ignore the Muslim in action quote on the bottom/

[url]http://www.wtfpeople.com/openlink.php?LID=8815&SID=3b9ae6fef45979e88e2deb4c3799d67d[/url]

savages. complete savages. this is only appropriate for rapists. and this is even rougher. you seriously have to be kidding me if this is in the texts. i doubt it, but god almighty this group of ppl is fucked up. wish a errant missle hit their homes.

^^^ you said it with the only word I could use to describe them- fucking savages. :(

I can't believe some cultures still do this kind of shit.

Re: holy.shit. now i think we need to invade the whole place

dude it was done because they had an affair!!!

i mean i am all for killing murderers and rapists but for fucks sake, COME ON!

if i saw this and i would order a bunkerbuster on the crowd. kill em all. they just made themselves murderers because they found out someone had an affair.

[list]1: I'm so damn glad I know Muslims that are totally unlike the guys in the video.

2: Throw a fucking bomb on the lot: puts the 2 guys in the middle out of their misery, serves the damn sadists right.

3: Watching this video made me nauseous and really upset me. My hands are shaking while typing this.[/list]

because we might view them as savages does not justify bombing them.

They view us as savages and they might try to bomb us- how do you think we'd feel? Oh- that's right, they already did, and we made complete jackasses out of ourselves in retaliation. At the same time, we validated their jihad.

our societies are in large part incommensurable, and brought together over oil. We wouldn't see any of this stuff if it weren't for that. Yet they'd still thrive, and so would we if we if we had no economic ties. So where's the problem? Adultery is a bad thing for them, and their law is different.

Let them be.

to add-

who is going to "invade"? You?

The solution is always to declare war instead of learning and solving problems. We still have so far to go...

Re: holy.shit. now i think we need to invade the whole place

[quote=thesightless]dude it was done because they had an affair!!!

i mean i am all for killing murderers and rapists but for fucks sake, COME ON!

if i saw this and i would order a bunkerbuster on the crowd. kill em all. they just made themselves murderers because they found out someone had an affair.[/quote]

maybe the case. but how did you come to that conclusion?

funny you tell everyone to ignore the caption at the bottom of the video, yet you get suckered by the most influential part. the caption at the beginning says they have been found guilty of adultery. i don't hear the cleric passing judgement.

and as a sidenote, what compells you to post this right-wing propaganda on this board, yet you don't on bedrock?

let's do it USA style! [img]http://sharon.marway.org/~osparky/davis3.jpg[/img] how do you like that? you know what he did? he stole some candy! :shock:

and for the record, Iran is a religious state. it's governed by the laws of islam, shariah law. i don't know about you, but when you live in a country you usually live by the laws of that country. and trust me, you are well aware of the big ones.

you live in a country that doesn't punish people for adultery. yet you can be fined for having some of your underwear hanging out or exposed.

america is a democracy, yet it's laws are so convoluted. christianity and the democracy of america are so closely entwined. the death sentence for murder stems from christianity, "an eye for an eye".

in fact if the USA was a religious state (Christian, based on the majority) and they followed religious law, people committing adultery in America would be sentenced to death also.

[quote][b]Christian view of the death penalty[/b] Jesus underwent the death penalty by crucifixion. His trial was affected by popular opinion. His death is frequently depicted in religious art, and the cross, either with or without his body on it, is the primary symbol of Christianity. Christians believe that his death was punishment for the sins of the world and brings about their redemption.

Christians are divided on the issue of capital punishment - some are in favour, some are against it under all circumstances. Liberal Christian groups tend to oppose it while most conservative Christian groups support it. The Amish and Mennonites are two conservative Christian groups that are known for their opposition to the death penalty.

Those in favour of capital punishment often point to passages in the Old Testament that advocate the death penalty such as Genesis 9 which states, "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man."

Those against capital punishment often point to passages in the New Testament that advocate love, forgiveness and mercy. In Matthew 5 Jesus says, "You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also... "You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven."

In John 8, a story is told of a woman who was caught in the act of [b]adultery[/b]. The Old Testament Law demanded that she be put to death, however, Jesus saves her life against the teachers of Law when he tells them that who-ever is without sin should throw the first stone. He later tells the woman to go and sin no more... Because the theme of the Bible is man's redemption through repentance to Christ, some Christians argue that by executing a murderer we are cutting short his life and taking away his opportunity to repent. Some conservative Christian groups who believe in a literal Hell argue that without repentance, all who die automatically go there. They argue that many serial killers, most notably, Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Bundy became born again Christians in prison.

