Shocking

[tooner 243]

about as shocking as sunrise this morning.

 

so you're not going to tell us what your fancy solutions are ? Like, "give in to Islam, build a mosque on every corner for them, they're nice blokes really, and we can all live happily ever after"

 

 

 

.....you first. your ideas (of me and of "the real world") are far more enlightening than anything i could come up with given my apparent/perceived lack of "real world" experience.

 

so please i insist, after you......

[LeazesMag 0]

about as shocking as sunrise this morning.

 

so you're not going to tell us what your fancy solutions are ? Like, "give in to Islam, build a mosque on every corner for them, they're nice blokes really, and we can all live happily ever after"

 

 

 

.....you first. your ideas (of me and of "the real world") are far more enlightening than anything i could come up with given my apparent/perceived lack of "real world" experience.

 

so please i insist, after you......

 

What are you asking exactly ?

 

You know my views, and I know yours, which you don't deny [see above post]

 

Are you going to give a powerpoint aided lecture to the Taliban telling them how uncivlised they are

[tooner 243]

about as shocking as sunrise this morning.

 

so you're not going to tell us what your fancy solutions are ? Like, "give in to Islam, build a mosque on every corner for them, they're nice blokes really, and we can all live happily ever after"

 

 

 

.....you first. your ideas (of me and of "the real world") are far more enlightening than anything i could come up with given my apparent/perceived lack of "real world" experience.

 

so please i insist, after you......

 

What are you asking exactly ?

 

You know my views, and I know yours, which you don't deny [see above post]

 

Are you going to give a powerpoint aided lecture to the Taliban telling them how uncivlised they are

 

 

i was asking you to provide your "fancy solutions"

 

 

so then, why don't you give me a quick over-view of my ideas if you know them

 

contrary to your assertions, i've never made any suggestions as to what we should be doing to the Taliban

[LeazesMag 0]

about as shocking as sunrise this morning.

 

so you're not going to tell us what your fancy solutions are ? Like, "give in to Islam, build a mosque on every corner for them, they're nice blokes really, and we can all live happily ever after"

 

 

 

.....you first. your ideas (of me and of "the real world") are far more enlightening than anything i could come up with given my apparent/perceived lack of "real world" experience.

 

so please i insist, after you......

 

What are you asking exactly ?

 

You know my views, and I know yours, which you don't deny [see above post]

 

Are you going to give a powerpoint aided lecture to the Taliban telling them how uncivlised they are

 

i was asking you to provide your "fancy solutions"

 

so then, why don't you give me a quick over-view of my ideas if you know them

 

contrary to your assertions, i've never made any suggestions as to what we should be doing to the Taliban

 

no, I was asking for your solutions to the Islam problem, but you think there isn't one though. Or do you ?

 

Enlighten us as to your "studies" ?

 

You know my views. They are in this very thread.

[tooner 243]

about as shocking as sunrise this morning.

 

so you're not going to tell us what your fancy solutions are ? Like, "give in to Islam, build a mosque on every corner for them, they're nice blokes really, and we can all live happily ever after"

 

 

 

.....you first. your ideas (of me and of "the real world") are far more enlightening than anything i could come up with given my apparent/perceived lack of "real world" experience.

 

so please i insist, after you......

 

What are you asking exactly ?

 

You know my views, and I know yours, which you don't deny [see above post]

 

Are you going to give a powerpoint aided lecture to the Taliban telling them how uncivlised they are

 

i was asking you to provide your "fancy solutions"

 

so then, why don't you give me a quick over-view of my ideas if you know them

 

contrary to your assertions, i've never made any suggestions as to what we should be doing to the Taliban

 

no, I was asking for your solutions to the Islam problem, but you think there isn't one though. Or do you ?

 

Enlighten us as to your "studies" ?

 

You know my views. They are in this very thread.

 

is there a problem with Islam? i was unaware, not to split hairs but I would say the problem is with radical/fundmentalist Islam, but the vast majority of the over 1 billion of those that follow Allah would not fit into that category.

 

my studies? why the interest in my studies? which ones? what i went to school for or what I was studying for the last month or so?

 

what do you think i studied? ask parky he'll tell you.

