Sundas Hoorain -- Sharia law - Divine claims and harsh realities at the LSE
I only just found this, I am still watching it.

Peter Brown wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:
Are you still trying to get at some kind of SJW angle, Peter?

Because this is just the same as the Affleck shit you wanked on about for eons.

Are you attempting to get this thread closed to by tricking me into using discriptive terms Blip has asked me not to? Are you hovering over that ! waiting to pounce?

No, I am saying that you ARE using absurd strawman terms, similar to that which Blip told you not to.

No, Peter - whether you want to believe it or not, I have no interest in you being cautioned or warned by the mods.

However, if you do engage in that sort of behavior, you can't just keep it up endlessly. I gave you fair warning before after about the 8th time, and then when you repeated it yet again, I reported them all.

So yeah, if you don't want to get the thread closed - don't make up a new pejorative strawmanning term as a proxy for me then argue with it. If you want to ask me something about social justice, just ask, don't insinuate.

Peter Brown wrote:You already made it very clear my views on the closure of Mosques will not be tolerated because its a word you are allowed to use.

No, this is a fucking strawman as you have been told 50 times? By what? A dozen people?

This kind of bullshit ISN'T tolerated here and NEVER has been.

I've spelled out my point of conflict with you in extremely clear terms, so you can no longer pretend my position is anything else. Sure, if you plan to keep on posting misrepresentations of what I've said, i will report you.

The point, Peter, is that you need to play fair - which means you can't lie about what I've said.

You can post as many vids of Pat Condell as you like - even though it's trolling after a while, I think it's like watching you shove a foot in your mouth!

Peter Brown wrote:Didn't you also state I should leave RatSkep and go some other Forum or was that someone else who feels the same way about my views on Mosques being the teaching ground for Islam?

No Peter - no one suggested you should leave the forum. I suggested you should 'sling your hook' in the same way one might use 'piss off'. I suggested that you might find a more welcome reception for your anti-Muslim prejudice on other sites, but I never suggested you couldn't post in both fora at the same time.

What actually happened was you threw your toys out of the pram and claimed you were leaving anyway, then you pissed off for a couple of days before bouncing back like a creationist weeble repeating the same stupid contentions.

Peter Brown wrote:Do you watch those clips and actual concider what Pat is saying or is it the attitude of Pat's a racist so I'm not going too?

Yes, Peter. Again, I've told you think - the fact you pay ZERO attention to what people write is part of the problem here. I used to watch Pat Condell.... WHEN HE WAS FUNNY (remember me saying that 3 or 4 times?). Pat has made some good vids in his time, but over the years he became fixated with Islam and started saying stupid things that were no longer just ironic little jabs for the grins, but actual serious full on nastiness about entire groups of people. He's got worse and worse and worse since.

I never said either you or Pat is a racist. I have quite specifically used the word 'prejudice'. Racism is a subset of prejudice, but it's not synonymous. However, I do think that part of the anti-Muslim rhetoric is because they are foreign - we've watched you apologize endlessly for the just as absurd but more familiar and local Christian narrative, and you don't tar all Christians with the same brush as you do Christian extremists - the imbalance of your criticism has been noted a number of times.

Peter Brown wrote:which is the same attitude I thought PZ suffered even before SJW came up as a web meme.

Aha! 27 references to it later, we finally get to hear what it was you were trying to say. However, it's still not clear because of your sentence structure. What are you saying that PZ 'suffered' from? You haven't explained at all what that supposedly is.

However, as I have already told you - you can easily go and search my post history for the term 'pz myers' and see what my position on him is.

Or you can just make it up and tell me that's what my position is. That seems to be the pattern.

Peter Brown wrote:I wrote that PZ line to hint at the McCarthy era, and it is funny that ex Muslims are branded as the new McCarthys too.

In what circles are Muslims branded McCarthys, Peter? This again highlights the gap in your understanding of sources and chambers of information: just because you obsess over Islam and hunt down sites and videos that conform to your position - it's not remotely mainstream.

Peter Brown wrote:Here is another clip and reason why Islam is bad, it is a religion that isn't just full of bad teachings, it rots the minds of nations too

Again, why are you telling me this? It's like a broken record. I have repeatedly stated that Islam is a nasty mind-virus - apparently even publicly making this admission for you numerous times doesn't satisfy your suspicion of me - which is why you've also frequently suggested that I am on the side of terrorists.

