General Debate 6 January 2011

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment191

Uncategorized
General Debate

Comments (191)

Login to comment or vote

Johnboy

Are we not made in His image reid? 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 6:46pm
reid

Some of us more than others Johnboy (I don’t place myself in the former category..)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 6:50pm
Johnboy

Some of us are as Lambs to the slaughter reid. 🙂

However we may be dressed. 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 6:52pm
dad4justice

Bahaaaaaaaaaa, went the Christian taxpayers’ as the socialist blue coats crippled New Zealand.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 6:54pm
bereal

You have to laugh at a couple of the posters on this thread.
They reveal their true pittiful colours.

beab 10.10 calls th GG the ‘fat indian’

My name is jerk off 4.27 refers to Ann Coulter, ‘ does my arse look fat when you butt fuck me ‘
What do either of you think that comments such as these add to the discussion ?
Ever notice how it is only a particular persuation that stoop to name calling?
Or fibbing, eh beab ?
Why is that beab and MNIJ ?

Also, the Poms appear to be thrashing Aussie.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 6:55pm
bhudson

I don’t think there is too much to worry about with the Retailers Association’s bleating. Not only is there a question of the cost of collection, there is a far bigger matter of prioritization of resources – if Customs put more effort into capturing all of these imports and collecting the GST they would end up diverting resources from other, far more important tasks, such a capturing Meth precursers and dodgy fake meds. The govt is not going to stump up more cash to pay for more staff to collect small GST transactions.

The Retailers are having a whinge because sales are down and they want to find any unfair advantage possible to blame it on. (As opposed, perhaps, to actually taking a look at their businesses and making sure they are aligned to compete in today’s global markets.)

The smell drifting undetected past the nostrils of the Retailers would be the coffee.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 6:56pm
dad4justice

“Why is that beab and MNIJ ?”

They both post from a satanic run mental hospital. Dr Evil has mean drugs.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 6:58pm
Kris K

reid 6:36 pm,

So you must agree, don’t you, that no “genuine” Muslim could support terrorism while still being true to his faith? Or is that different, if so, how?

Once again, Reid, you’re out by exactly 180°.
Mohammed was a terrorist by any modern definition, and he sets the standard. The Muslim who murdered Punjab Gov. Salman Taseer (which we were discussing yesterday) was in fact being true to Islamic teaching by his killing a blasphemer. The murderer/terrorist is the “genuine” Muslim; secularists* and moderates, like Taseer, are in fact denying what Islam teaches, and the example of Mohammed.

In a Christian context we would call Muslims who claim to be secularists* and moderates “lukewarm”, or non-believers – not true Muslims.

*secularist is a misnomer in Islam as there is no separation of “mosque and state”.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 6:58pm
Johnboy

Vast improvement in your spelling since last night bereal.

Just shows the power of applying self improvement and a little advice from those of us who take an interest in your higher education. 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 7:00pm
Johnboy

Islam. What a wonderful religion to follow. The epitome of tolerance and respect for the beliefs of others.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10631174

Why are we bringing the scum into NZ?

Could someone remind me again!

Oh Helen and the UN said its OK. 🙂

Fine.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 7:08pm
Put it away

Reid what the fuck are you on? How do you construe a link about Kyrgyz mozzies killing a policeman in the year 2011 as proving something about xtians in Nazi germany? You are completely insane.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 7:11pm
dad4justice

“You are completely insane”.

Thank the Lord that I dwell in the sane blogger inner circle.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 7:14pm
reid

Kris one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. Duh.

A terrorist is a terrorist. Focusing on ideology like Communism or Islamism or even Capitalism is focusing on the wrong thing.

A terrorist is always someone beyond the mainstream, beyond the pale. By definition.

Asymetric warfare.

First rule of asymetric warfare (which the UK learned centuries ago and which the US still hasn’t) is not to alienate the indigenous population.

Globalisation like it or not is a package deal and it brings things like international people migration to the whole world not just us. This means Muslim people come and settle here. It just does. You try to cut that off and what do you think happens to other dimensions like oil imports and food exports?

So live with it, duh, and do what the intelligence services do. Be wary, aware, not naive, watchful, vigilant and act decisively at all times when action is required. But don’t go fucking mental and make waves because you just upset the entire balance of the operating dynamics in unpredictable ways. Duh.

This is not rocket science Kris, this is actually, how life works in the 21st century, whether you agree with it or not and its how life will continue to work for the forseeable future and how can everyone else all be wrong and you right, in terms of what needs to be done about it? How come the entire security apparatus is configured one way and you and a few others are calling for it to be reconfigured entirely differently. Who do you think has a better chance of having picked the correct orientation, Kris?

Your biggest fallacy which I was pointing at directly Kris, is your idiotic conflation of what a religion says with what people do. You as a dedicated Christian, of all people, should know the vast vast vast difference between doing vigorously everything that the religion says ought to be done, and what just about everybody including I’ll wager yourself, actually does. You know that because you live it, all the time. You know the gap intimately. And yet, even knowing that, you somehow transcribe to Islam some magical fanatical power to instantly turn all its followers into mindless robots intent on completing to the crossed t and dotted i every single thing the Ko’ran says without fail and as rigidly regimented as those hammers were on The Wall. This is what you are saying they do, Kris, all 1.8 billion of them. This is exactly what you are saying.

Now hello.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 7:21pm
bereal

Hey johnboy,
Thanks for the compliment, however, you are part of the same crew i was alluding to.
Why do you need to resort to name calling ?
Got an answer mate?

Also, now 7/171 at the SCG
Tremain on a hatrick. or is that hat trick Johnny. i’m sure you will correct me if i need it.
If i called people names, i would call you the yolk, but i don’t.
The Aussie commentaters cannot handle it.
The only crowd noise is from the barmy army.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 7:36pm
adam2314

There you all go again..

Religion !!!..

Is there anyone here that can really prove what is the one and only true religion ??..

Or even if there is one ..

