<< NOW THEY HAVE GLOVES ~ MAIN ~ BATTLE IS JOINED >>
BAG LADIES
London women in their liberation sacks:
UPDATE:
Britain’s race relations minister has said a young Muslim teaching assistant suspended for refusing to remove her veil in class should be sacked ...
That should please her. Until she realises he means “fired”.
I see they’ve also freed the apostrophe from oppression.
Posted by Crispytoast on 2006 10 16 at 12:52 AM • permalinkMust be terrible to be that plain; imagine, a whole belief system of women who make Margo Kingston look like Jennifer Hawkins.
BTW- I might have to ask an imam how Moslem hairdressers manage to survive direct exposure to the evil randy rays that beam from Moslem sheilas hair? Must be some sort of heavy duty hazmat suit, like an asbestos burkha.
Luckily, I’m an eye man. Check out the tall chick in the middle. She sure has a hot look.
Full head cover, eh? No wonder all of the hairy, hefty, lefty, lesbians approve of it.
Posted by Jack Lacton on 2006 10 16 at 01:16 AM • permalinkMaybe the guy in this article can reapply if he agrees to cover his tattoo with a burqa?
Tattoo means ta ta to police job
Posted by Art Vandelay on 2006 10 16 at 01:22 AM • permalinkIf dressing like a letterbox makes ‘em feel free, then they’re going to love the dungeon.
The only liberating thing Islam’s done for women is clitorectomies.
Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2006 10 16 at 01:23 AM • permalinkWhat I want to know is what are they doing out of the house.
Hussies!
—Nora
Posted by The Thin Man Returns on 2006 10 16 at 01:29 AM • permalinkI am amazed the UK has a Faith and Race Minister - that is just creepy.
Posted by attilathepun on 2006 10 16 at 01:42 AM • permalinkI can see their eyes, the shameless hussies! Modesty demands they complete the outfit with wrap around sunglasses.
Posted by LeftyApostate on 2006 10 16 at 01:43 AM • permalinkIn France the Napoleonic code explicitly and constitutionally separates state and religion hence the absolute necessity for the French to ban headscarfs. In the UK there is no such separation in the constitution or the law which means that anyone objecting to the full religious head gear is forced to find other grounds.
It seems to me from reading the article that the politicians have made a reasonable attempt at this on the grounds of the ability to do the job effectively. The problem with this reasoning is that it leaves it open for this woman to go to court and prove that she can do her job and then it follows that if the court is satisfied (and remember this is an english court so usually left of centre) then she gets her job back with the head gear and a new legal precedent.
Politicians in the UK are afraid to face the central issue that the dress of some Muslim women is a symbol of women’s oppression. Individual women saying it is not are just “Uncly Tom’s”. Until we all begin to face core issues we will see these incidents recur until the oppressors get their way through sheer tedium.
They seduce us with those eyelashes, for us mere mortal man-animals cannot resist, and they provoke and excite us !!!!
Posted by closeapproximation on 2006 10 16 at 01:55 AM • permalinkI suppose that these women are “liberated” in the sense that men can’t admire their charms (if any), thereby reinforcing their sense of modesty. But that’s their problem.
But If they can’t effectively interact with other people, that’s their problem as well.
And if they can’t keep deal with the rest of the world not giving a damn for their issues subsequent to their “liberation”, well, that’s defintely their problem. .
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 10 16 at 01:56 AM • permalinkI can’t wait for the Islamic Olympics- I reckon even a pudgy, chainsmoking pisshead like me could flog any of these birds in beekeeping suits, in any event. Pity we wouldn’t be able to watch any events though, on pain of having our eyes poked out in the helal manner.
BTW- I know assorted dingbat councils allow Moslem women only swimming times at public pools, but how the fuck do you swim in a sack? Doesn’t work out well for cats.
Habib, I think the idea is that if it is women only at the pool, then they can show some skin to other women.
My local YMCA pool in South Kensington (Melb) had a special session for women only, for a few weeks. Then, a sign was put up stating that these sessions had been discontinued.
I would love to know the back story to that one (anyone…?). It is clear that there are a lots of recent muslim arrivals in this suburb, and I have often seen burka-clad mothers sitting by the pool watching their kids (usually boys, but some little girls as well) swimming. I feel sorry for them as it was stinking hot weather and I can’t believe they would truly, honestly choose this for themselves were it not for their fucktard husbands and whatever other cultural forces at play…
Posted by closeapproximation on 2006 10 16 at 02:13 AM • permalinkIt is past time for someone to tell all Muslims that if there is something about a job, etc., that offends them, then they need to do something else. The choice of one individual does not carry with it the right to demand that the any other individual give up his or her rights, however. There are consequences to every choice which must be taken into consideration. The rest of the world isn’t here to make the choices of any individual easy. No individual has any rights above and beyond those enjoyed by every other individual that makes up humanity.
As for being offended: I am offended by every single instance of whining by Muslims who demand that I give up my freedom so that they will not be offended. Said Muslims ought not to take the fact that I do not take a page from their playbook and threaten murder and mayhem against those who are offending me as a sign I am unwilling to do so, should the offense continue.
Shouldn’t they be wearing gloves or better yet, mittens? Those lascivious fingers are causing a jihadic stirring in my loins.
Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2006 10 16 at 02:14 AM • permalinkAfter a few hours on a warm London day they must get up a bit of a hum under that black clobber. It’s not exactly designed for personal freshness. Still, the perspiration stains and bad teeth don’t show.
They reminder me of Easter Island statues - and about as articulate.
Posted by walterplinge on 2006 10 16 at 02:18 AM • permalink“Full head cover, eh? No wonder all of the hairy, hefty, lefty, lesbians approve of it.”
Have you actually spoken to any lesbians about this instead of just relying on a stereotype? I’ve spoken to two lesbians about this, each of whom fit the two main lesbian stereotypes. The first was a guard at a woman prison (she owns the entire series of “Prisoner” and “Bad Girls” on DVD). She’s one of many butch alpha-lesbians who work in the manliest of jobs, about half the women in the Royal Australian Navy are lesbians. The other one was an art student, pothead, almost certainly leftie girly-girl who unlike most lesbians, couldn’t strip down a carburetor to save her life.
I correctly presumed that both of them were hardline feminists and probed to see if they had inconsistent views when it came to Islam. In both cases, the general jist of it was that every Muslim male is an enemy of freedom who needs to surrender to their mighty will or die.
Our armed forces may be filled with out and proud lesbians but as far as I’m concerned we don’t have nearly enough. What we need is a Sacred Band of Thebes style elite all lesbian battalion. The last thing I want fundie terrorists to see before they die is an angry lesbian screaming EAT LEAD YOU SEXIST PIECE OF SHIT! Can you imagine how much that could demoralise the enemy?
I wonder when the “Race Relations” minister is going to sack a certain teacher and several police officers for depriving a 14 year old girl of her liberty for the abhorrent crime of demanding she be able to learn her lessons in English?
Quite astonishing ANTI dhimitued from the BBC on this subject
Always Testing the infidel’s tolerance limits#27- in most Australian states it is an offence- going masked in public is the clause in Queensland, under the Vagrants, Gaming and Other Offences Act.
Dickless state governments don’t have the stones to enforce it, because it may cause offence to highly valued
voterscitizens.I really don’t give a shit, and would prefer they cover up due to the overwhelming preponderence of pooches in the ethnicities which embrace Islam; I’d prefer it though if they were covered up somewhere else which actively practises their daffy, medieval beliefs.
I couldn’t get over how many of these walking letter boxes there were in London, I thought I was in Mecca. At Regents Park zoo alone, there were hordes (was it Mussie Monday I wondered. Are zoo’s haram?) accompanied by a large, swarthy, scowling man who looked like the result of an affair between a bear and a hog.
#31 nothing more hilarious, pathetic and hypocritical (as much as I’m loathe to use that ultimate of leftoid words) than seeing some swarthy, hairy, beardo-weirdo, camel pesterer strutting around Hyde Park bare chested, in shorts, licking his lips at kaffir “sluts” sunbaking on the green…with a walking postbox and 5 kids bring up the rear.
Would like to see the tall one eat a banana slowly while maintaining eye contact.
Posted by Hank Reardon on 2006 10 16 at 03:35 AM • permalinkThe real reason muslim women must wear the veil.
Narrated ‘Aisha:
The wives of the Prophet used to go to Al-Manasi, a vast open place (near Baqia at Medina) to answer the call of nature at night. ‘Umar used to say to the Prophet “Let your wives be veiled,” but Allah’s Apostle did not do so. One night Sauda bint Zam’a the wife of the Prophet went out at ‘Isha’ time and she was a tall lady. ‘Umar addressed her and said, “I have recognized you, O Sauda.” He said so, as he desired eagerly that the verses of Al-Hijab (the observing of veils by the Muslim women) may be revealed. So Allah revealed the verses of “Al-Hijab” (A complete body cover excluding the eyes).
Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 395:
ive been to the beach with burka clad lasses before. We had 2 female gaurds and me. they asked if Icould not go down to the beach as they wanted to swim. i said ok and parked my ass on a park bench and looked after our picknick gear. (This was the port hedland Detention centre) After about half an hour one of the ladies came up to grab a cool drink or 2 and forgot to cover up. She was in shorts and a t shirt looking quite refreshed and happy. She had a brief moment of alarm when she remembered I was there. Ilooked over at her then continued reading my book, she visibly relaxed at my reaction, probably imagining her hair rays turning me into a wild animal. She went back to the beach and shortly after the rest of the ladies came up all “undressed” and having a ball.
For that afternoon they didnt have to cover up, no “gestapo” to rat them out as hussies or bad muslims. Even the old grandma ended up uncovering and enjoying herself.
Islam and the burqua are methods of controlling women, nothing more.Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 10 16 at 04:00 AM • permalinkMost people who go to Dubai are impressed with the amount of construction. I was more impressed with how many prostitutes there were and the folly of the arabic swimming costumes. A visit to the Wild Wadi water park was high farce. A balmy 50 degree day and hundreds of poor girls dressed as mini Darth Vaders are trying to cool off. An endeavour about as practical as an ashtray on a motorbike. Meanwhile the menfolk strolled around displaying the physiques of Jabba the Hut’s stunt double dressed in a mohair vest.
Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2006 10 16 at 04:18 AM • permalinkIn a way they are winning the IO campaign. They know that most western countries don’t have the fortitude or courage to put them down. And that’s what the situation requires, that they be put down and put down hard. They’ll continue to send the ladies to the front lines of this campaign and let the media lap up the propaganda. Can you imagine the worldwide collective liberal howl if the British plowed through scenes like this in full riot gear and German shepherds? We see the problem. Everyone sees it. But I think they are right in assuming the west won’t do anything to stop them, aside from bitching. As far as I know, no one has ever won a war with bitching.
