Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

Comment #252148 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 2:40 pm

Actually, Nairb, what I have said is that Shariah-advocating maniacs like Abu Hamza should loose their citizenship and then be deported so, technically, no I'm not talking about deporting citizens.

I love how you think that the important bit is that they're "citizens" and not that their raging Wahabi nutcases.

302. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252130 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 2:31 pm

Nairb your screaming dishonesty comes through in the weasel words you use:

Fanusi asks for support to deport citizens

Actually, what I call for is the deporting of goons like Abu Hamza. Funny you don't mention little details like that, now, isn't it?

And let's hear an example of these awful, nasty 'sweeping statements' I make. Even better, how about you bringing some evidence when I ask for it? I've been bugging you about that for some time and you just ignore and wander off...

303. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252119 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 2:23 pm

AtheistJon, here I'd advise calming down. hawt4dawk is a very decent and honest person.

Why are there so few people on this site that can discuss without calling each other twerps and idiots?

Fanusi, so you do make the distinction that I mentioned then?

Okay, sorry JAM. Yes, of course I make that distinction, it's central to most of what I propose, not that you'd know that from Steve's comments.

Sorry, but I've had that piece of idiocy thrown at my head so often...

EDIT: Nairb, the source for the Norweigan data is the Dagbladet newspaper. Now I have given more sources for my data than you ever do for yours.

304. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252098 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 2:01 pm

Ian do you really think your long line of ad hominems mean anything? And if you don't want a thread derailed, don't want nuttin', don't start nuttin'.

IRanian nuclear ambitions aren't "blah, blah, blah". It's a very serious matter and I think it's central to this election. You don't just get to deny it and wander away.

If there's anyone being sycophantic its you and yours kissing up to Steve.

305. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252092 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 1:57 pm

Fanusi fails to make the distinction between Islam, which is pure, undistilled evil and between Muslim people who are on the verge of becoming a race more persecuted and oppressed than has ever existed.

Oh wonderful. Another twerp making this mistake. How about actually reading what I write? Or trying to prove this point?

Nairb I'm growing tired of your damn hairsplitting. This is creationist arguments - anything that goes against your p.o.v. you get very, very critical. Anything for it, and you get completely accepting. You were talking about your personal experiences earlier. Isn't that just your anecdotal evidence? And you still haven't given me the evidence I've asked for.

Oh, and there was some statistical evidence that I posted, specifically about gang-rape, which, surprise surprise, you skated over.

306. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252086 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 1:53 pm

Richard has more than once vented his frustration at thread derailing, and we owe it to him in the first place.

Really? Where? *interested* I'd have thought these tussels would be beneath him.

If I addressed you specifically, it's because you clearly have a special commitment and interest to the Islamic-threat topic, and on this site there is no lack of space devoted to that.
Also, this thread derailed when you brought it up, if I am not mistaken.

Well, stopping the Jihad is the beginning and end of my politics these days. I brought up the subject of Iranian nukes, and I was promptly buried under a series of long-winded whines, amongst which was the question of how an atheist could possibly not be a liberal???????

It's irritating. As long as this lot keep trying to throw this bumf at me, I'll throw back. And throw down.

307. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252076 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 1:45 pm

decius that's a bit too pedantic for even me. The thread seemed to be about which choice was better in the upcoming elections, and I gave my opinion.

Again, if you'll ask certain members from the other side of the fence to quit derailing topics, I'll be happy to sign onto that.

308. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252075 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 1:43 pm

Sciros,

Fanusi, regarding Iran and McCain/Palin and all that -- if I were you I would be just as concerned about McCain/Palin's stance on conflicts involving Russia. They are FAR too eager. And Russia is NOT your friend when it comes to Israel's welfare

*groans* Please don't remind me. I heard about this particular lunacy while this thread was progressing. However, I didn't first hear it from someone on this thread, but elsewhere.

You know, I have said that I consider most elections to be "the choice of a man on a raft, of whether to drink seawater or his own urine". Apparently that makes me an uncritical Palin worshipper.

309. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252068 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 1:39 pm

Nairb,

Antisemitic attacks in France - see the New York Times (hardly a mouthpiece of the VRWC) article and do a little research for yourself.