Carl Marx was right…

Of course he came along before TV and mass sports coverage.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 7:38pm
Rex Widerstrom

I usually can’t be bothered with the Muslim apologists vs the Christian apologists crusade into which the General Debate seems to descend every damned day but as DPF seems to be failing in his duty to provide more entertaining topics, here’s a not-so-hypothetical…

A man who claims to be vehemently opposed to “progressivism” (whatever precisely that is) watches Glenn Beck, listens to conservative radio host Michael Savage, and reads InfoWars.com. He decides – based primarily, he claims, on what Beck says – to violently attack the left-leaning Tides Foundation and the ACLU.

On the way he’s pulled over for speeding and California Highway Patrol officers notice he’s donning a bulletproof vest and armed with three guns, including a rifle.

A 12 minute shootout follows during which two CHP officers receive minor injuries.

Is the ideology which Beck espouses responsible for this atrocity?

Is Glenn Beck to blame because his inane babbling caused someone to decide to murder his fellow humans?

Or is it purely the fault of the individual who decided to arm himself and try to kill his fellow humans?

I’d post the answers are, respectively:

No, of course not. It’s just a set of ideas. No one is obliged to believe them and, upon believing them, act upon them. Like most ideas they’re open to interpretation and, like most belief structures, probably too rigid to be of use in the real world.

No, of course not. While his rhetoric might be inflammatory and he may demonise certain groups of people, thousands of people listen to and read the same material without arming themselves to the teeth and going on a murderous rampage.

So that just leaves the would-be killer. If one supports, as I do, the concept of individual freedom to the greatest possible extent then one must also accept the concept of individual responsibility.

When someone picks up a weapon and commits murder in the name of an ideology they’re making a choice they didn’t have to make, and should bear the complete responsibility for that choice. There are plenty of hate-filled ideologies around – railing against them won’t make any difference. They’ll never be extinguished because they’re ideas and, once uttered, cannot be unsaid. Instead they lay around waiting for someone to pick them up and wreak havoc.

What reid is saying – and I agree with – is that if some people choose to pick up an ideology and pursue it non-violently – whether they be Tea Partiers or Muslims – then our best hope lies in acknowledging their choice, encouraging it, and where possible reaching out to those people.

While, of course, arming ourselves to deal with those who choose to pick up a weapon.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 7:42pm
Put it away

Reid, if you go beyond our pale you reach the their mainstream. That is the difference. Sure xtians are feeble minded and delusional, but how hard do you have to look to find one that actually killed someone for xtianity? Like the other day someone ( forget who) was asking the difference between Scott Roeder and this mozzie in pakistan that killed the politician the other day. Well one obvious difference is he needed to go back to May 2009 to find one Western example to compare with something that happens many times every day in the muslim world. The ratio of mozzie nutters murdering pople to xtian nutters murdering people must be at least 1000:1
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 7:44pm
Johnboy

Interesting statistic PIA however if we have say a 100,000 muslims in NZ they are certainly not keeping their end up in the murder rate compared to say…..say….say…….Murris! 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 7:52pm
reid

Put it away, did it ever occur to you and/or Kris that maybe just maybe whatever killing occurred didn’t occur because of the religious factors but because the person was a complete nutter? Did that ever occur? Cause I think that’s what happens, most of the time.

If they didn’t do it in the name of Islam, they would have done it in the name of something else, in other words.

Now is this credible to a western audience? Well who gives a fuck, because we’re not talking about a terrorist bombing in Westfield, are we. We’re talking about something happening in a context within which we have no experience nor intimate understanding of. And yet we’re confident that once again, it’s those fucking Muslim terrorists. Well, if that’s the standard of your logic, then count me out, for I don’t buy it.

As in, what was the real cause: were they nutters, or were they religious people? Hint: if someone says they did it cause of ….. , sometimes, they may be either lying, or telling the truth as someone else has told it to them, and that someone probably wasn’t Muhammed cause he’s dead…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 7:55pm
Put it away

Johnboy – I think the mozzies have got much bigger fish to fry than new zealand. If you flew a plane into a building here, most people in the world would go “Where’s that?”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 7:56pm
Johnboy

“Why do you need to resort to name calling ?”

Sorry bereal.

I thought I called you bereal.

Getting old and stupid I guess. 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 7:57pm
Johnboy

I like your thinking PIA.

The Beehive perhaps. 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 7:58pm
bereal

Get with the programme mate. 100,000 ?
Last cencus there were 40,000 people who identified them selves as Muslim
The Somalis in particular have integrated well into our society.
Thank you Helen. NOT. But it did help her CV for the UN
The spelling mistakes are just for johnboy.
He needs a mission in life.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:00pm
Put it away

Reid – so you’re saying it’s not being mozzies that makes them so prone to murder/suicide bombing, it must just be that mental illness is something like a 1000 times more common in muslim countries? Care to propose a reason why that is? And they all happen to select Islam at random out of a near infinite list of possible banners to commit these acts under? Wanna tell us some more about ‘logic’. Fuck’s sake. If you have to wilfully blind yourself to such an extent to make an argument, you have no argument.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:01pm
OctagonGrappler

http://www.eutimes.net/2010/12/senior-greek-priest-blames-jews-for-greeces-financial-problems/

Imagine if some said this on tvnz breakfast.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:02pm
adam2314

Put it away (1,244) Says:

January 6th, 2011 at 7:44 pm
Reid, if you go beyond our pale

The word is PAIL… As in fence..
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:05pm
Johnboy

I cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht bereal was riting. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid.

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn’t mttaer inwaht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae.

The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm.

Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

Amzanig huh? yaeh and I awlyas thought slpeling was ipmorantt!

Yur roight bereal.

Oi feeel libberatted.

Tank yu frum the bottum of moi hart. 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:07pm
bereal

Hey johnboy,
one more time,
why do people of your persuation attack the messenger, call them names,
have you ever considered that mate ? WHY ?

Have you got an answer ?
You could address the question or santctimoniosly criticise spelling mistakes to score points in your mind.

any answer mate?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:11pm
adam2314

OctagonGrappler (60) Says:

January 6th, 2011 at 8:02 pm
http://www.eutimes.net/2010/12/senior-greek-priest-blames-jews-for-greeces-financial-problems/

Imagine if some said this on tvnz breakfast

Imagine if you can how much NZ owes Rothchilds..

