Nadeem F. Paracha spews more hatred for Islam

[picoico]

@Reason

It was state policy after the state became aware and condoned it. The reaction was to the Shah receiving medical treatment. Look at the timeline. Khomenini took over in February, the hostages were taken in November. If it was a reaction to foreign meddling it would have occurred in February or March.

Khomeni didn’t have sweeping control over the state until after the crisis. Leftists were also in the picture. Again, it wasn’t a state sponsored act, and the regime decided to let it play out. The abordted american “rescue” attempt did not help matters one bit.

Regardless, there was much vitrol over this event from the Americans, even though it paled in comparison to what America had done to that country.

Of course one will have ill designs against a country whose foreign policy is based on your “death” and a “world without” you.

…and this was said in the 50’s? What did Iran ever do to anyone prior to the revolution and the shah?

Again, put down the Islamist dogma and look at the timeline. Why weren’t the sanctions imposed in until almost a year later? The reason is the sanctions were a response to the hostage crisis.

You’d kindly spare me ad homenim. A year later…exactly. The timings do not correlate.

It is ironic to see an Islamist defender of Iran’s current government cite “foreign meddling”, given Iranian mullah’s love for doing today what they condemned yesterday.

Eh?

No, male is for rape cases. 4 witnesses must be produced to prove rape under shariah–and all four must be male.

If you say so.

Why the focus on it? It is a prime example that shariah cannot adapt to changing times.

We call it a strawman where I come from…pak laws are questionable in their current form, so it’s laughable to write off a whole legal system based on a few flaws. Claims to perfection are the domain of mindless ideolgoues…those who demand it are simple sophists who have nothing better to offer.

DNA testing is usually very accurate and is far better than a ridiculous requirement that 4 men happen to see a rape occurring given the fact that rapes usually occur in private quarters. Under that ridiculous standard, rape is de facto legal since it can almost never be proved.

I don’t think you’ve understood a word I wrote…at the risk of repeating: 4 witness => particular punishment. Lack of witnesses=> possible alternative punishment. DNA? Open issue.

I know Islamists like to pretend this isn’t true, but shariah is in force in several countries. They all adhere to basically the same law. Islamists like to make people believe there is a great debate over shariah’s provisions when in fact shariah has been basically the same for 1,000 years.

Not really. The Pakistan vairanet follows a british legal styling, whereas other nations differ in their formulation. In form and function, there is discussion…even though islam haters would very much like to convince others otherwise.

South Africa is Dutch and British influenced, especially in its laws and form of government.

Dude…apartheid…that was not Dutch and British influenced circa the time of it’s imposition.

The USSR disintegrated. It was in decline before that because it too failed to keep up with the times because of a rigid, intrusive, very prescriptive system.

LOL…I know, I was around when it happened. Regardless, as I already mentioned, impressive achievments in several fields and by no means a technological light weight.

India is free compared to most countries, certainly compared to any Muslim country.

LOL…okay, whatever make syou happy

You are correct about Mexico and any projection that has it rising assumes it will correct those problems. Right now it is now on a path to power like China, India, and Brazil.

If you wish so…I have no idea who is projecting this “path”, and based on what indicators. I’d suggest “liberty” is not a good indicator.

Wrong. Malaysia is vastly overrated by Muslims. It is affluent compared to Muslim nations but middle-income compared to the world.

Wikipedia never lies : List of countries by GDP (nominal) - Wikipedia

GDP is a joke. Isreal doesn’t score that high either, but it has a very impressive technological base.

Anyway, Malaysia and Indonesia have what it takes to take off in fields that the Muslim world lacks, as well as other latin american countries. Room for improvement? Sure.

The Mexico and South Africa talk is based in part on potential. No one sees much potential for Malaysia becoming a world power…

World power? You throw that term around so loosely…neither Mexico nor SA have any chance in hell of becomming a world power any time soon.

You can’t say one thing at one moment and then another when it suits you. In one sentence you said Mexico is “by no means a liberal democracy”, three sentences later you say it is a liberal democracy.

…meant modern Russia, post USSR. Controlled by oligarchs.

What you should notice about the list is the influences on the countries on it, excepting China, and also the lack of any Muslim nation making the list. If any Muslim country becomes a world power in this century it will be Turkey. This is not due to mere chance…

Your analsyis is here and there…I have no idea what you’re basing your opinions on.

