@Sir Mick.

Nurse!

She's in the stock room banging a security guard. Now get out the pharmacy and put that loot down.

@rob andersen

you seem to be extremely confused about what Julia Harris thinks, so the whole of your post is based on an erroneous assumption. you will need to start all over, sorry, not my fault.

you tell me just now;

"I don't see her saying muslim = bad here at all as you then conclude. Why or how did u do that?"

well i know because that is what Julia believes, only because she has said so on many NS threads. same as she has done on this one. don't believe me? fair enough, here you are;

[Julia Harris
09 January 2012 at 17:39
“10 Things you didn’t know about Mehdi Hassan....”

Point 8 – He defends Islam and promotes Islamic values which includes Sharia law which promotes the stoning of adulterers, execution of apostates and blasphemers, repression of other religions, and a mandatory hostility toward non-Islamic nations.]

since that infantile and meaningless generalisation, which only allows one to conclude that 'Muslims = bad', she has likened someone turning to Islam as turning to Herion (yes i think she meant heroin, but she kept spelling it that way). again if you don't believe that Julia would write such utter bollox, go see for yourself on this thread; 11 January 2012 at 08:49

you may begin to appreciate now that your case against me is bogus. the other huge clue this was so, was the fact that Buckskins praised you. this is the intellectual Gold Standard equivalent of The Kiss of Death.

@ Mehdi.
"Really? Explaining something is the worst thing I could do??"
A. Yes my friend I really think on this occasion and with this subject about a childs death and grief...I really do think that you've got it wrong.
"I think this comment above exemplifies why so few journalists these days take commenters below the line seriously."
A. I'm afraid that I am not responsible for the comment above your last post. I'm not to sure as to what you mean by below the line, I could interpret this comment in several different ways.
"Explaining something has become a crime."
A. I don't recall saying that it was a crime, I wrote move on.
"something to be belittled by unthinking, anonymous commenters."
A. I have in no way tried or even attempted to belittle you. As I wrote, I think that on this occassion and on that single point, you got it wrong. What disgusts me more is that Santorum's wife will even try to benefit financially from the death of her child.Best to move on son.

Well done Jackass. You never fail with your childish naughty perceived insults. Let me finish it for you.

Na nana na na na.

I’m surprised you’re still drawing attention to this.

You wrote a piece that was designed to show him in a negative light, and in the piece you decided to include the details of how he and his family dealt with the death of a baby. It doesn’t matter that you didn’t comment on the specifics, or that the information was already in the public domain, what matters is the context.

To put it mildly you’ve not covered yourself in glory here.

And now, rather than do the grown up thing and apologise for your behaviour you’re continuing to try and justify what you did.

Here’s some news for you, the more you try and justify, the more you look like a thoroughly nasty little man.

Jankaas
Yes good humans do bad things irrespective of being believers or not. I think Julia's point is that the atrocities are commited IN THE NAME of a faith, and that the extremism is a growing danger. Personally I think western governments overstate it because they can capitalise on our fear, and sometimes I think they are sometimes even implicated in the cause of it by dark dodgy deals we don't get to hear about. And she makes a good point re the Nazis don't you think?

Jankaas
I wonder how you would feel if the atrocities were on your doorstep Daily?
Genuinely just a thought. If her reports are true these guys are blowing themselves up everyday.
I don't know what I would do if my kids were blown up in front of me, and I can't even bear to think of the mothers in these places, the thoughts are so disturbing- yet it's daily it seems...

''Look up the meaning of Taqiyya and explain to me how I should trust anyone that claims the Quran to be their perfect guide to living..''

Why don't you explain to us what you're understanding of this concept is.

@Aliya

All systems are susceptible to abuse. What's wrong with adults choosing an alternative avenue to settle disputes. An avenue that they feel is closer to their religious principles. I would sympathise with your argument if these courts were made compulsory and people were forced to follow their rulings. But this isn't the case.

Why would I choose to go to a British court to handle matters such as inheritance, when a Muslim court is available, especially if I wanted an Islamic opinion?

''We live here, we use the health system, the education system, etc. so we should also use its legal system.''

I disagree with this comment. How are the Sharia courts any different from the Jewish Beth Din courts (which have operated in this country for centuries). Don't Orthodox Jews use this country's health and education system?.

@ Jankaas
Thanks

Julia you took a group of events committed by, at most, a hundred people, and used that to represent the views, opinions, and behaviour of one and a half billion people.

In other words, you believe that a people can be judged by the worst 0.0000006% of their population. If we take the worst 0.0000006% of atheists, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, or anything else I bet you we'd find some pretty nasty people you have to agree no?

Please, for your own sake, stop being so stupid and hateful.

Sir Michael, you dont know what your talking about so please shut up.

