ISIS are pure evil.

Wurzelbert

eternal wrote: »

Scumbags desroying ancient artifacts of our artistic heritage that can never be replaced. It makes my blood boil. Destructive, disgusing subhuman cnts. Why aren't they totured and burnt and swept away into the nothingness of time.

yes, why?

keanosbeard

We are digressing, but;

" There is no penal code in Saudi Arabia and there is no written law which specifically criminalizes rape "

" There is no prohibition against marital rape " i.e. forcing your penis into your wife against her wishes is not rape.

" There is no prohibition against statutory rape " i.e forcing your penis into an underage girl against her wishes is not rape.

" If the rape victim first entered the rapist's company in violation of purdah, she also stands to be punished by the law's current holdings. In Saudi Arabia, rape cases usually target both the defendant and the victim, and in some cases, the victim can be sentenced to even harsher punishment than the assailant "

In Islam forcing a your penis into a slave woman or a woman you own against her wishes is not rape.

4 witnesses are required to prove the woman was not actually committing adultery.

It's not that Sharia " promotes " rape, but that there is not a great deal to discourage those who wish to do so.

And it is not that Islam " promotes paedophilia ", but it undoubtedly offers justification for it.

Egginacup

eternal wrote: »

Scumbags desroying ancient artifacts of our artistic heritage that can never be replaced. It makes my blood boil. Destructive, disgusing subhuman cnts. Why aren't they totured and burnt and swept away into the nothingness of time.

Are you referring to the priceless Assyrian and Babylonian treasures lost and destroyed forever by American bombs and shells in Iraq, the Cradle of Civilization?

nokia69

Egginacup wrote: »

some other poster's ignorant insistence that Islam promotes rape. It expressly forbids it and the punishment is harsher than in any Western country ....i.e. the death penalty.

nope, try again

Shurimgreat

keanosbeard wrote: »

We are digressing, but;

" There is no penal code in Saudi Arabia and there is no written law which specifically criminalizes rape "

" There is no prohibition against marital rape " i.e. forcing your penis into your wife against her wishes is not rape.

" There is no prohibition against statutory rape " i.e forcing your penis into an underage girl against her wishes is not rape.

" If the rape victim first entered the rapist's company in violation of purdah, she also stands to be punished by the law's current holdings. In Saudi Arabia, rape cases usually target both the defendant and the victim, and in some cases, the victim can be sentenced to even harsher punishment than the assailant "

In Islam forcing a your penis into a slave woman or a woman you own against her wishes is not rape.

4 witnesses are required to prove the woman was not actually committing adultery.

It's not that Sharia " promotes " rape, but that there is not a great deal to discourage those who wish to do so.

And it is not that Islam " promotes paedophilia ", but it undoubtedly offers justification for it.

And yet consensual sex between homosexuals I'm sure it punished severely as it is throughout the middle east. And consensual sex between two adulterers is also punished severely I'd imagine.

It's a screwed up society, no mistake about it.

A man can pretty much rape as he pleases but if he has consensual sex with another man or a married woman he's in trouble.

eternal

Egginacup wrote: »

Are you referring to the priceless Assyrian and Babylonian treasures lost and destroyed forever by American bombs and shells in Iraq, the Cradle of Civilization?

Any loss of civilisation is a devastation to the annals of history regardless of the country or motivation who carries out such acts.

Egginacup

keanosbeard wrote: »

We are digressing, but;

" There is no penal code in Saudi Arabia and there is no written law which specifically criminalizes rape "

" There is no prohibition against marital rape " i.e. forcing your penis into your wife against her wishes is not rape.

" There is no prohibition against statutory rape " i.e forcing your penis into an underage girl against her wishes is not rape.

" If the rape victim first entered the rapist's company in violation of purdah, she also stands to be punished by the law's current holdings. In Saudi Arabia, rape cases usually target both the defendant and the victim, and in some cases, the victim can be sentenced to even harsher punishment than the assailant "

In Islam forcing a your penis into a slave woman or a woman you own against her wishes is not rape.

4 witnesses are required to prove the woman was not actually committing adultery.

It's not that Sharia " promotes " rape, but that there is not a great deal to discourage those who wish to do so.

And it is not that Islam " promotes paedophilia ", but it undoubtedly offers justification for it.