35. burrah
The wives of the Prophet used to go to Al-Manasi, a vast open place (near Baqia at Medina) to answer the call of nature at night.
And I though it was only muslim men who had sex with goats.
Posted by flying pigs over mecca on 2006 10 16 at 04:55 AM • permalinkYeah, you’re right Bonmot - only and out an out moonbat would see people rushing over each other to think of newer and more appealing derogatory names for Muslims as some sort of bigotry.
Of course its nothing of the sort. People who like to call Muslims towelheads, camel pesterers, beekeepers, darth vaders etc are just defending free speech!
45. tommyg
newer and more appealing derogatory names for Muslims
lol
Posted by flying pigs over mecca on 2006 10 16 at 05:13 AM • permalinktommyg
Moles dictionary.
Its called mocking.
Its what people do to others they see as deluded or weird.
Dressing up in desert costume because its “liberating” is both.
Hence the mocking.
People who find it “cute” to squeal racism at fairly low key name calling are often known as tools, fools, fellow travellers, lackwits, know nothings, lickspittles, apologists, ankle grabbers, quislings, knobs, and Mark Lathams.Answer one question if you may, does it contribute to society to have a whole community effectively enslave the female portion of that community?
Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 10 16 at 05:16 AM • permalink#6 Jack L.
I remember reading an article about Saudi Arabia in which the writer was with a local male in a mall. At some distance, two women were coming down an escalator in the full rig. ‘Check out the hottie on the right,’ said he.
Notice how carefully these girls have made up eyes. Religions will come and go but Nature always has her way.
Of course its nothing of the sort. People who like to call Muslims towelheads, camel pesterers, beekeepers, darth vaders etc are just defending free speech!
Personally, I’m partial to “walking letterboxes”.
And, yes, free speech includes the freedom to say rude and unpleasant things. Odd how the left only remembers that when they’re the ones saying rude and unpleasant things.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 10 16 at 05:22 AM • permalinkI think we’re jumping to conclusions here. Their eyes are awfully pretty. I’m guessing they’re goats that have recently married. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
Posted by wronwright on 2006 10 16 at 05:28 AM • permalinkTommy G, I prefer the epithet “sand goblins” when referring to desert dwelling atavists who believe some farcical tales about a bloodthirsty paedophile leaping off a rock to heaven and other fictions.
However, regarding you I think “fuckwit”, or possibly“microcephalic tosspot” for literal accuracy fits the bill.
In the interests of fairness tommyg, we can insult you as well if you’d like.
Posted by Quentin George on 2006 10 16 at 05:33 AM • permalinkIn the interests of fairness tommyg, we can insult you as well if you’d like.
You’re a little late; some already have done it.
I think I see the problem, though. People insult the burqa proponents for their behavior—for coming to Western countries and insisting we follow their barbaric traditions. Dimwits like tommyg assume the insults are due to race; never mind that the antics of globular warmening advocates inspire insults as well.
I think that’s because, deep down, tommyg doesn’t think of non-whites as completely human. They’re not fully-formed moral actors, so their behavior is not subject to criticism, so obviously any criticism they receive is based on their race.
That’s it, isn’t it, tommyg?
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 10 16 at 05:39 AM • permalinkTim that was very funny. I had a great laugh.
Those women should be lucky that it doesn’t get awfully hot in Britain. Otherwise they would sweat like pigs.
I can’t wait for the day those veils are ripped off.
Posted by The Best Infidel on 2006 10 16 at 05:41 AM • permalinkthefrollickingmole:
Answer one question if you may, does it contribute to society to have a whole community effectively enslave the female portion of that community?- no, it doesnt. I would support a whole variety of social sanctions against the niqab, including businesses excercising their right to deny entry, employment, etc. Dont think I would be cool with a government ban based on principle, but in practice it wouldnt bother me so much.
frollickingmole - answer me - is it good for society for religious namecalling to become mainstream and acceptable?
Rob Crawford - of course you have the right to say bigoted things, and worse. I’m just saying that its interesting to see how conservatives are now happily excercising that right - and that it is very helpful to lefties like myself, who have always believed that there is some inherant bigotry and racism lying around in conservative circles…
That tall one also looks to have nicely manicured nails. Methinks that wearing the full death mask is not normal for her.
And how the hell do they manage that god awful ululation cacophony when they’re covered head to toe in one of Crazy Ahmed’s discarded persian rugs?
Posted by Jack Lacton on 2006 10 16 at 05:44 AM • permalinkYeah, Rob, besides, I don’t know about many others, but I’d find it difficult to pick on appearance here because:
a) My own swarthiness qualifies me as being of “Mediterranean” appearance and often mistaken for a MOMEA…I’d probably be darker than some of those women….
b) That is…if you could actually tell much about their ethnicity. Seriously, I can only see their eyes.
The tall chick in the middle is hot though. Oh yes…you know she is. I’d oppress her, baby!
Posted by Quentin George on 2006 10 16 at 05:46 AM • permalinkIs it good for society for religious namecalling to become mainstream and acceptable?
Just what do you think a fair amount of stand up comedy consists of? If Christianity can handle “namecalling”, Islam can.
I’m just saying that its interesting to see how conservatives are now happily excercising that right - and that it is very helpful to lefties like myself, who have always believed that there is some inherant bigotry and racism lying around in conservative circles…
You were asked to support your racism charge and did not.
Keep banging on with that moral superiority shtick though…it’s quite cute.
Posted by Quentin George on 2006 10 16 at 05:49 AM • permalinkRob Crawford - since when does insulting burqa proponents become all out acceptance of bigoted slurs agains 1.2 billion of the worlds population?
and cant you insult the stupid ones without using the same racist terms that are used against all the innocent ones? When a segment of the black community act stupid, do you start calling them niggers? Would you call a Jew acting stupidly a Kike?
tommyg
When a segment of the black community act stupid, do you start calling them niggers? Would you call a Jew acting stupidly a Kike?
Capitalised? Interesting Freudian slip.
Posted by flying pigs over mecca on 2006 10 16 at 05:55 AM • permalinkQuentin, if the racism charge you are speaking of is from Rob - “I think that’s because, deep down, tommyg doesn’t think of non-whites as completely human. They’re not fully-formed moral actors, so their behavior is not subject to criticism, so obviously any criticism they receive is based on their race.”
I believe their behaviour is subject to criticism. I believe they are humans just like I am, with all the same rights and responsibilities. I think criticism that involves commonly used derogatory / bigoted / racist epithets is the domain of bigots and racists, not people who genuinely want to coexist together in peace.
Again, tommyg, what was the racist slur?
Please tell us.
Posted by Quentin George on 2006 10 16 at 05:56 AM • permalinkTry again, tommyg, the sentence you’ve quoted is Rob accusing you of innate, latent racism.
I’m asking for the basis of your charge against him.
Posted by Quentin George on 2006 10 16 at 05:58 AM • permalink59. If it holds unacceptable practices up to ridicule then yes. If it offends the intollerant so much they leave or dont bother to come in the first place then yes again.
The far right (Nazis etc) are possibly the most mocked group in the world, it is possibly the most hurtfull form of censure a polite society can impose.
Catholics and other minor groups have been mocked for years, nuns as penguins, priests as homosexuals and so forth. They havent responded much beyond letters to the editor let alone insisting on all other members of society bend to their will.
By the way it is be illegal to practice many of the forms of discrimination you are referring to, so in the meantime a bit of mockery of the intollerant will do just fine.Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 10 16 at 06:00 AM • permalinkLet’s be clear tommyg.
No Muslim female is born with a burqa or headscarf.
Not every Muslim female even wears a headcovering.
There is a good reason that racism and sexism are wrong. They are both aspects that individuals cannot change, aspects that are inherent to that individual.
Religious belief, or for that matter, any belief, is not like that. These are simply ideas - they can be criticised, mocked and called silly. Without the freedom to offend, freedom of speech means nothing.
Posted by Quentin George on 2006 10 16 at 06:02 AM • permalinkAllow me to assist tommyg in understanding…
Rob wrote:
“I think that’s because, deep down, tommyg doesn’t think of non-whites as completely human. They’re not fully-formed moral actors, so their behavior is not subject to criticism, so obviously any criticism they receive is based on their race.”
Hopefully, I didn’t hinder the bold and italics budget.
Posted by Patrick Chester on 2006 10 16 at 06:02 AM • permalinkQuentin I wasn’t calling Rob a racist. I was saying that using commonly used bigoted or racist language against people is always a bigoted or racist act, even if the people being insulted are themselves are acting stupidly.
In the case of religious bigotry, yes, it isnt racism. Congratulations for pulling a stunningly insignificant bait and switch.
So you are saying that bigoted, loaded slurs against a person based on their religion is OK?
So you are saying that bigoted, loaded slurs against a person based on their religion is OK?
Question: when such slurs are used against those of conservative bent, what is your reaction?
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 10 16 at 06:21 AM • permalinkSo you are saying that bigoted, loaded slurs against a person based on their religion is OK?
Oh my F-U-C-K-I-N-G god you people are slow.
YES. IT. IS.
That is the gift that The Enlightenment gave us: No longer could somebody be branded a heretic and burnt at the stake for insulting a particular religion; nor could somebody be burnt at the stake for adhering to a particular religion. It became every person’s right to ridicule any religion in any manner they saw fit.
In my opinion, Islam is inherently stupid and evil. Therefore, it should not be a surprise, even for braindead leftoids like you, that I consider Muslims to be either stupid, evil or both. I will continue to ridicule them until either they change or I’m dragged off by the PC Thought Police.
If you have a rebuttal, by all means let’s hear it.
And BTW. Here’s a pre-emptive strike: I’m not a Christian or a Jew.
Thing is, tommyg, the Islamists want to enslave or slaughter everyone I know. They consider every woman I’ve ever known to be godless sluts deserving rape.
Their co-religionists react to this with studied indifference. If they notice it, it’s to condemn us for noticing it. Or for somehow causing it.
They—both the Islamists and their supposedly moderate co-religionists—would have us surrender our freedom of speech so that their tiny little “god” Allah would never be insulted. They would have us surrender our freedom of conscience so that no one could ever question the teachings of their pedophile “prophet” Mohammed, so that we would stop protecting those who want to stop being Allah’s slaves and stand up as free men and women.
They would have us abandon our culture so we will tolerate the dehumanization of women by forcing them to become walking letterboxes. Have us accomodate them in our homes, rather than their bending to the prevailing customs of the lands they moved to.
That people call them nasty things doesn’t bother me at all.