Not there fault..

Ours…. We borrowed it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:12pm
Put it away

adam2314. Wrong actually. It’s PALE, as in fence. You know, like PALINGS. And IMPALE for that matter. A PAIL is a bucket.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:13pm
reid

Reid – so you’re saying it’s not being mozzies that makes them so prone to murder/suicide bombing, it must just be that mental illness is something like a 1000 times more common in muslim countries?

Er, not quite, but close, so have a small banana.

What I’m saying Put it away is that you may have noticed ME people are rather quite different than us in temperament and that explains a whole hell of a lot about how they apply the more execrable parts of Islam such as their treatment toward women. I can’t help but observe this treatment is precisely what the Bedouin used to met out to their womenfolk and also note the confluence of the genetic heritage in today’s ME peoples.

There are a number of other traits to which I could draw similar parallels. Asian Muslim policy on the other hand adopts a different approach as evidenced in Malaysia for example.

I think you need to accept however that leaving your family forever and making yourself into an international criminal liable to arrest at anytime isn’t a small step for any person and those who take it must have very strong and specific motivations.

One thing that is missing from this entire Islam-Terrorism discussion is any recognition whatsoever of what else might have happened to these people in their home countries life-experience-wise, that may have bought them to this juncture. Nothing at all? Of course, that’s right, nothing at all bad has ever happened to them in anyway and no-one was responsible if it ever did but it didn’t ever so that’s not the factor. Discount entirely.

So one is left with what to me seems a fantastically optimistic assessment of the power of religion, to motivate millions of people from both ME and Asian cultures in multiple countries to forget their families, make themselves international criminals for the rest of their lives, and murder other human beings, simply because their was no other reason than they read a particular passage or two in the Ko’ran.

It just doesn’t make a whole lot of sense, but that’s what you’re saying, right?

Thanks for the correction Adam, most appreciated.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:15pm
bereal

As we all can see now.
You are the yolk johnboy.

Address the question.
Are you up to it mate.

No. Pathetic.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:17pm
Johnboy

“Have you got an answer ?”

Well its just that you are more ridiculous and amusing than anything that is on TV at the present moment bereal.

When is Coro Street on by the way?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:18pm
Put it away

reid – “millions of people from both ME and Asian cultures in multiple countries to forget their families, make themselves international criminals for the rest of their lives, and murder other human beings, simply because their was no other reason than they read a particular passage or two in the Ko’ran.”

Nice summary of the history of Islam’s expansion. Well done.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:20pm
bereal

You proved my point again Johnboy,
call me ridiculous, ignore the question.

Why do you always need to do that mate ?
What is your problem?
Dont you embarrass yourself ?

Shooting fish in a barrell. consider yourself shot.

Please correct my spelling again. That will score a big point for you, in your mind.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:26pm
Steve

Speeling. When do the schoolteachers go back to school.
Soon I hope
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:29pm
Put it away

Reid “What I’m saying Put it away is that you may have noticed ME people are rather quite different than us in temperament and that explains a whole hell of a lot about how they apply the more execrable parts of Islam such as their treatment toward women. I can’t help but observe this treatment is precisely what the Bedouin used to met out to their womenfolk and also note the confluence of the genetic heritage in today’s ME peoples.”

Reid you are frantically treading water and backpedalling in random directions while you try to come up with an argument that avoids blaming Islam. This is not a good look. Oddly though, by ascribing the mozzies behaviour to genetics rather than religion, you make a strong case that they should never be allowed into the west, because even if they assimilate and tone down the loony tunes religion, their genetic propensity to extremist violence will inevitably find some reason to blow something up. Are you sure you want to make this argument? I suspect in your panic to come up with something, anything, to exonerate the Koran you’ve landed closer to the National Front than you intended to.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:31pm
adam2314

Put it away (1,247) Says:

January 6th, 2011 at 8:13 pm
adam2314. Wrong actually. It’s PALE, as in fence. You know, like PALINGS. And IMPALE for that matter. A PAIL is a bucket.

Yes you are correct..

Looked at it with questions in my mind when the seconds clicked away..

Put it down to the sticky weather :-))
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:35pm
Put it away

adam – if it’s any compensation, I assumed for years that “the pale” meant some kind mystical fog between civilisation and the boondocks
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:37pm
Johnboy

Is that mystical fog between civilisation and the boondocks also known as “beyond the Palin”. 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:41pm
Johnboy

bereal. What the hell was your question again and what is this mythical “point” you keep claiming to have proved?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:43pm
Kris K

reid 7:21 pm

Kris one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. Duh.
Blah, blah, blah …

So many words and so little content … sad.

Goodnight, Marylou 😉 – you too, Reid.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:48pm
Johnboy

Night Kris. 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:49pm
Hurf Durf

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Ah.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:50pm
Johnboy

“Prof White said: “There is no doubt that the amount of plastic in the world’s oceans is troubling, but this kind of exaggeration undermines the credibility of scientists. ”

Sounds very familiar.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:53pm
Rex Widerstrom

reid:

Thanks for the correction Adam, most appreciated.

Nope, you were right first time reid, as Put it Away pointed out above. “Pale” in this context comes from the same etymology as “paling”, as in fence paling.

Or, as Wikipedia puts it:

The word pale derives ultimately from the Latin word palus, meaning stake, specifically a stake used to support a fence. From this came the figurative meaning of boundary and eventually the phrase beyond the pale, as something outside the boundary

So “beyond the pale” = “outside the bounds of normality”. Interestingly, it also was used as meaning “beyond the influence of the (Christian) church”, so would certainly apply to Islam.

Now, if I were 13 years old, I’d be tempted to say adam2314 just got pwned 😀

Johnboy:

Since you’re clearly not reid, I can only assume Kris K calls you “Marylou”. Care to elaborate? 😀
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:54pm
Johnboy

Night all.

I have taped 5000 old episodes of Coro to watch. 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 8:55pm
reid

because even if they assimilate and tone down the loony tunes religion, their genetic propensity to extremist violence will inevitably find some reason to blow something up

Congratulations Put it away I was hoping one of you at least would accidentally stumble across it at least just once.