No, you're not getting away with that little attempt at trickery and deflection.
You cynically tried to equate Saudi Arabia's fairly draconian system of justice for women with what Islam espouses and that was a lame and transparent attempt. I was unaware that Saudi Arabia had no penal code with regard to rape, but that's Saudi Arabia. Not Islam and not Sharia Law.

keanosbeard

Egginacup wrote: »

Other countries where Sharia Law is applied in full are Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Sudan. It is applied to personal issues (such as marriage) in a host of other countries, India, Morocco, Egypt, Algeria, Malaysia, Uganda and many more. And all these countries have a minimum marriage age, many of them have the age set for the girl a lot higher than us in the enlightened and protective "west".

Now we really are digressing, but only because you brought it up

Well according to an oft quoted online resource Marriageable age for girls in Europe, or the enlightened and protective West as you call it is 18.

And the " legal " marriage age for girls in the countries you quote ?

Yemen - NONE

Sudan - PUBERTY

Iraq - either 13 or 15, it's " unclear ".

Pakistan - 16, but a UNICEF report claims 70 % of girls in Pakistan are married before the age of 16. A custom in Pakistan, called swara, involves village elders solving family disputes or settling unpaid debts by marrying off girls. The average marriage age of swara girls is between 5 and 9.

India - 18, but of course, India, unlike Pakistan, is a far more tolerant of multiculturism (funny that) and it appears that for Muslim girls legally 15.

Afghanistan technically 16, of course up in the mountains things might get a little " lawless ".

Eygpt - 18, since 2006, when the law was 16

And of course since you have a fondness;

Saudi Arabia - NONE

keanosbeard

Egginacup wrote: »

Saudi Arabia is the most rigid autocratic Muslim state but if you rape someone there, or molest a kid you will be executed.

I was unaware that Saudi Arabia had no penal code with regard to rape

I'm confused !

But I would guess you do not live under this Sharia Law of which you speak so highly. It sounds like you find it preferable ?

keanosbeard

Anyway, this thread is about Isis, not Sharia Law or Saudi Arabia.

Although I guess there certainly are some similarities !

Wurzelbert

Egginacup wrote: »

You see this is where you people are cherry-picking bullshit little episodes and using them as a yardstick to vent your own bigotry. So the grand fucking mufti of Saudi Arabia wants there to be no legal age for a girl to get married. Is this guy's stance codified in the teachings of Islam?

Other countries where Sharia Law is applied in full are Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Sudan. It is applied to personal issues (such as marriage) in a host of other countries, India, Morocco, Egypt, Algeria, Malaysia, Uganda and many more. And all these countries have a minimum marriage age, many of them have the age set for the girl a lot higher than us in the enlightened and protective "west".

So to assert, as that poster in his galactic clumsiness did, that Islam is some kind of predatory cult that promotes paedophilia just because some old religious fogey in Saudi is opposed to the introduction of a minimum marriage age is laughable.

this looks like it could be interesting...

Wurzelbert

Egginacup wrote: »

No, you're not getting away with that little attempt at trickery and deflection.
You cynically tried to equate Saudi Arabia's fairly draconian system of justice for women with what Islam espouses and that was a lame and transparent attempt. I was unaware that Saudi Arabia had no penal code with regard to rape, but that's Saudi Arabia. Not Islam and not Sharia Law.

enlighten me, what exactly does the quran have to say about rape?

keanosbeard

I am wondering why this fella is so touchy and defensive of Sharia Law ?

Isis are enforcing it with a vengeance on the areas under their control, and we are sort of the agreement that Isis are pure evil.

Mind you there is a certain sort of folk who thoroughly relish that sort of thing. Absolutely beautiful human beings who loved cake, until the nasty British government gave them no choice but to carve another human beings head off.

Egginacup

Wurzelbert wrote: »

this looks like it could be interesting...

That is quite a collage you've posted. I haven't had time to source everything but one thing that jumped out at me was the author's claims that the turkish government is "Islamist" and that they lowered the marriageable age to 12 in 2009. This is news to me. According to many sources the marriageable age for a female in Turkey is 18. When did they change it back from 12?

Zebra3

keanosbeard wrote: »

Now we really are digressing, but only because you brought it up

Well according to an oft quoted online resource Marriageable age for girls in Europe, or the enlightened and protective West as you call it is 18.

And the " legal " marriage age for girls in the countries you quote ?