*shrug*
If that makes me a bad person in your eyes, I can live with that.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 10 16 at 07:12 AM • permalinkMurph - I’m not saying you dont have the right to think and say these things, of course you do. Say it as much as you want, go extreme, whatever. I’m not going to try and stop you, and neither should Muslims, or the government.
But here’s the deal - Is it a good idea? Are you possibly a fuckwit for thinking that one in every five people in the world is stupid and/or evil?
My rebuttal - I have spent that last few years of my live either living in a Muslim country (Egypt) or around large numbers of Muslims (the Netherlands, Europe in general).
There is a whole load of psycho Muslims. There is also lots and lots of really great Muslims - bizarre joint-smoking hip-hop fiends, veiled girls who can hold their own in a discussion on Voltaire and the American revolution, small store owners working their asses of so their kids can have a better life they they have, peaceful, good people.
When people like you declare all Muslims to be evil and/or stupid, it does nothing but strengthen the position of the psycho’s, and make the good people a lot less likely to be able to play a moderating force in their societies. It helps to swing fence-sitters to the wrong side, alienate otherwise natural cultural allies. You wouldnt believe how aspirational towards Western society most Egyptians are.
Go ahead and call them camel fucking virgin rapists. Its your right. Its just that your excercising your right like a fucking idiot.
#29 to go back a bit.
Habib the Vag Act has been toast since March 2005. The Summarry Offences Act which replaced it, doesn’t have an equivalent provision to the old act which incidently made a person a vagrant if with intent to committ an indictable offence they were found masked or with their face blackened. Under the Vag Act it was an offence to be a vagrant.
Posted by Just Another Bloody Lawyer on 2006 10 16 at 07:30 AM • permalinkSo, after all the accusations, the only one to stick that you have is “fuckwit”?
Isn’t that a little undergraduate?
Posted by Quentin George on 2006 10 16 at 07:38 AM • permalinkI’m starting to believe that the British Muslim protesters are doing their best to bait the rest of us into a reaction that perpetuates their “victim” status.
After the Pope’s comments I recall a photograph of a Muslim chap holding a sign stating “Islam will conquer Rome”. It is as likely to happen as Osama converting to Christianity.
We see stupid signs at “peace” rallies all the time, but no matter how ludicrous equating Bush to Hitler is, it isn’t going to inflame anyone.
These signs serve no purpose, but to provoke outrage and hatred towards all Muslims; something the extremists need if they’re ever going to succeed.
Getting back to this particular sign…that would have to be a textbook example of cognitive dissonance if I’ve ever seen one.
What annoys me the most is on an extremely routine basis Mullahs, Imams and other male representatives of the Islamic community give their opinion on the dress code of Non-Muslim women, Western women in particular. They include that our clothing is lewd and immodest, that we should change attire in areas where they frequent, including not wearing bikinis, so as not to offend their sensibilities and in extreme cases that we deserve to be raped.
When these comments are made the silence of the female representatives of the Islamic community is deafening but a non muslim mentions the veil and all hell breaks loose.
It seems to me they can dish it out but not take it.
I do not think Western women can rely on the likes of the ladies in the photos to protect their right to wear what they want when Muslims are in significant numbers in many Western countries.
I will make a deal with those ladies in the photos they can tell their men to shut up and mind their owe business and I will tell the likes of Jack Straw etc to shut up and mind theres. Do you think I could trust them to keep their end of the bargain.
When people like you declare all Muslims to be evil and/or stupid, it does nothing but strengthen the position of the psycho’s, and make the good people a lot less likely to be able to play a moderating force in their societies. It helps to swing fence-sitters to the wrong side, alienate otherwise natural cultural allies. You wouldnt believe how aspirational towards Western society most Egyptians are.
Been hearing that line for a long time.
Never seen much freaking evidence of it. Instead, we keep seeing Muslims in the West aspiring to turn the West into the same sort of cesspool they or their parents left. They pump cash into “charities” that fund jihadis. They attend mosques that hand out anti-semitic, anti-western pamphlets. They throw hissy fits when asked to report anything unusual happening in their communities.
For that matter, your line is just a variation on the “don’t criticize the extremists, it just makes the moderates turn to extremism” crap we keep getting from the Muslims. That’s like saying “don’t criticize the Kluckers; it just makes the average white Southerner more likely to join the Klan”. Can’t you see what a load of horse shit that is?
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 10 16 at 07:44 AM • permalinktommyg
What moderating forces? There are none in the Muslim world. Islam is utterly incapable of honest inquiry, self-reflection and self-criticism. It is theologically averse to such concepts. The only force which moderates Islam is other cultures - mainly Western/Judeo-Christian, Hindu and Buddhist.
The problem is that, in the West, we’re approaching a demographic and, therefore, cultural tipping point. We’ll see who’s right in 20 years when, save ethnic cleansing (which I would not put past the Europeans), Western Europe collapses under the strain of a bi-cultural system where Western culture is no longer dominant.
What I’d really like to know is this: where exactly does the mythical beast known as the Moderate Muslim Majority reside? I hear about them all the time - albeit mainly from leftoids who have a pathological aversion to the truth.
Who and where are the Moderate Muslim Majority? Where were the Moderate Muslim Majority’s “Not In Our Name” marches when 9-11 happened? All I saw was a mishmash of denial and glee. Where were the Moderate Muslim Majority’s “Not In Our Name” marches when jihadists murdered more than 200 people in Bali? Where were the Moderate Muslim Majority’s “Not In Our Name” marches when jihadists murdered hundreds of schoolchildren in Southern Russia? Where were the Moderate Muslim Majority’s “Not In Our Name” marches when Al-Zaqarwi was hacking off people’s heads and blowing up Shi’ites at prayer? Where were the Moderate Muslim Majority’s “Not In Our Name” marches when the Taliban were shooting women at the football stadium in Kandahar? Where were the Moderate Muslim Majority’s “Not In Our Name” marches when an Italian nun had the back of her head blown out and Christian churches in the West Bank were burned following a statement by the Pope?
All I see is aggression and threats from a growing and significant portion (the evil ones) of Muslim society and total indifference from 95% of the remainder (the stupid ones).
sorry quentin - I know that you would prefer something based on his religion, nationality or ethnicity, I just don’t know enough about Murph to pull out the crowd pleasers.
So now you’re accusing me of bigotry? Please point out where I have made a racist, bigoted or otherwise offensive statement in this thread.
I was willing to give you a chance, but I may be forced to agree with the others: You’re a troll and a fuckwit.
Posted by Quentin George on 2006 10 16 at 07:50 AM • permalinkRob, calling all Muslims evil and stupid is not criticising extremists. Denigrating the entire Islamic religion, calling their prophet a paedophile etc. is not criticisng extremists. Happily linking to pictures of a guy using the Koran as a shooting target is not criticising extremists.
It is sending a message that the problem is Islam, not Islamic extremists - and that alienates a whole load of people who would otherwise be on your side.
tommyg, why can’t you accept that people also have legitimate complaints about the Islamic religion? About Islamic prophets?
Personally, I consider Mohammed an incredibly awful role model, whether one is speaking spiritually or morally. I’m not going to shout it from rooftops, but I’m not going to deny it if asked.
I have similar problems with aspects of other religions. I am allowed to express those. Why must we all walk on eggshells because Muslims are easily offended? That’s not my problem, that’s theirs.
Posted by Quentin George on 2006 10 16 at 07:58 AM • permalinkQuentin I have a ton of complaints about Islam and the message laid out by the prophet. I bring them up regularly in conversations with Muslims and non Muslims. A lot of my problems with Islam are based on my problems with any of the monotheistic religions, or any believe system that tells people that they posess an absolute undeniable truth and everyone else is wrong and evil. Some are based on specific problems with Islam, like the role of women and the attitude towards non-believers (non-monotheists).
The difference between me and you, from what I can see, is that you have a whole bunch of idealogical fellow travellers who like to refer to Mohammed as a beastial paedophile, to his followers as ragheads, desert goblins and evil people, and you dont seems interested at all in saying anything against it.
tommyg,
you seem to have lived amongst Muslims and failed to understand Islam, which in fact a number of contributors here have. Not their fault because it’s a tad out of people in the West’s frame of experience.
The thing that needs to be understood is that Islam is a political doctrine wrapped up in a religious message.
There are countries that function as secular democracies whose dominant religion is Islam because they’ve separated the political and religious aspects of Islam. Examples are Turkey (where Kamal Ataturk was insistent that the state be secular in order to not follow the mistakes of the recently fallen Ottoman Empire), Malaysia and Indonesia.
That Islam is their dominant religion does not make them ‘Muslim’ nations in the way that Saudi Arabia and Iran are, for example. Both of those countries have the full political/religious Islam experience happening. Likewise, Australia is not a ‘Christian’ nation because Christianity is its dominant religion.
The terrorists are fundamentalists that believe the political and religious aspects of Islam cannot be separated and, indeed, view countries like Malaysia and Turkey as being enemies. Their goal is to create a Caliphate, the Islam equivalent of the Papacy, to rule over the world with Sharia as the dominant law.
What are referred to as ‘moderate Muslims’ are those who believe in the religious aspect but are secular in nature. These are the people you are describing in your travels, particularly in Europe.
There is a wider question as to why the moderates are less than active in voicing their disapproval of terrorist activities and the wanton killing of women and children to achieve political ends. They are, indeed, intimidated by the fundamentalists within their societies and fear for their safety if they speak out. It’s also important to understand, though, that Islam is a religion of shame (as distinct from guilt, like Christianity) and that moderates are brought up with this shame. They give the terrorists a pass because, at a high level, they’re standing up for the religion regardless of the barbarity. It enhances the moderates sense of identity and strength in the world.
I lived in Egypt, too, amongst my travels around the world. Nearly died there, come to think of it. Was in a coma for a week after an accident and was lucky to make it through.
Posted by Jack Lacton on 2006 10 16 at 08:07 AM • permalinkRob, calling all Muslims evil and stupid is not criticising extremists.
They fund the jihadis. They defend the jihadis. They deny the very existence of the jihadis while simultaneously praising their acts.
Denigrating the entire Islamic religion, calling their prophet a paedophile etc. is not criticisng extremists.
Sure it is. The real moderates—the ones who really aspire to a Western way of life, and not just a Western standard of life—will ignore it or do nothing more than grouse about it. If someone turns to violence because someone said something nasty about their faith there was never a chance they would ever be on the side of civilization.
Happily linking to pictures of a guy using the Koran as a shooting target is not criticising extremists.
Again, it is—because those who truly want the Western way of life will realize that criticism of and even insults to their religion is part of that way of life. It’s a freaking book. If the Muslims want to post pics of someone shooting a Bible, they can go for it. I don’t think any Christian will do anything more than shrug.
Anyone recall the riots after the “Opie and Anthony” stunt of having the couple have sex in a church? No? Odd, that.