World Public Opinion:

Pew Research (2010):

84% of Egyptian Muslims support the death penalty for leaving Islam

86% of Jordanian Muslims support the death penalty for leaving Islam

30% of Indonesian Muslims support the death penalty for leaving Islam

76% of Pakistanis support death the penalty for leaving Islam

51% of Nigerian Muslims support the death penalty for leaving Islam

61% of Egyptians approve of attacks on Americans

83% of Palestinians approve of some or most groups that attack Americans (only 14% oppose)

62% of Jordanians approve of some or most groups that attack Americans (21% oppose)

Populus Poll (2006):

16% of British Muslims believe suicide attacks against Israelis are justified.

37% believe Jews in Britain are a "legitimate target".

al-Jazeera (2006): 49.9% of Muslims polled support Osama bin Laden

al-Arabiya: 36% of Arabs polled said the 9/11 attacks were morally justified; 38% disagreed; 26% Unsure

40% of Indonesians approve of violence in defense of Islam.

Terrorism Research Institute Study:

51% of mosques in the U.S. have texts on site rated as severely advocating violence; 30% have texts rated as moderately advocating violence; and 19% have no violent texts at all.

83% of Pakistanis support stoning adulterers

78% of Pakistanis support killing apostates

ICM Poll: 40% of British Muslims want Sharia in the UK

NOP Research:

68% of British Muslims support the arrest and prosecution of anyone who insults Islam;

World Public Opinion:

81% of Egyptians want strict Sharia imposed in every Islamic country

76% of Pakistanis want strict Sharia imposed in every Islamic country

49% (plurality) of Indonesians want strict Sharia imposed in every Islamic country

76% of Moroccans want strict Sharia imposed in every Islamic country

77% of Egyptian Muslims favor floggings and amputation

58% of Jordanian Muslims favor floggings and amputation

36% of Indonesian Muslims favor floggings and amputation

82% of Pakistanis favor floggings and amputation

65% of Nigerian Muslims favor floggings and amputation

Pew Research (2010):

82% of Egyptian Muslims favor stoning adulterers

70% of Jordanian Muslims favor stoning adulterers

42% of Indonesian Muslims favor stoning adulterers

82% of Pakistanis favor stoning adulterers

56% of Nigerian Muslims favor stoning adulterers

Turkish Ministry of Education: 1 in 4 Turks Support Honor Killings

Civitas: 1 in 3 Muslims in the UK strongly agree that a wife should be forced to obey her husband's bidding

BBC Poll: 1 in 10 British Muslims support killing a family member over "dishonor".

Middle East Quarterly: 91 percent of honor killings are committed by Muslims worldwide.

Policy Exchange: 61% of British Muslims want homosexuality punished

NOP Research: 62% of British Muslims do not believe in the protection of free speech;

Only 3% adopt a "consistently pro-freedom of speech line"

@john woods

"God, it's fun annoying lefties."

i see, you trash the murder of all those Norwegians just to score cheap points against "lefties".

well that's alright then...

Bee your logic is absurd - if we all did what we wanted and chose systems that suited us society would break down. It's this sort of stuff that gives a shot in the arm to far-right groups.

And I notice you're playing the old relativist card - "all systems are open to abuse". That's true but the point is swill - the British system isn't perfect but we have the rule of law, all are equal before it and corruption that is virtually non-existent by international standards. But you want an apartheid legal system.

@Godless - Look up the word "allegory".

You might also want to consider how inherently hypocritical anti-religious fanaticism is.

@Julia - You've yet to present any fact, only the opinions yourself and your collection of internet bigots. I did think you were merely misguided and racist, now I honestly think you are insane. Get help.

@ Matthewblott, err I think your very wrong about Mehdi and Sharia.. he's tries to defend it and water it down - which is tantamount to helping it spread. The fact he's a devote Muslim too - lets not go there..

http://www.newstatesman.com/religion/2011/06/islamic-law-sharia-british

I wrote about Sharia and fleshed out the detail to draw a parallel. I never accused Mehdi of supporting those particular acts of Sharia but since he does support it, does he become guilty by association. In the same way Mehdi is giving us his tabloid 10 best about a US politician, his way of delivering those facts and mentioning the death of a baby creates an air of suspicion about it.

"My deares Julia(n), I write to you for advice about a up and coming fancy dress party at the Grapes and Banana (pub). I have a little red skirt and waiste coat with a frilly white blouse. I also have a cap (red). What colour feather would you insert to make the outfit complete?

Angela,

Oh your going to the annual 'we haven't got any friends - Saddo's party" with Jackass and Sir Michael?

I think you should could go as a transvestite - with your mustache, hairy legs and thinning hair line you'll be ahead of the game...

Jackass could go as Forest Gump, don't forget to take a bib for him to wear to mop up his dribbles.

And Sir Michael could go as an Ostrich, he likes to keep his head in the sand and avoid reality.

You'll all have a lovely time slagging me off there with lots of awkward silences as you wouldn't have anything interesting say otherwise.

Hope it helps.

"Well done Jackass."

what for ButtFucks..?