Yemen - NONE

Sudan - PUBERTY

Iraq - either 13 or 15, it's " unclear ".

Pakistan - 16, but a UNICEF report claims 70 % of girls in Pakistan are married before the age of 16. A custom in Pakistan, called swara, involves village elders solving family disputes or settling unpaid debts by marrying off girls. The average marriage age of swara girls is between 5 and 9.

India - 18, but of course, India, unlike Pakistan, is a far more tolerant of multiculturism (funny that) and it appears that for Muslim girls legally 15.

Afghanistan technically 16, of course up in the mountains things might get a little " lawless ".

Eygpt - 18, since 2006, when the law was 16

And of course since you have a fondness;

Saudi Arabia - NONE

Scotland - 16.

keanosbeard

The British Government have some new clues in their fight against homegrown Islamofacist terrorists;

The lad was an absolutely lovely boy, humble, the nicest lad you could ever meet.

The nasty British Government stopped him from going on his " Jiholidays " because his companions had " connections ".

He spent a lot of time hanging out with CAGE, a " Human Rights " charity with a particular interest in convicted terrorists (who seemed just never recognised him in all those videos)

He loved to eat Balkava cake.

I'm going with the Balkava. He was chopping up all those nuts, and he accidentally chopped some innocent aid workers heads off.

Wurzelbert

Egginacup wrote: »

That is quite a collage you've posted. I haven't had time to source everything but one thing that jumped out at me was the author's claims that the turkish government is "Islamist" and that they lowered the marriageable age to 12 in 2009. This is news to me. According to many sources the marriageable age for a female in Turkey is 18. When did they change it back from 12?

this might interest you...secular - i.e. non-islamic - law means precisely dick to islamists and many devout muslims...

Egginacup

keanosbeard wrote: »

I am wondering why this fella is so touchy and defensive of Sharia Law ?

Isis are enforcing it with a vengeance on the areas under their control, and we are sort of the agreement that Isis are pure evil.

Mind you there is a certain sort of folk who thoroughly relish that sort of thing. Absolutely beautiful human beings who loved cake, until the nasty British government gave them no choice but to carve another human beings head off.

I take it you're referring to me, kb. You can ask me directly rather than seeking feedback and ultimately scoffs, I would imagine, from others.

I'm not in the slightest bit defensive regarding Sharia law, though I do see merit in the prohibition of usury, you know, the concept of powerful people making wealth out of nothing.

I have no opinion about Sharia law. I have a problem if you cared to read back a little with someone who stated that things like rape, paedophilia and a plethora of other abominations were sanctioned by the ideology of Islam. The person who made this gutless assertion has not displayed the strength of character to admit to downright bigotry but only to try to worm out of this assertion by equating child brides in Saudi Arabia with his skewed and ignorant opinion of a religion about which he knows nothing.

I couldn't give a damn about demons and deities. But I loathe people who spread lies, prevarication and hatred based upon their own ill-informed worldview.

reprise

Egginacup wrote: »

(.......)
I couldn't give a damn about demons and deities. But I loathe people who spread lies, prevarication and hatred based upon their own ill-informed worldview.

Damn tootin', life's too short for that!

Salvation...

keanosbeard

The thread is about Isis.

Isis are imposing their ideology on the territory they have in their control.

These people are having sex with children ( peadophillia ), raping captured women, selling women, persecuting, beheading and crucifying folk of other religions and ethnicities and members of their own religion whom they consider apostates.

They are imposing this ideology because the original followers of Mohommed, the inventor of Islam, during his lifetime, under his command, instruction and example did these things.

They are justifying their behaviour by the book of the Koran and the example of Mohommed.

You were the chappie who introduced to the benefits of Sharia and sexual mores in Saudi Arabia

Wurzelbert

keanosbeard wrote: »

I am wondering why this fella is so touchy and defensive of Sharia Law ?
[...]

just another western leftist full of cultural self-hate, i suppose...

Wurzelbert

Egginacup wrote: »

[...]I do see merit in the prohibition of usury[...]

i agree with the usury part...as do islam and (at least originally) christianity...so that would bring us into conflict with another even more ancient middle-eastern religion and people...think i'll have to watch the life of brian again soon...

ivytwine

Zebra3 wrote: »

Scotland - 16.