[LeazesMag 0]

about as shocking as sunrise this morning.

 

so you're not going to tell us what your fancy solutions are ? Like, "give in to Islam, build a mosque on every corner for them, they're nice blokes really, and we can all live happily ever after"

 

 

 

.....you first. your ideas (of me and of "the real world") are far more enlightening than anything i could come up with given my apparent/perceived lack of "real world" experience.

 

so please i insist, after you......

 

What are you asking exactly ?

 

You know my views, and I know yours, which you don't deny [see above post]

 

Are you going to give a powerpoint aided lecture to the Taliban telling them how uncivlised they are

 

i was asking you to provide your "fancy solutions"

 

so then, why don't you give me a quick over-view of my ideas if you know them

 

contrary to your assertions, i've never made any suggestions as to what we should be doing to the Taliban

 

no, I was asking for your solutions to the Islam problem, but you think there isn't one though. Or do you ?

 

Enlighten us as to your "studies" ?

 

You know my views. They are in this very thread.

 

is there a problem with Islam? i was unaware, not to split hairs but I would say the problem is with radical/fundmentalist Islam, but the vast majority of the over 1 billion of those that follow Allah would not fit into that category.

 

my studies? why the interest in my studies? which ones? what i went to school for or what I was studying for the last month or so?

 

what do you think i studied? ask parky he'll tell you.

 

no problem with the vast majority of over 1 billion ? What utter rubbish.

 

Is that what your "studies" tell you ?

 

Why should I ask Parky, I'm not bothered what you do or don't do but I'm sure you can tell me yourself if you want to. On the other hand, confidentiality is an important thing in life [ahem], so it's entirely up to you.

[Guest alex]

Just wait until he starts calling Happy Face 'KSA-lite'.

[Happy Face 29]

no problem with the vast majority of over 1 billion ? What utter rubbish.

 

[acrossthepond 878]

is there a problem with Islam? i was unaware, not to split hairs but I would say the problem is with radical/fundmentalist Islam, but the vast majority of the over 1 billion of those that follow Allah would not fit into that category.

 

my studies? why the interest in my studies? which ones? what i went to school for or what I was studying for the last month or so?

 

what do you think i studied? ask parky he'll tell you.

 

If I could interject here - we follow God, not Allah, unless you're speaking Arabic. Allah just means God in Arabic. German-speaking Christians don't worship "Gott" any more than Latinos worship "Dios", so why is it we always get pegged as the ones who worship some "other" god? (Hint: it's because many Westerners don't even know that Islam follows on from what they so blithely term the "judeo-christian tradition.")

 

You may now return to your regularly scheduled quote pyramids.

 

EDIT: French-speaking Muslims talk about "Dieu", not Allah (well, except when they are actually praying, because in Islam the actual words of the prayer are supposed to be recited in Arabic exclusively.) The prayers of Arabic-speaking Christians (such as the 10% of Egypt's population that adhere to the Coptic church, such as the Syriacs and Maronites, etc etc) are addressed to Allah. Just to give you some additional (and probably totally un-called for) perspective on this topic.

 

SECOND EDIT: There I go making an ass of myself. I implied that Copts speak Arabic when they pray. Wrong, their prayers are in Coptic. Glad I could get that one cleared up, since someone was totally going to call me on it

Edited October 19, 2010 by acrossthepond

[tooner 243]

about as shocking as sunrise this morning.

 

so you're not going to tell us what your fancy solutions are ? Like, "give in to Islam, build a mosque on every corner for them, they're nice blokes really, and we can all live happily ever after"

 

 

 

.....you first. your ideas (of me and of "the real world") are far more enlightening than anything i could come up with given my apparent/perceived lack of "real world" experience.

 

so please i insist, after you......

 

What are you asking exactly ?

 

You know my views, and I know yours, which you don't deny [see above post]

 

Are you going to give a powerpoint aided lecture to the Taliban telling them how uncivlised they are

 

i was asking you to provide your "fancy solutions"

 

so then, why don't you give me a quick over-view of my ideas if you know them

 

contrary to your assertions, i've never made any suggestions as to what we should be doing to the Taliban

 

no, I was asking for your solutions to the Islam problem, but you think there isn't one though. Or do you ?

