It was the best response to give to that dog ORQuote:
Originally Posted by Mr Earl
Letterman is a smart man
Printable View
It was the best response to give to that dog ORQuote:
Originally Posted by Mr Earl
Letterman is a smart man
Yes. Makes them look like uncovered meat <unquote>. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Butterfly
The deafening silence from our Muslim lovers about Sheik Hilali makes me think they want to pretend he never said it, or it was taken out of context, or he's not a 'proper' Muslim.
And there's probably a few posters who don't want to know about this condemnation of the veil, too. :D
We already discussed that.
Not much.Quote:
Originally Posted by surasak
What's to discuss? It seemed like we all condemned it.
Oh, pity. I was hoping for a good argument. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by surasak
I found this when looking for some answers to the above:-Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Earl
"Women's rights are now protected in the Arab world."
FACT
In most Arab countries, the Shari'a, or Islamic law, defines the rules of traditional social behavior. Under the law, women are accorded a role inferior to that of men, and are therefore discriminated against with regard to personal rights and freedoms.
As Middle East expert Daniel Pipes explains: "In the Islamic view...female sexuality is thought of as being so powerful that it constitutes a real danger to society." Therefore, unrestrained females constitute "the most dangerous challenge facing males trying to carry out God's commands." In combination, females' "desires and their irresistible attractiveness give women a power over men which rivals God's."2
"Left to themselves," Pipes continues, "men might well fall victim to women and abandon God," resulting in civil disorder among believers. In traditional thought, Pipes notes, women pose an internal threat to Islamic society similar to the external one represented by the infidel.
Traditionally, the Arab woman marries at a young age to a man of her father's choice. A husband is entitled to divorce any time, even against his wife's will, by merely declaring verbally that this is his intention.
Although the image of the egalitarian woman is slowly developing within some more secular Arab states, it remains largely confined to urban centers and upper-class circles. Ritual sexual mutilation of females is still common in rural areas of Egypt, Libya, Oman and Yemen.
Furthermore, laws that restrict women's rights remain in force in almost all Arab countries. In Syria, a husband can prevent his wife from leaving the country. In Egypt, Iraq, Libya, Jordan, Morocco, Oman and Yemen, married women must have their husbands' written permission to travel abroad, and they may be prevented from doing so for any reason. In Saudi Arabia, women must obtain written permission from their closest male relative to leave the country or travel on public transportation between different parts of the kingdom.
According to the UN, "utilization of Arab women's capabilities through political and economic participation remains the lowest in the world in quantitative terms….In some countries with elected national assemblies, women are still denied the right to vote or hold office. And one in ever two Arab women can neither read nor write."3
In a Saudi Shari'a court, the testimony of one man equals that of two women. In Kuwait, the male population is allowed to vote, while women are still disenfranchised. Egypt, Morocco, Jordan and Saudi Arabia all have laws stating that a woman's inheritance must be less than that of her male siblings (usually about half the size). Moroccan law excuses the murder or injury of a wife who is caught in the act of committing adultery; yet women are punished for harming their husbands under the same circumstances.
Wife-beating is a relatively common practice in Arab countries, and abused women have little recourse. As the State Department has noted regarding Jordan (and most of the Arab world): "Wife beating is technically grounds for divorce, but the husband may seek to demonstrate that he has authority from the Koran to correct an irreligious or disobedient wife by striking her."4
In Saudi Arabia, restrictions against women are among the most extreme in the Arab world. Saudi women may not marry non-Saudis without government permission (which is rarely given); are forbidden to drive motor vehicles or bicycles; may not use public facilities when men are present; and are forced to sit in the backs of public buses, segregated from men. At Riyadh's King Saud University, professors lecture to rooms of men while women watch via closed-circuit television from distant all-female classrooms.5 "[Islamic] Advice columns" in the Saudi Arabian press recommend strict disciplining of women as part of a proper marriage. Women must cover their entire body and face in public, and those who do not are subject to physical harassment from the Saudi religious police, known as the Mutaaw'in. The Saudis even extend their discriminatory treatment to women abroad. During a visit to the United States by Crown Prince Abdullah, for example, the prince's aides requested that no female air traffic controllers be allowed to control his flight into Texas to meet President Bush. They also requested that no women be allowed on the airport tarmac with the jet.6
The UN, international organizations and local human rights rights nongovernmental organizations constantly pressure the regimes in Arab states to improve the state of human rights in general and women's rights in particular. According to UN data, the proportion of women's representation in Arab parliaments is only 3.4% (as opposed to 11.4% in the rest of the world). In addition, 55% of Arab women are illiterate. The Assistant to UN Vice Secretary General, Angela King, publicly called on Arab states to grant women their rights.7
Arab regimes find different ways to deal with the international pressure to improve women's rights. They often prefer to introduce mild improvements in women's status rather than to enacting radical reforms that might contradict their ideology and antagonize conservative elements in the country.
________
I am not sure how old this article is - so thre may have been some recent changes to it.
Maybe they do have a point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Butterfly
Ask for an apple, get nudged onto the back foot with a pear.
Would be interesting to know what a good Muslim is. According to the so-called moderates, he who blows up a train or plane is not a good Muslim; anyone spouting politically improper Islamic doctrine is not a good Muslim; anyone claiming to support terror or other radical elements of Islam is said to be not a good Muslim...one imagines it's the moderates who can best define a good Muslim, which appears to be anything close to the left or right of themselves... praps one of our inhouse followers can tell us what a good Muslim is?Quote:
Originally Posted by RDNYes. Makes them look like uncovered meat <unquote>. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Butterfly
The deafening silence from our Muslim lovers about Sheik Hilali makes me think they want to pretend he never said it, or it was taken out of context, or he's not a 'proper' Muslim.
