to me we crossed it some ways back.

And yet, you, Fanusi, know precisely what everyone who says "I support Shariah" means, in detail.

Steve, I have already, at great length, described the connection between supporting Shariah 'vaguely' and the way that is, for all practical purposes the same thing as supporting it full-blown. You never addressed that point then, and you are not going to address it now.

406. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250696 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 20, 2008 at 6:37 am

*looks* So I did. No, I haven't, I'm afraid.

Top three recommendations? *thinks* I'd say:

Why I Am Not A Muslim, by Ibn Warraq
Islam and the Psychology of the Musulman by Andre Servier (out of print, but you can find it here: http://musulmanbook.blogspot.com/

For number 3, I'm torn. As regards an introductory work, I'd suggest either The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades (if you can get past the Christian apologetics, its a good introduction) by Robert Spencer and Islam and Dhimmitude by Bat Ye'or.

If you can find "Islam: What the West Needs to Know" or "Obsession: Radical Islam's War against the West" online, those two films are also pretty good.

But there is no such thing as Islamism. There is only Islam.

407. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250687 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 20, 2008 at 6:25 am

Anyone doesn't agree with you precisely is "giving Islam every benefit of every doubt imaginable".

ACtually, no. There are plenty who disagree with me, who understand Islam. It's just you specifically.

When Shariah courts open in Britain, I seem to recall you being very quiet - except to denounce my own commentary on that. I also remembre you pinning your hopes on those who say they want Shariah voting against Shariah.

You always manage to sidestep direct point that doesn't fit into your self-image.

408. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250672 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 20, 2008 at 5:46 am

Steve, may I respectfully suggest you learn to read?

Nice to see Fanusi back on form.

"Do it my way or you are all doomed."

No, that is not what I said in that post. What I pointed out was that, if we do it your way, and I turn out to be right - we are well and truly screwed. Those are the stakes. What you are essentially gambling on is that you can beat Islam without being as ruthless as I suggest. I merely pointed out the stakes of that gamble. Again, I hope you're right; I merely don't think you are.

Now, you manage to misread that, and then have the nerve to lecture me about twisting words?

To claim that someone wanting Shariah-compatible business funding, for example, is, because of that, against human rights is sheer lunacy.

The chances are extremely good, and the reason I say this is because I have actually bothered to study Islam, that those who want Shariah financing are also those who want the full blown thing, or will want it down the line.

The phrase for this is "wedge strategy".

Also, we were discussing the introduction of Shariah courts in the UK. That you manage to switch subjects and avoid the implications of that is very suggestive.

As I noted earlier: you are willing to read the worst possible motives into anything I write, while simultaneously bending over backwards to give Islam every benefit of every doubt imaginable.

409. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250620 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 20, 2008 at 2:24 am

I trust it's okay to skip Jesus86's essay for the moment.

We have to admit though - most Muslims are not directly hostile - and many would never dream of killing others. When we look at modern day Islam, we have to realize it is pretty much working in the same way as did medieval Christianity. Many Christians would revert back to that, if they could.

In the first instance, many Christians would not revert to that if they could (that is, if you interpret 'many' in terms of 'relatively large proportion). In the second instance, Islam has always been far, far more vicious and dangerous than Christianity. Here's a wee example: even taking the most out there, mush-brained-wiccan estimate of the number of Witches killed won't get you much more than sixty thousand. That's chickenfeed to Islam. It's nothing compared with the Armenian genocide, the slaughter in east timor, the numerous genocides in the Sudan, or the Hindu Holocaust (seventy million killed).

Islam is a very, very different beast.

In fact, Islam isn't even a religion as we understand it. It is first and foremost a political project, much closer to fascism or communism. Christianity and other forms of religious lunancy can be combated in the arena of debate and discussion. With Islam, though, much more is needed. We need to face this monster in battle as well as in the cultural arena.

410. Look Who's Irrational Now

Comment #250598 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 20, 2008 at 1:19 am

aprilmb, it would be a sad thing if we weren't able to blaspheme, just because we don't believe in god. :-)

411. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250597 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 20, 2008 at 1:16 am

Diacanu, given that I don't think you have made a meaningful contribution to an argument in... - well, ever, really, perhaps it is you who should excuse himself?