 

Enlighten us as to your "studies" ?

 

You know my views. They are in this very thread.

 

is there a problem with Islam? i was unaware, not to split hairs but I would say the problem is with radical/fundmentalist Islam, but the vast majority of the over 1 billion of those that follow Allah would not fit into that category.

 

my studies? why the interest in my studies? which ones? what i went to school for or what I was studying for the last month or so?

 

what do you think i studied? ask parky he'll tell you.

 

no problem with the vast majority of over 1 billion ? What utter rubbish.

 

Is that what your "studies" tell you ?

 

Why should I ask Parky, I'm not bothered what you do or don't do but I'm sure you can tell me yourself if you want to. On the other hand, confidentiality is an important thing in life [ahem], so it's entirely up to you.

 

riiiiight, why'd you ask then?

 

all that info is on the board somewhere. Tell you what, i'll give you 20 questions to figure it out.....ok go.

 

oh, and please provide proof to the contrary of my above statement about the majority of the muslim population. what sort of problems have there been? keep in mind not believing in JC does not qualify as a problem, only as a cultural difference.....ok go.

[tooner 243]

is there a problem with Islam? i was unaware, not to split hairs but I would say the problem is with radical/fundmentalist Islam, but the vast majority of the over 1 billion of those that follow Allah would not fit into that category.

 

my studies? why the interest in my studies? which ones? what i went to school for or what I was studying for the last month or so?

 

what do you think i studied? ask parky he'll tell you.

 

If I could interject here - we follow God, not Allah, unless you're speaking Arabic. Allah just means God in Arabic. German-speaking Christians don't worship "Gott" any more than Latinos worship "Dios", so why is it we always get pegged as the ones who worship some "other" god? (Hint: it's because many Westerners don't even know that Islam follows on from what they so blithely term the "judeo-christian tradition.")

 

You may now return to your regularly scheduled quote pyramids.

 

EDIT: French-speaking Muslims talk about "Dieu", not Allah (well, except when they are actually praying, because in Islam the actual words of the prayer are supposed to be recited in Arabic exclusively.) The prayers of Arabic-speaking Christians (such as the 10% of Egypt's population that adhere to the Coptic church, such as the Syriacs and Maronites, etc etc) are addressed to Allah. Just to give you some additional (and probably totally un-called for) perspective on this topic.

 

SECOND EDIT: There I go making an ass of myself. I implied that Copts speak Arabic when they pray. Wrong, their prayers are in Coptic. Glad I could get that one cleared up, since someone was totally going to call me on it

thanks for the info....i guess to be accurate i should have said those who follow the teachings of Mohammed.

 

please excuse my previous oversight.

[Park Life 71]

People who disfigure others in Britain are considered criminals in the eyes of the law; under Taliban rule it is perfectly legitimate to beat a woman to the point of disfiguration or perhaps death for any number of misdemeanours, including her having been raped. Ignoring the rest of the barbarous and oppressive ideology that the Taliban impose on its sufferers, the rampant and murderous misogyny inherent in their way of life is evidence enough that they are wholly evil, and I don't use that word lightly.

 

I have to ask, do you have a problem with the Taliban being referred to as 'backwards people'? Is this culturally insensitive?

 

"You've only descended to this stomach turning tactic because all other justifications you've offered have been comprehensively disproved.....and now we'll disprove this one."

 

I can't say I've seen all justifications for intervention in Afghanistan comprehensively disproved, far from it: even Mr. Juan Cole recognized the necessity of it: this was an instance when the merits of intervening clearly outweighed the prospect of inaction.

 

So when is Nato going to invade thw whole of Africa?

[ChezGiven 0]

So what was the justification for going to war in Afghanistan then KSA?

 

What exactly are we doing there and why?

 

From a personal perspective, when Cameron said that British soldiers had not died in vain, i was not clear if he meant that somehow it had been a success or had been morally justified from the outset. The post-hoc moralising in your posts is evidently full of shit btw.