I think it's bloody stupid to get married before you're 30 if I'm honest, but are you seriously saying there's no difference between 16 and 9?!!

The west is not perfect no. But as a woman give me the west with all its many faults than what I could expect from the Middle East.

I don't like Islam in the sense I don't much care for any religion. I don't have a problem with individual Muslims at all. For example I love members of my family despite the fact they are devout Catholics. A person has a right to believe what I think to be nonsense.

It's when the belief leads to smashing artefacts, raping kids, beheading others- that's the problem.

Well aware that all the above can apply to Christians at points in time, but just because Western Christians have done some bad **** doesn't stop Daesh [the only thing I've ever agreed with Tony Abbott on] being terrifying and dangerous.

Roger Hassenforder

Egginacup wrote: »

Well if you read that right there it clearly states that rape is punishable by flogging or death (under Sharia Law, i.e. religious Islam code of justice) but in Saudi Arabia they basically don't give a shit.
That kind of flies in the face of some other poster's ignorant insistence that Islam promotes rape. It expressly forbids it and the punishment is harsher than in any Western country ....i.e. the death penalty.

where is rape expressly forbidden in Islam?

keanosbeard

Being critical of Islam is not bigoted, or questionable, or iswhamowobic, or wayscist.

Islam is a collection of ideas.

Being critical of Islam is quite different to being critical of Muslims.

It is fine to be critical of Marxism or Capitalism or Socialism or Republicalism or Communism or indeed Christianity.

It just seems that for the liberal handwringing left, Islam holds a special protected status.

And after a decade of being feted by the BBC and the Guardian, Cage have just had a watershed moment when the scales have even dropped from the Guardian's eyes. The impact of what happened yesterday is as big for the lefts unquestioning support of " Islamic Human Rights " organisations as 9/11 was for Gerry Adams. A game changer.

If you criticise Islam and you are a white skinned westerner you are a bigot and a questionable type and an iswhamowhobe.

If you criticise Islam and you are a brown skinned woman living under some horrific sharia dictatorship, then you are a brave human rights activist.

I feel sorry for every single woman that lives in Saudi Arabia under Sharia Law, living basically under state sanctioned and state enforced sexism and misogyny.

I feel sorry for every single migrant worker and lets face it slaves that live in Saudi Arabia under Sharia Law living basically under state sanctioned and state enforced racism.

I feel sorry for every single free thinking, broad minded Saudi Arabian living under Sharia Law, having to living under such a cruel and barbaric dictatorship.

You can be critical of Islam and it does not nessasarily follow that you are " Anti Muslim ".

Playboy

keanosbeard wrote: »

Being critical of Islam is not bigoted, or questionable, or iswhamowobic, or wayscist.

Islam is a collection of ideas.

Being critical of Islam is quite different to being critical of Muslims.

It is fine to be critical of Marxism or Capitalism or Socialism or Republicalism or Communism or indeed Christianity.

It just seems that for the liberal handwringing left, Islam holds a special protected status.

And after a decade of being feted by the BBC and the Guardian, Cage have just had a watershed moment when the scales have even dropped from the Guardian's eyes. The impact of what happened yesterday is as big for the lefts unquestioning support of " Islamic Human Rights " organisations as 9/11 was for Gerry Adams. A game changer.

If you criticise Islam and you are a white skinned westerner you are a bigot and a questionable type and an iswhamowhobe.

If you criticise Islam and you are a brown skinned woman living under some horrific sharia dictatorship, then you are a brave human rights activist.

I feel sorry for every single woman that lives in Saudi Arabia under Sharia Law, living basically under state sanctioned and state enforced sexism and misogyny.

I feel sorry for every single migrant worker and lets face it slaves that live in Saudi Arabia under Sharia Law living basically under state sanctioned and state enforced racism.

I feel sorry for every single free thinking, broad minded Saudi Arabian living under Sharia Law, having to living under such a cruel and barbaric dictatorship.

You can be critical of Islam and it does not nessasarily follow that you are " Anti Muslim ".

