So it's ok to explore the wider context on how someone did a crime, but not ok to explore the wider context on why someone did a crime? It seems like you have decided on your end conclusion, and then are working backwards in the reasoning to get there, trying to split straws to make it work.
Those who believe in the general prohibition of firearms are fantastic hypocrites on this issue and others. The point is that neither the legality of firearms nor the Islamic faith lay behind either tragedies. In both cases it was an individual decision to commit a criminal offence, and the individuals in question ought to be tried and punished in accordance with the law of the land.
So it's ok to explore the wider context on how someone did a crime, but not ok to explore the wider context on why someone did a crime? It seems like you have decided on your end conclusion, and then are working backwards in the reasoning to get there, trying to split straws to make it work.
Those who believe in the general prohibition of firearms are fantastic hypocrites on this issue and others. The point is that neither the legality of firearms nor the Islamic faith lay behind either tragedies. In both cases it was an individual decision to commit a criminal offence, and the individual in question ought to be tried and punished in accordance with the law of the land.
Actually, I'd argue that widespread availability of firearms AND the current state of the Islamic faith should both be debated in how they relate to the respective crimes. That doesn't downplay individual responsibility of course.
There's a huge difference between Christianity and Islam, as they exist today, in that the vast majority of Christians in the world have views that are moderate and democratic, while a majority of Muslims in the world have extremist views. This is the inconvenient truth that people try to gloss over with false equivalence.
Oh really. Do you have any actual evidence to back that up? Have you actually spent any time with muslims in muslim countries? Or are you just letting your own western bias influence your views?
I am no fan of any religion and am certainly no cheerleader for Islam. But to try and claim that the majority of muslims in the world are extremists is simply wrong and offensive. The vast majority of muslims in the world, just like the vast majority of christians are just normal people getting on with their lives and hoping their governments don't do anything stupid.
Of course if you know any different and have any real evidence to back up your bias then please do let us know.
Considering the Afghan War was fought because the Afghan government of the time was sheltering the people that launched an attack on the US that killed three thousand people, it's hard to think of a clearer case of a just war.
It would have been a clearer case of a just war if the US had given the Afghan government evidence that the people they were sheltering had launched the attack, rather than just expecting them to take their word for it.
And even then it doesn't sound like a clear case of a just war at all. For example, the UK is currently sheltering someone accused of involvement with terrorism in Jordan. Aside from whether or not we think they should be doing that, and even if he'd been involved in very large-scale attacks, it's not obvious to me that the Jordanians would be justified in invading the UK over it.
Perhaps I was overly euphemistic in my post. The Taliban were not just sheltering Al-Qaeda, they were intricately involved with them, to the point of almost being different wings of the same organisation.
When Al Qaeda arrived in Afghanistan from Sudan around 1996, says Kuehn, its membership was not more than 30. Al Qaeda fighters, and the growing number of recruits who came to Afghanistan from elsewhere, kept apart from Taliban fighters, who resented Al Qaeda, and there was a great deal of animosity between the two. Osama bin Laden insisted that international actions against the United States and other countries was crucial to his strategy, while Mullah Omar opposed such actions, says Kuehn.
PS. I will grant that there are some disanalogies with the Abu Qatada case, for example that Mullah Omar probably wasn't primarily prevented from extraditing Bin Laden by the EU Court of Human Rights. But on its own sheltering an enemy is a terrible justification for invasion and one that if widely followed would lead to perpetual war everywhere, especially if the country doing the invading isn't even prepared to provide evidence of their guilt.
There's a huge difference between Christianity and Islam, as they exist today, in that the vast majority of Christians in the world have views that are moderate and democratic, while a majority of Muslims in the world have extremist views. This is the inconvenient truth that people try to gloss over with false equivalence.
Oh really. Do you have any actual evidence to back that up? Have you actually spent any time with muslims in muslim countries? Or are you just letting your own western bias influence your views?
I am no fan of any religion and am certainly no cheerleader for Islam. But to try and claim that the majority of muslims in the world are extremists is simply wrong and offensive. The vast majority of muslims in the world, just like the vast majority of christians are just normal people getting on with their lives and hoping their governments don't do anything stupid.
Of course if you know any different and have any real evidence to back up your bias then please do let us know.
Hard to argue that a majority of any major religion has extremist views isn't it?
It's a minority of extremists that paint a negative picture of Muslims in many English people's minds by their extreme actions and vice versa.
Also, is it fair to say that the zeal of the convert plays a big part in extremism? Neither of the "Islamic terrorists" who killed Lee Rigby were born Muslims were they?
There's a huge difference between Christianity and Islam, as they exist today, in that the vast majority of Christians in the world have views that are moderate and democratic, while a majority of Muslims in the world have extremist views. This is the inconvenient truth that people try to gloss over with false equivalence.
Oh really. Do you have any actual evidence to back that up? Have you actually spent any time with muslims in muslim countries? Or are you just letting your own western bias influence your views?