There is no clear consensus among Christians regarding the death penalty. It is interesting to note that most church denomination outside the United States, officially are opposed to the death penalty. In countries such as Australia and those of Western Europe, most Christians are probably opposed to capital punishment. Within the United States, there is strong support for the death penalty, especially by Christians in the southern states.

[b]Muslim view of the death penalty[/b] A Muslim may be sentenced to death under Shariah, Islamic law, for the murder of a Muslim, [b]adultery[/b] if there are four witnesses, apostasy (deserting Islam), a third conviction for drinking alcohol and a fifth conviction for theft. A dhimmi (zimmi, non-Muslim living in an Islamic state) can be executed for sex with a Muslim woman, and "persecution" of Islam, for example blasphemy against Allah or Prophet Muhammad, or attempting to proselytise, i.e. convert a Muslim from his religion.

Shariah is not in force in many countries with a Muslim majority, especially those which still have laws on their statute books which date from their colonial pasts. One of the aims of Islamic fundamentalists is to re-introduce Shariah. [/quote]

from [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment[/url]

so the next time you make a call to arms to invade a nation, stop, use your brain. and if that doesn't work. SHUT THE FUCK UP

Mr. Sammwalk,

See you're new here. If you had taken some time to read some of my posts, then you would've noticed that I am by some peepz here considered left (although I consider myself centered). Furthermore: if there's anyone defending other people's lifestyles, it would be me.

This, however, goes against my personal beliefs when it comes to treating a fellow human being. respect is OK, but when it harms myself, it crosses the line. In my opinion, it is far overdone to stone someone too death for such a minor 'crime'.

I don't condemn a religion on this, I'm condeming the people that are involved in this stoning, and even seem to like it. My bombing phrase was more an aid in expressing my disgust at this. I'll never be able to change people, and that would show little respect form my side. But it doesn't mean I have to condone this type of behaviour.

And: if death would be the sentence, why in such a brutal and painful manner? A bullet in the head should do the job satisfactory and quick. If you have the measn to do it quick and simple, yet you choose to do it slowly and painful...sorry dude...can't find the least bit of understanding for that.

Hos: this is a political board...I bet they don't have one at Bedrock

:wink:

Yao: we created this section after much politcal shenanigans in the General section. people, including thesightless, have posted politics on bedrock [b]plenty[/b] of times. yet it seems the extreme posts from thesightless are reserved for here. sure, maybe he feels more comfortable spouting off in a section that the main populus of the board don't look at.

This is just another illustration of what happens when people have a hard on for government.

Yey! We get to torture someone on behalf of our fundamentalist state. Yey!

There is a reason limited government was selected by the founding fathers and there's a reason they outlawed vigilanteism and declared rule of law: 1) They were British so they knew what rule of law was :RockOn: 2) they knew that this sort of shit would happen if you wrote too many stupid laws.

Make the government smaller, please! Minimize the government controls and control yourself.

[quote=mylexicon] 2) they knew that this sort of shit would happen if you wrote too many stupid laws.[/quote]

Eh, I lost you there mate..

Hos: didn't know that...though in the light of this video the extreme thoughts maybe explained at least partially. Looking back at my post...that ain't exactly cool responding either eh...

yeah i guess we had a few knee-jerk reactions in here, understandable after those scenes.

This is awful.

[quote=Yao][quote=mylexicon] 2) they knew that this sort of shit would happen if you wrote too many stupid laws.[/quote]

Eh, I lost you there mate.. [/quote]

Lol. I wan't [i]that[/i] mad, i mean, what the hell do i care about a couple of Muslims. This will never affect the way I live. I have lots of guns and I would never allow this to happen to me :lol: But what I was trying to say is..... Large government causes these problems. I believe we have similar problems in the United States (though far less gruesome) that are ignored because we are obsessed with "progress" instead of individual freedom. That's what i get out of this. Don't let your superiors get too powerful and too detatched.

Nothing more, nothing less. Oh yeah, and own lots of guns cuz you never know when you might need one in a pinch.

oh dear. what have you done?

first of all, i'm sick of people using words like "they" and Islam" as if they were all samuel huntington's bitch lapdogs.

yes, what took place in that video is without a doubt disturbing and wrong.

there is not one "Islam" and there is not one "Shari'a" (btw. it's not just Islamic law, it's how to live your life) or interpretation thereof. when a state is a theocracy, or when a state appoints its Islamic jurists to further its agendas, these jurists will undoubtedly interpret the Islamic texts any way that suits them.

so don't be ignorant and think that Islam is a monolithic faith. the stoning part didn't make me as sick as the poorly done "religion of peace?" message attached. uhh, remember the crusades? western christians massacred eastern christians, jews and muslims (and even ate them for sustenance).

but then again religion makes people think, say and do crazy shit. there's no other way to put it.

and sammwalk, our societies have lots in common. it's precisely when you say things like that that we get into trouble.

there is no clash of civilizations, as huntington would have it. a civilization is just a label we used to refer to mode in which we organize our repertoire of society. this mode is outdated in the post-modern era in which we live. perhaps one could discuss a clash of globalizations, different worldviews which disagree on how the world should look today.