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

@ Parky/Chez

 

Already covered these queries extensively in the previous threads that covered Afghanistan. (I assume Parky's taking the piss/stoned)

 

The truth of the matter is Chez if you had any serious interest in the conflict in Afghanistan you wouldn't be asking me about things which have been extensively covered since the NATO mission started. With regard to your two specific questions: if you don't know, look it up, there is tonnes of material on it (I have also spelled some of it out in previous threads during discussions with HF; you posted in these threads yourself).

I assume when you accuse me of 'post-hoc moralising', you mean to say I have stated that the reasons for the intervention were motivated by human rights concerns and the brutality of Taliban rule. I have stated no such thing. I merely made an observation that 96-01 was a horrific period for women, and that their plight has improved since. The Afghan constitution now states women are equal in the eyes of the law and the are various female members of the parliament and government. Women's rights have improved significantly from the period before the intervention, I stated this is a good thing and we shouldn't forget the suffering of those under a Taliban rule. Is that an objectionable statement? I don't think so.

Edited October 20, 2010 by Kevin S. Assilleekunt

[Renton 22008]

i'm going to try to get this thread back on topic.

 

the fact that this kind of thing goes on in the world is horrifying. fucking savages. there really is no way to defend it.

 

totally agree. That is why I posted it.

 

I expected one or two to play it down or even defend it though, but there is really no excuse for it at all. It's of even more concern that this is the sort of mentality they would try and impose on us, because they certainly won't change their ways in the name of "multiculturism and tolerance". Not a chance.

 

well, i don't agree with that. this kind of thing doesn't happen in most parts of the civilised world. britain is a good example of multiculturism - it works. the taliban however, are barbarians. i don't think we will win the war in afghanistan and that is a real worry. these people are animals.

 

I don't really think that multiculurism is working, nor will it ever work. For it to work, the onus is on those accepted into a country to conform ie when in Rome do as the Romans do, but wherever muslims go in the world, they are totally intolerant of said countries traditions and cultures. Everything has to stop for Allah so far as they are concerned, and they expect others to do the same. In their homeland, yes, but not elsewhere.

 

This problem is now a worldwide one, although the UK because of the PC correct brigade has it bigger than most if not the biggest, and will only accelerate. Our politicians don't have the balls to tell the pc correct brigade where to go, basically.

 

Prime example here:

 

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/172324...-dress-ban-vote

 

"The law's author, Daniel Bacquelaine, said a burka is incompatible with basic security as everyone in public must be recognisable and clashes with the principles of a society that respects the rights of all."

 

 

huge over-simplification, i would agree with that statement if you had singled out "fundamentalist islam", but I would also point out that fundamentalist christianity does much the same thing, ie trampling local indiginous cultures in the name of saving the population from eternal damnation.

 

and as far as multiculturalism goes, sure it works. It's worked over here, despite resistance by portions of the population that are scared of anything/anyone they can't identify with on the basis of a first impression.

 

I would love to take part more in this discussion today but I have to go and study , I look forward to having a debate on this further after tomorrow 11 am local time.

 

ah. It becomes clearer. You're a 14 year old then

 

 

hardly dipshit...I wrote my Professional Practice Exam yesterday...

 

 

Well boogalloo. What fancy theories, from the comfort of your armchair, did you spout on about ?

 

Leazes, are you aware that it is quite normal for people to take courses and exams throughout their working lives as part of their continued professional development? And yes, this usually involves studying and the reading of books.

[Meenzer 15737]

How murder exposed Saudi prince's homosexual life

 

A Saudi prince has been convicted of murdering his manservant, who was found beaten to death in bed at a plush London hotel. The defendant spent most of the trial trying to prove he was not gay. Why?

 

Before his trial began at the Old Bailey, Prince Saud bin Abdulaziz bin Nasir al Saud made strenuous efforts to keep the question of his homosexuality secret.

 

The 34-year-old prince admitted he had assaulted his manservant, Bandar Abdulaziz, but denied murder.

 

His barrister, John Kelsey-Fry QC, argued the question of sexuality was irrelevant to the case and pointed out homosexual acts were a "mortal sin" under Islamic sharia law.

 

Mr Kelsey-Fry said if the prince was outed as a homosexual he could face execution in his native Saudi Arabia.

