Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News > Somalia Islams to stone 5 rapists to death
Reload this Page Reply to Thread
FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Thread: Somalia Islams to stone 5 rapists to death Reply to Thread
Title:
Message
Image Verification
Please enter the six letters or digits that appear in the image opposite.


Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Topic Review (Newest First)
Jul 4th, 2006 11:06 PM
KevinTheOmnivore zing!
Jul 4th, 2006 08:35 PM
Courage the Cowardly Dog Hard line islaamic regimes have lots of problems and in general i disagree with them, but stoning rapists gets a kudos from me.

As opposed to American colleges where you simply rape stoners.
Jun 28th, 2006 07:43 PM
ziggytrix Oh, I'm sorry, please let's get back to solving all the world's problems. What shall we tackle first?

Oh, I know, let's find a cure for AIDS!
Jun 28th, 2006 04:30 PM
Abcdxxxx Conversational sabotage?

Well at least we're discussing how much you don't like me again. That's super productive.
Jun 28th, 2006 12:47 PM
ziggytrix
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx
Anyway, I think you've confused typing a lot of words, with substance.
Nice dodge! But again, you've replied to me by ignoring every point I tried to make, and latched onto something from another thread, which you won't bother to properly reference. I don't have time for that sort of bullshit, so just don't even bother, OK?


Quote:
The fact is you run away from virtually even conversation where I do provide you with facts (like the rebutal to your assertion that this all stems from a movement founded in the 70's).
I disagree that I "ran away" from that conversation or any other, but I have neither the time nor the inclination to dig trhough old threads right now.

The fact is that you read posts with blinders, pick out 1 or 2 snippets that you think you can tear apart and completely ignore the rest. In that sense, how can I run away from the conversation, when there is no conversation, but rather a very obnoxious and systematic method of conversational sabotage in nearly every exchange of dialogue between you and I?
Jun 28th, 2006 04:46 AM
Abcdxxxx
Quote:
Profile: Somalia's Islamist* leader
http://www.garoweonline.com/2004pro/index.php?id=4055

"A former army colonel, Mr Aweys was put on the US list because he used to head al-Itihaad al-Islamiya, an Islamist militant group accused of having links to al-Qaeda in the 1990s."
[img]

http://www.garoweonline.com/2004pro/..._aweis2203.jpg

[/img]

Holy shit, the mothership has landed. It's Funkadelic meets the Taliban!!!
Jun 28th, 2006 01:34 AM
Ant10708 you jerks totally hijacked this thread
Jun 28th, 2006 01:07 AM
Abcdxxxx No, this is the part where I encourage you to latch on to all this "wrongness" you attribute to me instead, then get over yourself and your fascination with my Assholeness.

Anyway, I think you've confused typing a lot of words, with substance. You're the one who suddenly embraced the term Jihadist as the Hallal term of choice, right? You're the one who dropped a name to back up your choice, right? If you can't see the irony in your choice, or why it's following you, well then you have obviously missed the point of the aestrisks in the first place, proving this has all gone so far over your head you should really just go back to spending your spare time sellling herbal exctasy instead. The fact is you run away from virtually even conversation where I do provide you with facts (like the rebutal to your assertion that this all stems from a movement founded in the 70's). So why bother wasting our time. Just keep saying "fuck you". It does wonders for arguing your position.

Quote:
then why did you even bother reading his book? I mean the folks at National Review don't like him! And he didn't know Al Qeada could do a 9/11!
Obviously I read these books just so I can show you how wrong you are in an absolutely dumbfounding fashion, and then laugh to myself about how I'm the smartest and funniest guy on the message board.

Hell, but if all else fails, just remind me we're on a satirical website. That's a fresh and exciting response.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. You're what Geggy has to look forward to in his old age.
Jun 28th, 2006 12:19 AM
ziggytrix
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx
...and you're just like a punchine bag without a lifeline.
Touche, sir! I particularly like how a "punching bag with a lifeline" actually means something terribly clever. Your mastery of wit and the English language in general leave me feeling just like a toothbrush without a skyline!


Quote:
the difference here is, i'm sitting with a proof copy of "journey of the jihadist: inside muslim militancy" while you're just referencing it like the asshat you are.
OH MY GOD, YOU HAVE A BOOK! I should just give up right now!

I never referenced his book, smart guy. If I recall correctly, I referenced two articles at his website. Those may have been excepts from his book, but that would be irrelevant to the only point of that reference, which was that I was not making up my own terminology. Not that at this point I'd expect you to pay attention to points, or facts, or anything other than HOW STUPID AND WRONG ZIGGY IS, HYAH HYAH HYAH! HE REFERENCED GERGES, LOL!