Do you really think any race on Earth has a genetic propensity toward extremist violence? Sure many nations have commited such but they’ve all been lead by individuals haven’t they: Alexander, Khan, Bonaparte et al. Given Islam’s been round for thousands of years, why is it only in the last ten we’ve become hyper-concerned about it? What’s the causal difference? Is it Bin-Laden? Is he the causal factor? How come Islam has been bubbling away for centuries and all through the 1910s, 1920s, 1930s, 1940s, 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, 2000s and has only just now, right now, reared its terrorist head? Why is that?

Are there any other possible causal factors in world geopolitics that may have even conceivably had something to do with this rise in threat level, which BTW, is grossly overstated?

Nothing at all? Nothing happening around the world in anyway whatsoever, that might have exacerbated this potential issue which we all knew about?

Of course not. It was Islam all along. It’s quite clear. There is NOTHING at all that has happened in the last twenty or so years that has been done by ANY COUNTRY which has caused this threat to escalate, ergo, IT MUST BE ISLAM!!!!

This people, is logic indeed. I’m in awe.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 9:01pm
bereal

Johnboy 8.43 asks;
‘what is your question ?’

How pathetic. Is that the best you have, to answer a question with another question ?
Or chortle over a spelling mistake.
Thats a big score in your mind is it ? That your very best ?
You really are a yolk.

Try my question to you at 6.55
or try 7.36
or try 8.11

Got a straight answer to a straight question?
Give it a go genius.
Give it your best shot.
As someone said above, sooner u skool teechas go back to skool the better.

You have been found out mate.

There is nobody home at your address. You are a no contest.

By the way, where is your mate, the fibber, Beab ?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 9:27pm
Put it away

More frantic backpedalling from reid. Can you let us know when you have a position you’re prepared to hold for more than 45 minutes? You really think Islamic violence started in the 2000s? Fuck’s sake you’re ignorant. Learn a bit of history please. How do you think they went from being a small tribe with a chip on their shoulder to running a vast chunk of the world? It wasn’t by holding hands and singing songs…
I really wonder about your sanity. Oh, and it’s one and a bit thousand years, not “thousands of years”. Don’t let facts get in the way.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 9:28pm
Put it away

Reid – “why is it only in the last ten we’ve become hyper-concerned about it?”

Umm, 9 September 2001 mean anything to you?

What’s the causal difference? Is it Bin-Laden?

Pretty much answered your own question there, didn’t you? Idiot.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 9:33pm
Guy Fawkes

Can anyone understand how a youngster gets behind the wheel of car, and then after a certain and predictable tragedy.

The family then get angry with the Police for chasing a vehicle that was being driven unlawfully.

Why don’t Government make the family collectively responsible financially for all the mayhem that is caused with 13-14 yo hoons.

For me, te more that have a Darwin moment the better. Utter shits the lot of them.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 9:39pm
bereal

Put iy away 9.28
There goes another one.
Put it away. You another yolk ?

i’ll ask you the same question your mates johnboy and fibber Beab refused to answer.
Why do you need to enhance your argument in your mind by calling people names?

Why is it always people from your political persuation do that?

Maybe you can answer for johnboy, he is not up to it.
Are you?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 9:40pm
adam2314

Been for a stroll on milford beach

Put it away (1,251) Says:

January 6th, 2011 at 8:37 pm
adam – if it’s any compensation, I assumed for years that “the pale” meant some kind mystical fog between civilisation and the boondocks

It came into common usage in America during Puritan times… The Pale being the fence line before the boondocks as you put it.. and Red Indians.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 9:47pm
Put it away

bereal – reid is an idiot, I pointed out exactly why. He asked a question that answers itself, with the opposite answer to what he’s hoping. That really is a spectacularly idiotic rhetorical blunder. You seem to be confusing calling a spade a spade for argumentum ad hominem ( although I’m sure you have absolutely no idea what that means), it means arguments based on the person as opposed to arguments based on logic and facts, as if this “enhances the argument”. I do not do this. I demolish the person’s argument with logic and facts, and if the situation warrants it, additonally make an accurate observation that they are an idiot. If I just called him an idiot for no reason, as if this by itself had some weight as an argument, then you would have a legitimate cause for concern. I have no idea what johnboy does, I don’t speak for anyone except myself.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 9:58pm
nickb

Can anyone understand how a youngster gets behind the wheel of car, and then after a certain and predictable tragedy.

The family then get angry with the Police for chasing a vehicle that was being driven unlawfully.

Why don’t Government make the family collectively responsible financially for all the mayhem that is caused with 13-14 yo hoons.

For me, te more that have a Darwin moment the better. Utter shits the lot of them.

Totally agree with all of this 100%, have already talked to friends etc who think this kind of stuff is the police’s fault… get fucking real
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 10:18pm
nickb

Lol at the bottom one Hurf.

Muslim extremists have committed some atrocities but fucking with my right to a zinger bacon tower is taking it too far.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 10:22pm
Yvette

Rex Widerstrom – The Waltons TV show: ‘Night Johnboy, night Mary Lou, night Jo Bob, night Grandad.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 10:22pm
Put it away

nickb – every man has a breaking point!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 10:24pm
Dazzaman

Inky sez’s

Queen Elizabeth II of NZ*…..

….* Can someone explain who was the first Queen Liz of NZ I can find no record of an earlier one.

It’s her title you dipshit.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 10:31pm
nickb

nickb – every man has a breaking point!

That would be mine 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 10:38pm
reid

Reid – “why is it only in the last ten we’ve become hyper-concerned about it?”

Umm, 9 September 2001 mean anything to you?

What’s the causal difference? Is it Bin-Laden?

Pretty much answered your own question there, didn’t you? Idiot.

Put it away I’m so pleased it’s you who said this, for this was my very point all along, in the very first place. For if it’s Bin-Laden that’s the reason for the terror, then IT CAN’T VERY WELL BE ISLAM, CAN IT. So why the fuck do you and Kris et al go on and on and on and on about it, as if Islam is the reason, for you’ve just indicated it’s not, and as we ALL know and have always known, you’re quite correct, Islam has NOTHING to do with it, Al-Qaida has EVERYTHING to do with it.