Re: holy.shit. now i think we need to invade the whole place

face, you right, hence the first line of the post

[quote]ignore the Muslim in action quote on the bottom/ [/quote]

its been done in some of the more isolated places in south america and africa as well,. i remember hearing about a guy who was burned alive tied to a tree in a brazilian town because he raped a 12 year old girl about 3 years ago. sadly, i didnt disagree with the punishment. if he killed her, at least she wouldnt have to live with the scars of that for the rest of her life.

yeah, in apartheid south africa, they would put a car tire around you, douse you in gasoline and watch you as you burn...

i forget what they called it, something to do with 'ring' i believe...

oh yeah, and remember the holocaust? we are not innocent either.

drop a nuclear fucking bomb on the middle east and end all the suffering. They are so unhappy to live, so kill them all. Im not fucking kidding!

[quote=glucksmann]drop a nuclear fucking bomb on the middle east and end all the suffering. They are so unhappy to live, so kill them all. Im not fucking kidding![/quote]

great idea genius.

it's people like you who make me sick.

who said they are unhappy to live? just because they don't live your lifestyle? that's called fascism.

About the tyres:

They call it necklacing: tie your hands, hang a petrol-filled tyre around your neck, ignite it and watch you burn to a slow and painful death.

thanks yao

animals..

[quote=face] and sammwalk, our societies have lots in common. it's precisely when you say things like that that we get into trouble.

there is no clash of civilizations, as huntington would have it. a civilization is just a label we used to refer to mode in which we organize our repertoire of society. this mode is outdated in the post-modern era in which we live. perhaps one could discuss a clash of globalizations, different worldviews which disagree on how the world should look today.[/quote]

Perhaps I should phrase it differently: Our systems are different. We all want the same thing, and we're all people, but our systems are different. You say civilization is a mode of organization of people (and I say you're right), but such mode differences are what winds up causing conflict. The differences are not inherent- they are caused by race, geographic location, history, circumstance, etc. But they are still there. This is why you have some people on the forum who want to randomly bomb people and some who have this perspective or that.

It is when we start exporting our worldview that we must take a look and say, well, what makes US right? I don't think it's any of our government's business to do anything about other countries' customs which are different than our own. Now, if one wants to change that belief system as an individual or start a group that is interested in such noble acts, be my guest. It is not the role of government to police other nations, nor is it to judge other countries' law and deem it worthy of war.

that video is a horrible thing to see......but i can understand that....in other places, like Iran, have an affair is the worst thing that you can do. Honur is a value that they respect a lot.

For example, here in Peru, in the Andes (at the Mountains), is a thieft is caught, he is gonna be killed by punches and gonna be torched alive. why is that? in that zones, the people are so poor, that if you are caugh stole, you are dead. The worst thing to do to poor people is to stole the only thing that they have to survive. So that?s why they kill you for that. sounds fair to me.

very true indeed.

what people don't know is that there are only 5 crimes in islam that are considered crimes against god (huquq allah):

fornication (adultery)

irhab (originally highway robbery, now refers to terrorism)

theft

drinking of wine

false accusation of fornication

notice how murder is not on that list (it is considered a crime against humans, with differing consequences)

so...to those people that wants to bomb these people. why dont you take a book and try to find a reason or and explication for these behaviour.

bombing is always the easiest solution

After seeing reading this post i have become an isolationist. I'm getting tired of dealing with other cultures. No more saving the world, no more AIDS supplies, no more tsunami aid, all troops out of Europe and let them fend for themselves. Put up huge barbed wire fences and shoot everyone who crosses into our country.

I don't care about human rights, the U.N., Kuwait, NK, Somalia, or Bosnia. I don't care about Asian textile workers or about people who get stoned for committing adultery.