Quote:
if you want to discuss it, then come back once you've read the fucking book. that way, when i counter with a reference to gerges of my own, you won't think it's putting words in your mouth, and you might actually get the punchline.
Putting words in my mouth is when you say "You think ____" when I have never said "I think ____". It really isn't that difficult to understand.

If Mr. Gerges is wrong about everything he's ever said because the fine, unbiased folks at National Review can take contextless snippets from pre-9/11 publications that certaily seem to indicate he was grievously mistaken about Bin Ladin, then why did you even bother reading his book? I mean the folks at National Review don't like him! And he didn't know Al Qeada could do a 9/11! I mean, EVERYONE knew they could that!

See what I did there? I just completely avoided addressing any "facts" National Review has at their disposal because I don't like their poilitics and think they're biased! Except I was being sarcastic in an attempt to parody what you have done with Gerges thus far in this forum. I hate spelling that out like that, as it takes all the humor out of it. But you must have a pretty warped sense of humor anyway, coming to a internet humor site specifically for its politics forum! Maybe, to you, that makes it even more hilarious! Who knows, LOL!


However, none of that in any way addresses a brief remark I made regarding his essay, nor does it matter to me, because I'm not the sort of person who latches onto an author or scholar and defines my entire universe around either believing or disbelieving everything word they say. I'm perfectly willing to believe that sometimes people say things that are wrong, and sometimes they say things that are right. Unless it's some random troll on an internet forum. I absolutely adore latching onto the wrongness of every word uttered by a self-important jerk like you.

If you really wanna debate about Mr. Gerges (which I don't - I'd much rather just call you names), then why didn't you do it in that thread, instead of bringing it up here? I seem to recall you were upset that I used the term "jihadist" to describe a group of people. I don't recall (or particularly care) what else upset you about that post, since you didn't bother to reply with anything of substance then, but I'm pretty sure Gerges isn't the only person on Earth to call these people jihadists, as a lazy Google search will indicate.

(NOTE: this is the part where you show me how wrong I was in an absolutely dumfounding fashion, and then laugh to yourself about how you're the smartest and funniest guy at this message board)
Jun 27th, 2006 10:43 PM
Abcdxxxx ...and you're just like a punchine bag without a lifeline.

the difference here is, i'm sitting with a proof copy of "journey of the jihadist: inside muslim militancy" while you're just referencing it like the asshat you are. if you want to discuss it, then come back once you've read the fucking book. that way, when i counter with a reference to gerges of my own, you won't think it's putting words in your mouth, and you might actually get the punchline.

in the meantime, this is what a lazy google search turns up from the natinal review crowd:


Quote:
http://www.nationalreview.com/commen...rris072103.asp
Militant Islam. Gerges consistently downplays the threat of militant Islam in general and Osama bin Laden in particular. One year before 9/11, he found that Osama bin Laden was "exceptionally isolated," and "preoccupied mainly with survival, not attacking American targets." He also ridiculed "exaggerated rhetoric" in Washington about the Bin Laden threat. Al Qaeda was no longer more than a "shadow of its former self," Gerges had the misfortune of writing, as bin Laden was "confined to Afghanistan, constantly on the run," and, "hemmed in by the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt." Not just that, but his "resources are depleting rapidly." Gerges drew the bizarre conclusion that the U.S. government must have its reasons for "inflating his importance." Six months before 9/11, Gerges publicly ridiculed what he called "the terror industry" — his term for specialists voicing concerns about militant Islam — for fomenting an "irrational fear of terrorism by focusing too much on far-fetched horrible scenarios."
Jun 27th, 2006 09:51 PM
ziggytrix yeah, but then i realized you had nothing of substance with which to counter. even your current baiting about Fawaz has been little more than "OMGLOL you take him seriously?!" I mean, if I were one to complain about lack of substance I could ask you what reasons you have for discounting everything that he's said, but you haven't really displayed any desire to converse at that level.

you're like a joke without a punchline.
Jun 27th, 2006 08:50 PM
Abcdxxxx
Quote:
Originally Posted by ziggytrix
what a fascinating assertion you have there. and it compliments your rhetoric without being just too guady. good form!
was that response supposed to do anything more thenyour usual "fuck off" hissy fit? remember when i used to bait you into posting something of SUBSTANCE? don't bother. you've proven you have none.
Jun 27th, 2006 05:31 PM
KevinTheOmnivore ok.
Jun 27th, 2006 05:22 PM
ziggytrix
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx
the problem is how within certain circles, it's become sexy and acceptable to condone fascism, as long as it's third world, and can be embraced a the struggle of a powerless downtrodden people.
what a fascinating assertion you have there. and it compliments your rhetoric without being just too guady. good form!
Jun 27th, 2006 04:43 PM
Abcdxxxx the fundamental problem isn't our methodology in trying to change world fascism, because hey amrikans already are the most fascist of all, right? the problem is how within certain circles, it's become sexy and acceptable to condone fascism, as long as it's third world, and can be embraced a the struggle of a powerless downtrodden people. forget that we're talking about a huge chunk of an entire contenant, which is the source of most of the worlds natural resources.
Jun 27th, 2006 02:28 PM
KevinTheOmnivore black ops.

