Man Beheads Wife in 'Honor' Killing
- Thread starter jessiej920
- Start date
A mere convenience of geography, Sam. Are Iraqis shot by patrolling US servicemen really more Iraq's fault, then?
Yeah, I know. I just think it wasn't a very good one.
S.A.M. said:
I agree that the 100 to 1 ratio of the israeli-palestinian conflict doesn't look like fair play to me. However, while israel may be harsh with what it considers to be its enemies on the battlefield and isn't too afraid of 'collateral damage' in that arena, it's only officially executed 1 man while in custody: Adolf Eichmann.
Not that I'm justifying Israel's bombing campaigns. I just found a good article on that subject:
'The Floggings Will Continue Until Morale Improves!'
Except for their women, perhaps.
Bells
Staff member
She's not wrong though. You can't point the finger at their statistics when your own is not that great either. If Pakistan's rates of violence against women can be blamed on the "old hinterlands tribal thing", what can the rate in the West be blamed on?
I oppose both. So I guess that makes me a "white Westerner" with a multiple personality disorder. Because apparently as a "white Westerner", I am meant to rejoice in the killing of Muslim civilians.Sam said:
The same kind of religious patriarchalism - or that at some proportion plus evolutionary motivations for males to dominate their mate's reproductive behaviour, plus economics and other factors. Leaving the latter aside for a second (let's assume it functions similarly in all societies, say), the Western rate is better than Pakistan. So while we're not fixed by any means, I think you can see the results of social effort, anyway. 90% is a huge proportion. It suggests a degree of social acceptability.
No that actually makes you a coloured person with native common sense.
If you were a white westerner, you'd be justifying both.
<enter Geoff>
<Geoff stands confusedly at the door>
How exactly am I meant to come in here?
Pick any one
1. the elected representative governments
2. the troops who willingly sign up, especially in unconscripted armies
3. the ones who demonise the victims
4. those who accept the "collateral damages" label and allow the shenanigans to continue
5. who watch on the sidelines, indifferent to the pain and trauma being inflicted on their behalf
6. who support any or all of the above as justified
Or the social instability that comes from 25 years of war next door and 60 years of selectively funding and arming dictators and undermining elected representatives from abroad. Anyway, it can also suggest a poor representative sampleGeoff said:
Bells
Staff member
But according to DH, I am a "white westerner" who dances a happy jig when Muslims are killed.No that actually makes you a coloured person with native common sense.
If you were a white westerner, you'd be justifying both.
<enter Geoff>
Which could apply everywhere, could it not?GeoffP said:
Maybe. Or maybe the figures for the West is an estimate since the majority of women who are abused at home remain silent about their abuse. While our figures in the report puts us in the 'better' bracket, it's still not exactly such a good figure that would put us in a position to lord it over others about their rates.
Bells said:
No that actually makes you a coloured person with native common sense.
If you were a white westerner, you'd be justifying both.
<enter Geoff>
I'm not sure how you classify a 'white westerner' (my father was born and raised in Mexico, so I suppose you could say I have common native sense too), but I'm fairly sure I'd disagree with that assessment. I've argued with Geoff for -ages- concerning who was responsible for 9/11 until he got tired of it- I didn't, however, and you can still see me arguing with people who didn't give up over in pseudoscience and Formal Debates.
So yes, there are a fair amount of people who aren't all that interested in questioning how much muslims really are to blame for certain things, but I believe there's a growing movement that have realized the way powerful forces have manipulated them into believing this for their own benefit. This doesn't mean that public executions, cutting of hands, floggings, "etc." is a good thing though.
you must realize scott that sam is sciforums propaganda minister, and she lays it on with a trowel.
While there may be some truth in what you say, based on my own dealings with how muslim men treat women even in North America, I'd say that it's not only because of wars and arming dictators.
How do these Muslim men treat women in North America?
If she were being paid to do what she does, it could lead to some rather difficult questions for her; but I seriously doubt that's the case. It sounds more like she's simply defending her belief system.
The most experience I have is with my former brother in law, who happens to be a sufi sheikh and a leader of a fairly large muslim following. After my sister got separated from him (then divorced), things got pretty messy. The guy has lots of money, which he made very clear with the amount of money he spent on his lawyer. I found it to be pretty amazing what the well healed can get away with; despite his wealth and his being ordered to pay my sister 10,000$ a month, he's giving her perhaps less then 10,000$ in the 2 years that the trials have gone on. Anyway, after all this time, the tape where he threatened to kill my sister and her daughters was finally allowed on record and my sister has finally gotten full custody of both of her daughters and has escaped to Mexico. Apparently he's still managing to not pay the 10 grand a month or anything close to it though; these things take time. I think that's especially true if you've got a big pocket book and know how to use it. I'm sure that not all muslims are this bad. But my first hand experience of a muslim in my family wasn't exactly heart warming.
This is pretty common in the west
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...kills+wife+children+child+support&btnG=Search
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...kills+wife+children+child+support&btnG=Search