Now that you finally get it, can you talk to Kris, knock on his head, whatever it takes, get it through his thick skull. This is fucking boring man, your position was just so fucking moronic, I just couldn’t let it go.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 11:03pm
bhudson

Dazzaman,

It’s absolute trivia but Inky does have a point. The Queen is quite correctly Queen Elizabeth II of England and Queen Elizabeth I of NZ. (She would be II of NZ if we were part of the United Kingdom.)

It makes no real difference of course and somewhat obtuse by Inky, but he is correct.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 11:04pm
bereal

Put it away.
Reread the PUKE you posted at 9.58
Just another who is unable to address a question.

Just for you i’ll give it one more try.

WHY do you need to denigrate the person as oposed to their argument ?

i’ve got no torch to carry for reid. However,
WHY start your tirade with,’ Reid is an idiot ?’
you say,’i do not do this’ etc etc
See 9.27
You demolish argument with facts and logic. In your dreams mate.
What a yolk.

OK very cool.

WHY do you need to abuse the person as opposed to their argument ?

Address that point with logic and facts.

Prove you are not just a joke.

Go for it mate. i will acknowledge any credible answer you may produce.

i don’t think you are able.
Good luck to ypur family.

Also, what happened to that fibber Beab ?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 11:10pm
Hurf Durf

No probs nick. I’ve just realised the middle one doesn’t properly work either. DAMMIT. Oh well, I offer this in compensation.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 11:11pm
Fletch

Rex @ 7.42

Interesting argument, but I don’t think the analogy quite holds up. I think the main difference is in the source of the ideology the person is following. Christians, ultimately, no matter what Glen Beck says, should be following the Bible and the teachings of Jesus (who, when the disciples were being taken by the soldiers in the garden and Peter asked if they should use the swords, Jesus said, “those who live by the sword will die by the sword”).

Christianity, as a religion, as an ideology, does not advocate violence to convert, whereas Islam and the Qu’ran does. Islam advocates conversion by force and to ‘slay the infidels wherever you find them’. Of course there are Muslims who will not slay anyone, but then they are not following the written tenets of their religion – making them “bad” Muslims, essentially.

Muslims believe that the Qu’ran is the unalterable word of Allah and that it cannot be changed one jot, as there is an identical copy of the book in Heaven.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 11:26pm
adze

I guess you won’t find this in the Halal KFC’s bathroom then:

http://abortedfajitas.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/receive_bacon1.jpg
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 11:32pm
reid

Muslims believe that the Qu’ran is the unalterable word of Allah and that it cannot be changed one jot, as there is an identical copy of the book in Heaven.

How do you know, Fletch, since (I assume) you’re not actually a Muslim?

See even if the Qu’ran says that and I don’t know or care frankly even if it does, so what? Does that mean that every single human being who reads those words stands rigidly to attention, smartly salutes then marches to their death, blindly obedient to the particularly compelling words found only in that particular book? How come the mere act of reading the Bible doesn’t make [most] people do that? Could it be that people who do that do that because they’re people who have a propensity to do that, or could it be the compelling power of this particular and only this particular book?

In the real world, which of those two alternatives do you think is the more probable explanation?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 11:38pm
Put it away

bereal – read it again, try to understand it this time, it’s all contained in the post you refer to. “WHY do you need to abuse the person as opposed to their argument ?” as I aready pointed out, it’s not one instead of the other, I always deal with the argument AND as an aside I might point out that the person is an idiot, if their arguments are egregiously stupid, but it does not carry any weight towards the argument which is dealt with separately. It’s just an observation, like commenting on the weather or the colour of flower. As I already said, if I said “reid is an idiot” just on its own with no further argument dealing with his argument, then you would have a problem. Here is an example:

Bereal is a complete fucking moron. Bereal is asking questions that have already been answered in the post he refers to. Bereal is not capable of separating two different things. It has already been pointed out that argumentum ad hominem is arguing about the person’s characteristics as if this counts towards disproving their argument, calling a spade a spade while also dealing with the argument is not the same thing. Bereal continues to repeat the same things over and over again rather than read the answer.

See – observation of your intelligence AS AN ASIDE to pointing out what you are doing wrong. Not complicated is it?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 11:40pm
Rex Widerstrom

Yvette says:

The Waltons TV show: ‘Night Johnboy, night Mary Lou, night Jo Bob, night Grandad.

Yes, I knew that… I was just having a dig at Johnboy. Given his admitted proclivities for sheep, dressing up in a Little Bo Peep outfit and going by the name “Mary Lou” wouldn’t seem too much of a stretch 😉

And actually, it’s Mary Ellen. It was Ricky Nelson who said (or rather sang) “Hello, Mary Lou”.

Here endeth the pedantry 😛
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 11:51pm
bereal

Put it away.
You say,’ bereal is a complete fucking moron.’

You just proved my point conclusivley’

Even you must see that.

The balance of your rant makes as much sense as usual. Eff all.

‘Argumentum ad hominem.’ Jeez mate, get a grip.
Sprechen die english ?

No contest.
you must be gutted.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 11:52pm
Rex Widerstrom

Fletch:

There’s quite a few exhortations to, and examples of, gory violence in the Old Testament. The majority of Christians just chose not to follow them, just as the majority of Muslims don’t take seriously exhortations to put infidels to the sword.

That does raise a tangenital point, though. As you say, the Koran is thought unalterable. Christianity, when it emerged from the dark, decided its founding text needed a user-friendly (and much less violently inclined) re-write. Though again that says nothing about the respective believers and everything about the differences amongst those on either side who believe themselves guardians of the Word.

While I’d argue that the bulk of mosque-going Muslims aren’t wild-eyed jihadists, I’d also argue that their religious leadership needs to start repudiating, and perhaps excising, those parts of the Koran which can be used as an excuse by the handful who are.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 11:57pm
Put it away

Put it away I’m so pleased it’s you who said this, for this was my very point all along, in the very first place. For if it’s Bin-Laden that’s the reason for the terror, then IT CAN’T VERY WELL BE ISLAM, CAN IT. So why the fuck do you and Kris et al go on and on and on and on about it, as if Islam is the reason, for you’ve just indicated it’s not, and as we ALL know and have always known, you’re quite correct, Islam has NOTHING to do with it, Al-Qaida has EVERYTHING to do with it.