Or, we could keep doing what we allegedly were doing, and that's financing warlords there to fight the Islams*.





*political and religious fundamentalists, not to be confused with the many millions of Muslims who follow a religion of equality and unity under god.
Jun 27th, 2006 02:18 PM
ziggytrix Psh, I can judge whomever I want. Killing a woman for the 'crime' of being raped is like burning someone's house down because they were burgularized.

So what do we do about it? What should we do about it? Being outraged by it isn't enough, but invading and attempting to convert people to our way of thinking might not be the right thing to do from a purely pragmatic view. :/
Jun 27th, 2006 09:44 AM
KevinTheOmnivore
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ant10708
An article I read brought up a good point. Where the fuck is all the feminsist outrage about the current treatment of Muslim women in the Middle East?
A broader question is what happened to the liberal desire for freedom and liberty?

Modern Democrats seem to get uppity when you call them isolationists (even isolationists support trade, guys), but if you had to find the Wilsonian nation builders in American politcs, it ain't the Democrats.

There's also the hyper-sensitivity that stemmed partly from the 60's and the New Left. Liberals stopped looking outward and started looking inward. Note, there's nothing wrong with that, but I believe it has made us p.c. jackasses.

So something that once might have seemed like common sense (women who get stoned for having sex is bad) all of a sudden becomes a discussion of cultural relativity. And don't dare judge! Once you judge you better be prepared to deal with your own demons, and here comes the native Americans!!!
Jun 27th, 2006 07:42 AM
Abcdxxxx Cliterectomy rocks!
Jun 27th, 2006 06:01 AM
Ant10708 In September, reuters reported the story of an Iranian man, 'defending my honor, family, and dignity,' who cut off his seven year daughter's head after suspecting she had been raped by her uncle. The postmortem showed the girl to be a virgin.

Bust.




According to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, every day two women are slain by male relatives seeking to avenge the family's honor.


An article I read brought up a good point. Where the fuck is all the feminsist outrage about the current treatment of Muslim women in the Middle East? Or are they too busy promoting the vagina monologues in your local high school and demanding their be a women's lacross team even though their isn't demand(or supply of female students) within the school for it.
Jun 27th, 2006 05:47 AM
Ant10708 'It shows that they don't take murders, rapes, or any other equally serious crimes lightly.'

Equally serious crimes such as changing one's religion to something other than Islam, adultery, sex out of wedlock, homosexuality, speaking out agaisnt the current leadership, and countless other equally serious crimes.
Jun 27th, 2006 05:42 AM
Ant10708
Quote:
Originally Posted by mburbank
Robert Zimmerman was not referring to drugs when he said "Everybody must get stoned."
Come on Max. You know if Vince or that crazy drunk in south korea said anything that geggy just said you'd be having a field day in their honor. Make me laugh Max! Geggy couldn't make it any easier for you guys I don't think.
Jun 27th, 2006 05:40 AM
Ant10708 How the fuck does Geggy not have his own sticky quote thread yet? This thread totally calls for it!

Geggy I like you even though I don't believe in most of the 9/11 conspiracy information i read from you but please do yourself a favor and read up on the Middle East's use of stonings before you start showing your support for them. It really isn't as just as you think it is.

And Geggy, why don't you think rapists deserve death? Even the Nazis considered rape to be the one thing there was no justification for(not that they followed this or anything). I'd rather be murdered than raped thats for sure.
Jun 26th, 2006 10:24 PM
KevinTheOmnivore Thanks for the vote of confidence, princess.

So hey, what are your thoughts on the Saudi justice system???

Be careful, you DO NOT want to say the wrong thing and come across as "Islamophobic"

btw, Geggy, please post more often. I adore you.
Jun 26th, 2006 06:01 PM
ziggytrix
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinTheOmnivore
See Ziggy, you're not alone in the "let's not tie this into religion" camp! You have GEGGY!
Meet KevinTheOmnivore, diametric opposite of a relativist. If I say X is not 100% of the picture Kevin can shrewdly decude that I must believe X is 0% of the picture!

So man, is your head so far up your own ass that anytime someone disagrees with one thing you believe, you think they disagree with everything you believe? I know you're more enlightened than that.
This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:14 PM.

I-Mockery.com - Archive - Top

© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.