It is sending a message that the problem is Islam, not Islamic extremists - and that alienates a whole load of people who would otherwise be on your side.
If they’re “alienated” because their religion was treated equally with Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, etc. then there was never a chance they would be on “my” side.
Fer crissake, how much violence—or even threats of violence—was there in the wake of the “South Park” episodes making fun of Mormons? Or the episodes making fun of Catholics? Even the freaking Scientologists did nothing more than convince one of their cultists to quit the show.
Shouldn’t we expect the same level of maturity from Muslims?
Fer crissake, who’s being racist? People who use offensive terms or the guy who insists we not say anything bad about Muslims because they can’t handle what everyone else in the West deals with as a matter of course?
Can you imagine a Hollywood movie that treats Islam the same as “Saved!” treats Christianity?
Why not?
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 10 16 at 08:08 AM • permalinkThe difference between me and you, from what I can see, is that you have a whole bunch of idealogical fellow travellers who like to refer to Mohammed as a beastial paedophile
Because he was!
He ordered entire tribes slaughtered. He ordered slavery and rape. He ordered assassinations of people who wrote poems making fun of him. He married a pre-pubescent girl.
And Islam holds him to be the perfect man!
There’s little admirable and much to be disgusted at in Mohammed’s life. I’m as much allowed to point that out as I’m allowed to point out that Thomas Jefferson owned slaves. If it pisses off Muslims, then they need to go someplace where they won’t hear their prophet criticized. That ain’t the West.
And, again, there’s a massive difference between aspiring to a Western standard of living and aspiring to the Western way of life.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 10 16 at 08:14 AM • permalinkA lot of my problems with Islam are based on my problems with any of the monotheistic religions, or any believe system that tells people that they posess an absolute undeniable truth and everyone else is wrong and evil
um. tommyg
It has nothing to do with mono-theism.
Christianity certainly does not teach that believers of other religions are evil. Islam does.
Christianity is not absolute. Is it still awaiting the final revelations. Islam IS the final revelation. It IS absolute. There is no more to learn, nothing else to discover. Islam stifles inquiry and crushes dissent. It MUST do so, otherwise it is admitting that it is not the absolute “truth”.
The fact that Judeo-Christian civilisation (specifically, the Western European variety) has provided a cradle for philosophical and scientific enlightenment is no mere historical coincidence.
The difference between me and you, from what I can see, is that you have a whole bunch of idealogical fellow travellers who like to refer to Mohammed as a beastial paedophile,
JESUS IS A FUCKWIT!
MOSES WAS A WARMONGER AND A THIEF!
VISHNU WAS A BLUE MIDGET!
BUDDHA IS A FAT MORON!
Let’s see if anyone flies a plane into a building.
Anyone?
All just words. The mature religion is not undermined by words of no substance. A person secure in their faith can withstand the barbs of a non-believer.
to his followers as ragheads, desert goblins and evil people, and you dont seems interested at all in saying anything against it.
Number of people using the slur “raghead” in this thread:
Only 1. You
Number of people using the slur “desert goblin” in this thead.
Only 1. You
Number of people labelling all Muslims evil. None.
If you were to read the comments correctly, you will notice that murph and Rob labelled some (not all) Muslims as evil.
With the existence of people like Bin Laden, Zarqawi, Saddam Hussein and the Assads, I’d be inclined to agree.
Posted by Quentin George on 2006 10 16 at 08:19 AM • permalinkI keep hearing different stories about the justification behind the veil and burqa and not fully understanding it supposedly is a show of faith in their religion, something like that. What bugs me when they say it is not suppresion of women is why men do not wear something similar? I read it somewhere lately an argument that if women use this dress to show faith then why not men. The answer would be very telling. either it is ashow of faith and men should wear it as well or if not then it just controls what women wear and express themselves - a form of subjugation? Does that make sense?
Posted by The Big Fish on 2006 10 16 at 08:22 AM • permalinkTexas Bob - I speak out against radical Islam all the time. I said earlier in this thread that I would support every social sanction available against the Niqab. I fucking hate radical Islam.
Rob - its getting harder to argue with you, but here goes:
ALL Muslims dont fund and support Jihadis. You just gave a prime example of putting moderates in the same box as the idiots.
As for the rest of your argument, it is ridiculous in practice. Would you have dealt with the black panthers by using increasingly racist language, posting up pictures of KKK rallies and generally doing more and more offensive things?
And again, this one keeps coming up - there is a grand fucking canyon between what you have the right to say and do, and what a reasonable non-bigoted person actually does.
It has nothing to do with mono-theism.
Well…to a certain extent is do. Intolerance of other gods is more likely to spring from monotheism than polytheism, purely because of the nature of the beast (If you believe there is only one God, then naturally it follows that any others worshipped are false and by extension, bad).
Islam takes this a lot further than, for instance, Zoroastrianism, which in my estimation was a fair superior monotheistic religion originating from the Middle East.
Posted by Quentin George on 2006 10 16 at 08:24 AM • permalinktommyg
if you have spent much time dealing with people from the middle east then you should have run into the “bad muslim” card. The one condemnation that is thrown at any moderate muslim who happens to disagree with one of the beardie weirdie types.
I have seen quite moderate ladies be forced into full coverings with this type of condemnation, as it is like throwing a bucket of blood in a pool of sharks.
She becomes fair game for taunts, pinching, suggestive remarks and threats of rape and violence.
That is apparently sanctioned by the highest religous authorities accross most sects of islam.
Its not an abberation.
The whole religion is about submitting completely, much like Orwells room, they dont want you to conform they want you utterly.
In the religous authorities eyes there is NO private space, nor any need to have any. Its the type of low level all pervasive surveilance that the gestapo or stasi would have given their eye teeth for.
The west has made the mistake of allowing the fanatics in with the moderates. Its not by accident that most ME Muslims congregate in certain areas, for the mullahs it would be a catastrophie if the grass roots surveilance was lost.
Therefore it is considered a sin to live outside a group of the faithfull unless there is no other option.
The fanatics arent the abberation they are the perfection of Islam.
Ask an imamPosted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 10 16 at 08:47 AM • permalinkrebase, i’m talking the “normal” veil, not the Niqab. Fully face veiled women in Cairo are still quite a rarity - you can see them every day, but only because you see about 7 million people every day on the walk to and from the metro stop…..They attract slightly bemused stares and are generally “noticed” on the street, even among average Egyptians. Its considered here to be an extremist concept, brought back to Egypt by all the people who go as expat workers to Saudi Arabia and the Gulf…
I’ve never spoken one on one with a fully face veiled woman - they seem fairly reclusive and dont exactly hang around in cafe’s meeting foreigners etc. I did see a bunch of them at KFC once, all chowing away - I tell ya, watching a bunch of ladies completely covered trying to eat a three piece combo is pretty interesting stuff.
Narnian1
I wouldn’t hold out much hope. In a competition between disabled people and those who would decapitate them if given half a chance, the left is sure to come down on the side that they’re most afraid of.
The Mozzies have an almost Jedi like suggestion spell over the Left.
Leftoid(looking at floor, sweeping his right foot from side to side): “Um…I think…I perceive…that…um…you are being unfa…um…*gulp*...discriminatory…*breath*”
Imam: “You don’t have the right to question Muslims!”
Leftoid: “I don’t have the right to question Muslims”
Imam: “Who are you…a worthless kaffir…to question a pious Muslim?!”
Leftoid: “Right! Who am I…an worthless kaffir…to question a pious Muslim!?”
Imam: “Now run along and jail a 14 year old girl for suggesting that she was getting the rough end of the pineapple in a Manchester school room because she was expected to speak Urdu. Or, even better, arrest and prosecute some Scottish guy for revving his engine in the vicinity of his and your new masters.”
Leftoid (snaps to attention): “YESSIR!!!!”
Moderate Muslims that is an oxeymoron.
I have not met one yet who if they do not openly support the terrorists, sympathise with them.
Also they all seem to think we would be better off either converting to Islam or under Muslim rule. Also it does not matter what the problem is it is always the West’s fault, especially the USA or the fault of the Jews including brown stains in their underwear. My problem is that with the level of “moderation” within this religion they will attempt to eliminate the perceived cause of all their problems. After they have done that and the stains are still in their underwear, then they might actually look at themselves. Unfortunately not really great for the perceived cause of the problem. Not sure what Muslims TommyG has met. I avoid them as much as possible, especially the men.
Yes Murph, Muslims would decapitate you if given half the chance. They’re all just waiting at home, sharpening the scimitars, waiting to catch you in a vulnerable time, then BAM. You have no head, and some dude named Karim is running down the street laughing. Its cruel, but its happening all around us, all the time.
Its lucky for the left that brave folk such as yourself are willing to take on the Mozzies. Just keep calling them Sand Goblins, I hear that they magically dissapear after the third time…
alienates a whole load of people who would otherwise be on your side. Says who? Does this include tyhe thousands, possibly millions, getting jiggy with it in the streets when the two 757s plowed into the twin towers? Moderate Islam is a myth.
As opposed to PC proscribed pillocks such as yourself who have no problem with insulting white taxpaying males, Christians, conservatives and aspirational members of the lumpen proletariat, we have no problems with being rude to whoever we like, which is pretty much everyone- we’re equal opportunity villifyers.
BTW- Islam is a religion, not a race, so your accusations of racism are idiotic; even if the dread spectre of racism could be levelled at poking fun at moronic Arab cultural traditions, it would be incorrect- Arabs are a caucasian race, like we nasty WASPy types.
If I hold any institution in respect, I’m less inclined to poke fun at it; I hold at least a healthy distrust for all religions, but I reserve my utter contempt for Islam, and any of its adherents; an atavistic cult that is the main reason that most of the middle east is an intolerant, insular, misogynist, backward shithole.
Murph - make sure you shoot all of them mate, what you need is a final solution….
Habib - If 10 million muslims got jiggy on the street celebrating 9-11 (a huge overestimate), and another 300 million muslims were happy with it, either overtly or secretly, theres still another 850 or-so million muslims in the world who didnt.
tommyg
I have made something in the vicinity of 20 points with regards to theology, history and demography and you haven’t bothered to address a single one. Instead leap on a clear absurdity, choose that as your straw man and flail away.
Here’s a hint: I’ve seen your type come and go a thousand times. Your arguments are boring, shallow, simple and emotive. This is why I started out by calling you a fuckwit. I should not have bothered even engaging you.
ALL Muslims dont fund and support Jihadis. You just gave a prime example of putting moderates in the same box as the idiots.
I didn’t put them into that box. They did.