I know you cannot possibly misunderstand the details of my challenge to your contentions here. I've spelled them out clearly enough and frequently enough that, even should you wish to pretend otherwise, you must know that no one would buy it. You have read what I've said, but you can't address it. Again, there's a reason you can't address it head on, and I think it's because you don't want to inspect it. It's not a nice thing, but ignoring it isn't going to make it go away.

And it is a mind virus that every Muslim is told is Allah’s word, and the messenger must be followed as Allah’s example.
What do you think is going to happen when children brought up to believe that actually then read and understands the Arabic words?

You know it’s true too. How huge would the demonstrations be, and how venomous the bombing campaign be if we closed any other religious groups halls? Can you seriously think of a political party, say the Conservatives, being as frightening on the streets if Conservative central office was shut?

If it was America I can imaging Fox News wanting civil war 2, but I think they and their far right followers are very much like Islam in the retoric.

Sometimes you just have to take the tough decisions to be rid of such mind virus’, especially in a make believe poll option where nobody gets really hurt feelings that last forever.

So lets just drop the we don't like your sort for having those thoughts here. OK too harsh, I don't mean it that nasty.

In what circles are Muslims branded McCarthys

Did you even bother to read the NSS links, it is in the NSS papers

It would be the people who wish to keep the mosques open and full of potential members who are saying ex Muslims are the new McCarthys. If ex Muslims are rebranded as Pat Condell's, bigots, Islamophobes, whatever, the Muslims and others can ignore what they say. This is so they (Islamists) can spread the actual words Quran to people who would follow them rather than quit the religion.

Yes I remember the change when Pat went from Creationist knocking to Islam. I think I felt the same, this is a bit strong, a bit harsh on Muslims. Then a year or more on as I said I started to look at history in the ME, Islam came up so I read a bit of it and then I'm thinking shit it really is nothing more than a terrorist guide to taking over the world wrapped up in Allah as big Caesar and Muhammad as little Caesar (gangster pun intended).

The closer you follow the texts the more nasty you are to everybody you view as a non Muslim. The further you go the less nasty you are.
Pat isn’t joking I find, he is hitting the nail on the head every time when talks about the Islam of the Quran. Not the Islam of Muslims, that can have literally no major Quran influence at all even if they would demand (a little Quran) punishment for those who slander the prophet or burn the book.

The girl in that clip re says what Hitchen said about Islam. If you don't let them do as they want, let them throw acid in girls faces, let them burn heritics alive, Muhammad said it is your fault, you brought it on, you have your religion and I have mine which is the real one.

Continued failure to acknowledge subjective interpetation has been noted.

Radicalisation occurs at University and centres for Islamic studies has been noted as well.

Peter Brown wrote:And it is a mind virus that every Muslim is told is Allah’s word, and the messenger must be followed as Allah’s example.
What do you think is going to happen when children brought up to believe that actually then read and understands the Arabic words?

I think there's no one answer to what 1.7 billion people would do given even just those two criteria, but the fact is that those two criteria are just 2 amidst a zillion other criteria that humans necessarily process and decide on as they mature.

Peter Brown wrote:You know it’s true too.

I know what is 'true'?

Peter Brown wrote:How huge would the demonstrations be, and how venomous the bombing campaign be if we closed any other religious groups halls? Can you seriously think of a political party, say the Conservatives, being as frightening on the streets if Conservative central office was shut?

The demonstrations would be huge - and I'd join in with them, as would any sensible member of our secular society. History has taught us that you do not stand idly by when other members of your society have their fundamental liberties removed, because who's going to stand with you when they try to take yours?

The bombing yadda yadda spin wibble wobble assertion, rejected as being worth the screen space it takes up.

Peter Brown wrote:If it was America I can imaging Fox News wanting civil war 2, but I think they and their far right followers are very much like Islam in the retoric.

Showing you that it's not just Islam which has a problem with extremists. Oh no, that won't be your take-away message, I am sure.

Peter Brown wrote:Sometimes you just have to take the tough decisions to be rid of such mind virus’, especially in a make believe poll option where nobody gets really hurt feelings that last forever.

No Peter. You can make that decision for yourself, but you can't make it for others. Making such decisions for others is tyranny.

Peter Brown wrote:So lets just drop the we don't like your sort for having those thoughts here. OK too harsh, I don't mean it that nasty.

I promise you that I will instantly drop it the moment you stop espousing that all Muslims are to blame for the actions of a few, and you acknowledge that it was wrong.

Peter Brown wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:In what circles are Muslims branded McCarthys

Did you even bother to read the NSS links, it is in the NSS papers

Yes, I read the links. Now answer my question: in what circles are Muslims branded McCarthys?