I am no fan of any religion and am certainly no cheerleader for Islam. But to try and claim that the majority of muslims in the world are extremists is simply wrong and offensive. The vast majority of muslims in the world, just like the vast majority of christians are just normal people getting on with their lives and hoping their governments don't do anything stupid.
Of course if you know any different and have any real evidence to back up your bias then please do let us know.
The Koran teaches that a Muslim is superior to a non-Muslim.
The Bible holds a very different view for Christians.
There are 100s of websites online that go through the Koran line by line including all the stuff about jihad. These include sites run by Islamic preachers who answer questions. When the political class say there is nothing in the Koran that supports this or that they are lying - and anyone can find out for themselves online - but not from the political class or anywhere in the MSM.
As it happens i think most of what happens is excuse rather than reason i.e. people want to do something for some personal reason and then go looking for an excuse in religion or idealogy rather than the religion or idealogy being the cause but the political class lying about this over and over for years is just another reason for why they're becoming so despised.
On topic, sort-of stating the obvious but it depends how much national support they lose.
It's all very well getting a relative advantage from UKIP and having a good ground game in key seats, but if half the people who voted for you last time vote for somebody else, even FPTP in its weirdest of moods won't be able to save you.
A lot of left-leaning 2010 LibDems seem to be seriously miffed with them. It's one thing to choose the lesser of two evils and vote tactically for an incumbent in a seat the LibDems already hold, but it's another to carefully scrutinize the possibility of a split in the right-wing vote, do the appropriate UNS calculation and figure that it might be worth voting for Clegg in a seat they lost last time. I don't really see how the LibDems are going to put up a "winning here" argument that will convince these people.
Let's bring some facts into the discussion about whether it's unfair to paint Islam, as a global religion, with extremist views. Let's look at the top twenty Muslim populations in the world, available here:
And let's compare with a poll question from Pew, about whether stoning should be the punishment for adultery. This is a seriously extreme view. It's not just punishment, it's not just corporal punishment, it's not just capital punishment, it's a brutal, extremely painful form of capital punishment. I've never heard of even the most extreme right wing Christians holding this point of view. Anyway, here it is, page 221:
- Indonesia, Muslim population 205m, 42% support for stoning, that's 86m extremist Muslims - Pakistan, Muslim population 178m, 86% for stoning, 153m extremists - India, Muslim pop 177m, we don't have a number here, but let's give them the number for most moderate South Asian country we have data for, Bangladesh at 54%, so 80m extremists - Egypt, 80m, 80%, 64m - Nigeria, 75m, 37%, 28m - Iran, 75m, we don't have a number here so let's use an average of the two main neighbours, Iraq and Afghanistan, 71%, 52m extremists - Turkey, 75m, a moderate country with only one in ten extremists - 9%!, 7m - Algeria, 35m, no number so use Tunisia, which seems generous considering Algeria's extremist history, 28%, 10m extremists - Morocco, 32m, use Tunisia again, 28%, 9m - Iraq, 31m, 57%, 18m - Afghanistan, 29m, 84%, 24m - Ethiopia, 29m, 23%, 7m - Uzbekistan, 26m, no number so use Kyrgyzstan, 26%, 7m - Saudi, 25m, no number so use best proxy of Jordan, 65%, 16m - Yemen, 24m, as above, 65%, 16m - China, 21m, no number so use Tajikistan, which is right next to the Muslim bit, 25%, 12m - Syria, 21m, use Iraq, 57%, 12m - Malaysia, 17m, 54%, 9m - Russia, 16m, 13%, 2m
Totalling it up you get 681m extremists out of a Muslim population of 1.3bn in these 20 countries, a slim majority. And this is on a seriously extreme question. Muslims are clearly in a completely different league to Christians in terms of extremism.
The far left fellow travellers of the Islamists and the mirror image EDL and their propagandists are the enemy within. We have none of the former on here, but their excuses are all too familiar, before the election many on the right took up cudgels to blame foreign policy too.
Those on the right who seek to broaden their attacks to Muslims in general and "multiculturalism" are equally cancerous and provide cover for those who attack Muslims and Mosques.
But nothing is new under the sun, and the rhetoric and scapegoating has it's parallels.
Attacking muslims as if they or their religion were in any way to blame for what happened is abhorrent and plain wrong. And I say that as someone who doesn't believe in any of these Middle Eastern Sky Fairy tales. Religion is the excuse not the cause.
Attacking multiculturalism - a system which has driven communities apart and allowed extremism to thrive - is not wrong. Integration, with all communities taking the best bits of each others cultures and using that to isolate and combat the extremists, is the only way to effectively deal with the alienation felt by so many sections of society today.
This is why the idiots who protest about mosques being built are so wrong. Having a mosque alongside a church should be a sign of integration rather than alienation.
Thats why I put "multiculturalism" in speech marks. The propagandists are largely attacking Muslims and those with different coloured skins.
Which propagandists are attacking those with different colour skins, and in which posts?