Fer crissake, the largest Muslim charity in the US channeled funds to jihadis. The most vocal and popular Muslim groups in the US have had executives convicted on charges of supporting terrorists. The majority of mosques in the US are funded and run by Wahabbists. There were more reporters at a march of Muslims against terrorism than there were marchers.
I’ve seen reports of Muslims standing against the “extremists”. For some odd reason, the ones resisting the “extremists” find themselves shunned by their community, as if the community supports the “extremists” and not the ones putting up the resistance.
Again, if someone wants to be part of the Western way of life, they’d damned well be used to the fact that their faith is going to be criticized. And, no, I wouldn’t use the KKK to attack the Black Panthers; I’d use the acts and words of the Black Panthers themselves. I’d poke fun at the idiocy of the people who support them, at their hypocrisy and willingness to swallow evil.
I’d do the same thing I do towards Muslims.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 10 16 at 09:16 AM • permalinktheres still another 850 or-so million muslims in the world who didnt.
Finish the thought: “theres still another 850 or-so million muslims in the world who didnt do squat to clean up their own mess”.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 10 16 at 09:18 AM • permalinktheres still another 850 or-so million muslims in the world who didnt
Where were the mass “Not In Our Name” protests in the Muslim world? Huh?
Fucking nowhere. They either sat around with their thumbs up their dates or set about leveraging the situation to their political advantage.
Anyhow, that wasn’t my experience. I was at work in London. Every single Muslim in my workplace was visibly happy. On my way home from work, I stopped at my local corner store in Fulham where the Muslim owner and staff were gleefully laughing and joking whilst a replay was been shown on the TV above the counter.
After Sep 11, I began a little experiment where, if given an opportunity, I would ask Muslims their opinion of the event. Every time I get in a cab with a Muslim cab driver, I ask without fail at some point in the journey. In five years (including three in London), I have met exactly two Muslims who didn’t think the USA “had it coming”.
In five years (including three in London), I have met exactly two Muslims who didn’t think the USA “had it coming”.
To be fair, you’d get the same results asking students at Berkeley.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 10 16 at 09:33 AM • permalinkIn five years (including three in London), I have met exactly two Muslims who didn’t think the USA “had it coming”.
tommyg probably thinks the USA “had it coming” too. The first thing expatriates absorb from their kewl new native buddies is hatred and envy of the US.
Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 10 16 at 09:45 AM • permalink#92 “It is sending a message that the problem is Islam, not Islamic extremists”
Tommy G, Have you read the Koran or the Hadiths? give it a go and you will realise that the statement I excised from your comment is exactly true (apologies for the lack of contextual respect).
Like you I tried for years to be optimistic about Islam and its adherents - however having read the Koran and doing some reading on the history of Islam my own opinion is that the problem is Islam itself.
Try this exercise - compare the character of Jesus as it is recorded in the Bible to the character of Mohammed as recorded in the Koran and the Hadiths. They are complete moral opposites. Jesus was until recently the moral benchmark for the Christian west and still has a considerable, usually unrecognised, influence ; while the same can be said of Mohammed for Islamic countries. A society that has a man like Mohammed as a moral benchmark is going to be seriously dysfunctional. I don’t think that there is a lack of empirical evidence to back this claim up.
Personally, I hope we are witnessing the last desperate death throes of this ridiculous cult - however I think we should apply the precautionary principle and completely halt Islamic immigration to western countries.
JESUS IS A FUCKWIT!
Oh Quentin, you’ve done it now! You just try and get seconds on fried chicken and potato salad at our church picnic next Sunday. As for your playing shortstop on the church softball team, well, those those days are over!
Posted by Vanguard of the Commentariat on 2006 10 16 at 09:54 AM • permalinkAndrea, I don’t hate the US or its people. You need to learn this is part of the “not being a bigot” thing - don’t judge someone just because of where they live. Everyone’s different you know?
Although it does depend on what you mean by “had it coming” - if you mean did the US deserve such an attack, I would totally disagree.
But if you mean was such an attack predictable, or expected, then yes, I think that given the enormous hostility that exists towards the US in the Middle East, the “super empowered individuals” taking advantage of new technologies, Gulf money etc - a terror attack inside the US was fairly predictable.
Willow76
TommyG doesn’t need to read the Koran and Hadiths. All he needs is the soothing words of The Grauniad to tell him that everything is a-okay.
To paraphrase a certain columnist:
To listen to the TommyG’s of this world is like watching a panto cast on drugs: No matter how often the baddies say, ‘I’m behind you!’, the TommyG’s reply, ‘Oh, no, you’re not!’
Fuck me, you’re right! And the Wermacht wasn’t sitting behind Churchill in 1938 either! The silly fat bald cigar chomping cunt didn’t know what he was talking about. The BBC were right to refuse to broadcast his speeches for fear of insulting moderate elements in German society. I mean, they didn’t attack in 1935, so why didn’t he wait until 1939 to get all fucking wound up about it?!
Yes Murph, radical Islamists are about to launch a massive ground invasion of Western Eurpe with the worlds biggest and most powerful army.
Islamic radicals will be lucky to manage a coup in Mauritius. They’ve just managed to scrape through a useless rebel government in Somalia.
They Muslim brotherhood are allied with the Egyptian reformist movement because they want to be allowed on the ballot in the next sham Egyptian election. Hizbollah just got their asses pounded in South Lebanon. Palestine is fucked. Syria is fucked. Iran’s best hope for attracting world attention is if it manages to test a miniscule atomic device it has worked years to create. Islamic radicals tend to do best in places where people are hungry and poor, and need food and education (sub-saharan Africa, South-East Asia).
This isnt exactly the Third Reich we’re talking about here. Its a loose clusterfuck of weird crazies. Stop being such a pussy.
#133:
Oh Quentin, you’ve done it now! You just try and get seconds on fried chicken and potato salad at our church picnic next Sunday. As for your playing shortstop on the church softball team, well, those those days are over!
No, that’s not the worse. Try the experience of having a nun… glare at you. *shudder*
Posted by Patrick Chester on 2006 10 16 at 10:20 AM • permalink“I have pretty much nothing to fear from radical Muslims”
Ok tommyg, now we’re getting somewhere. It’s good that you’re not scared. That means a bunch of brave westerners going to where radical Muslims were projecting their sick ideology, killing them and breaking up their terror cells has worked, in spite of the shrieks of protest from the Left.
Now the Earth getting warmer by a degree or two over a hundred years because of its normal temperature cycle, there’s something to be shit scared of, eh?
Posted by Vanguard of the Commentariat on 2006 10 16 at 10:21 AM • permalinktommyg
Nope. It’s actually worse.
Even if we were to believe the laughably low figure of 15% radicalisation*, this represents 400,000 people within the borders of Britain who are openly hostile to the British people. No need for an invasion mate. They’re already there and the numbers are going to grow to breaking point. The Poms are getting old. They are culturally weak. As I said, give it 20 years of the same ol’ same ol’ and get back to me.
* the ones who own up to it to opinion pollsters:
“Hello, Mr Muslim, I’m an opinion pollster who you’ve never laid eyes on before. In fact, as far as you know I could be from MI5. Tell me, do you support blowing up commuters at King’s Cross?”
Vanguard - re global warming,lets not even go there…..
The fact that I am not scared has nothing to do with the “brave” invasion of Iraq. That has certainly made the world a more dangerous place, especially for a white guy in the Middle East. Its just that even if the threat has doubled since 2003, it still isnt as big as the threat of being hit by a car or shot by some random mugger. It just doesnt scare me that much.
I think most lefties arent that scared of Muslims, radical or otherwise….Mostly because our entire political platform for the past 5 years hasnt been based on how scary muslims are and how much of a threat to western civilisation they represent. Its amazing what being connected to reality can do for you…
Well Murph, your research seems conclusive. All Muslims hate us and want us dead, so we better kill them all first.
Most Muslims hate us. The rest dislike us intensely, except for one sweetie that is married to my son. But she’s Kuwaiti and thinks most Muslim men are fuckwits.
I talk to Muslims all the time at work and as in laws. To them the West is the shits and at best they wish we would go away.
Do you understand? They see no advantages to the West at all. Even the ones who have been here for decades are barely integrated and extremely insular. And they’re the educated ones.
Islam is a death cult. Yes, not every Muslim is willing to go to Jihad, but they admire the ones who do.
There can be no rapprochement with the West and no mingling of the cultures. They need to be beat back to the desert for another 400 years or until they stumble onto a reformation…altho that will be difficult as the Book is the ‘direct’ word of God, not second hand info like the Bible is.
What you are starting to see is the reaction to Islam that Islam deserves. Remember, the man in the street is always ahead of the curve compared to the politicians. It’s not a hate of the ‘other’ that’s starting, it’s a hate of head-chopping, woman oppressing, caliphate loving, Sharia wanting barbarians. If the current politicians don’t catch up, you’ll get politicians appearing that you may not like.
All cultures are not equal…that way lies madness. Their religion and culture are barely tolarable, but only if they keep to their crappy parts of the planet.
Good call tommyg, I was way off on this one. The average annual death rate from natural causes in 2 random office buildings in New York was about 2500 anyway, so 9-11 wasn’t even a blip on the radar. Ditto for London subway, Bali nightclub, Beslan etc, etc, etc.
As for the left being connected to reality, when socialism works anywhere, give me a yell will ya?
Posted by Vanguard of the Commentariat on 2006 10 16 at 10:39 AM • permalinktommyg is making the exact same argument that Hamid Rizvi made:
Islam values the rights of every person and their right to express their opinion. Expressing their opinion is different, however, from openly denouncing or insulting the beliefs and religion of someone else.
And yet, freedom of speech means having the right to do exactly that, regardless of whether it’s a “good idea”.There is a simple solution to these “violent” retaliations. Let’s keep practising free speech, but eliminate the ignorant insulting of Muslim beliefs. The retaliations will stop.
In other words, not exercising the right of free speech.Is mocking a “good idea”? I don’t really care. A religion that demands that its women erase themselves from view deserves mocking. Even worse, a religion that demands its women accept their erasure and even defend it, deserves really rude mocking.
This offends you, tommyg? Perhaps you should take your smug, superior self to a website where your comfortable world view won’t be disturbed by people who see the world as it really is.
I think most lefties arent that scared of Muslims, radical or otherwise….Mostly because our entire political platform for the past 5 years hasnt been based on how scary muslims are and how much of a threat to western civilisation they represent
That would be because the post-modern Left’s political platform has been to stab it’s own civilisation in the back. After all, they’re not the first pack of mass-murdering shitbags the Left has hitched its wagon to in it’s never ending quest to strangle the goose that laid the golden egg.
Vanguard - The whole idea of terrorism is to create a higher level of fear and percieved threat than what actually exists. You have swallowed the terrorist bullshit hook line and sinker.