Peter Brown wrote:It would be the people who wish to keep the mosques open and full of potential members who are saying ex Muslims are the new McCarthys. If ex Muslims are rebranded as Pat Condell's, bigots, Islamophobes, whatever, the Muslims and others can ignore what they say. This is so they (Islamists) can spread the actual words Quran to people who would follow them rather than quit the religion.

Again, this is completely unintelligible to me, but I will try to find something comprehensible in it.

No one has claimed that ex-Muslims are Pat Condells, bigots, Islamophobes or whatever.

Another strawman knocked down.

Peter Brown wrote:Yes I remember the change when Pat went from Creationist knocking to Islam. I think I felt the same, this is a bit strong, a bit harsh on Muslims. Then a year or more on as I said I started to look at history in the ME, Islam came up so I read a bit of it and then I'm thinking shit it really is nothing more than a terrorist guide to taking over the world wrapped up in Allah as big Caesar and Muhammad as little Caesar (gangster pun intended).

Again, Peter - this is what I've already suggested happened. You've surrounded yourself with a belief system then you're amazed to find that you keep finding information which corroborates it.

I didn't cite Morton's Demon to mock you, Peter. I mean it deadly seriously.

Peter Brown wrote:The closer you follow the texts the more nasty you are to everybody you view as a non Muslim. The further you go the less nasty you are.

If you read the Qur'an as extremists read the Qur'an, you can find quotes justifying extremism. If you read the Qur'an as an ahmaddiya Muslim reads the Qur'an, you can find quotes justifying their contention about being peaceful.

As I've pointed out many, many times - neither of them are right or wrong - the books are internally contradictory fiction. But I would rather the entire world's population of Muslims cherrypicked the text towards peaceful interactions rather than attempting to legitimize extremists by saying that they're the True Muslims.

Peter Brown wrote:Pat isn’t joking I find,...

No, he's not - that's why I've said the point about him being a comedian who stopped being funny half a dozen times.

Peter Brown wrote:he is hitting the nail on the head every time when talks about the Islam of the Quran.

And I'd say his criticisms are accurate of the subset of Muslims who do employ violence towards extremist ends, but painting all Muslims as such is just as bigoted and stupid as extremist rhetoric - it IS extremist rhetoric, albeit non-violent. However, I fear that the climate of such statements are also going to lead to violence, prejudice, and a general worsening of our situation.

Peter Brown wrote: Not the Islam of Muslims, that can have literally no major Quran influence at all even if they would demand (a little Quran) punishment for those who slander the prophet or burn the book.

Again, can't parse what you're trying to say in this paragraph.

Peter Brown wrote:The girl in that clip re says what Hitchen said about Islam. If you don't let them do as they want, let them throw acid in girls faces, let them burn heritics alive, Muhammad said it is your fault, you brought it on, you have your religion and I have mine which is the real one.

And I am telling you that this is not an accurate representation of all Muslims. Lay the guilt at the door of people who do engage in such behaviors and you won't hear a squeak from me as I'll be standing beside you. But try to foist off collective guilt and use that as justification for ostracising and demonizing all Muslims and I will be in yours, and Pat Condell, and whoever else's face. For me, they're exactly the same base human prejudices being espoused.

Peter Brown wrote:Radicalisation occurs at University and centres for Islamic studies has been noted as well.

As it does on echo-chambers on the internet. Islamic radicalisation, and anti-Muslim radicalisation. Neither are desirable.

Peter Brown wrote:Radicalisation occurs at University and centres for Islamic studies has been noted as well.

Petulant response continues to willfully ignore subjective interpetation and internal diversification in favor of continued bigoted scare-mongering.

Well it was aimed at Thomas as I don't regard anything he says as remotely useful to the debate anymore, it’s just pure risible back biting childlike behaviour and I’m replying at his level of debate and being just as stupid, back biting and obviously childlike, at least you are making the effort to make a case until you start looking like you are supporting his behaviour and posts.

Maybe Thomas will get the point? He hasn't yet.

Spearthrower wrote:

Peter Brown wrote:And it is a mind virus that every Muslim is told is Allah’s word, and the messenger must be followed as Allah’s example.
What do you think is going to happen when children brought up to believe that actually then read and understands the Arabic words?

I think there's no one answer to what 1.7 billion people would do given even just those two criteria, but the fact is that those two criteria are just 2 amidst a zillion other criteria that humans necessarily process and decide on as they mature.