You can't back this up because there wasn't such a post and you are incapable of logical reasoning. There is as much justification for your point as someone arguing that as you dislike it when people post links about recent child abuse scandals, that you actually like child abuse.
Making allegations without backing them up should result in a ban
I am afraid that history is not on your side. Christians down the ages have used the Bible to persecute people they disagreed with, whether of other religions or their own. They continue to do so today. Conflating the Koran, Islamic extremism and the general Muslim population is no different to equating the Bible, The Westboro Baptist Church and the general Christian population. In both cases the comparisons are ludicrous.
I think you will find it was a Papal legate who uttered those immortal lines "Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius" at Beziers.
Quite right. The irony is that for all the rhetoric linking a tiny extremist minority to Muslims in general in Britain, it remains the official position of the church of Rome that the Pope is infallible, possesses a plenitude of power in spiritual and temporal affairs, may depose emperors, may license princes' subjects to murder them, may absolve any sin, commute any temporal punishment and alter any doctrine of faith at will. Of course, most British Romanists would abhor most of these positions, but they remain the bedrock of the Roman dictatorship.
Really? It's been a while since I read papal history (there was a great book about it I read about 5 years ago), but I thought they abandoned temporal authority de facto with the Risorgimento and de jure in the Lateran Treaty
Totalling it up you get 681m extremists out of a Muslim population of 1.3bn in these 20 countries, a slim majority. And this is on a seriously extreme question. Muslims are clearly in a completely different league to Christians in terms of extremism.
Is there any evidence that people of other superstitions and indeed of no religion at all, hold substantially different views in countries at those levels of economic development?
There's a huge difference between Christianity and Islam, as they exist today, in that the vast majority of Christians in the world have views that are moderate and democratic, while a majority of Muslims in the world have extremist views. This is the inconvenient truth that people try to gloss over with false equivalence.
Oh really. Do you have any actual evidence to back that up? Have you actually spent any time with muslims in muslim countries? Or are you just letting your own western bias influence your views?
I am no fan of any religion and am certainly no cheerleader for Islam. But to try and claim that the majority of muslims in the world are extremists is simply wrong and offensive. The vast majority of muslims in the world, just like the vast majority of christians are just normal people getting on with their lives and hoping their governments don't do anything stupid.
Of course if you know any different and have any real evidence to back up your bias then please do let us know.
The Koran teaches that a Muslim is superior to a non-Muslim.
The Bible holds a very different view for Christians.
This, incidentally, was evident right from the beginning in the split between James the brother of Jesus and Paul. J tboJ argued that Christianity was effectively a reformed Judaism, while Paul believed he had a mission to preach to the Gentiles. I've always thought that James not being maytred when he was could have created a very interesting counterfactual history
On topic: One key factor may be the extent to which long-standing LibDem MPs choose to retire in 2015. There are quite a lot of such MPs who will have strong personal vote. Examples are Norman Baker in Lewes and Sir Alan Beith in Berwick-on-Tweed, two seats which on a good night the Tories might be able to win against a new candidate, but are unlikely to win against the incumbent.
Really? It's been a while since I read papal history (there was a great book about it I read about 5 years ago), but I thought they abandoned temporal authority de facto with the Risorgimento and de jure in the Lateran Treaty
That is a favourable interpretation of the historical record. All that occurred in the Lateran Pacts was that the Vatican recognised Italian temporal sovereignty. It did not renounce the plenitudo potestatis, how could it? The existence and recognition of the exercise by others of temporal authority in Italy has never been considered in any way to infringe upon the temporal supremacy of the pope. You should re-read your Aquinas and Aegidius Romanus.
Totalling it up you get 681m extremists out of a Muslim population of 1.3bn in these 20 countries, a slim majority. And this is on a seriously extreme question. Muslims are clearly in a completely different league to Christians in terms of extremism.
Is there any evidence that people of other superstitions and indeed of no religion at all, hold substantially different views in countries at those levels of economic development?
I have shown that a huge proportion of Muslims worldwide have extremist views. If you wish to argue the same for people of other religions, I suggest you find some opinion polling to back you up.
I'd also point out that economic development is not unrelated to religious culture, so it's not reasonable to treat that as an exogenous factor. South Asia, for example, had a very similar history under the British, and was left with pretty much the same institutions in the late 1940. Yet what is GDP per capita in these countries now?
I have no inherent objection to Islam over other religions. I believe it is perfectly possible to have a form of it that is compatible with liberal democracy. They just need to ignore the immoral bits to their scripture, like Jews and Christians do. But if we want to get democratic Muslim societies we need to accept that the Muslim world is a very long way from getting there, and far further away than any other major religion. Why are those on the left so determined to stick their head in the sands over this?
I think this is a very good idea. And remember, this would increase wage inflation by the same amount, so people would not be poorer. It just means we would have more flexibility for monetary policy in a recession. Also, this is something Conservatives should support because it reduces the need for Keynesian stimulus because we'd be less likely to hit ZIRP.