And socialist policies havent exactly pushed Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Australia, New Zealand, Israel, Brazil and others into the grave just yet…
Murph - The left is the opposite to the right - and the post-modern right has spent the last 50 years hyping the threat of a series of pretty much harmless boogeymen. So of course the right loves to portay the lest as in cohorts with the boogeymen.
Oh dear. We have a live one.
Let me guess? Gorbachev just woke up one morning and decided to relinquish power? Aggressive encirclement by Reagan had nothing to do with it? The spread of democracy since the fall of the Soviet Union is a mere coincidence?
Yes TommyG. Communism only killed 100 million people. I don’t know why we were so worried.
a series of pretty much harmless boogeymen
which boogeymen would they be? Communism? Not exactly harmless. What else?
Posted by daddy dave on 2006 10 16 at 11:25 AM • permalinktommyg, dig behind the rhetoric and you’ll find that among the “soft socialist” countries listed, many (not all) have backed off economically and morally unsustainable socialist policies and freed their citizens to excel. The ones that have not are in an unsustainable death spiral, economically and demographically.
With regards to terrorism, I guess I am wrong counting terror’s dead bodies as evidence of terrorism. It is all a bunch a hooey got up by Bush and Howard to get votes from rubes like me. How could’ve I been so stupid?
Of course the Left has never ackowleged dead bodies as evidence of anything, particularly its own policies. The only true equality of outcome (so lusted after by the “caring and sharing” set) is the equality of the grave. In that regard, Leftism has worked in spades. Well done!
Posted by Vanguard of the Commentariat on 2006 10 16 at 11:26 AM • permalinkMostly because our entire political platform for the past 5 years hasnt been based on how scary muslims are and how much of a threat to western civilisation they represent.
Instead, “your” entire political platform has been based on “Bush bad! Bush doofus! Bush madman! Bush dumb dumb!”. Congrats on a choice well-made, tommyg.
let’s look at just a little bit of the left’s track record, shall we?
stalin was great
mao was greater
ho chi minh was pretty good too
pol pot was one special cuddly guy
robert mugabe is liberating his people
thabo mbeki is doing wonders for the african economy
castro has improved cuban education & health no end
hugo chavez is a cool dude
ahmadinejad is doing wonders for world peace
the chechens have a right to kill ballet goers & schoolchildren because they are brutally oppressed
wossname from hamas is cleaning up gaza
wossname#2 from hezbollah is doing untold good for his people in south lebanon
despite the disporportionate response of the israelispretty cool, eh dudes
The real reason muslim women must wear the veil.
Good old Muhammed ~ Guidance from a guy who married an eight year old.
Posted by tree hugging sister on 2006 10 16 at 11:49 AM • permalinkAnd socialist policies havent exactly pushed Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Australia, New Zealand, Israel, Brazil and others into the grave just yet…
Of course, Sweden just elected a conservative government on the explicit promise to curtail the welfare state in meaningful ways before it keels over and goes away completely, Denmark saw a nationalist (“anti-foreigner” is probably accurate, too) party poll quite strongly in the last election, Norway’s social system is only affordable thanks to the country’s massive off-shore oil wealth and they haven’t had much Muslim immigration (funny how that has left the country much more peaceful than both Denmark and Sweden where the percentage of Muslims is three and four times as high), and Australia and Israel as prime examples of successful socialism are too laughable to even comment on. All that those last two are teaching us is that socialist policies might be affordable if they’re limited in scope and combined with both strong support for free markets and a muscular foreign policy, but that’s not quite the point you’re trying to make, is it?
I might give you Brazil, though with the way that South American countries fall over like clockwork once the people start thinking that it’s okay again to elect far-left nutcases instead of sorta-moderates like Lula, I won’t be shocked at all if Brazil is the 2010s version of 1990s Argentina. (And 2000s Venezuela, if Chavez keeps up his idiocy.) And New Zealand? Eh, Helen Clark might be pushing hard to turn it into the same kind of multi-culti lala-land that Britain seems to have become, but it’s hardly there yet, and NZ certainly doesn’t have a history of full-on socialism like the European countries you listed.
So that’s 1.5 points out of 7 if I’m being gracious. Yep, that socialism thing sure is working out great.
Don’t want to distract from the many valid points made by murph (and others) in their replies to TommyG, but if you look at the right-hand side of the photo above you can see a couple of the women have their faces uncovered. Sluts.
Posted by Mr Snuffalupagus on 2006 10 16 at 12:14 PM • permalinkThe funny thing is, I remember reading tommyg’s site because somebody (Instapundit?) had linked to something sensible and interesting he’d written…of course, that was back in either 2003 or 2004, and apparently Tom’s reaction to the mounting evidence that most Muslims really do despise the West has been to become a generic leftoid with his head firmly stuck in the desert sand. For shame.
Mostly because our entire political platform for the past 5 years hasnt been based on how scary muslims are and how much of a threat to western civilisation they represent.
No, the left’s platform for the last 30-odd years has been based on how scary white men are, and what a threat they represent to the entire freaking planet.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 10 16 at 12:18 PM • permalinktommyg, was the following a bad idea, guaranteed to piss off the moderates we desperately needed to connect with?
When Der Fuehrer says, “We ist der master race”
We HEIL! HEIL! Right in Der Fuehrer’s face
Not to love Der Fuehrer is a great disgrace
So we HEIL! HEIL! Right in Der Fuehrer’s face
When Herr Gobbels says, “We own der world und space”
We HEIL! HEIL! Right in Herr Goring’s face
When Herr Goring says they’ll never bomb this place
We HEIL! HEIL! Right in Herr Goring’s facePosted by Rob Crawford on 2006 10 16 at 12:22 PM • permalinkBritain’s race relations minister has said a young Muslim teaching assistant suspended for refusing to remove her veil in class should be sacked ...
Put her in the backfield and watch what happens when the pass protection breaks down….
Posted by Bashir Gemayel on 2006 10 16 at 12:26 PM • permalinkBTW, just today several German politicians of Turkish descent called on Muslim women to give up the headscarf in order to show their willingness for integration into German society. (Sorry, no link as it hasn’t made it into English-language news sources yet, AFAICT.) Gonna be an interesting week here if the reactions are the usual ones.
Channeling my inner Ferengi -
“And they shamelessly clothe their females, inviting others to unclothe them. The very depth of perversion.”
Posted by joe bagadonuts on 2006 10 16 at 01:14 PM • permalink“I think most lefties arent that scared of Muslims, radical or otherwise….”
Funny that, the first time I told a lefty acquaintance of mine what I thought of mo his first reaction was not outrage but to look around nervously fearing we might have been overheard. And we were boozing at a biergarten, which I assume is a purely kafir environment.
PW - “Tom’s reaction to the mounting evidence that most Muslims really do despise the West has been to become a generic leftoid with his head firmly stuck in the desert sand. For shame.”
Actually, my reaction to the mounting evidence that most Muslims really do despise the west has been to immerse myself in a Muslim country, read as much about the Muslim world as possible, get to know and understand as many Muslim people as I can, and try to best understand the people and the region.
If the outcome of that is that I think people who call Muslims towelheads and camel fuckers are fuckwits, then interpret that how you will. I guarantee you that I am far from a generic lefty.
PW - Peace. You live your life trembling with fear and fury, I’ll try to explore and understand the Middle East and understand what the fuck is going on here….
We’re both just as likely to get killed by Islamists, its just the threat of Islamist violence has become the focus of so much of your attention - you’ve been terrorised, would be one way of putting it.
Oh deary me, The right wing deathbeast government is installing fear into the sheepos of the right so it can whip up some flag waving to fight a NON existent Islamic terrorist threat and those Texan oil junkies can steal even more Islamic Oil.
unfortunately it is the american left that instill even more fear in the RWDBs as they see clearly what havoc their insane policies would wreak on the USA .
And yes the lunacies of the progressive leftists are indeed covert right wing conspiracies to instil fear into the voting population.
it is this fear of leftism that has resulted in record support for republicans.
may the MSM and their hordes of moonbat university supporters carry on their great work and many thanks to Michael Moore in particular!I guarantee you that I am far from a generic lefty.
No, I think what you really are is a wannabe who has romanticized Islamic culture and really wishes he belonged. You never will, you know. You can convert, become a “slave of God” if you wish, which is to give up every independent mode of thought, but you’ll never be able to rid yourself of that taint of kuffr in their eyes.
You live your life trembling with fear and fury ... you’ve been terrorised
Not particularly. Unlike you and your lefty friends, I’m not viewing the Islamist threat through the prism of my ego. I don’t need to feel personally threatened in order to consider them a threat to Western society. That’s really what it comes down to…your lot thinks everything’s fine as long as you’re individually secure (hence many leftoids’ infatuation with the public response to “do you feel more or less secure due to the Iraq War” polls and the like). We on the right side of the political spectrum are a bit more sophisticated and - comme il dit? - nuanced in our perception of the world.
All in all, I’m quite amused by your claims of understanding Muslims while you exhibit so little understanding of the non-liberal mindset.
..I’ll try to explore and understand the Middle East and understand what the fuck is going on here….
Do make sure you actually go there, and rub elbows with them, as opposed to simply going to the local library.
We’ll do our best to ignore the wailing should you find yourself being detained against your will….
Posted by Bashir Gemayel on 2006 10 16 at 04:35 PM • permalinkJust to cut off the obvious retort* (“What’s so nuanced about calling Muslims ‘towelheads’?”) - please don’t bore us with a misplaced focus on words when it’s Muslim actions that are at question here.
* “Obvious” because the one main thing that lefties and Muslims have in common is a near-fanatical dread of “insensitive” words, and you pretty much qualify for the double whammy. Well, at least lefties aren’t burning down embassies and shooting nuns over it.
No, I think what you really are is a wannabe who has romanticized Islamic culture ...
Which in turn does make him a generic lefty, his protestations notwithstanding. Almost every lefty (basically all except the out-and-out sociopaths) I’ve ever encountered romanticizes something, whether it’s the “equality” of communism, Gaia, living in third-world countries (the “noble savage” myth), religions different from the one they were brought up with, the power of pure reason, and perhaps a few other things.
I have a new theory about why the tall chick is so HOT. You see, the hair rays, which have been scientifically proven, are confined by her scarf, the energy builds up as they bounce around in there, and are released as Eyelash Rays, which drive men mad with lust.
#26 “Why is it that we women who wear the veil should be segregated?”
Dude, you choose to segregate yourself. Drop the burkha, drop the rockspider and get yourself into the 21st century.
Come join the human race.
/snark off
Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2006 10 16 at 05:47 PM • permalink#82 Tommyg muslims in Egypt moderate and modern?
Maybe in the airconditioned casbahs you hang out in.