 

Jonathan Laidlaw QC, prosecuting, argued that if he was convicted and recommended for deportation after serving his sentence he would be able to claim asylum in Britain by arguing that his life was in danger, whether or not he actually was gay.

 

Christoph Wilcke, a Saudi Arabia expert with Human Rights Watch, said homosexuals had in the past been executed but it was usually for rape and he said a prince would be immune from court action.

 

When the trial began Mr Kelsey-Fry went to great lengths to stress his client denied he was gay.

 

But a string of witnesses suggested otherwise.

 

A hotel porter Dobromir Dimitrov, himself homosexual, said: "I would describe them as a gay couple."

 

But Mr Kelsey-Fry, cross examining Mr Dimitrov, told him: "It is not accepted that this was in fact a gay couple - but I readily accept that you had the impression they were a gay couple."

 

Two male escorts, Pablo Silva and Louis Szikora, also gave evidence they had performed sex acts on the prince.

 

Although the prince never gave evidence, during police interviews he insisted he was heterosexual and had a girlfriend in Saudi Arabia.

 

But Mr Laidlaw said this was a lie: "The defendant's keeping back of his homosexuality might in other circumstances, because of the cultural background perhaps, be explained away by embarrassment, or indeed, fear.

 

"But the defendant's concealing of the sexual aspect to his abuse of the victim was, we will argue, for altogether more sinister reasons."

 

When he was found in the bed in Room 312 of the Landmark Hotel in central London the victim had bite marks on his cheeks. The police also found naked photographs of him on the prince's mobile.

 

All this, suggested Mr Laidlaw, suggested a "sexual element" to the abuse which led to the victim's death.

 

The prince, whose mother was one of 50 children of the late King Saud, paid for his 32-year-old manservant to fly around the world and stay in the best hotels.

 

Together in London they went shopping, dined in the best restaurants and drank champagne and cocktails in swanky nightclubs.

 

They shared a bed but the prince frequently subjected his manservant to violent attacks, such as the beating which was captured on the CCTV camera in a hotel lift three weeks before Bandar Abdulaziz's death.

 

In the footage the victim makes no attempt to fight back and afterwards walks meekly after his master like a scolded dog.

 

Professor Gregory Gause, a Saudi Arabia expert, said: "Homosexuality is considered extremely shameful in Saudi Arabia and there is not a publicly acknowledged homosexual community.

 

"It's still closeted. But, for young Saudi men, contact with the opposite sex is extremely difficult so there might be a temptation to experiment before marriage," said Prof Gause, from the University of Vermont.

 

He said about 5,000 Saudi princes get a yearly stipend of about $200,000 (£126,000), but some were "fabulously wealthy".

 

An insight into the prince's bashfulness about his homosexuality was given by one of the escorts, Mr Szikora, who described visiting the prince for a two-hour "erotic" session three days before the murder.

 

He said: "The man I met ultimately did want sexual massage but it is like mixing Nigel Havers with Omar Sharif. You have to build some rapport.

 

"Middle Eastern gentlemen, they are not as open about what they want as people in the West."

 

Whatever the exact relationship between the prince and his manservant, when he overstepped the mark, with his beatings, and inflicted fatal injuries on Bandar he tried to conceal it by concocting a cover story.

 

He claimed his manservant had been beaten up and robbed of 3,000 euros in Edgware Road three weeks before, and suggested those injuries must have led to his death.

 

His lies were exposed by the post mortem, which showed the injuries were fresh, and by CCTV footage in the lift, which showed it was the prince who inflicted those earlier injuries.

 

He later admitted causing the injuries which led to his death.

 

Now he faces a long spell in a British jail before being deported back to Saudi Arabia.

 

But Mr Wilcke said: "Irrespective of the court verdict his humiliation has already taken place. A family council will have been held and he will probably have his money cut off."

 

Trying to impose their values on this country... or something

[Monkeys Fist 43115]

So, under Sharia law, poovery is a mortal sin, punishable by death.

Unless you're a Prince.

 

And they're only cutting his money off, nothing else.

 

 

Seems like a fair system

[acrossthepond 878]

So, under Sharia law, poovery is a mortal sin, punishable by death.