1.7Billion or 7% of 1.7Billion, every single one of them are told the Quran is the word of Allah to Mankind.

You agree the Qur'an has the mother load of bad ideas as Sam Harris said, correct.

So the only difference between one of the 1.7 billion Muslims and another of the 1.7 billion Muslims is how much of the literal Quran they practice, and how much of that practiced Quran they do practice is what we in the non Muslim world hold as really bad ideas.

A bad Qur'an idea can be anything from a woman’s place is only in the home, right across the Quran spectrum of chopping off heads of polythesists and atheists, we we both agree on this too.

Spearthrower wrote:

Peter Brown wrote:You know it’s true too.

I know what is 'true'?[/color]

That the Quran (see above epic by me) and the indoctrination of it being the word of Allah and the prophet must be obeyed is the problem of Islam


So far are we in accord or not?

Peter Brown wrote:Well it was aimed at Thomas as I don't regard anything he says as remotely useful to the debate anymore,

More personalised comments to hide your own failure to defend your position.
You're not fooling anyone Peter.

Peter Brown wrote:it’s just pure risible back biting childlike behaviour and I’m replying at his level of debate and being just as stupid, back biting and obviously childlike, at least you are making the effort to make a case until you start looking like you are supporting his behaviour and posts.

Maybe Thomas will get the point? He hasn't yet.

That's because this is pure fantasy on your part and yet another desperate attempt to deflect attention from your own 'reasoning'.
I have responded in detail to many of your ludicrous and outright false claims.
I've not obfuscated like you've done with random videos and pictures, nor have I repeatedly tried to straw-man my interlocutors or attack them via neoligisms.
That's all you Peter, not me.

Peter Brown wrote:
That the Quran (see above epic by me) and the indoctrination of it being the word of Allah and the prophet must be obeyed is the problem of Islam


So far are we in accord or not?

The disagreement is that you keep asserting there is one single, objectively TrueTM way, to interpet the Qu'ran and the word of Allah.
Which, as evidenced by the many different sects and Muslims, is demonstrably false.

I am rubber you are glue

na na na

Peter Brown wrote:I am rubber you are glue

na na na

QED.
I adress your points and demonstrate why they're flawed, you respond with peurile behaviour like the above.
And you dare to accuse me.

What does Muhammad say about those who do not; about those who fails to obey his teachings? That is the answer to your other sects arguement.

I can kick a football, be bloody stupid to call myself a footballer, but you are quite willing to call someone a Muslim if they do not follow the Quran or do not behave like Muslims following the teachings did in the first few hundred years

you Thomas address nothing!!

o my god your offended, and I'm offended by you claiming to be offended

Peter Brown wrote:What does Muhammad say about those who do not do about those who fails to obey his teachings? That is the answer to your other sects arguement.

It's not an aswer. It's JAQing off.
Try again.

Peter Brown wrote:I can kick a football, be bloody stupid to call myself a footballer, but you are quite willing to call someone a Muslim if they do not follow the Quran or do not behave like Muslims following the teachings did in the first few hundred years

Continued failure to acknowledge the fact of subjective interpetation has been noted.
Mindlessly repeating this No True Muslim fallacy won't make it any less assinine Peter.

Peter Brown wrote:you Thomas address nothing!!

Blatant lie.

Peter Brown wrote:o my god your offended, and I'm offended by you claiming to be offended

Fuck off with the incesssant straw-men. Nowhere have I said I'm offended.

Thomas Eshuis wrote:

Peter Brown wrote:What does Muhammad say about those who do not do about those who fails to obey his teachings? That is the answer to your other sects arguement.

It's not an aswer. [/qoute]

It is the answer you don’t like to admit because you know it destroys every defence you have for protecting the Quran and the damage it does. The defence every terrorist apologists uses to protect those who are radicalising the youth today.

Don’t shoot the Hamas soldier firing rockets, he is hiding behind the innocent children.

[/quote]

May the holy T pot save us from arguements like that Thomas

Peter Brown wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:

Peter Brown wrote:And it is a mind virus that every Muslim is told is Allah’s word, and the messenger must be followed as Allah’s example.
What do you think is going to happen when children brought up to believe that actually then read and understands the Arabic words?

I think there's no one answer to what 1.7 billion people would do given even just those two criteria, but the fact is that those two criteria are just 2 amidst a zillion other criteria that humans necessarily process and decide on as they mature.

1.7Billion or 7% of 1.7Billion, every single one of them are told the Quran is the word of Allah to Mankind.