BTw, cutely meaningless use of scare quoes :-)

412. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250590 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 20, 2008 at 12:58 am

Faith based? Pure reason, old boy

*shrugs* I know it's a waste of time arguing with self-confessed Marxists. It's like arguing with Dowsers; except that, instead of not being stopped by only being unable to find water, they aren't stopped by several hundred million killed and the enslaving of a third of the planet. What a wonderful sense of morality.

Conservatives DO apparently give more money to charity, however, quite a large proportion of that is "enforced" giving by the church.

Actually, ljirving, no, it isn't enforced, given that Churches in the US do not have that kind of power. Charity is higher amongst conservatives, which tells you a great deal about the difference between those who are willing to do good with their own money, and those who are wiling to spend someone else's.

In America, liberals are fighting for secularism and social justice. I am a liberal, all my friends are liberals, I live in a liberal city and go to a liberal university - absolutely NOBODY I know would ever defend radical Islam

Question: the idea that there's no Islamic threat comes from which side of the political divide principally?

The phrase "social justice" is actually just a pseudonym for socialism. Thanks, but no thanks.

413. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250588 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 20, 2008 at 12:53 am

Even if the Islamic fundamentalists are 10 times more stupid and cruel and evil than Bush, the problem is Bush wields a 100 times more power. So the effect the US administration has had on the world has been a lot worse.

root, I now understand that you really don't know much about Islamic history, practice and theology. Try the following on for size: two millon were just butchered in the Sunda. Two million. How does that fit into this picture?

May I please suggest that you read Ibn Warraq's essay "Islam, the Middle East, and Fascism"? And look up "the unofficial Ibn Warraq website". Also take a look at thereligionofpeace.com

As regards the Iraq war itself, I'll direct you to Hitchens's arguments. Go to buildupthatwall.com and look ath the Iraq videos.

For some reason 4000 US troops lives are a lot more precious than more than 10,000 Iraqi children

Well, who exactly is responsible for those 10,000 dead Iraqi children? If you can find one instance of a US marine deliberately killing a child, I'll eat my hat. No the ones responsible for that are Muslims. You know, the ones you think are comparatively harmless?

414. Turkey bans biologist Richard Dawkins' website

Comment #250576 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 20, 2008 at 12:09 am

What is equally unfortunate as banning of Dawkins website by Turkish courts is that some of the adamant readers of Mr Dawkins are so ignorantly hateful and remorseful against Turks that, some wrong legal action taken against this website causes uproar and hateful remarks against a country that has one of the most legitimate and staunch secular systems in human history.

Frankly, I am ashamed for some of the racist commentators posting here anti-Turkish sentiments

I haven't been following this thread that closely, so I can't say whether there were any anti-Turkish sentiments. Personally, it isn't anti-Turk, but anti-Islam. The Turks are like the Persians: they're managing to resist what the plague of arab Islam's doing to their culture.

415. Look Who's Irrational Now

Comment #250574 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 20, 2008 at 12:05 am

I'm going to have to say that this guy's conclusions make alot of sense. It's in the borderlands between real religion and true rationalism that you get fully-fledged lunacy, as what we call religious liberalism is a willingness to abandon evidence, but also has lost the desire to integrate everything according to his world view. The result is a general placing of reality up for grabs.

I think it's the same just on this side of the line of atheism too. It's one thing to simply declare that you don't believe in god. It's something entirely different to live a life of true reason, to completely integrate your worldview according to rationally defined principles.

It's very different.

416. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250388 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 3:30 pm

I do really like your idea about developing a cheap oil substitute.

It certainly would be better than parking troops permanently in the middle of the dar al-Islam, where they'd constantly be in danger of being attacked.

Alternatively, there's the possibility of just plain wrecking everyhting, the whole infrastructure, and then seeing whether or not they could ever dig their way out of that (and we'd still have enough oil. In Canada, there is more oil than in Saudi Arabia just in tar reserves).

I, on the other hand, am a Marxist.

Nice little faith based position that. Of course, only if you ignore the hundreds of millions killed because of that faith-based position...

417. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250381 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 3:19 pm

quantum_flux, exactly. There's no such thing as a "natural resource". Something only becomes a resource when human ingenuity finds a use for it.

Titania, calm is good, so why are you using multiple question marks?

