Australian Politics Forum - The boy accused of blasphemy who cut off his hand

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 95896
Gender: male

Re: The boy accused of blasphemy who cut off his hand
Reply #285 - Feb 4^th, 2016 at 1:31pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 4^th, 2016 at 11:53am:

Soren wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2016 at 9:20pm:

Was the Iranian oil industry developed by the Iranians - or was it done by US and UK capital? The latter. Did the Iranian parliamentary democrats propose a fair compensation for that investment? No. So 'cannot be trusted with freedom' is correct.

Your "argument" wouldn't pass the laugh test in anything even remotely resembling a serious discussion on the topic. The idea that a foreigner has any sort of right to violently overthrow an elected government of a sovereign nation over their greed for that nation's rightful sovereign resources - shouldn't even be dignified with a response.

Nonetheless, you even got this absurd argument wrong - Mosaddegh was only too willing to negotiate a compensation deal for Britain:

Quote:

Mohammad Mosaddegh attempted to negotiate with the AIOC, but the company rejected his proposed compromise. Mosaddegh's plan, based on the 1948 compromise between the Venezuelan Government of Romulo Gallegos and Creole Petroleum,[49] would divide the profits from oil 50/50 between Iran and Britain. Against the recommendation of the United States, Britain refused this proposal and began planning to undermine and overthrow the Iranian government

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat#Oil_nationalizatio...

Iran appealed for negotiations until the very end, but it was Britain who was set on only one path from the very beginning: overthrow. Even Uncle thought Britain was being unreasonable - fancy that eh

Not good enough, G. The Iranians had the gall to suggest nationalizing their own oil in the first place. You should know this by now. This is old boy values 101. Those Iranians have an inferior culture and incompatible values.

Uncle supported a despotic monarchist coup to overthrow an elected democratic government because tyranny is one of those superior old boy values.

Pretending it's not is stupid and mendacious, as every schoolboy knows. In fact, raising this at all is forbidden. Uncle and the Shah's coup is ancient history. We're not supposed to discuss old news like this.

Always absolutely never ever, innit.

Back to top

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: The boy accused of blasphemy who cut off his hand
Reply #286 - Feb 4^th, 2016 at 3:57pm

Soren's argument one day: those tinted people only have themselves to blame for not helping themselves and developing their economies to make themselves rich and powerful

soren's argument the next day: how dare those tinted people attempt to forge their own destiny, develop their own potential and make themselves independently rich by removing the yoke of colonialism!

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 95896
Gender: male

Re: The boy accused of blasphemy who cut off his hand
Reply #287 - Feb 4^th, 2016 at 4:16pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 4^th, 2016 at 3:57pm:

Soren's argument one day: those tinted people only have themselves to blame for not helping themselves and developing their economies to make themselves rich and powerful

soren's argument the next day: how dare those tinted people attempt to forge their own destiny, develop their own potential and make themselves independently rich by removing the yoke of colonialism!

And if they don't put the yoke around their own necks, they're uppity little PBs who need to be oppressed. White man's burden, innit. Colonialism ended far too early.

What do you think, FD? You've been remarkably quiet. Do you concur with the old boy's take on Freeeedom?

Back to top

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: The boy accused of blasphemy who cut off his hand
Reply #288 - Feb 5^th, 2016 at 11:29pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 4^th, 2016 at 3:57pm:

Soren's argument one day: those tinted people only have themselves to blame for not helping themselves and developing their economies to make themselves rich and powerful

soren's argument the next day: how dare those tinted people attempt to forge their own destiny, develop their own potential and make themselves independently rich by removing the yoke of colonialism!

None of the Arab or Persian oil wealth was developed by Arabs.

In fact, none of the Arab or Persian wealth of any kind was developed by Arabs or Perisans.

It was all 'effendi this and effendi that' until whitey developed their oil industry and then along came the (Western educated) Arab nationalists (Arab Marxist) and confiscated it all without ant compensation.

It's a parable for what Muslims do every time: all bowing and scraping and hospitality is all while they are weak and small but then they get all shirty and aggressive and want to take over once they have grown in numbers. It;'s all 'religion of Peace' and Mecca verses until it's time for the Medina verses and the smiting.

Is there an Arabic word for trust? (other than taqiyya)

Discuss.

Back to top

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: The boy accused of blasphemy who cut off his hand
Reply #289 - Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:06am

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 4^th, 2016 at 3:57pm:

Soren's argument one day: those tinted people only have themselves to blame for not helping themselves and developing their economies to make themselves rich and powerful

soren's argument the next day: how dare those tinted people attempt to forge their own destiny, develop their own potential and make themselves independently rich by removing the yoke of colonialism!