Gays attacked in Amsterdam and elsewhere - read Bruce Bawer.

Women raped - in Norway, 65% of rapes are committed by "non-Western immigrants" a category almost wholly Muslim, in France muslim youths call it the tournante, in Denmark it's three-quarters etc. etc.

Now some of us have read the Qur'an and think that this might have a little something to do with the fact that Islam holds it as not a problem, even meritorious, for Muslims to rape infidel women.

Now are you going to give me the evidence that I've been asking for for some time? I doubt it.

310. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252062 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 1:34 pm

decius, with respect, this thread was about McCain/Palin vs. Obama. I said that I was slightly for the former, for one reason: Iranian nukes.

Then the usual suspects crawled out from under their rocks to call me an Evil Fascist Iago Lady MacBeth hell-bent on turning Richard Dawkins's good name into a tool for my fascist ends. Sorry, I'm not sitting still for that.

I'll be very happy to keept things on topic if you can convice Steve & his likes to quit their continual ad hominem bullshit whenever I post about anything. Deal?

311. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252056 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 1:26 pm

Sciros, thanks again. :-)

Incidentally, there is a hair-raising book by Andrew Bostom called "The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism" if you're interested.

Nairb read the fricken' article and do some research yourself, just for once. I love how you think that I'm about to plunge us all into fascist darkness, but the Muslims burning synagogues are completely harmless. Come on, I still want that list of how many burnt synagogues are 'acceptable'.

312. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252045 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 1:14 pm

Do you realise that there are millions of muslims living next to almost a million of jews in Paris.

The statistic I hear most is five million Muslims and six hundred thousand jews.

But what I'd like to underline is your query whether the burned synagogues are "statistically significant". Oh, wow. How silly of me. A few burned synagogues here, a few murdered kosher butchers there - nothing really to get worried about, is it?

Hey, Nairb, in thy infinite wisdow, could you draw up a list saying how many murdered Jews per annum is acceptable? What about the number of gang-rapes? And let's not forget the Sikhs and Hindus - how many of them a year is 'acceptable' to you?

It would appear that the stereotype about the French is correct.

313. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252039 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 1:08 pm

BS, try straining your brain and working it out.

----------

the dominance of right-wing fanaticism on many threads here

I love this. For my part, I'm concerned about guys in Brussels chanting "HAMAS, HAMAS! Send the Jews/To the Gas!" But Steve and his fanboys like Peace know that that's only a distraction, a minor blip. No the real struggle against fascism, the real fight is here on the richarddawkins.net chatboard, and the only thing that stands between civilization as we know it and my hordes of followers with their jackboot-keyboards is Steve's boyz - the Thin Blue Line. Rest asured, as gays are killed in Amsterdamn and women are raped in Norway and Jews are burned in France, nothing, nothing will cause them to glance away from the seething threat of Fanusi's fascists!

Incidentally, if anyone here wants to join my vsat legion of followers, we have an meeting every other month in a telephone booth.

314. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252029 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 12:58 pm

BS only someone as utterly intellectualy nul as yourself could misread that to mean sexual selection. I was referring to human sexuality, as is screamingly obvious, and that is a one-line aside in a discussion where I was voicing my dislike of what you might call the sexualization of youth. I also pointed out that this was probably due to my straightlaced African upbringing.

--------------

Sciros, here's some stuff on the burning synagogues of France:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A03E5DE123AF931A35757C0A9649C8B63

315. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252016 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 12:43 pm

Nairb how about providing some actual evidence that what I say isn't so?

On Richard Dawkins website, of all places, Fanusi state that children under the age of twelve should not be taught sexual selection

BS is quite simply lying through her teeth here.

316. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252013 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 12:42 pm

hawt4dawk, for the record, while you've disagreed with me, I've never thought you were "anti-Fanusi" as the phrase is.

317. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252005 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 12:36 pm

Styrer, AtheistJon, thanks. I appreciate it.

Don't forget we are all on the same side. I am also concerned about the Islamic threat, but I think we do have the laws to confront it, and the real battle is to get the government and our police forces to take action over "preachers of hate", and people calling for murder in the name of their religion. I also believe the media and the arts should be less condescending and to grow a backbone when confronted by Islamic censorship, otherwise we shall die a death of a thousand cuts.