Seizing the Saudi oilfields is a good idea, and only the US has clout enough to do that - but it would have to be once knowledge about the nature of what we face was widespread, and we'd hunkered down for this conflict. Because sending troops into the Land of the Two Mosques is a declaration of war on the Ummah.

Now, personally, I understand that the Ummah will be at our throats no matter what we do. Yet it won't be a good idea to bring this to full boil until we're ready.

Ideally, of course, it would be best to find a cheap oil substitute, since we could bankrupt the Arab/Muslim Middle East world then without having any messyness. Just some thoughts.

This lecture was nebulous and meaningless. I'm trying to imagine a speech more insufferable than one that parades, as even-handed, its attempt to get liberals excited about being more accepting of conservatives by showing that liberals are generally more concerned with the virtue of acceptance.

Exactly. It isn't the political principles so much as the dishonesty and smug fatuousness of the way they're presented.

418. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250351 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 1:59 pm

Not "my ideology". The moral principle is clear. In the case of Saudi Arabia, the development of those fields was clearely stolen. And there's a second point: we're at war. Every barrel in Saudi hands funds the Jihad. That has got to be stopped.

To paraphrase your comment to me, according to you "it's okay to seize the wealth of private citizens who have earned it through their own hard work, but it's not okay to seize it form an evil theocratic and fascistic regime which stole it in the first place, and is using said wealth to advance evil throughout the world?"

419. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250341 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 1:39 pm

Titania, who discovered those oilfields? Who build the infrastructure to use them? Who discovered the technology to make use of that oil? Who built the rigs to extract that oil from the ground? Who's still running all of those installations, because the local rulers and populace is too damn incompetent to even do that?

And who, after all being unable to create all of the forgoing, nationalized, i.e. stole, the forgoing?

That's the difference in moral principle, Titania.


----------

I fear that Haidt has pulled a sleight of hand here, transposing what he defines as liberal (and using data which confirms his bias)with what people themselves regard as liberal in their own thoughts.

*nods* That's exactly what provoked my black fury, severalspecies. It's not his political views, it's his stinking dishonesty.

420. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250312 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 11:30 am

Oh, it's you again, NEB? As I recall, I posted a systematic dismemberment of your post on the Palin thread; you never got back to me.

I'd like to see you back those comments here up.

Lucas,

just say now that I think you and I could have an awesome and mostly agreeable face-to-face conversation about various issues that would be fruitful, whereas posting written comments often leads to misunderstanding and an illusion of unmoving certitude that itself leads to an illusion of oppositional thinking.

Anytime, Lucas, anytime. I do think we'd have a good conversation, and find many points of agreement.

I appreciate your voice on this page more than you know, I just wish you'd calm down sometimes.

Sorry, but it's the unthinking condescension of that piece I find so frustrating. This assumption that anyone on the right must of course be there because of ignorance and delusion. The minor fact that the left has gotten itself consistently on the wrong side of just about every major conflict doesn't get noticed.

That nitwit talks about "working class people voting republican, despite the fact that it'd be in their economic best interest to vote socialist/democrat". Well, everything is wrong with this. Firs of all it betrays a colossal ignorance of economics, especially of the economic sclerosis that socialism produces. It also betrays a complete obliviousness that taking someones property by force may be morally questionable.

And as though that weren't enough, they go on about the left's supposed virtue in deferring to "the international community." That just got alot of people killed, in the Sudan. Got that? The US decided to go the UN way, the Kofi Anan way and look what happened? Actually, I believe that the Hitch phrased it best:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAhwgQ2HoF0

"deferring to the international community" means that the free countries should defer and crawl before every colection of dictators, jihadis and gangsters on the face of the earth.

Again, it's not even the specific policies, but the utter inablity to even consider that someone may think differently. That someone may, in fact, honestly think and come to different conclusions.

And just for Laurie's record, Charles Darwin would have been a conservative by modern standards.

---------------------------
sctparker, I didn't say Laurie was a marxist.

421. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250296 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 9:51 am

Lucas, specifics please about where and why I'm wrong.

Liberal's tendency toward anti-authoritarianism

I simply don't buy this. Liberals in the American sense of the word strike me as regimented as any other political movement.

Incidentally, I'm not an American, and I have to use the terminology that's used in this stupid presentation.

