User login
Author Information
Poll
Why have you visited this website?
To check for updates
11%
Read posts
39%
Contribute to discussions
6%
Share content
3%
Social media brought me here
6%
Tis fate
35%
Total votes: 632
Active forum topics
Recent blog posts
Upcoming Events
- 22 Sep 2024 - 11:00 to 16:30
- 22 Sep 2024 - 11:15 to 16:00
- 29 Sep 2024 - 11:30 to 16:30
Who's online
There are currently 0 users online.
Subjective books are those where there are no facts to verify except personal intuition/judgement - objective are those where there are facts. Political texts geared towards undergraduates for example are all full of facts...
Much political analysis is geared in fact to predicting where events are heading - read Nixon Foundation, Stratfor or Heritage Foundation's analysis for example.
Some political analysis is after the fact as you rightly say.
But not sure of your point here?
if you'd read my posts, u'd realise that i actually agree on most things u say... especially when it comes to Britishness and identity etc.
What I don't like is your horrible character. Or at least that's the way you've come across on this forum.
And why should I answer any of your questions when you still ignored the ONE question I asked you (twice)?
I was actually very polite to you at first telling other people not to give you a hard time.
But you constantly divert conversations from their original topic, ask irrelevant questions and try to belittle people's ideas and suggestions.
So unless I notice a change in the way you address other people, no, I won't be answering any of your questions.
Don't just do something! Stand there.
Your choice - you are free to do what you want...
So that means you're not going to start debating politely and sensibly with people, I take it.
Don't just do something! Stand there.
I debate politely and sensibly with people - where I don't and someone provides some substantiation, I will apologise and be more careful in future.
Where someone doesn't discuss sensibly, resorting to rhetoric, personality attacks or polemic, or utilises sarcasm, irony or cynicism, I see no problem in employing it with them.
Evidence please!!
You can't make assertions like that which are clearly untrue
Don't just do something! Stand there.
depends on if you are holding others to the same standard s yourself... you found this statement of mine rude: "I want proof"
On the other hand in your defence I have also been ill mannered often enough, and probably not given you reason to act otherwise...
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
This can actually be judged from posting style.
Ya'qub generally expected people to agree with him in many posts, indicating that his opinions are not that different from what others have in the circles that he has explored.
Yopu on the other hand have attacked everyone, which to me indicates that in the circles that you travel, your opinions are not all that popular or expected, which makes you combative from the start.
Is that true? Do your opinions fit in with the people around you?
(do you even like and accept very many Muslims?)
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Not too sure what the point of this is...
Popularity of opinions is neither here nor there - if it was, we wouldn't be Muslims as the companions would have followed the Quraysh and not the opinions of the Prophet(saw).
It is interesting how you will use any and every kufr criteria to determine the truth (from numbers, popularity, number of scholars etc), apart from the correct one Islam and reason ordains for us - the evidence!
Pages