Beggars can't be choosers. If your country is defunct and you take our money, you belong to us from that point on. I WANT A FUCKING RETURN ON ALL THE MONEY WE GIVE AWAY INSTEAD OF THIS GODDAM HEADACHE!!!!!

k, i'm done :lol:

Want me to sing you a sleeping song? :mrgreen:

yes please :WinkNSmi:

sadly i am with you. cut off foreign aid from any country outside of north america. lets work on this place first. tired of giving money to places that would stab us in the back if givin the oppurtunity. (read:france)

it's kinda messed up all of this french bashing.

i just wish the US would listen to them sometimes. as i've said before, the US is new to the middle east. our relationship only goes back to the turn of the 20th century (aside from a few missionaries in the late 19th).

having said that, britain and france clearly have much more experience in the region (good experience? ...i dunno). from the mid 19th up until the mid-20th century (give or take), france and britain had control over all of what we call the middle east and north africa (plus much more--france in sub-saharan africa and indochina, britain in india).

i know it is dirty to speak in these terms, but we are the new colonial power in the middle east, and it wouldn't hurt to give history a chance. france and britain had very different colonial policies. france's machiavellian divide and rule policy obliterated indigenous culture, society, and religions; clearly it was very different than that of britan's, which mainly controlled fiscal/military/foreign policy and left the indigens to their fates for the most part.

which was more effective? i can't say. i do know france did a hell of a number on algeria. and they are still recovering from it. but we could learn a lot from france (and britain), which have meddled extensively in the middle east and have massive arab and muslim minority communities (which we are beginning to have as well).

ok, a bit off topic. but i'm just trying to curb the french bashing. from the many french courses i've taken in undergrad, i think that france is suffering from sort of inferiority complex. france represents/represented high culture, and french is/was the lingua franca of the world. the "educated" class of any third world country will speak french (and now english) and you could get by with french almost anywhere in the world. bu with the collapse of the soviet union, leaving america as the lone superpower of the world, france i think feels it should have a chance at competing with the US. i dunno if that made any sense.

i just think it's funny how i hear some people say things like: "if it weren't for the US, the French would be speaking German."

that's very funny and all, but people seem to forget about our war of independence and a certain marquis de lafayette. so one could easily postulate: "if it weren't for the French, we would be sipping tea, riding the lift, and going to the lou (loo?)..."

on that note. i bid thee good night.

:Choir: :Blazed:

From left to right:

top: -e-, Pickles,Psynce bottom: Ska, Asdf, me, MJ

eh?

[quote=mylexicon]After seeing reading this post i have become an isolationist. I'm getting tired of dealing with other cultures. No more saving the world, no more AIDS supplies, no more tsunami aid, all troops out of Europe and let them fend for themselves. Put up huge barbed wire fences and shoot everyone who crosses into our country.

I don't care about human rights, the U.N., Kuwait, NK, Somalia, or Bosnia. I don't care about Asian textile workers or about people who get stoned for committing adultery.

Beggars can't be choosers. If your country is defunct and you take our money, you belong to us from that point on. I WANT A FUCKING RETURN ON ALL THE MONEY WE GIVE AWAY INSTEAD OF THIS GODDAM HEADACHE!!!!!

k, i'm done :lol:[/quote]

This would be fine except for a few minor problems: trade, immigration, travel, and ultimately our safety. Also, a lot of the world is the way it is because of us, so it's our responsibility. But I think you were being sarcastic, so :D

I just wanna have sex with women. i could care less about everything else. :RockOn:

WORD. If everybody thought like that, this planet would be a damn paradise!

The shariah law wasn't in the texts.

It came from the "hadeesth" or "sayings of the prophet" which were handed down from person to person over the years.

no educated muslim believes in it but in some states and provinces or in cases where there's been a major fuckup on the part of someone (aka homosexual acts) shit like this has happened.

oh and there's no way in hell im watching that.

this shit should not be posted on ms.

and hell, friggin saeed and palash and deep dish are from iran, before people start getting anti-muslim here.

lamers. :|

sheryar, rest assured. there are people who do know a thing or two about islam. not everyone is completely ignorant, and i'm doing my part to educate folks.

interestingly enough, the shari'a wasn't codified until the ottoman period. and with the traditions of the prophet and their chain of transmission (isnad), one can only imagine how distorted they could get over time. if anything, hadiths were consciously manipulated or even invented by 'ulama' under state authority out of convenience (and this began during the 'abbasi and umayya caliphates).

anyone who thinks the qur'an is closed to modern (re)interpretation is guilty of taqlid (stagnation). the text is to be interpreted as the times change, which is not to say that it can be distorted as the hadiths were during the early calphates, but that the qur'an is a dynamic text.

there was a fascinating article in the washington post about gamal al-banna, brother of hasan al-banna, the late founder of the society of the muslim brothers in egypt. it's very interesting and worth reading (you might have to sign up on the washpost site to read it, but it's free):

[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A12340-2005Mar6?language=printer[/url]