Let's bring some facts into the discussion about whether it's unfair to paint Islam, as a global religion, with extremist views. Let's look at the top twenty Muslim populations in the world, available here:
And let's compare with a poll question from Pew, about whether stoning should be the punishment for adultery. This is a seriously extreme view. It's not just punishment, it's not just corporal punishment, it's not just capital punishment, it's a brutal, extremely painful form of capital punishment. I've never heard of even the most extreme right wing Christians holding this point of view. Anyway, here it is, page 221:
- Indonesia, Muslim population 205m, 42% support for stoning, that's 86m extremist Muslims - Pakistan, Muslim population 178m, 86% for stoning, 153m extremists - India, Muslim pop 177m, we don't have a number here, but let's give them the number for most moderate South Asian country we have data for, Bangladesh at 54%, so 80m extremists - Egypt, 80m, 80%, 64m - Nigeria, 75m, 37%, 28m - Iran, 75m, we don't have a number here so let's use an average of the two main neighbours, Iraq and Afghanistan, 71%, 52m extremists - Turkey, 75m, a moderate country with only one in ten extremists - 9%!, 7m - Algeria, 35m, no number so use Tunisia, which seems generous considering Algeria's extremist history, 28%, 10m extremists - Morocco, 32m, use Tunisia again, 28%, 9m - Iraq, 31m, 57%, 18m - Afghanistan, 29m, 84%, 24m - Ethiopia, 29m, 23%, 7m - Uzbekistan, 26m, no number so use Kyrgyzstan, 26%, 7m - Saudi, 25m, no number so use best proxy of Jordan, 65%, 16m - Yemen, 24m, as above, 65%, 16m - China, 21m, no number so use Tajikistan, which is right next to the Muslim bit, 25%, 12m - Syria, 21m, use Iraq, 57%, 12m - Malaysia, 17m, 54%, 9m - Russia, 16m, 13%, 2m
Totalling it up you get 681m extremists out of a Muslim population of 1.3bn in these 20 countries, a slim majority. And this is on a seriously extreme question. Muslims are clearly in a completely different league to Christians in terms of extremism.
What a ludicrous way to try and justify your bigotry.
I suppose you were hoping that no one would go and actually look at the report you quoted and not see how you had lied about the views represented.
If you had actually bothered to spend just a couple of minutes looking at the site you would have seen this :
"In most countries where a question about so-called “honor” killings was asked, majorities of Muslims say such killings are never justified. Only in two countries – Afghanistan and Iraq –do majorities condone extra-judicial executions of women who allegedly have shamed their families by engaging in premarital sex or adultery."
Two countries. So your fantasy figures you just made up to support your bigotry are nothing more than smear.
Actually I would suggest anyone who believes Socrates' bile should go and look at the Pew site he links to. Fascinating results in terms of attitudes which put the lie to his claims of extremism.
Let's bring some facts into the discussion about whether it's unfair to paint Islam, as a global religion, with extremist views. Let's look at the top twenty Muslim populations in the world, available here:
And let's compare with a poll question from Pew, about whether stoning should be the punishment for adultery. This is a seriously extreme view. It's not just punishment, it's not just corporal punishment, it's not just capital punishment, it's a brutal, extremely painful form of capital punishment. I've never heard of even the most extreme right wing Christians holding this point of view. Anyway, here it is, page 221:
- Indonesia, Muslim population 205m, 42% support for stoning, that's 86m extremist Muslims - Pakistan, Muslim population 178m, 86% for stoning, 153m extremists - India, Muslim pop 177m, we don't have a number here, but let's give them the number for most moderate South Asian country we have data for, Bangladesh at 54%, so 80m extremists - Egypt, 80m, 80%, 64m - Nigeria, 75m, 37%, 28m - Iran, 75m, we don't have a number here so let's use an average of the two main neighbours, Iraq and Afghanistan, 71%, 52m extremists - Turkey, 75m, a moderate country with only one in ten extremists - 9%!, 7m - Algeria, 35m, no number so use Tunisia, which seems generous considering Algeria's extremist history, 28%, 10m extremists - Morocco, 32m, use Tunisia again, 28%, 9m - Iraq, 31m, 57%, 18m - Afghanistan, 29m, 84%, 24m - Ethiopia, 29m, 23%, 7m - Uzbekistan, 26m, no number so use Kyrgyzstan, 26%, 7m - Saudi, 25m, no number so use best proxy of Jordan, 65%, 16m - Yemen, 24m, as above, 65%, 16m - China, 21m, no number so use Tajikistan, which is right next to the Muslim bit, 25%, 12m - Syria, 21m, use Iraq, 57%, 12m - Malaysia, 17m, 54%, 9m - Russia, 16m, 13%, 2m
Totalling it up you get 681m extremists out of a Muslim population of 1.3bn in these 20 countries, a slim majority. And this is on a seriously extreme question. Muslims are clearly in a completely different league to Christians in terms of extremism.