Egyptian christians and copts I know would beg to differ on that one. There is a reason they left Egypt decades ago, and it isn’t the pyramids.
Starts with I.
Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2006 10 16 at 05:56 PM • permalink#150 Daddy
Boogey men like head hackers, splodey-dopes, plane-crashers, car-bombers, bus-bombers, train-bombers, child-hangers, woman-stoners. Then there are the filth that encourage this from the cradle to the (early) grave.
Yeah, harmless.
TommyG, are you telling us that 9/11, Bali, Bali, London, Madrid, Israel (let’s not forget splodeydope murderers in Israel), etc, etc, etc, didn’t happen, they are just government propaganda to scare us?
I’m not scared of terrorist/terrorism. I am scared of fools who cannot see that there is no compatibility with Muslims and western free democratic society.
Damn. I just lost everything I wrote. Damn.
Okay, abbreviated form: tommyg—I’m not living my life in fear of Islam or what any pissant atavist can come up with to do to me. I DO live in fear of what educated, collectivist pissants like you can do from within my own civilization. YOU are more of a long-term enemy of civilization and life on this earth than any ignorant, superstitious puppet who goes along with a belief system that demands everyone enslave himself, that no one thinks for himself, that everyone behave as though they are ants serving the needs of the whole. This is no surprise because collectivists will always run together against those who refuse to be a part of the collective. It is hatred for the Enlightenment, and the individual, that you share. It is no surprise that you have sought out what you hope to be the collective of the future for study; your own Marxist version has failed so spectacularly.
This is Orwellian.
Submission is liberation
Posted by Wimpy Canadian on 2006 10 16 at 06:58 PM • permalink#168 PW Mugged by reality
This is the defining phrase for me and many other neo (as in new) conservatives. The leftoids simply haven’t faced up to reality yet.
Posted by Wimpy Canadian on 2006 10 16 at 07:15 PM • permalinkYeah, good old reality, the play where Iraq is a much better place to live now than it was 5 years ago, where taking a principled stand against tyranny means cuddling up to creeps like King Abdullah and Islam Karimov and dictators like Musharraf, where basically all scientists, academic experts and journalists are hopelessly biased (unless they support your political position), where pretty much every country in the world hates the west and everything we stand for, including the west itself (except for countries that supported the Iraq war, possibly not including Spain), where 50% of America are America hating terrorist enablers and supporters…...
Sounds like such a normal, fun place to be, and not at all a product of collective delusion.
Saltydog, if you have any evidence at all that I am a collectivist, a hater of individualism and the enlightenment, or anything else in your rant for that matter, please share.
You sound like you are delivering the voiceover to the two minutes hate. I am a threat to life on this earth? Get a fucking grip.
I was going to deliver a real lambasting to tommyg but then I remembered what it is he (and other finger-pointing, lecturing fuckwits like him) reminded me of was the typical middle-class, middle-aged matron of the Fifties who refused to believe in all those dreadful stories about lynchings and riots and police brutality in the South because the US was a “Christian country” where such things couldn’t happen.
I will say this, though: trying to turn “the US had it coming” into “such an attack [was] predictable” is typical lefty-liberal hawk-into-handsaw language mutilation. And I daresay that I know a bit more about “different” people than tommyg does, but don’t let’s wake him up from his fantasy that I’m from some small, bigotted town in the Ozarks where everyone who doesn’t have six fingers is looked upon with suspicion as a “furriner.”
Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 10 16 at 08:34 PM • permalinkAndrea, don’t project your own weird insecurities onto me - I never made any assumption about you, in fact I did the exact opposite.
I wasnt turning “the US had it coming” into “an attack was predictable”, and I wasnt standing up for the idiots who think the US deserved such an attack. I was just clarifying my own position, and making it clear what I think - something few people here seem willing to do without the use of weasel words and relativism.
Just because someone is behaving terribly doesnt excuse you own less terrible response. To say anything else - that bad is subjective, depending on the situation, is to behave like a character in one of Derridas wet dreams…
Tommye, you are the one who is enamoured of how many: how many Muslims there are, how many are terrorists, how many are “moderate”, how many are against the war, etc. The ideas seem not to enter into your equations. You are the one who chose to clutch the enemy to your breast, just to get to know them, of course. You are the one who stands up for them and parrots all the “right” talking points. You are also the one who keeps putting words into the mouths of those who post here. Rare few among us would ever use such a term as camel goblin, or whatever the hell that term is. And I’m the one with the hate, huh?
Let me tell you something: If I had my way, we would have put an end to all the killing on Sept. 12th. We would have nuked Tehran, Damascus, and maybe Riyadh, and told the rest of the vast Muslim family that they could expect more of it the next time they thought they could get away with killing Americans, kidnapping Americans, or otherwise doing evil to Americans or American interests. I have a feeling that those silent moderates would have taken care of the rest of the radicals among them and the killing would have ended right then and there. As such, very few would have died, and certainly no more American lives would have been lost. This isn’t what I thought in the beginning, but what the enemy has taught me about dealing with them. You take your lessons, and I’ll take mine.
Innocent civilians? What innocents civilians? Why haven’t they stood up and declared their innocence, along with their outrage that the innocents among us died at their desks while minding their own business and and going about earning a living. You throw everything the west ever did back as some kind of justification for 9-11, and the 30 years of outrage against innocent people that went before that day. You have a very limited, and biased, view of history. I could name the things that we did wrong that led to that day as well, but I doubt that any of it would jive with yours. Truman did wrong when he allowed the Soviet Union to bully us in Berlin and didn’t retaliate militarily. Truman did wrong when he went to the UN, setting a deadly precedent, and stayed the hand of the military in fighting the war against the aggressor. Eisenhower only added to the problem, especially in the Middle East when he failed to back Israel, allowed several countries to nationalize Western business holdings there, allowed Egypt to seize the Suez Canal, etc. I can keep going if you like: We surrendered in Viet Nam, we surrendered to Iran instead of squashing them when they wouldn’t return our people. We ran when they murdered our Marines in Lebanon. We brought back Arafat from the brink of the oblivion he earned. We ran from Somalia. We have done nothing but let these little pissants run over us because we couldn’t be bothered to stand up and demand respect for what was ours. If you want to say that we’ve earned the mess we are in, I’ll agree with you, but never with your reasons.
Do I think that Western Civilization, for all its warts and mistakes, is better than some 7th Century superstition that demands we all bow and scrape and act like Orwell’s unthinking, emotion ridden puppets? I certainly do. There is much that is wrong, but nothing like the slavery and murder you are standing up for—and I mean actual slavery, too, which a resurgent Islam has reinstituted everywhere it has gone. If this be the hate of the enemy you were accusing me of, then make the best of it, because you are correct. I loathe anti-life death-worship in any form it takes, including Islam. That you could stand up for it and call it reason is beyond reason. It is Islam that is doing the murdering on a mass scale, whether it be the kafir or other Muslims. They revel in it, or they sit quietly while it goes on in their name. There is no excuse for any of this. There is no reasoning with any of it. They have chosen the gun and we ought to teach them the consequences of their choice. They ought to learn the real face of war so that they may learn to hate it and rid themselves of anyone who speaks for jihad. War is hell, and it ought to be hell for anyone who sits on their hands and backs it by their silence, or gives money to “charity” that pays for an IED or suicide belt, or dances in the street and hands out candy to children when others die, as much as for those who set the bombs. It also ought to be hell for those who aid and abet, or otherwise attempt to excuse such behavior.
You probably think you are a humanitarian because you are against all of this. Well I say that you have blood on your hands and that your so-called humanitarianism has caused more deaths than any nuke could manage. I can’t tell you how much I resent being made to feel this way, but it isn’t Bush I resent, it is the peaceniks and lovers of humanity who make excuses for the mounds of corpses that I resent.
Get a grip, my ass.
Saltydog:
The term “Sand Goblin” was used by Murph, one of the longest running and most active commenters on this site. I could collect all the other bigoted slurs uttered on this thread and protested by nobody, including yourself, but it wouldnt be of much value - we both know the language that has become mainstream among your fellow travellers.
Re the nuking of Tehran, Damascus, Riyadh: what you are talking about would be mass civilian murder unparalleled since Pol Pot, maybe Hitler - I am guessing easily 3 million civilians dead. You are insane.
Regarding innocent Muslims “standing up” against the violence, I completely agree that this should happen, although I don’t think they should be bombed and killed for not doing so.
You and the average violent Islamic radical would see eye to eye on a lot of things. You both fail to distinguish between civilians and the active combatants. You both feel nothing but disgust for liberalism. You both have a one-issue focus on how to fix the problems of the world, and the focus involves on both side a massive violent religious based confrontation.
Most importsntly you will both be looked at as historical curiosities - crazed extremists who lost sight of common civilised principles.
Andrea, don’t project your own weird insecurities onto me - I never made any assumption about you, in fact I oh blah blah blah fucking blah
God. Shut up you nattering, twittering bore. I’m beginning to feel sorry for the Muslims you encounter, you must put them into a coma. (And we’ll just consider your “on the contrary I’ve met many friends who are real nice to me” paean to yourself as already having been typed, so you won’t have to wear down your little fingers to nubbins with typing it.)
Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 10 16 at 10:14 PM • permalinkPeople, please stop trying to make tommyg “see it our way.” It is impossible for someone of his Godlike intellect to shrink his big, compassionate, multicultural brain so that he can see things from our primitive, myopic world view. Or in realitese, he’s a stuck-up jerk who would lecture his mother at her father’s funeral.
Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 10 16 at 10:18 PM • permalinkDid Habib really say something intemperate? You gotta link?
Thank goodness Tommy G is here to raise the standards.
Mmmh, I love the air you get up here on the high moral ground.
Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 10 16 at 10:29 PM • permalinkI can just imagine Tommyg with his Muslim friends, sitting in a café, sounding off at America, nodding in agreement with all their complaints about the West immersed in self flagellation at the success of the West, at the supposed expense of the developing world.
Try something different Tommy, try putting a pin in their bubble of victim-hood. Imply that the extremely high birth rate in Muslim countries and the ensuing problems that accompany it are not caused by George Bush or the West. Ask them why they harp on the Palestinian problem but apparently do not even raise an eye brow for the plight of the black Muslims in Dafur, the Asian Muslims in Aceh, the Berber Muslims of Spanish Sahara (dispossessed for over 30 years) the Kurds, or the Christians and animist of Indonesia, West Papua (slow genocide over 30 years), Sudan and Nigeria. Might it be something to do with them not being Arab Muslims? What racism by Muslims. Challenge them on female circumcision, domestic violence and as you are in Egypt ask if the level of incest is still what it was (this really takes them out of their comfort zone) and do they still perform the operation to return the girl’s hymen to what it was before she was sexually assaulted by her father or brother, at record levels, all nicely covered up by religious bigotry. Ask them about their own involvement in slavery over the centuries.