"You never fail with your childish naughty perceived insults."

and now in English pls?

Can someone lso tell me why republican evangelicals who are devoutly christian tend to be so fundamentally unchristian? Tax cuts for the super rich, benefit cuts for the poor, what happened to "the last shall be first".

They are all fire and brimstone and some of the things they try to do are downright evil. I watched a programme a few yrs ago and the evangelicals were using their teenage children to lobby politicians to deny payouts to men who had contracted cancer from working with asbestos, all in the name of saving business money. How very Christian!

It's all in the name Christian. Which means new testament not old.Peace and love not anger and killing. They should try and remember that but one thing is for sure, if there is a God, every single one of them is going to hell for their greed and amoral behaviour.

@Sir M

"Jankaas, you might appreciate this under the circumstances."

sorry but your link doesn't work....shame as i am a big fan of Jon's

Sir Michael, you silly man, sorry to embarrass you, I found the source of the 84%, sorry to disappoint you, lets see what excuse you come up with this time???

I think an apology for calling me a liar and an admission you were woefully wrong and a resignation from writing in future as your name and reputation quite frankly worthless.

"When asked about the death penalty for those who leave the Muslim religion, at least three-quarters of Muslims in Jordan (86%), Egypt (84%) and Pakistan (76%) say they would favor making it the law; in Nigeria, 51% of Muslims favor and 46% oppose it. In contrast, Muslims in Lebanon, Turkey and Indonesia largely reject the notion that harsh punishments should be the law in their countries. About three-quarters of Turkish and Lebanese Muslims oppose the stoning of people who commit adultery (77% and 76%, respectively), as does a narrower majority (55%) of Muslims in Indonesia."

http://www.pewglobal.org/2010/12/02/muslims-around-the-world-divided-on-...

Now get lost you stupid little twat.

Last year the Pew Research Center Global Attitudes Project conducted a survey of opinion in several Muslim countries. The subject was the proper role of Islam in politics and society. One of the countries surveyed was Egypt, and among other discoveries, the Pew researchers found that 84 percent of Egyptians favor the death penalty for people who leave the Muslim religion.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/01/egypts-conflicting-views-...

@Julia

thanks for completely ignoring my long post written only for you yesterday. clearly you just have no idea what you meant when you used the term 'jihad', three times no less, which appears to be the foundation of your argument. this makes your ode to Godless this morning ever so ridiculous and disingenuous; "unfortunately it doesn't matter what you say or what facts your present."

but that's ok, i did fully expect this cowardice from a bigot like you. evidence based reasoning will always befuddle your type. you can only handle life if it is all presented in tiny bite size chunks, conveniently labelled for you by the tabloids. your disability, carry on dear.

but the rest of us are forced to look for a more sophisticated meaningful solution to these complex human questions. you just stick to your infantile blame game.

sorry, that link is a mess.

try this?

http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/005424.html

Well done to Mehdi for coming on here to defend himself, but I think he might have missed the point, intentionally or otherwise.

Mehdi is very much of the left, as is his choice, and has little time for the political right in America, which is also entirely his choice in a free society. The original article was entirely in concert with these opinions. No positive comments whatsoever were in the article, though this would not of itself make of any of the statements made anthing less than factually true.

The problem with the article, which Mehdi appears unable to recognise, is that the article clearly and undeniably set out to speak negatively of the political character of Mr Santorum and stood as a lengthy diatribe celebrating why we all ought to be grateful that such a man will never be POTUS. Amidst this scene, the insertion of the comment regarding how Mr Santorum and his family coped with the loss of a young child could only be seen as a denigration of the moral judgements made by Mr Satorum and his family in their moment of indescribable stress.

Mehdi is entirely correct to state that the comment in question was factually true and was already well-known. This, however, was not the issue, as any impartial reader must surely see.

That Mr Santorum is an educated man is not in question, but that was not mentioned in the article. Thar Mr santorum is a comitted husband is not in question but it is not in the article. That Mr Santorum has been involved in the voluntary sector is not in question but it is not mentioned in the article. That Mr Santorum has been successful in the financial realm is not in question but it is not mentioned in the article. Surely the reason why none of these facts were included in the article was that the article was of a negative nature and set out to denigrate Mr Santorum on a personal level. This is no crime and Mehdi is entitled to deliver such articles. But to pretend afterwards that mixing a personal fact of an unusual nature with a series of negative facts of a political nature would nt lead to the former likewise being seen in a negative light, is at best niaive and at worst deceitful.

Either the comment was included to show Mr Santorum in a bad light, which is unforgivable, or it was simply thrown in in no kind of negative manner amidst a sea of other negative comments without ever imagining that this would thus be seen as a negative comment, and if this is true it shows remarkably poor judgement on Mehdi's behalf.

We all make mistakes. Mehdi ought to produce a far better defence of his behaviour here, or he ought to simpy apologise. To err is human.