Oh for chrissakes reid, enough with the retarded logical fallacies. You start by saying asking why concern for terrorism has HEIGHTENED in the last ten years ( What BIN LADEN did ten years ago, !no shit ) , and then mid argument you assume that terrorism didn’t exist at all before 2000 and therefore Bin Laden is the ONLY cause. Fuck’s sake have you no grasp of history AT ALL? Here is a list to get you started http://prophetofdoom.net/Islamic_Terrorism_Timeline.Islam . It runs to 1000 pages. I suggest starting at 1970 and moving forwards. Here’s January…

– January 1, 1970: In Turkey, an explosion occurred at the entrance of the U.S. Consulate in Istanbul. Islamic Turkey was becoming a dangerous place to be an American.
– January 9, 1970: In France, a TWA 707 airliner en route from Paris to Rome with just 20 passengers and crew aboard was hijacked to Beirut by a lone French terrorist. He said that he wanted to spite Americans and Israelis for their aggression in the Middle East. Considered a hero by Muslims, when the hijacker was taken into custody in Lebanon he was only sentenced to nine months in jail – essentially the time he served awaiting trial. He was promptly released and returned to France, where he was tried for illegal possession of weapons and sentenced to eight months in prison, once again, the length of the trial process.
The Popular Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine thought their criminal act was a good thing, so they claimed responsibility for the murder and mutilations. However, since the word has a problem understanding the benefits of being judgmental, and fails to appreciate the concept of responsibility, the murdering Muslim terrorists were set free after the September 6, 1970 hijacking of one Swiss and two U.S. airliners.
– January 11, 1970: In Ethiopia, Islamic jihadists shot and killed a U.S. soldier. The Eritrean Islamic Jihad Movement was responsible for the shooting the American.
The Eritrean Islamic Jihad Movement was composed of Islamic terrorists who are financed, trained, and armed by the fundamentalist Islamic government in neighboring Sudan. The terrorist club sought to depose the current secular government in Eritrea and replace it with an Islamic theocracy based upon Sharia Law.
– January 21, 1970: In the Philippines, a car bomb exploded behind the Joint U.S. Military Assistance Group headquarters in Manila. Three support staff were injured.
– January 24, 1970: In Israel, al-Fatah and the PFLP claimed credit for the explosion of an ammunition truck which was unloading at the time. Nineteen people were killed and 36 Israelis were injured. This terrorist, act combined with the joint press release following it, served to confirm that Yasser Arafat’s al-Fatah and George Habash’s Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine were acting as one following their late 1968 merger. While the PFLP is said to have begun life as a Marxist organization, it didn’t take long to amalgamate itself into the Muslim cause.

Islam has nothing to do with teror, right. You reckon shit like this might have something to do with it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjbJnZUJTYU&NR=1
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 6, 2011 11:58pm
reid

Yes, point is Put it away, these people were claiming they were doing it in the name of Islam, but how come all the other Muslims weren’t doing the same things at the same time? Does that mean that all the other Muslims were just suppressing their true feelings, or that those few who were killing people were just saying that to make themselves look good so that others didn’t actually think they were just the murderous thugs they actually are and were?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 7, 2011 12:03am
bereal

Hey Put it away,

How hard is it to be the true truth ?
What a cross you have to bear.

So many idiots you have to educate.
You must wonder sometimes why you bother.
So unrewarding.

If they don’t see it your way they are effing idiots.
You tell them over and over what fuckwits they are.
When will they listen to you ?
How long can you keep up the good fight ?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 7, 2011 12:07am
Put it away

bereal you will never listen, you are only interesting in bleating the same question incessantly when you have already been answered multiple times, and then absurdly declare victory when everyone is bored with repeating an answer you are not interested in, or not capable of, reading and understanding. There is no fight bereal, I can’t have a battle of wits with an unarmed man. It’s more like an execution.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 7, 2011 12:14am
bereal

Put it away,
Why do people of your persuation always denigrate the person not the argument ?

You have answered it multiple times, BULLSHIT.
If you are not totally full of it, what was your answer?
Refer me to where you answered it, another question is not an answer, not a mumble bumble of crap.
If you can put it in one coherrent sentence.

There is the question again. Surely a genius such as you can address it.
Try English, not pig Latin.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 7, 2011 12:23am
Put it away

Yes, point is Put it away, these people were claiming they were doing it in the name of Islam, but how come all the other Muslims weren’t doing the same things at the same time? Does that mean that all the other Muslims were just suppressing their true feelings, or that those few who were killing people were just saying that to make themselves look good so that others didn’t actually think they were just the murderous thugs they actually are and were?

So I take it you’ve abandoned your “evil gene” hypothesis? And now you seem to have accepted defeat on your “Bin Laden as sole cause” theory? Fuck it’s hard keeping track of your “logic” that’s different in every post.

Most likely many Muslims who aren’t violent haven’t studied the the religion closely enough, or have but they’ve chosen to ignore the violent teachings. Good for them, but you can’t credit Islam for people who’re acting contrary to the message. Others probalby want to do some damage but don’t have the means, method or opportunity. Again, no credit to the religion.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 7, 2011 12:27am
reid

Most likely many Muslims who aren’t violent haven’t studied the the religion closely enough, or have but they’ve chosen to ignore the violent teachings. Good for them, but you can’t credit Islam for people who’re acting contrary to the message. Others probalby want to do some damage but don’t have the means, method or opportunity. Again, no credit to the religion.

Fuck do you listen to yourself, Put it away? No religion is by itself capable of doing what you claim it does. It is not the problem, radical people are the problem, and guess from whence they are borne. Islam is the vehicle they use. If someone kills another in a car, whose fault is it? The cars fault? The roads fault? What if others use the same road or the same model of car thousands of times a day without incident? Does that make any difference?