SO tax and nationalisation are the same to your mind as well??

Re oppression.

I said if they cannot be trusted with freedom, oppress the bastards. Which is what every legal code around the world does (not excluding sharia): if you cannot be trusted to behave responsibly in the public sphere, they incarcerate or otherwise curtail your freedom.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:11am by Soren »

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: The boy accused of blasphemy who cut off his hand
Reply #290 - Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:20am

Soren wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:06am:

I said if they cannot be trusted with freedom, oppress the bastards. Which is what every legal code around the world does (not excluding sharia): if you cannot be trusted to behave responsibly in the public sphere, they incarcerate or otherwise curtail your freedom.

In the case of Iran, do you think offering 50% of the oil profits to Britain was a fair proposal?

Britain developed our agriculture industry too - does that mean we must hand over our agriculture to British companies to offshore the profits to Britain? Or is that different because we're all white?

Exactly what should Iran have done long term - keep dutifully shipping their wealth to a foreign country to enjoy - in eternal gratitude for that country colonising them?

Your views belong in the 19th century Soren, they are bigoted, racist and offensive.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: The boy accused of blasphemy who cut off his hand
Reply #291 - Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:30am

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:20am:

Soren wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:06am:

I said if they cannot be trusted with freedom, oppress the bastards. Which is what every legal code around the world does (not excluding sharia): if you cannot be trusted to behave responsibly in the public sphere, they incarcerate or otherwise curtail your freedom.

In the case of Iran, do you think offering 50% of the oil profits to Britain was a fair proposal?

Britain developed our agriculture industry too - does that mean we must hand over our agriculture to British companies to offshore the profits to Britain? Or is that different because we're all white?

Exactly what should Iran have done long term - keep dutifully shipping their wealth to a foreign country to enjoy - in eternal gratitude for that country colonising them?

Your views belong in the 19th century Soren, they are bigoted, racist and offensive.

They could have BOUGHT the oil industry from those who developed it. You do not confiscate.

Back to top

IP Logged

polite_gandalf Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20027 Canberra Gender:	Re: The boy accused of blasphemy who cut off his hand Reply #292 - Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:35am You didn't answer the question S - was 50% of the profits a fair proposal? Should the British have sat down for negotiations with a willing partner instead of plotting a violent overthrow?
Back to top	A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said: Quote: Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms. IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 95896
Gender: male

Re: The boy accused of blasphemy who cut off his hand
Reply #293 - Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:41am

Soren wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:30am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:20am:

Soren wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:06am:

I said if they cannot be trusted with freedom, oppress the bastards. Which is what every legal code around the world does (not excluding sharia): if you cannot be trusted to behave responsibly in the public sphere, they incarcerate or otherwise curtail your freedom.

In the case of Iran, do you think offering 50% of the oil profits to Britain was a fair proposal?

Britain developed our agriculture industry too - does that mean we must hand over our agriculture to British companies to offshore the profits to Britain? Or is that different because we're all white?

Exactly what should Iran have done long term - keep dutifully shipping their wealth to a foreign country to enjoy - in eternal gratitude for that country colonising them?

Your views belong in the 19th century Soren, they are bigoted, racist and offensive.

They could have BOUGHT the oil industry from those who developed it. You do not confiscate.

I could not agree more, dear boy. Of course, your Amerikans are the worst. They didn’t give us a penny for our Boston tea.

Shurely shome mishtake, eh?

Back to top

IP Logged

Soren Gold Member Offline Posts: 25654 Gender:	Re: The boy accused of blasphemy who cut off his hand Reply #294 - Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:48am polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:35am: You didn't answer the question S - was 50% of the profits a fair proposal? Should the British have sat down for negotiations with a willing partner instead of plotting a violent overthrow? Compared to what? Over what period? In return for what?
Back to top	IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 95896
Gender: male

Re: The boy accused of blasphemy who cut off his hand
Reply #295 - Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:52am

Soren wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:48am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:35am:

You didn't answer the question S - was 50% of the profits a fair proposal? Should the British have sat down for negotiations with a willing partner instead of plotting a violent overthrow?

Compared to what? Over what period? In return for what?

Confusing, isn’t it,?

Compared to funding a coup, you poor old thing.

Back to top

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: The boy accused of blasphemy who cut off his hand
Reply #296 - Feb 6^th, 2016 at 9:38am

Soren wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:48am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:35am:

You didn't answer the question S - was 50% of the profits a fair proposal? Should the British have sat down for negotiations with a willing partner instead of plotting a violent overthrow?

Compared to what? Over what period? In return for what?

I don't know S - I'm just relaying the scant details I found in the wiki article I quoted.