Unless you're a Prince.

 

And they're only cutting his money off, nothing else.

 

 

Seems like a fair system

 

There's nowhere more backward on this earth than Saudi Arabia. No prizes for guessing who gave the Arabian Peninsula to the House of Saud, though.

 

That's a good message for the people who are always banging on about how bad the regimes in the Middle East are - don't consider only the monster, but also its creator.

[The Fish 10972]

So, under Sharia law, poovery is a mortal sin, punishable by death.

Unless you're a Prince.

 

And they're only cutting his money off, nothing else.

 

 

Seems like a fair system

 

There's nowhere more backward on this earth than Saudi Arabia. No prizes for guessing who gave the Arabian Peninsula to the House of Saud, though.

 

That's a good message for the people who are always banging on about how bad the regimes in the Middle East are - don't consider only the monster, but also its creator.

 

 

Jim Henson?

[Monkeys Fist 43115]

So, under Sharia law, poovery is a mortal sin, punishable by death.

Unless you're a Prince.

 

And they're only cutting his money off, nothing else.

 

 

Seems like a fair system

 

There's nowhere more backward on this earth than Saudi Arabia. No prizes for guessing who gave the Arabian Peninsula to the House of Saud, though.

 

That's a good message for the people who are always banging on about how bad the regimes in the Middle East are - don't consider only the monster, but also its creator.

 

 

Jim Henson?

 

Mel Brooks?

[acrossthepond 878]

Don't talk that way about Alex's mam.

[Monkeys Fist 43115]

Don't talk that way about Alex's mam.

Stone him!!

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

Happy Face is the member who seems to display the most interest in this subject, I say this because I know he regularly reads articles regarding the Mid-East region and the conflicts within. Now, when I stated that women's rights had improved post intervention, HappyFace cited an article from the Guardian regarding a proposed policy - that to this day has not been enforced - that Karzai made in a bid to gain favour with the Shia community during an election campaign. The Shia Family Law was to apply to the Shia community (around 20% of the population), and would have legalised some of the most extreme attitudes towards women, similar to some of the ones the Taliban enforced, but ultimately less brutal. Several of the more extreme measures have so far been repealed, and if the bill is ever to be enforced in its stripped down form there would be international pressure on the Afghan government - as well as pressure from within that government itself and the Afghan population - to stop it. A group of women demonstrators protested the proposed law, and their was outcry from female members of parliament in Afghanistan. Needless to say the reaction to this rather cynical bout of electioneering from Karzai - that is what it has amounted to thus far - showed women exercising rights that they would never have had under a Taliban rule.

 

Happy Face failed to mention all this and indeed the article he cited, from 2009, alluded to the Karzai government being 'worse than the Taliban' in terms of women's rights. Happy Face stated that 'this only goes to prove the point' that women's rights had not improved since the 2001 intervention. He failed to mention the Afgan constitution which states that women are equal in the eyes of the law, and the various significant steps that have been taken for women's rights in the country. This is highly misleading, and this is from the poster who displays the most interest in the subject and seems to be a reasonable guy. His view is that even if some of the arguments for intervention had merit, the conflict has long since gone very wrong. This is a perfectly reasonable point of view but it shouldn't lead to one contorting evidence that displays some positive effects of the intervention. I am not going to pretend I have never been guilty of ignoring evidence when it hasn't fitted with my view on a matter, but this is something I do now actively try to avoid, having learned the dangers of such behaviour. If this is what can be expected from the person who is most willing to discuss the subject in a reasonable way, what can be expected from those less interested, less informed, and less reasonable?

 

I found this out to my displeasure: statements such as, "I think we got dragged into Afghanistan because of Iraq,", "I couldn't care less if the Taliban were still in charge,", and accusations that I am not addressing the point and the insights involved in such statements. Well forgive me if I now tire of this tomfoolery; the consistent repetition regarding points that have already been addressed; the continual misconstruing of arguments and statements, it is pointless continuing when faced with this kind of unrelenting idiocy. HappyFace does cite some interesting material regarding the Mid-East and his posts encourage further investigation into said topics. AcrossThePond offers knowlegable insights into the Muslim communities with great patience. That's about it though, the rest are all bell-ends and I won't descend to their level of petty insults and nonsense.

