That's a bit rich, coming from you, Paul.L

>>It seems you are unable to adress an argument at face value, and need to resort to ad hominem attacks to prop up your case<<

A touch of transference going on here, I think, from the master of personal attacks himself.

And if you don't think that the extracts I provided are evidence, there are many more. The problem is, locating them is a bit like foraging a septic tank for a lost trinket - ultimately, the discomfort outweighs the value of the retrieval.

You have made sidestepping into an art form, I notice.

>>I provided you with some basic statistics. If you have an issue with their veracity, provide your own.<<

Your statistics may be true. I suggested they might not be complete. and questioned the use of Wikipedia as a reliable source. It is not up to me, I'm afraid, to complete your research, you can do that yourself if you will. I merely pointed out the wobbliness of your source.

You love to divert the argument, do you not?

>>How this one article proves your point that the Taliban do not commit acts of terrorism is beyond me<<

Nobody suggests that the Taliban does not commit acts of terrorism. I merely pointed out that the conflict as a whole is better characterized as guerrilla warfare. Do keep up.

In the context of the Madrid bombing,

>>The terrorists had a goal they were attempting to achieve. Their methods achieved that goal. Simple.<<

Your earlier statement, the one I questioned, was "They achieved control of gov’t policy."

You failed to mention what policy they controlled. Any thoughts?

I also did very much appreciate the significant contortions required to convince yourself that I had misunderstood your "Islamo-Fascists have the experience of the Middle East" comment.

>>The “experience” in the above sentence belongs to the Middle East, not to the Islamo-Facists.<<

The sentence in question?

>>They [Islamo-Fascists] have the experience of the Middle East<<

Subject, verb, object.

Subject: Islamo-Fascists

Verb: have

Object: the experience of the Middle East.

Priceless.

Pericles,

You say >> “ And if you don't think that the extracts I provided are evidence ...”

It’s totally beside the point and you know it. Nowhere on this thread did I say any of those things that you have retrieved. I wonder is that why you decided not to reference them?

In rebutting my arguments above you have resorted to instead attacking positions on other threads about other issues. If you find evidence of a whack-a-mozzie approach on this thread about this discussion, please show me. Otherwise if you want to talk about those other issues, go back to the appropriate thread and restart it.

You say >> “ Subject: Islamo-Fascists, Verb: have, Object: the experience of the Middle East.

That’s exactly what I said. If it makes it easier for you to comprehend then “experience” could be replaced with “knowledge, understanding, familiarity or example”.

No contortions required, just a literal reading of what I wrote. The key phrase is “the experience of the middle east”. The experience of the middle east is that dictators can rule successfully without the popular support of their people. This is a lesson few Middle Easterners will not have learned, which is part of what motivates the Islamo-Facists. They know they don’t need a parliamentary majority to implement their reforms.

You say >> “You failed to mention what policy ...”

The policy regarding intervention in Iraq, funnily enough.

You say >> “It is not up to me, I'm afraid, to complete your research blah-blah”

I’m the one who has provided evidence of the increased terror attacks since 911. You have not produced anything to counter that, except vague and unsubstantiated claims about the veracity of said evidence. Without actually discussing any of the actual evidence itself, by the way.

The Wikipedia data will suffice me, and I imagine most others, to show the basic trend, which is a significant increase of terrorist incidents since 9/11. If you want to dispute that, find some evidence. Otherwise its just hot air.

steven that is truly horrific. One has to admire the courage of those who still believe in freedom.

Regardless of religion, it is the action that should be denounced. Whether it be bombing buildings, genocide, shooting doctors at abortion clinics or sexual abuse of young girls via sanctioned religious/tribal marriages.

Beside the point? Nice wriggle.

>>It’s totally beside the point and you know it... Nowhere on this thread did I say any of those things that you have retrieved... In rebutting my arguments above you have resorted to instead attacking positions on other threads about other issues.<<

I made the assumption that i) you are the same person who uses this pseudonym on other threads and ii) you maintain the same views, as you move between them. I apologize unreservedly if this is not the case.

>>The experience of the middle east is that dictators can rule successfully without the popular support of their people.<<

So this is about dictators after all. There are many examples of those around the world, in Africa, in South America. But fair enough, I accept that you simply didn't make it clear the first time around.

>>The policy [influenced by the Madrid bombings was that] regarding intervention in Iraq, funnily enough.<<

A reasonable view, but a simplistic one. The Socialist government that replaced Aznar did indeed order the withdrawal of 1,100 troops from Iraq, but let's not ignore the will of the people.

92% of them, actually.

http://www.clarin.com/diario/2003/03/29/um/m-537495.htm

It was also somewhat inconsequential, as some of the more sober commentators understood.

http://www.brookings.edu/testimony/2004/0331europe_gordon.aspx

In hindsight, the major change that occurred was a hardening of Europe's anti-terrorism stance in general, which was hardly the bombers' key objective.

On the subject of "increased terror", you persist in missing the point.

>>You have not produced anything to counter that, except vague and unsubstantiated claims about the veracity of said evidence<<

I have no doubt that the events recorded by Wikipedia actually happened, so you can quit with the "veracity of said evidence" schtick. I merely pointed out that if you set yourself the task of recording terrorist statistics, you are likely to do so more assiduously post-9/11.

While this would appear to the casual observer to show that the incidence has increased, it could equally be that the recording of the events that has improved.

I've been blissfully computer-free for a couple of days, so I'm late on this thread, but my position is pretty much as Bugsy articulated early in the thread.

Looks like Steven's succeeded with this thread in bringing out some Islamophobic hysteria from some usual suspects - all praise to Pericles for his eternal patience in dealing with them.

Yes, it looks like some Muslim idiots threw a crude petrol bomb through the front door of the publisher's office, but weren't they caught almost immediately at the scene?

The publisher should go ahead and distribute the book, the criminals who participated in the attack should be tried and punished, and the Islamophobes should have a cup of tea, a Bex (or something) and a good lie down.

What is your definition of an Islamophobe JC? (Opps, sorry!) CJ