Jesus, Vaal, you know you're pushing at an open door with me there.

However, Steve thinks this too and that we should use existing laws to address fanaticism, and he has said so often

He has also screamingly failed to address the limitations of his approach. Now, I maintain that incitement to murder and treason laws are actually on the books - but Steve is on record, and, yes, I can find you the quote, that if it's private groups saying things like gays should be crucified, there's no grounds for action. He also seems unwilling to confront what continued Islamic immigration means for the West.

On the other hand, I've long discussed such matters as trying to end slavery, offering asylum to persecuted religious minorities from the dar al-Islam, helping non-arab Muslims undertand the root of their plight and so forth, yet Steve's pretty quiet about that kind of thing, since it doesn't fit into his image of me as a slavering fascist.

---------

EDIT: What - Steve, you're all of a suddent complaining about accusations of bigotry? Not so fun to be on the receiving end, is it?

318. When Atheists Attack

Comment #252001 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 12:27 pm

hawt4dawk, he was attending an anti-Islam event, and was almost murdered by a couple of jihadis. No, no car-bomb - just old fashioned methods.

PM for you, btw.

I don't think posting general "anti-Fanusi" comments makes sense

Oh, but Sciros, it makes perfect sense. You see, when I post about synagogues burned in France, or gays murdered in Amsterdamn, Steve can hardly address that, now can he? That would require a little intellectual honesty, and also some integrity. And that might leave him in a place where he might need some moral courage, and some effort.

On the other hand he can primp and pose as the Grand Defender Of Richard Dawkins's Website From Fascism, and be able to stroke that lovely little pampered ego of his - and all for no risk! No risk at all, and he get's to be the brave little defender against fascism! What a bargain!

Of course, the absurdness of it must be known to him - as though Richard Dawkins or anything associated with him would need Steve's defence. So to drown out that little voice of honesty, Steve must raise his voice every shriller, ever shriller.

Now, onto a more serious note - your note, Sciros - believe me, I'd be more than happy is someone proved me wrong about Islam. Yet I haven't seen anyone provide that proof. So what I do is try to present the evidence, present the data and hope that enough honest human beings understand what Islam really is.

319. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251970 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 11:51 am

I'm out of here until you cease, or are shut up.

Oh, please scurry away, Steve. Best news I've had in a while.

Titania, no joke, this isn't the kind of thing I joke about. I wouldn't think to lie about something like this.

320. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251964 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 11:46 am

Sciros,

Any decisive and far-reaching policy intended to curb the spread of Islam will almost HAVE to be preceded by attempts at awareness in order to make the policy acceptable to any portion of the populace.

Couldn't agree more. THat is why one of the things I advocate, something that Steve is mysteriously silent about because it gives him no opportunity to whine and whinge, is a program of cultural imperialism to spread the truth about Islam.

321. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251959 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 11:43 am

Okay, enough is enough. I've just heard that my father was almost murdered by Jihadis this weekend, right in the middle of his own country.

Now which of you is willing to tell me this simpering nonsense that there's no problem? Apart from Steve of course.

It is contrary to human rights you ethical moron

I fail to see why. But wait a second - you're invoking absolute standards, something you have said is just made up, and isn't real.

And what human rights do you think will exist if this immigration continues and we have 10% Muslim populations? 15%? 20%? 30%?

As I said, Steve, will only come to his senses when Elton John get's beheaded in Trafalga square. Until then he'll wallow in the narcissitic cult of feeling morally good by the standards of a morality that demands nothing - does not demand a stand be taken, or that a fight be fought, demands nothing other than a willingness to lie down to anything, and swallow everything, except those who aren't willing to do the same.

322. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251952 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 11:28 am

particular angle of addressing the threat.

What does that mean, exactly? And when we've once again gotten to the point where jews are afraid to show their faith in Europe, havent things already gotten pretty damn extreme?

making them impractical and useless

I'll kick the ball into your court. How would you deal with this problem? What's your grand solution?

One of the reasons my tone is so heated is that I get a long high-handed whine from, say, Steve about my proposals, combined with either no suggestions, or ones that are demonstrably useless (Steve, for example, won't even consider stopping Muslim immigration).