It takes no talent, no system. It is a product of sheer luck. What will happen to the oil reliant nations when oil is superseded?

If they have sense, they will survive. The fact that oil wealth is essentially controlled by families reminds me a lot of the Ottomans, so I don’t think much will happen unless that money is invested.

Greece is more affluent than Israel. Islamists always talk about how strong and rich Israel is. How can you then say Greece is not affluent?

I have no idea where you’re getting your data from, but if you compare industries, I’d think Israel is far ahead. Israel is certainly not poor nor weak…Greece, affluent? Okay…if you say so. (LOL…You know…just becuase a country is european, you shouldn’t feel compelled to defend it…I don’t take any joy in Greece’s problem, as Greek friends readily confide in me that their situation back home ain’t roses).

Fair point on South Korea rising mostly under a dictator, but they have been a democracy and risen to new heights in the past two decades.

I do not see the relationship. Regardless, they’re hard working and have made impressive progress. It has been continuous…I see no spike becaues they are democratic now.

Japan was not a liberal democracy at the time–neither was the UK, France, or Prussia (Germany), or Spain. You did not need to be a liberal democracy to be successful during that time since you were not competing against liberal democracies since none existed during that time.

US was a…ahem…Jeffersonian democracy, influenced by the French republic…rest of Europe has a continuous intellectual and industrial trend that predates their contemporary political system.

of corruption in Persia, India, and China too?

Oh dear, where did I say ALL? The ottomans are the ottomans, and their ineffectual last days are known to all and sundry who care to know and not make lazy connections.

Patronage suddenly stopped around 1700 too?

Eh? Who stopped?

For example in the US the executive power is held by the president, the legislative power by two houses of Congress (which are themselves designed to serve as checks on each other), and the judicial power by the courts. Military power is shared by the executive and legislative branches.

I know all this. I like it. Could go a step further (Judges need checks themselves). What’s your point?

Religious power is in private hand.

Nonsense…meaningless as religion is a public thing.

Islamism seeks to unite all these powers into the same hands–

Not really…

Islamic doctrine is not silent on it. Look at the Muhammad and Rashidun era practices of sometimes taking slaves after winning a military victory. Clearly Islam approved of it if Islam’s leading lights engaged in it (at least the taking of slaves for the community). Yet, even Islamists today have changed that provision because it flies in the face of the modern world.

LOL…and this has what to do with sepration of powers? You’re all over the place…do you have a point to make?

Easy…we sign treaties and abide by them. Poof. Slavery gone. I’m not aware of any serious discussion on finding ways to wiggle out of these treaties…aside from in the minds of anti-islamic fanatics.

It is a byproduct of allowing individual liberty and not having a police state. If people are free to do what they choose so long as they do not harm others then some people will inevitably engage in fornication. Isn’t this why Islamists set up elaborate regulations and “religious police” to prevent it? A state that can regulate what occurs in the bedroom can regulate many other personal things.

Bzzt. Not bedroom. Public. The public sphere is owned by the pious. If that constitues being a “police state”, so be it.

You seem to think “liberal” is a constant set of beliefs. Times change, liberals change with them. What was “liberal” in 18th century England would be backwards in 21st century England. Fortunately, secular law allows countries to adapt–shariah does not.

No I don’t. I’m well aware of changes in thought and social norms through the ages in the western world. Adapt, or degrade? Or both? There’s no concern for this. Times do change, but jumping from one decade to another, and all of a sudden making fornication acceptable is dubious…time has nothing to do with it. One doesn’t need to be “liberal” to change. The question is, how to change in a meaningful way? I’m afraid those who espouse liberal views are useless…as their more concerned with how people dress, wha they can drink, etc. then how societies can evolve within their own traditions, which they blindly suggest is impossible as one needs to be “liberal” to evolve and compete…

Speaking of the obsession with fornication that Islamists have, why does your Islamist utopia in Iran have rampant prostitution? I thought that is one of the “big” (actually small…) things the Islamists were going to eliminate?

Duh…why does your liberal utopia of Ameirca have it too? I’m not a utopian. So look elsehwere to pander those kind of arguments.

I don’t think he wanted to ban it but his vision was not of a country with shariah. If it happened, I don’t think he would have lost sleep over it but it was not his preference.

…so Jinnah is a non factor in that discussion.