What a ludicrous way to try and justify your bigotry.
I suppose you were hoping that no one would go and actually look at the report you quoted and not see how you had lied about the views represented.
If you had actually bothered to spend just a couple of minutes looking at the site you would have seen this :
"In most countries where a question about so-called “honor” killings was asked, majorities of Muslims say such killings are never justified. Only in two countries – Afghanistan and Iraq –do majorities condone extra-judicial executions of women who allegedly have shamed their families by engaging in premarital sex or adultery."
Two countries. So your fantasy figures you just made up to support your bigotry are nothing more than smear.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
It's very sad you're stooping to tim-type behaviour. What ridiculous logic you're using. If someone has an extremist view in one area, and a non-extremist view in another area, that doesn't make them a moderate. To think that opposition to honour killings means you're a moderate, even if you support STONING PEOPLE TO DEATH FOR ADULTERY, is a really, really idiotic thing to say. It's probably the most stupid thing you've ever said on here.
"It was said UKIP cost the Tories anywhere from 5 to 10 seats in the 2010 General Election."
Yet Anthony Wells in the link actually says:
"If we use that data, we can make an estimate of how many seats UKIP might have actually cost the Conservatives. Say UKIP had vanished, the 27% of 2010 UKIP voters who said they’d consider voting Tory had done so and the 8% and 9% who said they’d consider voting Lib Dem and Labour had done that…the Conservatives then would have won an extra five seats. If instead we look at how people voted in 2005, and assume people went back to their old voting habits in the absence of UKIP, then the Conservatives would have won one or two extra seats."
So Wells actually says between 1 and 5 seats depending upon calculation method.
I saw that pix at the time and thought it was extremely funny satire - I'm sure the professionally offended were duly appalled by it. And would've banned the Life of Brian too at the time - or indeed still would...
Let's bring some facts into the discussion about whether it's unfair to paint Islam, as a global religion, with extremist views. Let's look at the top twenty Muslim populations in the world, available here:
And let's compare with a poll question from Pew, about whether stoning should be the punishment for adultery. This is a seriously extreme view. It's not just punishment, it's not just corporal punishment, it's not just capital punishment, it's a brutal, extremely painful form of capital punishment. I've never heard of even the most extreme right wing Christians holding this point of view. Anyway, here it is, page 221:
- Indonesia, Muslim population 205m, 42% support for stoning, that's 86m extremist Muslims - Pakistan, Muslim population 178m, 86% for stoning, 153m extremists - India, Muslim pop 177m, we don't have a number here, but let's give them the number for most moderate South Asian country we have data for, Bangladesh at 54%, so 80m extremists - Egypt, 80m, 80%, 64m - Nigeria, 75m, 37%, 28m - Iran, 75m, we don't have a number here so let's use an average of the two main neighbours, Iraq and Afghanistan, 71%, 52m extremists - Turkey, 75m, a moderate country with only one in ten extremists - 9%!, 7m - Algeria, 35m, no number so use Tunisia, which seems generous considering Algeria's extremist history, 28%, 10m extremists - Morocco, 32m, use Tunisia again, 28%, 9m - Iraq, 31m, 57%, 18m - Afghanistan, 29m, 84%, 24m - Ethiopia, 29m, 23%, 7m - Uzbekistan, 26m, no number so use Kyrgyzstan, 26%, 7m - Saudi, 25m, no number so use best proxy of Jordan, 65%, 16m - Yemen, 24m, as above, 65%, 16m - China, 21m, no number so use Tajikistan, which is right next to the Muslim bit, 25%, 12m - Syria, 21m, use Iraq, 57%, 12m - Malaysia, 17m, 54%, 9m - Russia, 16m, 13%, 2m
Totalling it up you get 681m extremists out of a Muslim population of 1.3bn in these 20 countries, a slim majority. And this is on a seriously extreme question. Muslims are clearly in a completely different league to Christians in terms of extremism.
What a ludicrous way to try and justify your bigotry.
I suppose you were hoping that no one would go and actually look at the report you quoted and not see how you had lied about the views represented.
If you had actually bothered to spend just a couple of minutes looking at the site you would have seen this :
"In most countries where a question about so-called “honor” killings was asked, majorities of Muslims say such killings are never justified. Only in two countries – Afghanistan and Iraq –do majorities condone extra-judicial executions of women who allegedly have shamed their families by engaging in premarital sex or adultery."
Two countries. So your fantasy figures you just made up to support your bigotry are nothing more than smear.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
It's very sad you're stooping to tim-type behaviour. What ridiculous logic you're using. If someone has an extremist view in one area, and a non-extremist view in another area, that doesn't make them a moderate. To think that opposition to honour killings means you're a moderate, even if you support STONING PEOPLE TO DEATH FOR ADULTERY, is a really, really idiotic thing to say. It's probably the most stupid thing you've ever said on here.