It's all a matter of degree, and I think liberals and conservatives have both made the mistake of taking their core instincts to the extreme without tempering them with the reason and knowledge needed to achieve the ideal admixture.

Technically speaking, I'm not actually a conservative, though I share many common political goals with the conservative movement (such as it is).

Sorry, I get irritated by alot of these cheap claims. Take the following:

I find more significant the finding (I wish I had kept the link to this study) that American conservatives, when given a controversial truth claim that they might be expected to favor, such as "there were WMD in Iraq," about 1/3 of them will agree with it; if they are also given documentary evidence that the claim is false, the number who will (in spite of the contrary evidence) agree with the claim doubles to about 2/3. The same is not found as strikingly for liberals confronted with an issue that they might be inclined to favor.

You could run that test about 9/11 conspiracy nutters and see what the results are. Or you could try seeing how many agree with the "Islamic terrorists are only responding to US foreign policy" b.s. and see what responses you get.

That's the other thing that infuriates me: it's not good science. Where are the controls? Where's the double-blind analysis? Where's the critical review?

ect that it is not really a "conservative/liberal" divide; perhaps it's an authoritarian/democracy divide.

Oh, I have no trouble agreeing with that. It's just that this self-satisfied idiot presents it in a totally one-sided way.

I will not lay the blame for the rapes on Norwegian women. But Norwegian women must admit that we live in a multicultural society, and behave accordingly.

This sounds terribly damning if you ignore the first sentence

Actually, I think it sounds damning, first sentence included. But anyway, thanks for the trans.

422. Ad 'likely to offend gay people'

Comment #250254 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 7:03 am

Acceptance of homosexuality as a society norm has been shown to be a serious symptom of society's demise throughout the history

Really? Compare, say, republican Rome and Greece with Christian Europe and the Muslim middle east?

The article is a key example of what's called "intellectual package dealing" - the idea that you have to accept a whole bunch of things together that are not connected by any essential.

In this case it connects the idea that single-parent families are increasing (true), that this is bad for children (true), and that this means that gays are bad (not true).

Yet it's all packaged under the whole "traditional family" moniker.

423. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250248 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 6:41 am

kwhitefoot, no problem.

Though I need to make one correction: in Australia, it was Monroe Reimers who wrote the following in the Sidney Morning Herald:

""As terrible as the crime was, we must not confuse justice with revenge. We need answers. Where has this hatred come from? How have we contributed to it? Perhaps it's time to take a good hard look at the racism by exclusion practised with such a vengeance by our community and cultural institutions."

In Norway, it was the University of Oslo Professor Unni Wikan who said the following:

"Norwegian women must take their share of responsibility for these rapes [...] Norwegian women must realize that we live in a Multicultural society and adapt themselves to it.”

I think I've managed to even chase down the article where she says it:
http://www.dagbladet.no/nyheter/2001/09/06/279676.html

I say 'I think', because though this is listed as the source, I don't speak Norweigan - I've relied on translations.

So, there you have it. And no, this isn't the first such case - you can see similar guff with that silly bitch Germaine Greer saying that female genital mutilation should be respected as a cultural practice.

424. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250242 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 6:22 am

squinky, indeed he does. Haidt strikes me as one of those cheap demagogues whose cheapness tries to imitate sophistication.

425. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250241 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 6:16 am

Of your five proposals, two involve giving money (presumably to the Islamic world, else I have trouble seeing what they're doing here), two involve weakening the position of the US (a disastrous move), and one involves demanding that Israel bend over to the jihadists. Thanks, but no thanks. That stinks of appeasement to me.

Furthermore, none of your comments seem to betray even the shadow of an understanding that the Jihad is raging worldwide. Concern for, say, the Christians in Tanzania, Sudan and Kenya seems markedly absent.

This takes ahistoricity to a new level - believing everything begins and ends with the Evil Bush Administration.

Fanusi, get a grip, and realise that not everyone who doesn't believe in the extermination of muslims is an appeaser.

And you have the nerve to say I'm the one twisting words?

My comments concern methods by which the oppositional ideologies of Islam, and the equally evil U.S. administration

And here we finally see the root of this. If you think that the US and Islam are equal forces of evil, then I honestly think you should find out the difference on your own hide. As I suspect you shall, as things get worse.

426. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250192 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 3:41 am

Thanks, memphis. Sam Harris is a very smart man and is able to understand that there is such a thing as good and evil, right and wrong.

Does forcing women and girls to wear burqas make a positive contribution to human well-being? Does it make happier boys and girls? More compassionate men? More confident and contented women? Does it make for better relationships between men and women, between boys and their mothers, or between girls and their fathers? I would bet my life that the answer to each of these questions is "no." So, I think, would many scientists. And yet, most scientists have been trained to think that such judgments are mere expressions of cultural bias. Very few of us seem willing to admit that simple, moral truths increasingly fall within the purview of our scientific worldview. I am confident that this period of reticence will soon come to an end.

I hope so, Sam, I hope so.

427. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250191 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 3:37 am

To maintain our way of life we have to kick the other way of thinking out of existence.

Well, yes. You can either have a worldview that respects human rights, human life, and human potential, or you can have Islam.

It's one or the other.

I'd rather give Steve's approach a go.

Just so you're aware: you are waging probably your life and freedom on Steve's approach being right. Those are the stakes that we're playing for now.

What I propose isn't really that radical. We already have laws on Holocaust denial & so forth in Germany. Nor is there anything unreasonable about launching a campaign of cultural imperialism against Islam.

However, radical can be arranged.

EDIT: I'd be less irritable if it weren't for the fact that Steve & others insist on interpreting my words in the worst way possible and imputing the nastiest possible motives, yet in the most hypocritical manner imaginable, they turn around and rationalize away Shariah in Britain and every advancing step of the Jihad. There's something rotten about that.

428. Creationist Britain (would you Adam and Eve it?)

Comment #250188 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 3:32 am

celitcaster, 's an interesting question. I maintain that the principle source of trouble is that science is taught platonically. That is the kids get a large list of 'facts' to be memorized, with no understanding of the long chains of observations that lead to those models being accepted. I think that's a very bad idea. A historical, inductive approach to teaching seems to work much, much better.

429. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250184 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 3:18 am

I don't see how anyone has the power to stop all Muslim immigration between all countrie

Okay, I'll admit that's unclear. No more Muslim immigration to the UK - or any of the other european states.

As for adult conversation, I think I'm trying to have one

Forgive me, but implying I want concentration camps and/or castration doesn't give me that impression.

We need to know what to do with those Muslims that remain. They'll be seeking foreign help and will more fervently demonstrate why their god-system is right and why I must convert or die.

Okay, then I'll throw the ball in your court. I think that my suggestions have a passable chance of being successfull. How do you plan on stopping the Jihad?

Beyond my current suggestions, I see little other than total bloody war. Which I'd like to avoid.

430. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250173 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 3:02 am

My five points were as far from grovelling as one can get.

Laurie your five points were all about how the West should apologies and appease Islam. Not one of them even expressed a hint that there might be something problematic with Islam itself, and they also strike me as hopelessly parochial. I can introduce you to a few Nigerian christians who can tell you alot about Islam and Jihad.

If that's insulting, I'm sorry, but the idea that we can just apologize to islam is not just wrong, but profoundly dangerous, not to mention unjust since it involves hanging our actual allies (such as Israel) out to dry.

The main point of difference I think is that alot of people have this idea - one which I shared until not to long ago - that there's a way to end this war one way or another and then it's back to business as usual. This isn't so. This is another phase in a war that's been going on for over a millennium. I think talk about getting 'peace' with this lot is a waste of time. If you know anything about Islamic law and theology, if you know what 'hudna', just for example, means, then it's pointless to hope for that.

We'll be fighting Islam until the day it's destroyed. We should be thinking in terms of Darura. The only time when it is Islamically legit to stop waging jihad is when the Muslim world is at a huge disadvantage militarily. That's what we need. We need the Muslim world to understand that tangling with infidels will be regretted. That's our best bet for holding this at bay.

Lazarus, it means stopping Muslim immigration. Is that so hard to grasp? Stop it, and hope to break the hold of Islam on the minds of the Muslims we already have. There's ways of doing that.

I've said my piece about what I advocate. Now, if you're going to come up with nonsense like asking about castration, please tell me when you want to discuss something like an adult.

431. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250156 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 2:23 am

I am not a subscriber to the "make nice to Islam" belief; as you should be aware,

If that five point groveling wasn't your idea of 'making nice', then I dread to see what you would consider making nice.

Oh, and if you can't say that you understand Islam, and then say it's just the same as other religions. You really, really can't.

Out of interest, do you live near a University, perhaps?

432. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250154 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 2:20 am

As for Shariah, I just don't care, providing what is implemented is compatible with the European framework of Human Rights that is incorporated into UK Law

Steve, I hate having to state the screamingly obvious, but Shariah is by definition against human rights.

We should not fixate on any one religion or culture as the only problem. We need to defend our way of life from many forms of attack

Except that it is one culture that is the problem. I haven't heard too much about marauding gangs of Sikhs causing ruckus, and calling for the UK to be governed in strict accordance with the ten gurus (or whatever it is) of Sikhism.

I've always found Steve's comments ideas to be very reasonable. I do think that you don't believe that now is the time for "polite society" to be "reasonable". I do believe that you now think it's time to get nasty and give Islam a good sharp kicking.

By George, I think he's got it!

Here's the reason Steve's softly-softly, "better screwed than rude" approach won't work. Any politician who tries to introduce regulation of Mosques and whatnot will a) be hounded by opportunist riff-raff, and b) likely get his throat cut. Unless that program was accompanied by a much broader effort to educate the Infidel populace and to take it along with those measures, it's doomed to fail.

Also, Steve doens't mind Islamic immigration - until we have, what, five percent? Ten percent? Fifteen? Chances of anything constructive being done then are, not to put too fine a point on it, remote. Except through civil war.

This is why I say Vilkomment zu der Verruckten Zeit. Welcome to the crazy times.

Concentration camps - but modern, nice ones?

Lazarus, is there anyone here who won't invoke Godwins law on themselves? Yes, I draw parallels with the Nazis too - but when you are dealing with people who chant about sending the Jews to the gas, then I think the parallel is, for once, justified.

This is what Islamic immigration has brought us too: skyrocketing rates of gang-rape, homophobic violence, not to mention all the antisemitic attacks. Synagogues, kosher butchers and Jewish schools are being torched in France. In Germany, the police are advising jews not to leave their homes with skullcaps or other signs of religious affiliation (gee, I wonder what that reminds me of?) Yet for some reason everyone here seems to think that the only threat comes from my good self and my hordes of fascist minions.

I still don't get why this is principally a cause fought by the right. It should be the left's issue. I'm pretty much a 'social conservative'. When the mullahs take over, I'll grow my beard out, get a couple of wives, and keep my head down. Steve and Brandy, on the other hand, will have it a bit rougher.

My policies are as follows (now pay attention):

1. A total end to all Muslim immigration to the dar al-Harb.
2. A broad, international alliance against the Jihad.
3. Providing asylum for Infidels fleeing the House of Submission.
4. Helping to end the slave trade, preferably by military means. If that doesn't work, buy and free the slaves.
5. Encouraging the sectarian and ethnic fissures in the dar al Islam, so as to break and weaken it internally. This means helping the Kurds, Berbers and other non-Arab Muslims realize that what they suffer is thanks to the arab supremacism that is part and parcel of Islam.
6. All Mosques to pass a clean bill of health. Any inciting hatred of the kaffirs, or preaching Shariah, or Jihad to be closed, seized and torn down.
7. A manhattan project to get us off oil, or, failing that, seizing the oil fields where necessary. We have to stop the money weapon.
8. This is the one Steve has a hissy fit about: making citizenship in the West contingent on accepting Western standards of human rights, i.e. renouncing Shariah. If found guilty of advocating for Shariah, citizenship is lost, permanently.
9. A broad campaign of cultural imperialism: on the air, on the radio, on the internet, in books, in magazines, in newspapers, it should be demonstrated what Islam is, what horrors it is responsible for, and how there is a better way to live than this.
10. Military intervention when necessary to either stop things like the Iranian nukes, or to stop matters such as the Sudanese genocide (which, thanks to the UN fetishists, has been allowed to continue to completion. Wonderful, eh?).

433. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250132 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 1:49 am

It is ghastly, but I don't see how you can, or should, stop such things in a civilized society. Only if they actually plan the crucifictions, then you can get them, or you can monitor them if you have reasonable suspicion.