So, what's your response?

323. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251927 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 10:49 am

Ian & Lev, my simple and dogmatic point is that Islam is a threat, a civilizaitonal threat, and the reason for this is that Islam will always demand that the Muslim attitude owards the kafirs be one of hatred.

Now, are you saying I'm wrong about Islam? That it's central doctrines aren't what I say they are? Or that it isn't the threat I say it is? If so, how about actually doing the research and coming up with an argument based on facts and logic, instead of supercillious drivel?

You see, right now we have Shariah courts in Britain, synagogues being burned in Fance, and Jews being warned not to advertise their religion in Berlin - now do you two really think that there's not a problem here?

324. Turkey bans biologist Richard Dawkins' website

Comment #251867 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 8:41 am

For crying out loud, what have I said that is particularly "inflammatory", gamerunknown?

325. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251798 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 6:12 am

Finally found a good quote that summarizes my feelings about this lot:

I don't want either of these men in charge of the federal government, neither the crazy old fool nor the simpering sophomore. I don't want either the moralistic imperialism of John McCain or the welfare-state-to-the world sentimentalism of Barack Obama. I don't want my country represented by either a Compassionate Crusader or by Oprah Winfrey in drag. (Possibly in person, too, if the rumors we're hearing about Obama's plans for Ms. Winfrey are true.)

326. Jewish 'ultras' defend morals with menace

Comment #251779 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 4:56 am

Bloody savages. I believe that Hitchens wrote a good collumn entitled "Bah, Hannukah", about the conflict between the orthodox jews and the apikuros.

---------

titania, har har.

I find it interesting how many are shocked, shocked in this clear thinking oasis that I might possibly have views that DIFFER from THEIRS! I mean, once people start to make up their own minds, what's next?

327. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251744 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 2:58 am

I have to agree with decius. Nothing that Sam's said is incorrect, as far as I can see, with the exception of things like this:

Who among conservatives would have resisted the temptation to speak of "the dysfunction in the black community"?

I believe it was Hillary Clinton who most pandered to anti-black prejudices in the hispanic community, not John McCain, but whatever.

But in broad strokes, decius is right. Sam didn't say anything specifically wrong; he just did the mirror image of what I did here with Obama: focusing on one candidate's weaknesses while ignoring those of his/her opponent. I just felt the need to balance the books a little, especially since I think Obama's weaknesses are considerably more dangerous (and yes, I am once more returning to the subject of Iranian nukes.)

328. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251734 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 22, 2008 at 2:12 am

ddedig, thank'ee for being one of the few to bring some data to the table. That's an interesting article.

329. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251493 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 2:16 pm

alan when you & Steve & Lucas & the rest actually are capable of bringing facts, reason and logic to the table, do let me know, would you?

330. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251489 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 2:11 pm

Oh, good grief.. Sorry, Titania, but just doing a comparison of the two manifestoes, on the single most important issue of the day I saw this:

The gravest threat we face â€" nuclear terrorism â€" demands a comprehensive strategy for reducing the world's nuclear stockpiles and preventing proliferation

from the Republicans versus this from the Dems:

America will seek a world with no nuclear weapons and take concrete actions to move in this direction

Thus confirming my view that the Dems just aren't credible when it comes to this kind of thing.

I also find it interesting that the Republicans place war and defence right up at the start of their manifesto, while the Dems only discuss it half-way through. I think that says alot.

Again, I'm sure there's alot of bumf in the Republican manifesto, but I wsa homing in on the bits that I consider important.

331. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251477 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 1:52 pm

Titania, I'm just starting to read the Democratic platform, and I'm sorry to say that it's sending me even further to the right than I usually am (don't worry, the Republican one will probably send me back...)

It's the explicity fatuousness of stuff like this:

We believe that every American, whatever their background or station in life, should have the chance to get a good education, to work at a good job with good wages, to raise and provide for a family, to live in safe surroundings, and to retire with dignity and security. We believe that quality and affordable health care is a basic right. We believe that each succeeding generation should have the opportunity, through hard work, service and sacrifice, to enjoy a brighter future than the last.