Oh really, well guess what. If you had bothered to actually look at your own report you would see they have the exact numbers for STONING PEOPLE TO DEATH FOR ADULTERY in some of those countries you have been making up fantasy stats about.
All it needed was for you to spend a bit of time looking with an open mind rather than trying to make stuff up to support your bigotry. You missed the fact that they only asked the question about stoning of those who had already said they supported Sharia law. It makes rather a big difference to the numbers.
Turkey
you said 9% ( and got all shocked about it) Actual number 3%
Indonesia (The country with the largest number of muslims in the world)
You said 42% Actual number 34%
Bangladesh
You said 54% Actual number 44%
Kyrgyzstan
You said 26% Actual number 13%
In only 5 of the countries where the question was asked about stoning (out of 20) did the majority of the muslim population agree with it.
That is a very long way from your ludicrous claims.
44% support stoning to death for adultery? If there was a fixed number of rocks that would be quite good as you'd expect half the people throwing them to miss deliberately. If there were an unlimited number not so good as it would just take longer.
44% support stoning to death for adultery? If there was a fixed number of rocks that would be quite good as you'd expect half the people throwing them to miss deliberately. If there were an unlimited number not so good as it would just take longer.
Don't get me wrong, I am no fan of the Islamic faith at all. I just think that when people like Socrates are stirring up hatred against muslims by fixing figures to make it seem like the majority are extremists then it is worth while pointing out their mistakes.
Why Ireland and developing countries should have a low corporate tax rate
"As you know there's much ventilating going on about corporate tax rates about the place. Special venom is reserved for Ireland's low rate and various development charities are turning the air blue with complaints about taxes in the developing countries. The thing is though, a small and open economy like Ireland should have a low corporation tax rate: and developing countries should probably have one of zero."
"The reason is that thing called tax incidence. Companies don't pay corporation tax: it's some combination of the shareholders and the workers who do. This is not a point in argument: the only argument is about what the portions are, not the fact that the burden falls upon these two groups. We also know what it is that influences which group: it's how large the economy is in relation to the world economy and how open it is to capital movement. The smaller and more mobile, the more the workers get it in the neck."
Read the rest here, and why lefties' hand-wringing about corporate tax is actually harmful to people they claim to want to help...
Let's bring some facts into the discussion about whether it's unfair to paint Islam, as a global religion, with extremist views. Let's look at the top twenty Muslim populations in the world, available here:
And let's compare with a poll question from Pew, about whether stoning should be the punishment for adultery. This is a seriously extreme view. It's not just punishment, it's not just corporal punishment, it's not just capital punishment, it's a brutal, extremely painful form of capital punishment. I've never heard of even the most extreme right wing Christians holding this point of view. Anyway, here it is, page 221:
- Indonesia, Muslim population 205m, 42% support for stoning, that's 86m extremist Muslims - Pakistan, Muslim population 178m, 86% for stoning, 153m extremists - India, Muslim pop 177m, we don't have a number here, but let's give them the number for most moderate South Asian country we have data for, Bangladesh at 54%, so 80m extremists - Egypt, 80m, 80%, 64m - Nigeria, 75m, 37%, 28m - Iran, 75m, we don't have a number here so let's use an average of the two main neighbours, Iraq and Afghanistan, 71%, 52m extremists - Turkey, 75m, a moderate country with only one in ten extremists - 9%!, 7m - Algeria, 35m, no number so use Tunisia, which seems generous considering Algeria's extremist history, 28%, 10m extremists - Morocco, 32m, use Tunisia again, 28%, 9m - Iraq, 31m, 57%, 18m - Afghanistan, 29m, 84%, 24m - Ethiopia, 29m, 23%, 7m - Uzbekistan, 26m, no number so use Kyrgyzstan, 26%, 7m - Saudi, 25m, no number so use best proxy of Jordan, 65%, 16m - Yemen, 24m, as above, 65%, 16m - China, 21m, no number so use Tajikistan, which is right next to the Muslim bit, 25%, 12m - Syria, 21m, use Iraq, 57%, 12m - Malaysia, 17m, 54%, 9m - Russia, 16m, 13%, 2m
Totalling it up you get 681m extremists out of a Muslim population of 1.3bn in these 20 countries, a slim majority. And this is on a seriously extreme question. Muslims are clearly in a completely different league to Christians in terms of extremism.
What a ludicrous way to try and justify your bigotry.
I suppose you were hoping that no one would go and actually look at the report you quoted and not see how you had lied about the views represented.
If you had actually bothered to spend just a couple of minutes looking at the site you would have seen this :
"In most countries where a question about so-called “honor” killings was asked, majorities of Muslims say such killings are never justified. Only in two countries – Afghanistan and Iraq –do majorities condone extra-judicial executions of women who allegedly have shamed their families by engaging in premarital sex or adultery."
