|
Post by thechemist on Jul 29, 2009 7:46:05 GMT -5
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/28/AR2009072801584.html?sub=AROK all of you cultural relativists. Tell me why the west in general and George Bush in particular treat women worse than those in the Islamic hell-holes. A couple of money quotes: NAIROBI, July 28 -- A Sudanese woman who works for a U.N. peacekeeping mission in Sudan's capital, Khartoum, is bracing to be flogged 40 times Wednesday as punishment under Islamic law for wearing "clothing causing harassment to the public sentiments." Hussein and 13 other women, including some southerners, were at a Khartoum cafe July 3 when police ordered them to a police station, according to Agence-France Presse news agency. The women were all wearing pants. Two days later, 10 of the women were called back to the station and lashed 10 times each, the agency said. This isn't the mountains of Pakistan or back-woods of Iran. This is the capitol of a major African nation.
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Jul 29, 2009 9:16:13 GMT -5
this is a surprise to you? this isn't a "major african nation" as you say. darfur is in sudan. this place is ranked as the third most politically unstable country in the world according to the failed states index, and there is widespread human rights violations here. slavery is still an issue there.
so i'm not surprised.
|
|
|
Post by thechemist on Jul 30, 2009 5:20:29 GMT -5
this is a surprise to you? this isn't a "major african nation" as you say. darfur is in sudan. this place is ranked as the third most politically unstable country in the world according to the failed states index, and there is widespread human rights violations here. slavery is still an issue there. so i'm not surprised. Does the fact that it is a predominantly Muslim nation have anything to do with these problems? Because that's my point, really. I'm not sure there's a majority Muslim state that's not a sewer.
|
|
|
Post by globe on Jul 30, 2009 5:38:44 GMT -5
this is a surprise to you? this isn't a "major african nation" as you say. darfur is in sudan. this place is ranked as the third most politically unstable country in the world according to the failed states index, and there is widespread human rights violations here. slavery is still an issue there. so i'm not surprised. Does the fact that it is a predominantly Muslim nation have anything to do with these problems? Because that's my point, really. I'm not sure there's a majority Muslim state that's not a sewer. See instead of starting all these thread where you take a news story and use it for your own agenda, why dont you save yourself some hassle and start a thread titled "I FUCKING HATE MUSLIMS" then you could just put all your snidey wee comments in there instead.
|
|
|
Post by halftheworld on Jul 30, 2009 8:35:23 GMT -5
this is a surprise to you? this isn't a "major african nation" as you say. darfur is in sudan. this place is ranked as the third most politically unstable country in the world according to the failed states index, and there is widespread human rights violations here. slavery is still an issue there. so i'm not surprised. Does the fact that it is a predominantly Muslim nation have anything to do with these problems? Because that's my point, really. I'm not sure there's a majority Muslim state that's not a sewer. we can talk again about a cruel justice in another country when people like NL4E or probably you stop supporting torture.
|
|
|
Post by thechemist on Aug 1, 2009 15:07:11 GMT -5
Imagine this were 1937, and instead of "Muslim", I was using "facist". And I was railing against this political ideology that was a huge danger to the world. Would I be a cultural racist? Would I be accused of hating all Germans, Italians and Spanish? I don't know. Probably by you losers.
Doesn't that example kind of prove that I'm NOT a racist? That I can care about the dangers that this political ideology is bringing to the world without hating everyone in the group? Now that I think about it, doesn't that cast Bush in the same mold as Churchill? Someone willing to call the enemy an enemy in the face of a more "enlightened" social/political class calling him a yokel?
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Aug 1, 2009 17:08:34 GMT -5
Imagine this were 1937, and instead of "Muslim", I was using "facist". And I was railing against this political ideology that was a huge danger to the world. Would I be a cultural racist? Would I be accused of hating all Germans, Italians and Spanish? I don't know. Probably by you losers. Doesn't that example kind of prove that I'm NOT a racist? That I can care about the dangers that this political ideology is bringing to the world without hating everyone in the group? Now that I think about it, doesn't that cast Bush in the same mold as Churchill? Someone willing to call the enemy an enemy in the face of a more "enlightened" social/political class calling him a yokel? but this isn't 1937. you're trying to run us through circles to justify your obvious racism against a people who did a lot more to me than to you. it isn't working. big differences: fascism is a violent ideology. islam is a religion. just because you're too stupid to see the difference doesn't make us fascist-sympathizers. it makes you an idiot. furthermore, you comparing the worst president in history to one of the best political leaders in modern times is among the most ridiculous things i've ever seen on this forum. i think this guy says it best:
|
|
|
Post by halftheworld on Aug 1, 2009 19:07:41 GMT -5
Imagine this were 1937, and instead of "Muslim", I was using "facist". And I was railing against this political ideology that was a huge danger to the world. Would I be a cultural racist? imagine this were 1937, and instead of using "muslim", i was using "jew", and i was railing against that religion that was a huge danger to the world. would i be a cultural racist? yes i fucking would. and people were damn right to tell me that.