What a load of horsesht. No one here really gives a sht about a religion like Islam. The world would probably be a better place without the majority of them. Plenty of folk on here though who try and misrepresent Muslims and the Muslim world. Its this big scary horrible place filled full of fundamentalist lunatics who cant wait to rape you, abuse your kids and then behead you is what we hear repeatedly. Some of us who know lots of Muslims and have spent time in Muslim countries know that they are normal folk like the rest of us who for the most part care about the same things. Yes what has been happening in the middle east is horrible and frightening but that situation is complex on many levels, religious ideology being only one of the factors at play. When people try and simplify or boil down all of these conflicts to be just about religion because they have some deep seated biases and fears then I and others will call it out. If people dont talk up against the kind of rhetoric we hear online and in the media then we as a society can end up in some scary places like we did in the past and like what ISIS are doing now... basically nut job fascists who have dehumanized their victims to the point that they enjoy killing them.

So if you truly believe everything that you just posted then you share similar views to most people you spend time arguing with on here who get called hand wringing liberals or lefties. No one supports Saudi Arabia except our governments. You can't criticize one and not the other. The House of Saud has been propped for decades by the West... we have played a major role in allowing this crazy version of Islam to be exported around the world. We are reaping what we have sown and if you dont understand that then you need a fckin history book. So sorry if some of us dont think the answer to all our problems in the ME is soldiers and bombs but some of us do value human life. I don't believe in sacrificing thousands of innocents to get revenge on a group that we had a hand in making. Whether its a Yazidi, a Japanese worker or a British journalist I value all there lives just as much as a value any innocent Muslims life, no more no less.

The Diabolical Monocle

keanosbeard wrote: »

Being critical of Islam is not bigoted, or questionable, or iswhamowobic, or wayscist.

Islam is a collection of ideas.

Being critical of Islam is quite different to being critical of Muslims.

...yes Gary yes

It is fine to be critical of Marxism or Capitalism or Socialism or Republicalism or Communism or indeed Christianity.

It just seems that for the liberal handwringing left, Islam holds a special protected status.

... good good

And after a decade of being feted by the BBC and the Guardian, Cage have just had a watershed moment when the scales have even dropped from the Guardian's eyes.

... think we're going to have to promote this man.

The impact of what happened yesterday is as big for the lefts unquestioning support of " Islamic Human Rights " organisations as 9/11 was for Gerry Adams. A game changer.

...... lol wuuuut.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMpXAknykeg

Egginacup

Wurzelbert wrote: »

this might interest you...secular - i.e. non-islamic - law means precisely dick to islamists and many devout muslims...

No I was asking you to provide information that the Turkish "Islamist" government changed the marriageable age to 12 in 2009, like your post implies.

I haven't been able to find any information about this.

Recip Erdogan was the Prime Minister of Turkey from 2003 and I can't imagine him agreeing to Turkish girls being allowed to be married at the age of 12 in 2009.....especially in light of the fact that Turkey has being attempting to achieve access to the EU.

SO.....when did this 12 year old marriage law in Turkey take effect.

keanosbeard

" We " have not done anything. Do you take personal responsibility for sh!te happening anywhere in the world ?

There are plenty of perfectly peaceable Muslims.

And then there are Islamic Fundamentalists and Islamicists and Islamofacists and Jihadis.

And certain sections of politics and the media are so enarmoured by the principles of " multi culturalism " that they either can't or won't or can't afford to tell the difference or criticise, because they might be accused of upsetting somebody.

So we get to a situation where yesterday Cage, darlings of the BBC and The Guardian and various NGOs as " Human Rights Activists " defended a cake eating psychopath cutting heads off because it was the British Governments fault, and suddenly some folk sit up and go WTF.

And just like the abuse of thousands of young white girls by males of Pakistani heritage in Britain's northern towns, the situation has been allowed because Islam has some sort of sacrosanct " protected status " amongst ideologies and the criticism of Islam is considered some sort of " racism " so is verboten.

old_aussie

keanosbeard wrote: »

"
There are plenty of perfectly peaceable Muslims.

Just like there were plenty of peaceful Germans and Japanese before their respective fundamentalist leaders (who were just a few, compared to the total of the population) tried to enforce their way of life on the world.

It's not the peaceful many who end up running things, it's the self egotistical few who end up running things.

unfortunately, it's not the many good cells around the few cancer cells that live in harmony with the cancer cells, the few cancer cells start to spread and end up wipeing out the rest of the good cells.

You have to kill all the cancer cells to survive and along the way a few good cells have to be cut out to totally remove the cancer.

We need to wipe out IS ASAP, before the situation becomes to big to stop.