Two countries. So your fantasy figures you just made up to support your bigotry are nothing more than smear.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
Bangladesh
You said 54% Actual number 44%
I find the Bangladesh numbers rather difficult to appreciate. It is a poor country, yes, but virtually the entire female population [ from the upper classes to working class ] work outside the home unlike , say, Pakistan where most do not work outside of their homes
Comments
Generally the LDs slip back in seat terms when the Tories are advancing and edge back when they are not.
The national vote share is not that relevant.
In 2010 the party got a 23.6% share - up 1% on 2005 - but down five seats.
But I respect you for at least being consistent.
I am no fan of any religion and am certainly no cheerleader for Islam. But to try and claim that the majority of muslims in the world are extremists is simply wrong and offensive. The vast majority of muslims in the world, just like the vast majority of christians are just normal people getting on with their lives and hoping their governments don't do anything stupid.
Of course if you know any different and have any real evidence to back up your bias then please do let us know.
PS. I will grant that there are some disanalogies with the Abu Qatada case, for example that Mullah Omar probably wasn't primarily prevented from extraditing Bin Laden by the EU Court of Human Rights. But on its own sheltering an enemy is a terrible justification for invasion and one that if widely followed would lead to perpetual war everywhere, especially if the country doing the invading isn't even prepared to provide evidence of their guilt.
It's a minority of extremists that paint a negative picture of Muslims in many English people's minds by their extreme actions and vice versa.
Also, is it fair to say that the zeal of the convert plays a big part in extremism? Neither of the "Islamic terrorists" who killed Lee Rigby were born Muslims were they?
The Bible holds a very different view for Christians.
As it happens i think most of what happens is excuse rather than reason i.e. people want to do something for some personal reason and then go looking for an excuse in religion or idealogy rather than the religion or idealogy being the cause but the political class lying about this over and over for years is just another reason for why they're becoming so despised.
It's all very well getting a relative advantage from UKIP and having a good ground game in key seats, but if half the people who voted for you last time vote for somebody else, even FPTP in its weirdest of moods won't be able to save you.
A lot of left-leaning 2010 LibDems seem to be seriously miffed with them. It's one thing to choose the lesser of two evils and vote tactically for an incumbent in a seat the LibDems already hold, but it's another to carefully scrutinize the possibility of a split in the right-wing vote, do the appropriate UNS calculation and figure that it might be worth voting for Clegg in a seat they lost last time. I don't really see how the LibDems are going to put up a "winning here" argument that will convince these people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country
And let's compare with a poll question from Pew, about whether stoning should be the punishment for adultery. This is a seriously extreme view. It's not just punishment, it's not just corporal punishment, it's not just capital punishment, it's a brutal, extremely painful form of capital punishment. I've never heard of even the most extreme right wing Christians holding this point of view. Anyway, here it is, page 221:
http://www.pewforum.org/uploadedFiles/Topics/Religious_Affiliation/Muslim/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf
So bringing these together:
- Indonesia, Muslim population 205m, 42% support for stoning, that's 86m extremist Muslims
- Pakistan, Muslim population 178m, 86% for stoning, 153m extremists
- India, Muslim pop 177m, we don't have a number here, but let's give them the number for most moderate South Asian country we have data for, Bangladesh at 54%, so 80m extremists
- Egypt, 80m, 80%, 64m
- Nigeria, 75m, 37%, 28m
- Iran, 75m, we don't have a number here so let's use an average of the two main neighbours, Iraq and Afghanistan, 71%, 52m extremists
- Turkey, 75m, a moderate country with only one in ten extremists - 9%!, 7m
- Algeria, 35m, no number so use Tunisia, which seems generous considering Algeria's extremist history, 28%, 10m extremists
- Morocco, 32m, use Tunisia again, 28%, 9m
- Iraq, 31m, 57%, 18m
- Afghanistan, 29m, 84%, 24m
- Ethiopia, 29m, 23%, 7m
- Uzbekistan, 26m, no number so use Kyrgyzstan, 26%, 7m
- Saudi, 25m, no number so use best proxy of Jordan, 65%, 16m
- Yemen, 24m, as above, 65%, 16m
- China, 21m, no number so use Tajikistan, which is right next to the Muslim bit, 25%, 12m
- Syria, 21m, use Iraq, 57%, 12m
- Malaysia, 17m, 54%, 9m
- Russia, 16m, 13%, 2m
Totalling it up you get 681m extremists out of a Muslim population of 1.3bn in these 20 countries, a slim majority. And this is on a seriously extreme question. Muslims are clearly in a completely different league to Christians in terms of extremism.
I'd also point out that economic development is not unrelated to religious culture, so it's not reasonable to treat that as an exogenous factor. South Asia, for example, had a very similar history under the British, and was left with pretty much the same institutions in the late 1940. Yet what is GDP per capita in these countries now?