And there's probably a few posters who don't want to know about this condemnation of the veil, too. :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Propagator
And we thought the USA was fucked up!
Perhaps one of the billion or so who don't cause problems? We have 5 million or so living here in the U.S. who don't cause a single issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by keda
We tend to focus on a small group and make the insinuation that all behave the same way. Are all American GIs rapists and murderers? I have several mosques within the limits of where I live and I have yet to see any of the members blow up a train, fire weapons at Jews, or cause any problems.
Let's work on a definition of a good American ? what is it ? maybe someone who don't kill innocents or invade countries under false pretense ?
Are you serious - you happily crow about an entire billion good Muslims from something like 1.2bn? So, only .2bn, or 200,000,000 of the bad ones to worry about...and when we consider what one bad man woman or child can do when attached to a bomb, that is one helluva lot of crowing you need to do. Just shows where you are coming from!Quote:
Originally Posted by surasakPerhaps one of the billion or so who don't cause problems? We have 5 million or so living here in the U.S. who don't cause a single issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by keda
We tend to focus on a small group and make the insinuation that all behave the same way. Are all American GIs rapists and murderers? I have several mosques within the limits of where I live and I have yet to see any of the members blow up a train, fire weapons at Jews, or cause any problems.
I would not for a moment consider 200,000,000 (give or take 100,000,000!) to be a small group, though it seems you are comfortable with those implications.Quote:
"We tend to focus on a small group and make the insinuation that all behave the same way."
What? I was simply pulling a number out of my head. 'Billion or so' means exactly what it says. It doesn't mean 'exactly one billion.'
Do we know the precise numbers of Muslims, Hindus, Christians, or Buddhists in this world?
Alright, let's play with numbers, shall we? According to the National Counterterrorism Center (US) there were 11,000 terrorist attacks in 2005.
http://wits.nctc.gov/reports/crot2005nctcannexfinal.pdf
Ok, there's about 1-1.3 billion Muslims in the world depending on which study you read.
Of those 11,000 attacks about 11,000 people were killed. 8300 of those took place in Iraq. That means for the rest of the entire world less than 3,000 died from terrorist attacks from all sources, Muslim, anarchist, political, Tamil Tigers, etc.
Of those 11,000 people only 56 were Americans. 47 of those died in Iraq. That means that in the rest of the world in 2005, 9 Americans died at the hands of Muslims.
9/1,300,000,000 = a really small number, or, approx. 1 in 200,000,000.
The chances in a given year that a random American would die due to Muslim extremism would be about 1 in 200,000,000.
In the United States the murder rate is about 6 per 100,000. That means the rate would be 12,000 per 200,000,000. 12,000 times greater risk than being killed by a Muslim.
Now, if those are the odds that you think are so bad, so terrible, because a group of 1 billion or so people are so violent then I have no problem with those odds.
Sounds like Islam produces the nicest people, according to your manipulation, though if you play with enough figures for long enough (you know, monkeys and typewriters), you might even convince yourself that whatever is upsetting you is somebody else's fault.
I'm not the one with Muslimaphobia.
Have you compared the attitudes of followers of different faiths, are you a scholar of kinds, have you come across some information you'd like to share with the rest of us?:pQuote:
Originally Posted by keda
Or are you having an uneducated guess and a cheap shot at Islam and those who disagree with your sentiments?:sheep2:
Maybe he'd like to refute my facts and come up with his own demonstrating the massive life-threating obstacles facing me due to Muslims in the world?
Clearly not, though you do seem besoted by your democratic right to despise the very system that gave you and protects those rights.Quote:
Originally Posted by surasak
Still, as we know democracy is far from perfect, and less demanding of the individual than those structures that seek out easily seduced personalities.
Oh, just a cheap shot sTROLLer...I leave the education parts to you and your lib/left/looney clique.Quote:
Originally Posted by strollerHave you compared the attitudes of followers of different faiths, are you a scholar of kinds, have you come across some information you'd like to share with the rest of us?:pQuote:
Originally Posted by keda
Or are you having an uneducated guess and a cheap shot at Islam and those who disagree with your sentiments?:sheep2:
Go on, fire away with those reds.
That's a demonstrative element of certain types - as long as you are not personally affected, everything is fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by surasak
Good for you; wish I were so thick skinned.
What's thick skinned about it? Thick skinned would be ignoring millions of attacks and deaths and calling it 'no big deal.'
Thick skinned is being presented with facts and dismissing them without any sort of debate regarding the validity or conclusion drawn by those facts because one's prejudice is so overwhelming and complete as to stifle any sort of intellectual process capable of discussing ways to dismiss one's paranoia.
We're talking about 50 Americans a year. To call Islam or any Muslim a threat to my person or my life is really beyond comprehension. We started a war in another nation over a threat so small it cannot be measured. The risk factor to me as an American is so low we're talking about 10 decimal places to the right of the decimal. I likely stand a greater chance of being impaled by a piece of blue ice flushed out of an airplane overhead than ever being attacked or killed by a Muslim. I don't worry about that so why should I concern myself with something that is so remote of a possibliy that the chances of it happening are less than winning the Powerball jackpot? (1:146,000,000)
For how many years have women (and even men) been dressing up?
Why do some idiotic men think that women only dress up for other men?
I think a veil will look preety stupid on her!
https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2006/11/8.jpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by surasak
Maybe it's because you are lucky and you live in the U.S.
Maybe it's because Islam means "SUBMISSION" .
And many men and women in this world have to be submissive to this crazy religion.
Lucky Man you are!