Let's just assume that you are right for the sake of the argument.

If this is the case, and yet only 7% of the 1.7 billion Muslims interpret the Qur'an in the way you think they do, then there's a fundamental problem for you in terms of evidence contradicting your argument.

If only 7% of Muslims are interpreting the Qur'an to justify their violence, then you cannot claim that the Qur'an necessarily equates to violence.

It's a compelling defeat of your contention.

Peter Brown wrote:You agree the Qur'an has the mother load of bad ideas as Sam Harris said, correct.

No, I don't agree that it is the motherlode of bad ideas - for me, that's religion as a whole. Islam is just one iteration in a long history of stupidity our species has engaged in. Again, i see it in context of its preceding belief systems, Judaism and Christianity, and the prevailing social forces of the times. I see it in context of the Arab states, its tribal society and outdated social restrictions. But I don't think that it has to be that way, anymore than Christianity still represents that slavery is ordained by god, or that women are chattel. I think it can change, I think it will change, and i think it already has changed for a vast swathe of Muslims

Peter Brown wrote:So the only difference between one of the 1.7 billion Muslims and another of the 1.7 billion Muslims is how much of the literal Quran they practice, and how much of that practiced Quran they do practice is what we in the non Muslim world hold as really bad ideas.

No, again I've taken pains to explain this to you now dozens of times. There are parts of the Qur'an that say killing another person is never justified except in self-defense - that's not wrong just because it's in the Qur'an, likewise if a Muslim practices that literally, I have no problem with it. Terrorists are not practicing the Qur'an literally, they are practicing cherrypicked verses of the Qur'an literally. Understanding this is essential to any rational discussion on Islam.

Peter Brown wrote:A bad Qur'an idea can be anything from a woman’s place is only in the home, right across the Quran spectrum of chopping off heads of polythesists and atheists, we we both agree on this too.

Yes, we do. But if a Muslim doesn't practice those, I am not about to tell them they're not Muslims or that's not what Islam is. I am not going to tell peaceful Muslims that they are not True Muslims because only violent extremists practice True Islam.

Peter Brown wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:

Peter Brown wrote:You know it’s true too.

I know what is 'true'?[/color]

That the Quran (see above epic by me) and the indoctrination of it being the word of Allah and the prophet must be obeyed is the problem of Islam

Well then, while I agree that it is A problem, I don't agree that it is THE problem. When a Christian murders someone because they've interpreted their texts to justify that action, I don't think it's simply because Christians are meant to believe that the Bible is the word of God, I think it's because that particular person was either mentally deranged or a violent wanker. I think there will be other problems if you look closer: what society they came from, what upbringing they came from, what their experiences in life were - just being a Christian does not mean that they will engage in violent activities. I think the same for Muslims.

Peter Brown wrote:So far are we in accord or not?

Not really, no. I don't like simplified analyses of entire swathes of people. Humans are complex, individuals are not representative of the whole.

Peter Brown wrote:What does Muhammad say about those who do not; about those who fails to obey his teachings? That is the answer to your other sects arguement.

I can kick a football, be bloody stupid to call myself a footballer, but you are quite willing to call someone a Muslim if they do not follow the Quran or do not behave like Muslims following the teachings did in the first few hundred years

Yes, indeed I am. I don't identify Muslims by whether they follow one particular set of cherrypicked literalisms over another. I identify Muslims by their own self-identification of them being Muslims.

Likewise, when I see a Christian or a Jew wearing mixed fabrics, I don't declare they are No True Christian because they're not following a literalist interpretation.

Peter Brown wrote:

Thomas Eshuis wrote:

Peter Brown wrote:What does Muhammad say about those who do not do about those who fails to obey his teachings? That is the answer to your other sects arguement.

It's not an aswer. [/qoute]

It is the answer you don’t like to admit because you know it destroys every defence you have for protecting the Quran and the damage it does.

Again with the pathetic lies.
I have never defended the Qu'ran nor claimed that does no damage.
Seriously Peter cut it out with this incessant need to lie about me. It won't hide the bigotry in your posts or your inability to defend it. It will only demonstrate that you cannot adress my points or defend your own.

Peter Brown wrote: The defence every terrorist apologists uses to protect those who are radicalising the youth today.

FFS.

Peter Brown wrote:

Don’t shoot the Hamas soldier firing rockets, he is hiding behind the innocent children.

May the holy T pot save us from arguements like that Thomas[/quote]
Will you fuck off with these desperate and transparent attempts to demonize me?