I may be going out on a limb here, but when Wahabi imams say that gays should be killed, I don't think they mean "just as a hypothetical here..."

I also notice that you don't address the issue of Muslim immigration. If Shariah courts are what we're facing now, what are we likely to face ten years down the line?

For all this bumf about my 'scaremongering', imagine, directly after 9/11, I told you that within seven years there'd be Shariah courts in the UK. You'd have thought I was crazy. Yet here we are. So, what do you see in the future, as this goes on?

434. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250128 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 1:45 am

So, Laurie your a subscriber to the idea that we can 'make nice' with Islam, that as long as we bend over and grab our ankles, everything will be solved?

I don't know how to explain this to those who think that history started eight years ago, but Islam has been waging Jihad for fourteen centuries. It has something like two hundred and seventy million corpses on its hands, from direct genocide alone. It still practices slavery.

I also notice what's absent from that list. So, forget about helping women's rights? Let the slave trade continue its merry way?

Laurie in all seriousness now, what exactly do you know about Islam? About its history, theology and practice?

435. Turkey bans biologist Richard Dawkins' website

Comment #250123 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 1:38 am

Bad Turkey! No EU for you

The rest of us should be so lucky,

divine why would you want to join this combination terminal ward and insane asylum? For crying out loud, we've got Shariah in Britain already! If things go on like this, be prepared for a tide of European immigration in your direction trying to get away from the mullahs of Londonistan?

436. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250120 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 1:36 am

You can have a church, or a mosque, or whatever, providing you agree to abide by civilized rules of behaviout

Define "civilized rules of behaviour". What would constitute a breech? For example, would the stuff on the two undercover Mosque documentaries qualify?

People can campaign all they like as groups or individuals,

So if private groups of Muslims get together for their "crucify the gays" speeches, that's okay, yeS?

437. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250116 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 1:32 am

Droll, Laurie, very droll. Now, just out of interest: how do you think that this slide is going to be stopped?

438. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250113 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 1:31 am

I don't think that Haidt was promoting any sort of agenda here.

Are you serious? He was all but saying liberals walk on water, while all conservatives cast their first born into a giant bronze statue of Bush.

439. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250107 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 1:25 am

Oh, why thank you for finally coming up with something constructive.

Enforce hate speech and incitement laws rigorously and with no pandering to cultures and religion

Do you mind expanding on that? What qualifies as hate speech? Describing members of other groups as unclean and inferior would qualify? And what're you suggesting as a penalty?

440. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250101 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 1:23 am

Laurie, so what exactly are you going to do about Shariah in Britain? hmmm? what's your grand solution?

Or do you really think it'll just magically stop? Believer in divine intervention, are we?

441. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250099 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 1:22 am

Laurie, actually very little of it is truth, as I pointed out in my post.

Now, the question is: is this a 'clear thinking oasis'? Or is this just another site for left wing demagoguery?

As I said, if you want to balance that nonsense out with something from right-wing atheists, great. But to present this junk as, as it were, gospel, is, deeply dishonest.

442. Sharia courts operating in Britain

Comment #250092 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 1:17 am

Could it be you just want to complain about me not giving you the document.

Nairb, this may come as a shock, but I don't spend my waking hours thinking of how to argue with you. I've said that there are many links in your posts, and it would be a point of courtesy to repost it.

Also, you could try giving that 'more sophisticated' model you've been going on about. You know the one that accounts for shorter Muslim generation times.

443. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250088 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 1:14 am

Steve, when Elton John is beheaded for sodomy in trafalga square, I'll send you a front row ticket. My treat.

Now, what, exactly, is your grand alternative Oh Wise One? How is this situation going to change? You're very good at whining, not good and providing any kind of constructive advice yourself.

444. The real difference between liberals and conservatives

Comment #250084 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2008 at 1:12 am

*blood pressure rising*

This is such unmitigated bullshit that I find it hard to believe.

"Openess" is a trait of the left? Really? This is the same left that has instituted those idiotic 'speech codes' on campuses, that has made it essentially criminal to criticize Islam, is muzzling free speech, hounded Ayaan Hirsi Ali out of the Netherlands Parliment...

Need I go on? Why, I do think I shall!