For chrissakes, you could run anyone on that platform, from Reagan to Roosevelt. Nor does this get any better:

We come together at a defining moment in the history of our nation �quot; the nation that led the 20th Century, built a thriving middle class, defeated fascism and communism

Not wishing to be pedantic here, but the principle admirers in America of both fascism and communism were on the Left.

The American Dream is at risk. Incomes are down and foreclosures are up

Not wishing to point out the obvious, but the housing bubble was, surprise, surprise, the result of governmental intervention in the economy, of the kind that gave us the great depression, Hitler, and Woody Guthrie.

Today, we pledge a return to core moral principles like stewardship, service to others, personal responsibility, shared sacrifice

Round about this point, I think armed insurrection becomes justified. If there's one thing I've learned it's that if some leader starts talking about sacrifices, you run. It stands to reason that when there's service, there's someone being served. It stands to reason that when there's sacrifice, there's someone collecting sacrificial offerings. The man who talks about sacrifice and service, is talking about masters and slaves. And he intends to be the master.

*holds up his hand* Oh, I am completely certain that there is alot of b.s. in the Republican manifesto too, but have some sympathy: I can hardly be expected to deal with this amount of political b.s. in one night.

---------------

EDIT: Caudi, I'm aware of that view of the Hojjatieh. However, there's an article in Asia Times a while back where the former Iranian president describes the Hojjatieh rather differently. So does Ali Akbar Siyaqi, who heads the Justice Department in Khorasan Province, according to the Iran Daily.

Which is the more likely? That this guy Ahmadinedjad - who's disliked even by the Iranian Mullahs, and described as a radical outflanking them - is a member of a radical group or a quiescent group?

332. Richard Dawkins infected with Satanic 'virus of mind', Christian group claims

Comment #251459 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 1:30 pm

Satan - patron saint of evolutionary biology? Embodied at last as a teacher in the heartlands trying to show fossils to the children?

So: who's up for sacrificing a goat in front of Dawkins's Oxford home next weekend? ;-)

333. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251458 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 1:28 pm

Yikes, alot of reading & viewing material. Well, I'll be back when I'm through with it.

334. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251448 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 1:15 pm

decius, my memory for names isn't what it should be - the what lecture now?

And what are we talking about when it comes to a "theocratic interpretation"? Are we talking overturning Roe v. Wade? Or are we talking about blaspheme laws?

335. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251447 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 1:14 pm

Actually, Lucas, my views of Obama come mainly from people praising him & his own words - but hey, don't let me burst your bubble.

336. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251441 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 1:09 pm

Titania, I'm not up on US law as much as you are, but is one more supreme court judge really enough for fully-fledged theocracy? Complete with death penalty for blasphemy, sodomy & the whole nine yards?

It just seems unlikely. The religious right in America can't even seem to get gay marriage banned, let alone have gays whacked.

337. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251437 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 1:03 pm

Thanks for the correction, Titania. Sorry about that.

Anyway, I still don't think so, based on the division of powers in the US government, its constitution etc. You'd need a total catastrophe to provide the push for that kind of a change.

Steve, I challenge you to come up with some actual evidence that I treat people as mindless sheep. On the other hand, you're just throwing these assertions out there without proof. As though... you want people to accept them on faith?

338. Richard Dawkins infected with Satanic 'virus of mind', Christian group claims

Comment #251429 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 12:59 pm

A satanic mind virus? I've gotta get me some of that. :-)

339. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251425 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 12:55 pm

Caudi, please feel free to look the stuff about Christians up; I don't know that much about Christian eschatology. I still find the idea that Iran's being run by a sect so radical that the Ayatollah Khomeni banned it extremely creepy.

340. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251422 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 12:52 pm

Furthermore the conflicts were not just waged against Muslims. Add to the list: Russian and Greek Orthodox Churchs, Jews, Slavs, Prussians and political enemies of the pope to name a few.

Vin, absolutely correct. I wasn't denying that for a second. I was focusing on the ones the Muslims keep whining about. I am seriously sick of the portrayal of those as being evil, evil European Christians attacking peaceful Muslims who were just minding their own business.