Duh.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 7, 2011 12:33am
Put it away

bereal it’s all in the two previous posts to the last one, you know that, you’re just not interested or not capable of trying to understand it, even though it’s really very simple. I have never claimed to be a genius, but compared to you, virtually everyone is. You will never stop bleating the same question no matter how many times it’s answered. Your ‘debating’ tactic is basically on the same level as a primary school kid just indefinitely repeating “I know you are, but what am I!” and thinking it’s a devastating answer to any schoolyard argument. You cannot just indefinitely repeat that your question hasn’t been answered just because you cannot understand it. That is your problem, no one elses. The answer is in English that anyone of average intelligence can follow. Therein lies your problem…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 7, 2011 12:35am
bereal

Put it away,
Just in closing, WTF were u trying to say at 12.27 ?
We know you cant keep track of logic. no need to state the obvious.
Have a go at the question, over and over you dodge, see 12.23

Go on mate, try.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 7, 2011 12:38am
Put it away

“Fuck do you listen to yourself, Put it away? No religion is by itself capable of doing what you claim it does. It is not the problem, radical people are the problem, ”

So you’ve backpedalled all the way back to square one of your ‘argument’ then reid, ok. lets see if you can do better rhis time around. So islamic countries just magically produce a thousand or so times more “radical people” than other countries, and it’s pure coincidence that they blow things up under the islamic banner, because that’s just what happens to be around. What do you propose is behind this? Why don’t we get, say, dozens of car bombings a week by New Zealanders attached to some random cause just because “radical people” were itching to blow something up, for some reason, doesn’t matter what?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 7, 2011 12:41am
reid

What do you propose is behind this?

Their gene pool and their life experience Put it away, but not their religion. Duh. Haven’t you read anything I’ve said above. Crikey. Duh, again.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 7, 2011 1:12am
Pete George

Fletch (1,737) at 11:26 pm

Christianity, as a religion, as an ideology, does not advocate violence to convert, whereas Islam and the Qu’ran does. Islam advocates conversion by force and to ‘slay the infidels wherever you find them’. Of course there are Muslims who will not slay anyone, but then they are not following the written tenets of their religion – making them “bad” Muslims, essentially.

Some of those experienced in bible cherry picking seem to also want to look for bad cherries in the Qu’ran. The following are full English translations around the bad cherries often quoted as proof of the evil if Islam.

Does the Qur’an Teach Violence?

Thank you very much for your kind words that you do not hate Muslims. Hate is not good for any person. I want to assure you that we Muslims also do not hate non-Muslims, be they Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhist or followers of any religion or no religion. Our religion does not allow killing any innocent person regardless of his or her religion. The life of all human beings is sacrosanct according to the teachings of the Qur’an and the guidance of our blessed Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him and upon all the Prophets and Messengers of Allah).

The Qur’an says about the prohibition of murder, (…Take not life, which Allah hath made sacred, except by way of justice and law: thus does He command you, that ye may learn wisdom.) (Al-An`am 6: 151) and Allah says in the Qur’an, (Nor take life, which Allah has made sacred, except for just cause. And if anyone is slain wrongfully, We have given his heir authority (to demand Qisas or to forgive): but let him not exceed bounds in the matter of taking life; for he is helped (by the law)) (Al-Israa’ 17: 33). According to the Qur’an, killing any person without a just cause is as big a sin as killing the whole humanity and saving the life of one person is as good deed as saving the whole humanity. (See Al-Ma’idah 5: 32)

However, your question is valid, then how come the Qur’an says, (kill them wherever you find them…) as it is mentioned in Surah Al-Baqarah 2: 191 and Surah An-Nisaa’ 4: 89. The answer is simple and that is, you should read these verses in their textual and historical context. You should read the whole verse and it is better that you read few verses before and few after. Read the full text and see what is said:

(Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loves not transgressors. And kill them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, kill them. Such is the reward of those who reject faith. But if they cease, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression. The prohibited month, for the prohibited month, and so for all things prohibited, there is the law of equality. If then any one transgresses the prohibition against you, transgress ye likewise against him. But fear Allah, and know that Allah is with those who restrain themselves.) (Al-Baqarah 2: 190-194)

For your second quotation also read the full text:

(They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): so take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (from what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks. Except those who join a group between whom and you there is a treaty (Of peace), or those who approach you with hearts restraining them from fighting you as well as fighting their own people. If Allah had pleased, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you: therefore if they withdraw from you but fight you not, and (instead) send you (guarantees of) peace, then Allah hath opened no way for you (to war against them). Others you will find that wish to gain your confidence as well as that of their people: every time they are sent back to temptation, they succumb thereto; if they withdraw not from you nor give you (guarantees) of peace besides restraining their hands, seize them and slay them wherever ye get them; in their case We have provided you with a clear argument against them.?w (An-Nisaa’ 4: 89-91)

So at least one of the 1.8b Muslims disagree with Fletch’s claim. There could be more, because, as Reid has said, not all Muslims are going around killing every non-Muslim they come across. Most seem to be able to live in some sort of peace. Like most Christians, and most of everyone else.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 7, 2011 7:16am
iMP

Bible/Koran cherry picking is fruitless (pun intended) as it doesn’t matter what the Koran (not korn) says, “by their fruit shall ye know them” (to cherrypick Jesus). People quote the Bible a gazillion different ways, it proves nothing, its what’s INSIDE a person that matters (what they think, how they think, what they DO). The real olive oil on this one (to continue my fruit theme) is HOW DOES ISLAM WORK OUT IN PRACTICE. Just step back and look at the way women and immigrants are treated in any one of a dozen ‘modern’ Islamic countries.

The future for the world is in the hands of moderate Muslims OR well-armed big stick Europeans/Americans if extremists want to play Jihadi games.

Wherever you look today – and my wife has worked in the Middle East, so we have first hand experience – Islamic nations are dark dark places, of oppression, slavery, corruption, greed, theft, murder and oppression, particularly of women (like maids being carried around town in the boots of cars, because they are unworthy to travel in the car; five muslim men murdered for wearing tennis shorts, etc). That’s why muslims themselves export themselves to ‘Christian nations’ en masse (Britain, France, Germany) not the other way round.

