Ignore the hate
|
|
|
Paris Attack
- Thread starter N3WMAN
- Start date
I am trying to understand and part of that is learning more about Islamic states.
So... Shah has conceded that ISIS is full of psychopaths and attracts psychopaths. There is a link here with a Saudi Iman saying not to make snowmen because they could cause sexuality etc. Obviously this is ridiculous. The Saudi state is corrupt, badly run, full of human rights abuses etc. Yet, they are one of the chief allies of the U.S. in the middle east. So, obviously ironic to remove Hussein in Iraq on the guise of chemical weapons and over human rights abuses when the Saudis are probably as bad as Hussein was.
Meddling in Iraq has led to an unstable situation and an ongoing civil conflict. Nature abhors a vacuum and one could argue that ISIS/ISIL is partially due to Hussein not being in Iraq anymore and using his totalitarian power to keep a lid on the various interests in the area.
I am all over the place a bit here but the examples I have cited thus far could be characterized as totalitarian states with a rash of human rights abuses. So, my question to Shah and others is to cite the examples of Islamic states which are progressive, democratic, forward thinking, and open with freedom of speech, freedom of expression etc.
Does such a state exist in the middle east?
So... Shah has conceded that ISIS is full of psychopaths and attracts psychopaths. There is a link here with a Saudi Iman saying not to make snowmen because they could cause sexuality etc. Obviously this is ridiculous. The Saudi state is corrupt, badly run, full of human rights abuses etc. Yet, they are one of the chief allies of the U.S. in the middle east. So, obviously ironic to remove Hussein in Iraq on the guise of chemical weapons and over human rights abuses when the Saudis are probably as bad as Hussein was.
Meddling in Iraq has led to an unstable situation and an ongoing civil conflict. Nature abhors a vacuum and one could argue that ISIS/ISIL is partially due to Hussein not being in Iraq anymore and using his totalitarian power to keep a lid on the various interests in the area.
I am all over the place a bit here but the examples I have cited thus far could be characterized as totalitarian states with a rash of human rights abuses. So, my question to Shah and others is to cite the examples of Islamic states which are progressive, democratic, forward thinking, and open with freedom of speech, freedom of expression etc.
Does such a state exist in the middle east?
Yes it does but... not in the middle east... all except iraq of saddams era ironically... all others are foriegn placed puppets... and I am saying that as a muslim...
Saudi royals are not as bad as saddam... they are much worse.. but they are our dictators so media completely ignores it....
And so do alot of the hate crime supporters here.. if you notice they stayed away from going towards who created and supports groups like isis
Saudi royals are not as bad as saddam... they are much worse.. but they are our dictators so media completely ignores it....
And so do alot of the hate crime supporters here.. if you notice they stayed away from going towards who created and supports groups like isis
Last edited:
This I can imagine must gall and piss people off. Remove Hussein as a middle eastern Hitler; yet puppet governments in Africa, the Saudis all propped up by the U.S. and their allies who are as bad if not worse.
So, is there an Islamic state out there which has a good record of human rights, due process, opportunities and education for women, progressive society etc?
Closest thing would be malaysia...
When you say human rights do you mean what was decided as human rights by a bunch of white men.. who represented an absolute minority of the global population.... or human rights as to whats accepted by the majority of the GLOBAL population... a nation has a right to punish as per their customs.. they shouldnt have to bend over because a bunch of western politicians said so
Lets be real.. its because of strict enforcement of laws and punishments that the barbaric nations have ridiculously low crime rates.. so are we right to tell them whats right and whats wrong... eastern world in general has a much better understanding if human rights.. we in the west just try to be politically correct instead.
When you say human rights do you mean what was decided as human rights by a bunch of white men.. who represented an absolute minority of the global population.... or human rights as to whats accepted by the majority of the GLOBAL population... a nation has a right to punish as per their customs.. they shouldnt have to bend over because a bunch of western politicians said so
Lets be real.. its because of strict enforcement of laws and punishments that the barbaric nations have ridiculously low crime rates.. so are we right to tell them whats right and whats wrong... eastern world in general has a much better understanding if human rights.. we in the west just try to be politically correct instead.
Last edited:
Malaysia and iran... you may not agree with iran because they did not abandon their ways and try to be european... but you cant disagree with their forward thinking in almost every field except their version of human rights
Now that is a good question. I do not agree with Capital Punishment and the West has been going away from this for decades; yet the U.S. still puts people to death so that one might be off the table.
I would argue that torture is barbaric; but this obviously took place in Guantanamo Bay. So, is torture off the table?
The British used to draw and quarter people but these sorts of practices went out of favor a long time ago. Things like lashing and other punishments seem barbaric to me. Same with be-heading.
I often ponder how one can have a "progressive" society if there is no separation of church and state. This is widely accepted in Western cultures but (from my understanding anyways) many Islamic states seem to be theocracies and are fundamentalist in nature. I wonder how such a state can be "progressive" in nature?
Thoughts?
Interesting...
I will try to read up on these nations some more and educate myself.
Iran is an excellent example of a successful theocracy.. if it werent for sanctions their economy would have far out weighed others from the region.
Well technically iran is the only nation with an economy even with the sanctions in the region... heck most people dont even know who actually owns the rights to the design of the american f-16, f-18fighters.... IRAN... they officially paid for it..
Joke: we should call our cf-18s with their real name.. cif-18
As a sunni I feel bad that a shia country follows the teachings of the prophet far far better than any and all of the sunni majority countries
Last edited:
If you can.. some day go visit.. they are in general far more educated than us..especially iran... very heavy emphasis on education there.
Motorcycle Mike
Well-known member
Shah, since you seem confused about what is hate speech, etc, here is a graphic I found for you:
...
Last edited:
Perhaps you should graduate from graphics and seek actual legal advice.Shah, since you seem confused about what is hate speech, etc, here is a graphic I found for you:
DISCLAIMER: the link is not legal advice. hope it points you in the right direction.
http://www.article19.org/pages/en/hate-speech-more.html
Last edited:
Incitement to genocide. . Actual crime as per the International Criminal Court.
...
Last edited:
O the ignorance....god have mercy..
Formal name of iran:
**ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN**
Islam is a faith.. persian is ethnicity/nationality(in its time)...
Arabian is not a faith either its a ethnicity.
Iran is a successor nation of the persian empire...
Just like...
The modern UK is a successor state of the former british empire...
English is a language as well as a ethnicity... it is NOT a religion
Caboose are you american by any chance?
That would explain ALOT.
Ps: This is why UNDERSTANDING what you are reading and writing is important.
Last edited:
O the ignorance....god have mercy..
Formal name of iran:
**ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN**
Islam is a faith.. persian is ethnicity/nationality(in its time)...
Arabian is not a faith either its a ethnicity.
Iran is a successor nation of the persian empire...
Just like...
The modern UK is a successor state of the former british empire...
English is a language as well as a ethnicity... it is NOT a religion
Caboose are you american by any chance?
That would explain ALOT.
Ps: This is why UNDERSTANDING what you are reading and writing is important.
Ah yes you got me on that one. I was thinking Arab not Islamic. Very different things. Congratulations on winning your first point in this entire thread.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
As long as you understand the difference that's what matters
|
|
|
|
|