Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Angel Heart, Sep 17, 2007.
I never knew a feminist or a female to simply fall silent. What is your point?
Are you unable to read? No that can not be it. Are you unable to comprehend simple concepts?
The article is plain as day. Femi Nazi's are mostly liberal and the Liberals love Arab terrorists and the "rights" of the Muslim religion. These women do NOTHING about the obvious atrocities committed in Muslim and Arab nations to women, the defacto slavery of the women in those societies, etc etc.
I think he reads just fine. Are you now trying to garner support for blowing up Arabs because of the religious subjugation of women?
If you were concerned about women, you wouldn't have supported destabilizing a secular country where women were educated and allowed to work and allowed to walk the streets without "chaperones" or without getting stoned because their ankles showed.
"liberal" does not equate to support of terrorists. That is simply absurd. So, when Bush decides to actually address terrorism, do let us know. Or was that what he was doing when the Farsi interpreters got fired for being gay? (considering THEY were what was needed to really fight terrorism... but keep on keepin' on).
Yes yes, defend the total silence on the issue by turning it into some attack on Bush. Now if we had mentioned Israel in there somewhere you would be rabidly attacking to defend THAT.
Why do feminists fall silent about mistreated muslim women?
Why do homosexuals fall silent about homosexuals being strung up in muslim countries?
Why do secularists fall silent and not attack any religion - except for christianity?
Why do liberals scream bloody murder when an unkind word is said about a jew in America but fall silent when jewish children are attacked and slaughtered in Israel?
Why do liberals say they support the troops but then attack and defame a decent, successful general?
Why do liberals call those who are against illegals "racist" but fall silent about racist groups like La Raza?
It's because they all are hypocritical and because whenever there is a conflict of interest they all choose the ANTI-American position FIRST. Anything to destroy our American way of life comes first with these two-faced, seditious antagonists - they are the enemy within. This is because they all have the same underlying commonality and the primary goal of tearing up America and replacing our representative democracy with a socialist/communist/totalitarian new world order.
Do I rabidly attack Chasidic and Orthodox Jews formaking their women second class citizens.
You're the one who won't acknowledge that Bush's actions made things worse, not better, for women. So it's disingenuous to now try to use a woman's issue as justification for this mishandled, failed policy.
It's like you have all these issues jumbled up in your head and can't suss them out.
Now take a look at what Bush's war ACTUALLY did in Iraq:
I notice the loudest on the left are always doing this when debating just about anything.
Loud? First off, on middle east issues, I'm moderate and probably right of center. But one cannot say that a policy should be supported by women which undermined women in the first place.
Separate names with a comma.