Edited October 20, 2010 by Kevin S. Assilleekunt

[Gemmill 46088]

Just woke up and I'm falling asleep again reading this.

[Happy Face 29]

Happy Face is the member who seems to display the most interest in this subject, I say this because I know he regularly reads articles regarding the Mid-East region and the conflicts within. Now, when I stated that women's rights had improved post intervention, HappyFace cited an article from the Guardian regarding a proposed policy - that to this day has not been enforced - that Karzai made in a bid to gain favour with the Shia community during an election campaign. The Shia Family Law was to apply to the Shia community (around 20% of the population), and would have legalised some of the most extreme attitudes towards women, similar to some of the ones the Taliban enforced, but ultimately less brutal. Several of the more extreme measures have so far been repealed, and if the bill is ever to be enforced in its stripped down form there would be international pressure on the Afghan government - as well as pressure from within that government itself and the Afghan population - to stop it. A group of women demonstrators protested the proposed law, and their was outcry from female members of parliament in Afghanistan. Needless to say the reaction to this rather cynical bout of electioneering from Karzai - that is what it has amounted to thus far - showed women exercising rights that they would never have had under a Taliban rule.

 

Happy Face failed to mention all this and indeed the article he cited, from 2009, alluded to the Karzai government being 'worse than the Taliban' in terms of women's rights. Happy Face stated that 'this only goes to prove the point' that women's rights had not improved since the 2001 intervention. He failed to mention the Afgan constitution which states that women are equal in the eyes of the law, and the various significant steps that have been taken for women's rights in the country. This is highly misleading, and this is from the poster who displays the most interest in the subject and seems to be a reasonable guy. His view is that even if some of the arguments for intervention had merit, the conflict has long since gone very wrong. This is a perfectly reasonable point of view but it shouldn't lead to one contorting evidence that displays some positive effects of the intervention. I am not going to pretend I have never been guilty of ignoring evidence when it hasn't fitted with my view on a matter, but this is something I do now actively try to avoid, having learned the dangers of such behaviour. If this is what can be expected from the person who is most willing to discuss the subject in a reasonable way, what can be expected from those less interested, less informed, and less reasonable?

 

I found this out to my displeasure: statements such as, "I think we got dragged into Afghanistan because of Iraq,", "I couldn't care less if the Taliban were still in charge,", and accusations that I am not addressing the point and the insights involved in such statements. Well forgive me if I now tire of this tomfoolery; the consistent repetition regarding points that have already been addressed; the continual misconstruing of arguments and statements, it is pointless continuing when faced with this kind of unrelenting idiocy. HappyFace does cite some interesting material regarding the Mid-East and his posts encourage further investigation into said topics. AcrossThePond offers knowlegable insights into the Muslim communities with great patience. That's about it though, the rest are all bell-ends and I won't descend to their level of petty insults and nonsense.

 

 

All reasonable enough. Though I wouldn't start having a pop at anyone showing an interest with the best intentions, whatever their current knowledge. I know fuck all about the Falklands conflict, it doesn't make me a bell-end.

 

On the "worse than the Taliban" comment, obviously it's not something I said, just highlighting a viewpoint that does exist. I held my hands up and said my absolute statement that "nothing" had improved in the realm of women's lib was probably just as hyperbolic as the article though. Almost as hyperbolic as saying if only we would stay in Afghanistan then no more women will be this mistreated.

 

I've said the reason I post a lot on the middle east and current events is because I want to learn about it, not because I know everything and want to berate anyone else for their view. It's not something that gets discussed in this detail in the pub.

 

It does get tiresome when entrenched views mean the threads descend into a pure bitch fest, that's when I try to take my leave generally. I think you enjoy the name calling and condescension as much as Leazes. You clearly have more insight into the situation than him so your barbs have more bite, not that you know it all like you clearly think you do.

 

If there wasn't any piss-taking though, these threads would be even duller for most people and would disappear as quickly as they're posted.

 

You stupid cunt

Edited October 20, 2010 by Happy Face