In-group/out-group thinking is apparently 'conservative', especially when it is used, quelle horreur, to fight other people. Unfortunately, as I have pointed out, there are always those who are willing to make use of those ingroup loyalties to get what they want, meaning you have to use them to defend yourself.

As regards "delusional", hmmm... - you might want to check in which political area the 9/11 conspiracy kooks are found.

The "moral matrix" - lovely phrase. In other words, it's a virtue not to know right from wrong, not to know can't from shouldn't. And no, this isn't just something about pornography and so forth - a moral sense is what gives you the strength to stand up when push comes to shove as it does.

Or you can step out of the moral matrix and end up like certain impeccably liberal professors in Norway and Australia explaining to rape victims that it was really their fault as they didn't bother to understand the culture the, ahem, "youths" came from. It's this sort of cringing, amoral, spineless cowardice that got us Shariah in great britain.

Now here it goes:

1) Liberals question authority. Really? Ever tried questioning the "Islam is peace" bullshit with a liberal? Ever try pointing out what socialism has always caused? Ever try explaining what the National Socialist Workers Party's manifesto actually was, and on which side of the political spectrum it lands?

2) "Liberals speak for the weak and oppressed" - question: which side of the politcal spectrum formed common cause with the Kurds in Saddams Iraq? Which side of the political spectrum has stymied all efforts to prevent the genocide in the Sudan by demanding we go through the UN?

3) From what I can make out it's a bad, baaaaad thing to be for or against anything. Well, excuse me I happen to be for women's emancipation and against treating them like slaves. I happen to be for freedom and against slavery, and I have no problems saying that those who practice slavery in the Sudan and Mauritania should be burned from the face of the planet.

I imagine that gets this prissy little bitch screaming.


"Do you accept stepping out of the battle of good and evil?"

NO, I fucking DON'T! In case this goddamn idiot hasn't noticed it this is what is going on right now. Or how else do you describe this conflict? What else can you call the massacre of two million Christians and animists in the Sudan? Or the conditions of life in Saudi Arabia? Or the killing of the entire Shia Hazara in Afghanistan?

I'm sorry, I don't think I can continue watching this mindless drivel without blowing a fuse.

What utter balderdash. Here's my basic difference between liberal and conservatives:

A conservative has realized that there's a real world out there, where real people live and die and suffer, and that that real world isn't amenable to our wishes. A liberal believes the whole world should mold itself to his narcissism,

Completely unfair, I'm sure, and there are bound to be many objections, exceptions etc. but if you're going to put up with crap like this, you can put up with my counter blast.

Josh I submit that this has no part on a site that's principally devoted to the destruction of religion. Or else post something from a conservative atheist point of view (you'll find a lot from, say, the Ayn Rand Institute).

Or is there some new rule that atheists must be leftists? That they have to swallow the whole suicide package of modern liberalism in one go?

445. Turkey bans biologist Richard Dawkins' website

Comment #250050 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 18, 2008 at 11:36 pm

JemyM, that second quotation is an instruction against curiosity, inquiry or science.

446. Turkey bans biologist Richard Dawkins' website

Comment #250039 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 18, 2008 at 11:06 pm

and by the way we are not arabs ok?

Once again, you're pushing at an open door with me. Turkey was home to some of the oldest settlements and civilizations in the world, before arab Islam came.

447. Eoin Colfer to write sixth Hitchhiker's Guide book

Comment #250035 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 18, 2008 at 11:00 pm

I have to know, Laurie: was that outburst prompted by my lack of Adams fandom or by my desire to see this oncoming trainwreck stopped? :-)

448. Eoin Colfer to write sixth Hitchhiker's Guide book

Comment #250032 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 18, 2008 at 10:31 pm

Okay, this needs to be stopped, and it needs to be stopped NOW.

I'm not even an Adams fan, but I know full well where this kind of nonsens leads (see Christopher Tolkien. See Brian Herbert).

449. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250028 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 18, 2008 at 10:14 pm

I know, Laurie, I know... :-)

450. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250025 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 18, 2008 at 10:06 pm

Good lord, I completely forgot to add the countdown in my response. I knew that the usual crowd of miscreants would use my reference to Glen Beck to conclude some form of uncritical support for him on my part.

I just didn't know that it would come that quickly.