Sri Lanka (mainly Buddhist) - $5,582
India (mainly Hindu) - $3,650
Pakistan (mainly Muslim) - $2,745
Bangladesh (mainly Muslim) - $1,777
I have no inherent objection to Islam over other religions. I believe it is perfectly possible to have a form of it that is compatible with liberal democracy. They just need to ignore the immoral bits to their scripture, like Jews and Christians do. But if we want to get democratic Muslim societies we need to accept that the Muslim world is a very long way from getting there, and far further away than any other major religion. Why are those on the left so determined to stick their head in the sands over this?
http://www.voxeu.org/article/case-4-inflation
I think this is a very good idea. And remember, this would increase wage inflation by the same amount, so people would not be poorer. It just means we would have more flexibility for monetary policy in a recession. Also, this is something Conservatives should support because it reduces the need for Keynesian stimulus because we'd be less likely to hit ZIRP.
NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSe38dzJYkY
Renounce your heresy... or it's the comfy chair.
I suppose you were hoping that no one would go and actually look at the report you quoted and not see how you had lied about the views represented.
If you had actually bothered to spend just a couple of minutes looking at the site you would have seen this :
"In most countries where a question about so-called “honor” killings was asked,
majorities of Muslims say such killings are never justified. Only in two countries –
Afghanistan and Iraq –do majorities condone extra-judicial executions of women who
allegedly have shamed their families by engaging in premarital sex or adultery."
Two countries. So your fantasy figures you just made up to support your bigotry are nothing more than smear.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
"It was said UKIP cost the Tories anywhere from 5 to 10 seats in the 2010 General Election."
Yet Anthony Wells in the link actually says:
"If we use that data, we can make an estimate of how many seats UKIP might have actually cost the Conservatives. Say UKIP had vanished, the 27% of 2010 UKIP voters who said they’d consider voting Tory had done so and the 8% and 9% who said they’d consider voting Lib Dem and Labour had done that…the Conservatives then would have won an extra five seats. If instead we look at how people voted in 2005, and assume people went back to their old voting habits in the absence of UKIP, then the Conservatives would have won one or two extra seats."
So Wells actually says between 1 and 5 seats depending upon calculation method.
Just to fit in with the tone - Hitler apparently was kind to animals ;^ )
I thought we were missing a Godwin's Law reference...
Im on here
"People only say Hitler was an environmentalist and vegetarian to make him look bad.”
Part of quite a funny ruse by Dellingpoles brother, that some outraged tories fell for!
http://swns.com/news/ukip-candidate-posts-doctored-picture-adolf-hitler-34831/
Before the elections, the elections the LDs were 2nd place in 770 Con seats, and 65 Labour seats.
http://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2013/04/29/if-lab-is-going-to-win-the-numbers-of-seats-at-le2013-that-are-being-predicted-then-its-going-to-have-to-take-a-fair-number-from-3rd-place/
In addition to their wins, UKIP placed 2nd in >800 seats.
I saw that pix at the time and thought it was extremely funny satire - I'm sure the professionally offended were duly appalled by it. And would've banned the Life of Brian too at the time - or indeed still would...
There is the "ratchet effect" wherein the wheel can only move one way.
And there is "proof by anecdote", that seems for instance to often be used in discussions of the possibility of man caused global warming.
All it needed was for you to spend a bit of time looking with an open mind rather than trying to make stuff up to support your bigotry. You missed the fact that they only asked the question about stoning of those who had already said they supported Sharia law. It makes rather a big difference to the numbers.
Turkey
you said 9% ( and got all shocked about it) Actual number 3%
Indonesia (The country with the largest number of muslims in the world)
You said 42% Actual number 34%
Bangladesh
You said 54% Actual number 44%
Kyrgyzstan
You said 26% Actual number 13%
In only 5 of the countries where the question was asked about stoning (out of 20) did the majority of the muslim population agree with it.
That is a very long way from your ludicrous claims.
44% support stoning to death for adultery? If there was a fixed number of rocks that would be quite good as you'd expect half the people throwing them to miss deliberately. If there were an unlimited number not so good as it would just take longer.
"As you know there's much ventilating going on about corporate tax rates about the place. Special venom is reserved for Ireland's low rate and various development charities are turning the air blue with complaints about taxes in the developing countries. The thing is though, a small and open economy like Ireland should have a low corporation tax rate: and developing countries should probably have one of zero."
"The reason is that thing called tax incidence. Companies don't pay corporation tax: it's some combination of the shareholders and the workers who do. This is not a point in argument: the only argument is about what the portions are, not the fact that the burden falls upon these two groups. We also know what it is that influences which group: it's how large the economy is in relation to the world economy and how open it is to capital movement. The smaller and more mobile, the more the workers get it in the neck."
Read the rest here, and why lefties' hand-wringing about corporate tax is actually harmful to people they claim to want to help...
http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/tax-spending/why-ireland-and-developing-countries-should-have-a-low-corporate-tax-rate
Woolwich murder suspect Michale Adebowale was detained by police two months ago, Sky News has been told.
Local shopkeepers say he was part of a group of Muslim activists who had been reported to police several times.
They were told the authorities were aware of him.