Ask them why they need to perform acts of terrorism to form a Caliphate when all they need to do is form an economic Caliphate like the European Union and with the standard of education, knowledge of English and the young and vibrant population levels in the Middle East etc why aren’t we seeing everything made in China or all our calls diverted to the Middle East call centres.
They love people like Tommy, stroking their victim-hood egos, agreeing with everything they say, but they despise head nodders like Tommy behind his back. Try disagreeing with them Tommy and see how peaceful and tolerant they remain. I dare you! Even if you do not agree with what I have mentioned above I dare you to perform the experiment. Try implying in only a small degree that some of their problems are self inflicted by ingrained tribalism and their refusal to see the emancipation of women as one of the key ingredients in the success of the West and the cause of their failure. Criticise them the way you would a white Westerner. If you are afraid to do it don’t worry it’s because you do not really have a wonderful fuzzy relation with them (and you know it), the respect and mutual understanding is all one way (there’s) or you really do feel you are superior and suffer from the veiled racism of low expectations.
No, no no no no, the girls in the Reuters Islamic picture above, are really girls wanting to find husbands on the Islamic for a mate or love site.
“The Devil wears a Burqa coming to a theatre near you…..”
First screening 11th November.p.s. Islamic Britain has teachers who wear this outfit to school to teach the young kiddies tolerance, I guess.
oh this muslim love site…
http://www.nikahsearch.com/Muslim_Nikah/successstories2004.asp
I’m sure the Burqa chicks above are on this one,to find a brother mate
Wow! Three million people. Aside from making huge assumptions about the size and number of nukes to be used, you seem to use the Lancet methodology for counting casualties. I never said to level those places, which wouldn’t be necessary. You are so wedded to the so-called Just War Theory, “how to wage a sensitive war”, right along with the Bush advisers. You didn’t tell us you are pro-Bush.
And you wondered where I got the idea that you are a collectivist? Just lumping everyone who comments on this blog, even though we are capable of stringent disagreement, shows—once again—your fundamentally collectivist thinking. You seem to see none of us as individuals.
You ignored everything else. You seem to ignore most of what people say that would require you to go beyond making ad hominem remarks in place of reasoned argument. I gave my reasons for why I advocate a certain course of action. You merely stated that you think I am insane and say that I’m just like the enemy. Ignorant, thoughtless sot, you. You give no indication of what course of action you advocate. Is this because you, like all of your fellow-travelers, don’t have a clue? What the hell do you think war is? What is the purpose? I’ll just bet that you can’t think of any purpose to war.
Don’t bother answering. You don’t answer whenever you do bother to type something in. You’ve already repeated yourself ad nauseum.
Ta.
Nice posts, saltydog! And they are not wasted—people other than tommyg will read them, and ponder your words.
And, with a little luck, those people will ponder tommyg’s words and laugh.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 10 17 at 12:42 AM • permalinkIt is tempting to think that nuking Tehran, Damascus and Riyadh would improve security in the West…
...this is what would have happened, were the means available, in just about any conflict in history. It is only recently that “proportionate response” in war has become a guiding principle. In a sense it is entirely artificial. Makes you wonder, though, after you’ve done the 1st tier axis of evil members, and another atrocity occurs, do you go for Ankara, or Jakarta, or ....?
Reminds me of a political cartoon I once saw;
two CIA types are having a conversation:CIA guy #1: “Gee, those North Koreans are getting really paranoid these days”
CIA guy #2: “Yeah, I know what you mean, we’d better nuke ‘em just in case”
Posted by closeapproximation on 2006 10 17 at 01:32 AM • permalinkSaltydog, I think lumping together all the civilians of three major population centers as “the enemy” and nuking them all is about as collectivist as you can get.
Jacky, I argue with my Arab friends here like no tomorrow. Theres nothing Egyptians love more than to argue, hard, about anything and everything. Surprisingly, they do not react in the crazy way you predicted! Could it be that not all Egyptians and Arabs think the same?
PS:
It’s nice to see you’re continuing to think that your singular personal experiences trump the perception created by literally thousands of events and incidents elsewhere. Good on you for simply ignoring my earlier point about how your viewing everything in the world through your ego distorts your point of view…not that I’m surprised, given that you’ve studiously ignored the 90+% of points people have made for which you didn’t have any easy refutation and/or couldn’t imply that we’re all dumb war-mongering hicks.
I suspect that’s how your arguments with the Egyptians go, too…just ignore everything they say that might otherwise upset your carefully-nurtured worldview of Islam as a fine, upstanding religion.
You suspect wrong, PW, but it doesnt really matter.
Your point re ego was an interesting one, and I don’t really know how to reply. Perhaps you are right? I am analysing the threat that extremists pose to me, and extrapolating from that a lot of assumptions about the threat posed to people like me…
And I completely disagree that Islamic radicals pose a “threat to western civilisation” as you say. This is just hyperventilation - Western civilisation has dealt with bigger, scarier threats in the past, and we will not be destroyed by this one.
I think even considering that these assholes pose a threat to our entire civilisation is an act of some sort of submission to the terrorist threat.
You asked if I agreed with these points:
Gorbachev just woke up one morning and decided to relinquish power? - no
Aggressive encirclement by Reagan had nothing to do with it? - no
The spread of democracy since the fall of the Soviet Union is a mere coincidence? - no
Of course the Soviet Union was a menace, primarily to its own people. The threat the Soviets posed to the US and the West was real, but unlikely to materialise. Thats the whole point of the mutually assured destruction thing, and the reason we didnt see confrontation between the powers for 50 years.
All the available evidence seems to point to the Soviet Union in the 1980’s being a sick and decaying empire, losing not gaining military strength. Of course Regan and Thatcher worked tirelessly to push it over. But it was dying from the inside, as any fundamentally broken and corrupt system will do.
Egyptians are also careful to tell you they aren’t Arabs. Oh wow, I knew something about a foreign nation! Do you think that will make a crack in tommyg’s smug assessment of me and everyone else here? No, he’ll just go on like the little train that could.
Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 10 17 at 05:50 AM • permalink#206:
That’s because you’re obviously quite careful not to push any of their buttons. Duh. You really are a deluded fool.
Precisely PW.
And Tommyg has slotted into every second or third comment space for around 200 comments over the last 24 hours to tell us that we should do exactly the same as he does. That is, when in doubt… appease!
Not only that, he has managed to keep his bait on the hook right the way through, dodging all the hard arguments by letting his line run freely when the arguments bite hard, then reeling in fast whenever there’s a chance to demonstrate the line strength of his astonishingly lightly rigged moral tackle.
North Queensland’s big-game fishermen should be humbled. Tommyg, master of obfuscation, is a total whitewater-foamin’ supertroll.
Splice, this started off being about the bigoted language and attitudes become a part of the mainstream right wing - and in typical relativist fashion, everyone responding to my comments accused me of sympathy for Islamists or hatred of the west - or brought up the far worse behaviour of the Islamists themselves.
The fact is, very few were willing to confront the fact that the mainstream right is fast becoming comfortable with throwing around derogatory religious and ethnic epithets.
I didnt go jumping after every single random sidetrack because it wasnt my point, it would have taken another 500 comments to argue each one, and it would legitimise a relativist attitude - that you can do something stupid as long as it is in retaliation or opposition to something more stupid.
You know what, I am through with you. Goodbye, boreyg.
Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 10 17 at 09:17 AM • permalinkPeople, I see it all now. WE are the relativists. We be bad because a few among us—which means that we are all guilty in the group-think mind of tommyg—use language that the PC left doesn’t care for. We are all slotted as religious nuts (though I’m an atheist, he assumed I am one of them righty-religious nut types), and is concerned over the school-yard epitaphs of some. He is a perfect product, folks: an unthinking, “educated”, thoroughly indoctrinated PC language code wielding (i.e., believes in thought-control) Progressive. He has lost all cognizance of the meaning of words; you can tell this by his misuse of the word “liberalism”. I happen to be a classic Liberal, one who believes in the liberty of every individual, but not in the “right” of one group to claim “rights” that depend on others to serve them up, such as a “right” to food, or a “right” to housing, or a “right” to health care. Understanding this, I know that anyone who initiates aggression against another forfeits their claim to be treated as a civilized person. That is not moral relativism, but its opposite—moral judgment, something Mr. tommyg only practices when it is safe and within the confines of the dicta of his betters.
His whole point in this thread was to chastise us over language, and to hell with what is happening in the world. We are foolish to be concerned over terrorists. They have no power, except of course, that which tommyg and his fellow-travelers give them, which is considerable indeed. He has a point here. It isn’t the ignorant barbarians with their puny suicide belts and vicious hatred of life on earth that is our greatest danger. Such people may manage to kill hundreds, perhaps even thousands. But the ideas of people like tommyg, particularly when they demand the kind of mind control he espouses, kill millions.
(There’s your Two Minutes and be damned.)
tommyg - “And I completely disagree that Islamic radicals pose a “threat to western civilisation” as you say”
Islamic radicals cannot destroy the West militarily but Muslims have already altered our schools, laws, economy, social contracts and cohesiveness beyond recognition. There is a determined Islamic onslaught against our culture - wouldnt you agree that it constitutes ‘destruction’? Yet you choose to comment about rightwingers catching up to the left in insults and name calling?
Peaceful resolution of the problems caused by Muslims may not now be possible. They have infiltrated our political system and use our laws against us - but hey, rightwing language is so, so important isnt it ..
TommyG have you ever in your actually looked at left wing sites. The racism and insults make this site look like a website for the Wiggles especially if the person concerned isn’t white and has an opinion which disagrees with the ethnic group he belongs to. Mind you they are pretty good at racism and insults at whitey too. The left has got nothing to stand on a hill and shout about. Bigotry in right only! I wish I had a cent for every time a black conservative was called the “n” word, I’d be as rich as Bill Gates. When I hear people like you I know why I left the left (or in my opinion it left me). Freedom of speech is just words to the left. You only like it when it agrees with you.
I reckon tommyg, when advised “inaction or complacency in the face of this threat could be fatal”, would ask “How fatal?”.
Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 10 18 at 03:59 AM • permalink#38, #41:
“mini Darth Vaders”
Well looky here…mini DV’s!
Posted by carpefraise on 2006 10 18 at 04:34 AM • permalink#89 Murph
What I’d really like to know is this: where exactly does the mythical beast known as the Moderate Muslim Majority reside? I hear about them all the time - albeit mainly from leftoids who have a pathological aversion to the truth.
And ever noticed that the Leftoids who say this stuff tend to live in Pymble?
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
Is it acceptable to say “Nice pair” to a woman in a burqa?