The point is though, we had an offer of compensation didn't we? The offer that you were so red in the face over because you claimed never existed. Were the British wrong to not even want to discuss this?

Given this new line of questioning, are you now open to the possibility that there was a reasonable compensation offered by the Iranians that could and should have forestalled the British overthrow? Do you now concede that its possible the British were belligerent and unreasonable - like Uncle seemed to think?

Tell me S, what would have constituted reasonable action by the Iranians to take control of their rightful sovereign wealth - that would have rendered a British plot to overthrow the government nothing more than naked, unjust aggression?

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: The boy accused of blasphemy who cut off his hand
Reply #297 - Feb 6^th, 2016 at 11:51am

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 9:38am:

Soren wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:48am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 8:35am:

You didn't answer the question S - was 50% of the profits a fair proposal? Should the British have sat down for negotiations with a willing partner instead of plotting a violent overthrow?

Compared to what? Over what period? In return for what?

I don't know S - I'm just relaying the scant details I found in the wiki article I quoted.

The point is though, we had an offer of compensation didn't we? The offer that you were so red in the face over because you claimed never existed. Were the British wrong to not even want to discuss this?

Given this new line of questioning, are you now open to the possibility that there was a reasonable compensation offered by the Iranians that could and should have forestalled the British overthrow? Do you now concede that its possible the British were belligerent and unreasonable - like Uncle seemed to think?

Tell me S, what would have constituted reasonable action by the Iranians to take control of their rightful sovereign wealth - that would have rendered a British plot to overthrow the government nothing more than naked, unjust aggression?

If it was their rightful sovereign wealth why did they need to make a deal with the British to develop it? Why didn't they develop it themselves? They sign a deal for 60 years for the development of their oil industry and then wanted to reneg on the deal. After the British did invested in the development. Typical bazaar mentality.

"In 1901 William Knox D'Arcy, a millionaire London socialite, negotiated an oil concession with Mozaffar al-Din Shah Qajar of Persia. He financed this with capital he had made from his shares in the highly profitable Mount Morgan mine in Queensland, Australia. D'Arcy assumed exclusive rights to prospect for oil for 60 years in a vast tract of territory including most of Iran. In exchange the Shah received £20,000 (£1.9 million today[1]), an equal amount in shares of D'Arcy's company, and a promise of 16% of future profits.[2][3]

D'Arcy hired geologist George Bernard Reynolds to do the prospecting in the Iranian desert. Conditions were extremely harsh: "small pox raged, bandits and warlords ruled, water was all but unavailable, and temperatures often soared past 50°C".[4] After several years of prospecting, D'Arcy's fortune dwindled away and he was forced to sell most of his rights to a Glasgow-based syndicate, the Burmah Oil Company.

By 1908 having sunk more than £500,000 into their Persian venture and found no oil, D'Arcy and Burmah decided to abandon exploration in Iran. In early May 1908 they sent Reynolds a telegram telling him that they had run out of money and ordering him to "cease work, dismiss the staff, dismantle anything worth the cost of transporting to the coast for re-shipment, and come home." Reynolds delayed following these orders and in a stroke of luck, struck oil shortly after on May 26, 1908."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Persian_Oil_Company

Why didn't the Iranians prospect for oil if they were so jealous of their sovereign national wealth??

Back to top

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: The boy accused of blasphemy who cut off his hand
Reply #298 - Feb 6^th, 2016 at 1:12pm

Soren wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 11:51am:

Why didn't the Iranians prospect for oil if they were so jealous of their sovereign national wealth??

Just a stab, but I'm guessing Mossadegh and his elected government wasn't around in 1908.

Is your argument that whenever a nation renege's on a contract with a foreign company, the nation of that company has a right to violently overthrow the government of that nation? Does it make any difference if the reneging nation offers compensatory measures - say like offering 50% of the profits?

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 95896
Gender: male

Re: The boy accused of blasphemy who cut off his hand
Reply #299 - Feb 6^th, 2016 at 3:30pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 1:12pm:

Soren wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 11:51am:

Why didn't the Iranians prospect for oil if they were so jealous of their sovereign national wealth??

Just a stab, but I'm guessing Mossadegh and his elected government wasn't around in 1908.

Is your argument that whenever a nation renege's on a contract with a foreign company, the nation of that company has a right to violently overthrow the government of that nation? Does it make any difference if the reneging nation offers compensatory measures - say like offering 50% of the profits?

Not at all. The old boy's position is that any country he deems to be tinted and/or Muselman can be invaded and have their government violently overthrown. He's made this point clear a number of times. White man's burden, innit.

The old boy, you see has values.

Back to top

IP Logged