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Aug 2, 2009 1:12:10 GMT -5
Imagine this were 1937, and instead of "Muslim", I was using "facist". And I was railing against this political ideology that was a huge danger to the world. Would I be a cultural racist? imagine this were 1937, and instead of using "muslim", i was using "jew", and i was railing against that religion that was a huge danger to the world. would i be a cultural racist? yes i fucking would. and people were damn right to tell me that. +k the german gets it. i can't see how thechemist doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by thechemist on Aug 2, 2009 10:45:09 GMT -5
So, none of you morons see militant Islam as a political ideology? Sadly, it is you and a significant percentage of the enlighened cultural and intellectual elite that don't "get it".
What's killed more people in the past 60 years? Islam or Fascism? And if each side get's to eliminate a single psychopath as an abberration to the rule, what's kill more people in the history of the world? By a lot?
|
|
|
Post by thechemist on Aug 2, 2009 10:46:06 GMT -5
And Churchill is WAY overrated.
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Aug 2, 2009 12:29:07 GMT -5
yeah. he is overrated. world war ii. pssh
|
|
|
Post by thechemist on Aug 3, 2009 16:17:41 GMT -5
Imagine this were 1937, and instead of "Muslim", I was using "facist". And I was railing against this political ideology that was a huge danger to the world. Would I be a cultural racist? imagine this were 1937, and instead of using "muslim", i was using "jew", and i was railing against that religion that was a huge danger to the world. would i be a cultural racist? yes i fucking would. and people were damn right to tell me that. Yes, the world would call you a racist and be damn right to tell you that. That's not a fair comparison to my example though. Muslims have been spewing lies about Jews since Mohammed took his first child bride. My warnings against fascist dictators would purely be filled with the truths that they were ON RECORD as preaching, and I'd be following their armies as they plundered the world. See the difference? Just like my postings about Muslims. They are on record with everything I say. No, not all Muslims agree with them, Just like not all Germans voted for Hitler. Just enough to keep him in power. So your little German friend really DOESN'T get it.
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Aug 3, 2009 23:59:25 GMT -5
you calling most of these crazy leaders the spokesmen of islam as a whole is like saying glenn beck speaks for all republicans. it's farfetched, and quite stupid.
p.s. you don't think i know that jews are hated by a number of muslims? guess what? so do christians. didn't martin luther write a pamphlet called "on the jews and their lies"? or what about the catholic church ignoring the holocaust? or the whole blood libel thing? or that it was only 45 years ago that the vatican changed their stance on jews being blamed for jesus' death? or are those things just something to laugh off?
|
|
|
Post by thechemist on Aug 5, 2009 21:34:08 GMT -5
It's been a long time since a religion waged war for their god. One notable exception.
OK. I say Islam is dangerous. You say it's peaceful. Maybe that's the wrong argument. Maybe we should be debating why a small minority of this religions followers have decided to take up arms against the west. And more importantly, why does a significant portion of that religions followers enable them? Can we agree to that reality?
You need to answer "no" to that question. Because once you agree to that, there is no alternative than to agree with me that they fight for their god, their religion, and all of the stone-age laws and customs that come with it. They were fighting the west well before George Bush was born, before Dick Cheney. Before oil.
I'll hand it to you. You stick up for your beliefs in the face of insurmountable evidence to the contrary. You need to wake up to the fact that people other than white males can be evil. We've got a HUGE Islam problem in this world and blaming it on George Bush is dangerous. We need to fight this enemy with our heads out of the sand. Wake up and learn a little honesty. You're wrong here and you know it.
|
|