As regards the parallels with HAMAS, if we're talking historical grievances, you need to go back to the six days war and so on, and then that business with Haj Amin al-Hussayni, and so on until you more or less get to Muhammad slaughtering the Jews of the Khaybar oasis.

341. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251415 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 12:45 pm

Vin, never thought I'd agree with you, but I do here. I really don't think that Palin could open the floodgates of Christian theocracy.

Which is more than I can say for Britain's labour government opening the floodgates of Islamic theocracy, I might add.

EDIT:

Dicanu, which is the funny villain? Been a while since I've seen the first film.

342. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251410 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 12:43 pm

In the interests of finding one non-controversial subject, which do you prefer Diacanu, the films or the novels about D?

343. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251384 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 12:15 pm

What my experience in debate has given me is the ability to detect when someone has fixed views and then will use all their powers of debate and all their knowledge simply to defend those fixed views,

Steve, you have said, in so many words, that no matter what you'd consider my views wrong. Who's being domatic here?

344. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251382 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 12:14 pm

Sargeist, the thing about the Crusades - at least the ones against the Muslims - was that they were a defensive conflict. I'll just repost what I wrote elsewhere:

"The Crusades were a defensive conflict. They were a response to centuries of Islamic jihad that conquered the traditional Christian heartlands and viciously oppressed the jews and Christians in those lands. They also seized Jerusalem, the holiest site in all of Christendom. Then when jihadist bandits started harassing (read: robbing, murdering, raping) Christian pilgrims to the Holy Land, Pope Urban said, basically, "Enough is enough".

And that is why the Crusades happened. "

The Crusades were incredibly bloody, of course. This was a terrible time in human history. I do, however, maintain that if the Muslims didn't want trouble, they shouldn't have started it.

345. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251375 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 12:08 pm

Sargeist, welcome to my world.

346. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251368 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 12:03 pm

Palin seems keen on a shootin' match with the Russkis.

*groans* Say it's not so. That's really the last thing we need right now.

347. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251365 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 11:58 am

Steve the only thing that's sad is your incapability of forming rational arguments combined with your expertise at skipping over points that don't fit into your worldview. And what you think is a 'hollow moral core' (my, how absolutist you can be when it suits!) is nothing more than a projection of your hollow skull, which doesn't seem to want to learn anything about Islam or its nature.

348. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251361 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 11:57 am

Paine, it's a fair point. The trouble is that in Pakistan, we seem to be up the creek without a paddle, given that they already have nukes. I've said myself that we're only one political assasination away from Al Qaeda with nukes, and buggered if I can figure out how to deal with that. I can see nailing them in the tribal lands and in Afghanistan, but in Pakistan as a whole?

The trouble is that I can't get rid of the impression that Obama just threw that out there as a way of trying to establish his "tough guy" credentials, and that he's just not credible when it comes to using military force.

It's also worth noting that the problem isn't just Al Qaeda, it's all of Islam.

349. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251356 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 11:52 am

Huzon,

Fanusi, where does your abhorrence for Obama come from

I've explained why throughout this thread. I dislike his messiah complex (and, yes, that's what it is), and I dislike the cultishness around him, and I dislike his statism (who on earth thought that expanding the power of the State is 'progressive'...). And I really dislike some of the people who support him.

I agree that Islam is more of a threat than Christianity, but only at the present time and only due to historical contingencies

WRONG! Try reading a little Islamic history and theology first.

or haven't you heard of the Inquisition?

More people are killed b jihadis each year than in all three hundred and fifty years of the Spanish Inquisition combined.

Christians wouldn't go back to their stake-burnings the moment they had the chance?

If you believe that, I suggest you try the following experiment. Select a reasonably sized city with a devout Christian population and a devout Muslim population wander around all day with a sign denouncing Christ and Chrisitanity. Now try that stunt with a sign denouncing Muhammad and Islam.

For all your nonsense about "lizard brain", my political views are the result of actually having read and studied philosophy and history and theology. You might want to try the same.

350. When Atheists Attack

Comment #251346 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 21, 2008 at 11:40 am

brian,

it's not as if Obama is going to hand over the nuclear arsenal

I think that Obama would throw time out the window, hold meetings, conferences, summits (summit for you, summit for me, summit for everyone), convene the UN etc. until it was too late.