People can quote holy texts all they want, as I see things, Islam is not – at least politically – a “moderate” practicality at all, regardless of how corrupt and evil conspiracists say America is. Give me Texas any day over Yemen or Saudi Arabia.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 7, 2011 10:01am
Fletch

Pete George that is simply not true, in many ways.

To start off with, your verse According to the Qur’an, killing any person without a just cause is as big a sin as killing the whole humanity and saving the life of one person is as good deed as saving the whole humanity. (See Al-Ma’idah 5: 32)

You haven’t quoted the whole verse there. That verse is addressed to the “Children of Israel” and set in the past. It is not addressed to Muslims. It’s from part of a warning to the Jews not to make war against Muhammad, of they will face punishment.

On that account We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person—unless it be for murder or for spread – ing mischief in the land—it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people . Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land. The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger , and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution , or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment
is theirs in the Hereafter. (Qur’an 5:31-33)

Sounds different in context ey?

I will address your other verses later when I have more time, but, really, those are either taken out of context or have been abrogated by more violent verses. Basically the Qu’ran says that a believer should not kill a believer (“it is not for a believer to kill a believer unless it be by mistake” (4:92)), but it makes no such statements about unbelievers.

Robert Spencer points out –

This led to a predictable double standard in Islamic law. “Killing
without right,” according to the Shafi’i school of Sunni Muslim
jurisprudence, “is, after unbelief, one of the very worst enormities,” It stipulates that
“retaliation is obligatory.. . against anyone who kills a human being
purely intentionally and without right,” However, no retaliation is per –
mitted in the case of “a Muslim killing a non-Muslim.”‘
An Iranian Sufi leader, Sheikh Sultanhussein Tabandeh, who wielded
consider able influence in fashioning the juri sprudence of Khomeini’s
Islamic Republic, wrote A Muslim Commentary on the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights. While arguing for capital punishment if a Muslim
is kille d, Tabandeh argues against it if the murderer is Muslim and the
victim non-Muslim: “Since Islam regards non-Muslims as on a lower level
of belief and conviction, if a Muslim kills a non-Muslim … then his
punishment must not be the retaliatory death, since the faith and conviction
he possesses is loftier than that of the man slain. A fine only may be
exacted from him.”‘
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 7, 2011 11:13am
Pete George

My link was only to a Muslim explaining their view Fletch, better to listen to Robert Spencer, eh.

You must know how much argument there is over interpretations of the Bible, can’t you see that the same could happen with the Qu’ran? Especially when people are trying to prove a narrow point and then paint it with a broad brush.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 7, 2011 11:28am
Ryan Sproull

This thread is so yesterday.

Badum tschh!

Thank you.

Thank you.

And that’s my 4000th comment.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 7, 2011 11:31am
Pete George

Ryan, probably tomorrow’s and next year’s thread too, I suspect the same things will still be being “argued” at your 5000th.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 7, 2011 11:36am
Courage Wolf

What is required here, Fletch, is some context. Deuteronomy 25:11 states:

If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.

This is a man’s law, right here. When Conan became king at the end of Conan the Destroyer, you can bet he made sure there was a rule just like this his first day in office. “Ladies, we respect your right to resolve disputes in whatever manner you feel necessary for the situation. But, DO NOT GRAB THE JUNK.”

The words in the Bible are actually those of God, speaking to the Hebrews and taking time to add the junk-grab rule into the supplemental commandments that didn’t make it into the original 10. This had to be right after God realized his plan for a male-dominated society had a fatal flaw, which is that the women could prevail in any conflict simply by grabbing the men’s junk.

Now, you nervous, liberal types are complaining that this is barbaric and misogynistic. Perhaps, a little context helps. Just a couple of pages earlier, in Deuteronomy 23:1, we get this:

No one who has been emasculated by crushing or cutting may enter the assembly of the LORD.

“Emasculated by crushing?” Gah! Everything in the Bible has to be understood in context of the times these people were living in. And, apparently, these people lived in a time when “crushing” the nuts was so common that the crushed-nuts victims were an entire demographic that had to be accounted for in the law. Call these commandments savage if you want, but if you were God, how many nuts would you have to see “crushed” before you overreacted? We’re thinking the answer is two.

Of course, if you’re not a believer and don’t think this “grab the nuts, lose a hand” commandment is from the almighty at all, then it becomes obvious what happened: The rule was handed down by some angry clergyman within the first minute or so of having his junk crushed. All perspective tends to go out the window at that moment.

Read more: http://www.cracked.com/article_15699_the-9-most-badass-bible-verses_p2.html#ixzz1AJcNKWut
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 7, 2011 4:13pm
Rex Widerstrom

Flippin ‘eck!!

Pete George is right… will this ever end?!

Here’s a suggestion… first person of each POV to arrive in the GD just writes “ibid”.
Supporters of either perspective then follow up with “ditto”.

Or you could do like the kids do and say “ibid x infinity” and that’ll cover you till the Rapture.

😀
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 7, 2011 8:32pm

More comments:

‹
1
2

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« Quin on Labour’s looming reshuffle

General Debate 7 January 2011 »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Highlights

The Kiwis are fleeing
Inflation by term
Houston we have a problem
Our immunisation disaster

Never miss a post

Email Address

Links

Ian Bradford: Is any of the material we are fed by the climate alarmists’ reliable?
Breaking Views
"Late-Stage Anti-Capitalism"
Not PC
Coastal Court Action Flies Under the Radar
NZCPR
The Battle of Doiran – Turmoil In The French Army I THE GREAT WAR Week 144
Utopia
Cuddly
No Minister
Word of the day
Hompaddock
Policing protests.
Kiwipolitico
Open letter to Hon Paul Goldsmith
Point of Order
The Working Group Weekend Politics with David Seymour, Chris Penk and Damien Grant
The Daily Blog
This is fine
The Standard
THE WAY THINGS WERE
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
"Comity" versus the rule of law
No Right Turn
Jacinda’s legacy – Increasing number of abortions
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
United Rugby Championship Predictions for Week 15
Stats Chat
Despair - construction consenting edition
Offsetting Behaviour
Tougher than that
Croaking Cassandra
ABs stripped of 2011 title after try disallowed
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz