Respected Kuwaiti Scholar on NECESSITY of Beating Your Wife

[Osomir]

blow it out your ass Omar! I watched the entire thing from begining to end and wrote my own notes! I esp liked the part where the douche was promoting the different sticks to beat your wife including the 8 foot one one!

Yes Omar it's hard to translate when you see the douche promoting long beat sticks!

Then you're simply being intentionally intellectually dishonest or are merely trolling. He never advocated hitting anything with those sticks. In fact, he did the exact opposite and told people not to.

 

[Osomir]

Not much of a surprise, beating your wife is part of the culture in Islamic countries.

It's part of the culture in some Christian and Hindu majority countries as well. It tends to be just that: a cultural thing, not a theological thing. In fact the countries that generally rank at the bottom of women's rights indexes tend to be a mix of both Christian majority countries and Muslim ones (IE: Sub-Saharan Africa). It is more so a reflection of their level of economic development. It's primarily in countries such as Saudi Arabia where we see women's rights well below the level we would expect them to be for the country's level of development. But it is also worth noting that Saudi Arabia is more of an outlier in that sense, than the general rule.

 

[daveman]

Terrorist is one of those words we need to lose.

Just remember. When Obama Bin Laden was killing Russians, Ronald Reagan called him a "Freedom Fighter".

He became a "Terrorist" when he started killing Americans.

He became a terrorist when he started killing civilians.

Dumbfuck.

So then when we kill civilians in war, does that make the US "Terrorists"?

Trying to get your logic here, Caveman?

Was Hiroshima a "Terrorist" act? Or carpet bombing Baghdad? Or just to be bi-partisan here, when Clinton bombed Belgrade so he'd have something else on his history besides Lewinsky.

Or to put it another way, since the Pentagon was filled with military people, was it a valid military target?

"Are we creating more terrorists than we kill?" - Donald Rumsfeld

Good question.

Why do you have to lie all the time? Nobody carpet-bombed Baghdad, you dolt.

 

[daveman]

JoetheDumbfuck, Osomir appreciates you derailing this thread about the Islamic sanction of domestic abuse.

Why do you Red State types care about Islamic domestic abuse? Frankly, you have more domestic violence in rural and red state areas than blue state areas.

You just want another excuse to feel "Superior" to Muslims. Maybe when you start acting superior, I'll take you all seriously.

We have a problem with the Muslim world because we keep sticking our dicks in the Hornet's Nest and wondering why we get stung.

Never does it occur to you people to stop sticking your dicks into the hornet's nest.

When Bin Laden said, "Hey, the Russians are teaching girls how to read. We can't have that!" Reagan gave him a shitload of weapons. And then he turned on us.

Make sweet, sweet love to that Hornet's nest.

The mating call of the American Left-Wing Chickenshit:

"We deserve it!!"

 

[daveman]

Your whacky cult was started by a polygamist wife-beater.

You are, of course, too chickenshit to say that to Osomir.

And don't try it now. You've had plenty of chances to condemn Islamic wife-beating, and have chosen instead to call for the killing of Jews and to condemn Mormonism.

 

[daveman]

Osomir, Esmerelda, Jones, I'd like you all to stop pretending this post doesn't exist.

Kinda like the requirement for 4 male witnesses when a woman accuses a man of rape, huh?

Well once again that is highly dependent on the jurisprudential area and type of sharia code set. For example that isn't really the way the Ottoman Empire (perhaps the most powerful Islamic empire in history) operated. I've had the opportunity to study historical legal cases from Ottoman era documents, and have seen rape cases against women where most of the witnesses called in court were women, (there weren't four males). A particular case that springs to my mind is one from 1854 in which a slave woman who was raped and impregnated by her master takes him to court and wins. Her name was Shemsigul, and she made it through the entire court process and ruling by the Grand Mufti without four male witnesses and did it not only as a woman, but as a slave as well, and one who had a child out of wedlock.

If we are going by your generalizations and stereotypes, you would probably assume that she would be stoned to death, killed, or otherwise punished for being raped, but she wasn't, and that is just one example out of thousands that defy popular western stereotypes and generalizations, and one that stems from a much earlier time period at that.

It really does depend on the specific region and community that you are looking at. Generalizations involving over a billion people spread out in such geographically and culturally diverse ways generally don't tend to hold up too well.

Yes, except there are no Jewish and Christian atrocities to whitewash, are there?

This statement strikes me as being somewhat ignorant of our own history as western peoples. We have done A LOT of violence while utilizing religious discourse as a means of justification. We're talking tens to hundreds of millions of deaths relating directly to Christian populations. I think we also tend to forget that most of Sub-Saharan Africa is pretty deeply Christian (in fact one of the fastest growing Christian regions in the world). We simply know enough about Christianity since we have grown up with it in our culture to be able to put such historical and modern violence into proper context and realize the diversity that exists within Christianity and the depth that other non-religious factors often play when it comes to violence within Christian populated areas. Unfortunately it seems that some of us don't really know enough about Islam to be able to show it the same courtesy; which is fine, but it becomes not fine when instead of reserving judgement due to our ignorance, we instead generalize and jump to conclusions despite the fact that say you might not really know much about Islamic law sets or traditional cultural sets within Islamic populations.

When it comes down to it, you have to be honest with yourself about the depth of your knowledge on the subject in question, and how that level of knowledge (whatever it may be) might affect your opinions and understanding of the topic at hand.

I'm talking about today, not 1854.

Abuse of U.S. Muslim Women Is Greater Than Reported, Advocacy Groups Say | Fox News

For Some Muslim Wives, Abuse Knows No Borders

Domestic Violence Series: A Hidden Evil and Muslim Communities | MuslimMatters.orgMuslimMatters.org

CFWIntro.pdf - By Nitro PDF Software



The steps for keeping evil from your family (because all evil comes from the wife, apparently):

Step 1: Admonishment.

Step 2. Withhold affection.

Step 3. Physical force -- "a light beating". May not leave any type of mark, may not break the skin, may not break a bone.

Sooo...are you going to keep whitewashing Islam's promotion of domestic abuse?

 

[JoeB131]

[

That is because you are a worthless antisemite coward!

The Arabs are just as "Semitic" as the Jews are.

I'm not anti-anything. I just don't want to get involved in their fights when they tend to spill over.

They want to kill each other who their Magic Sky Man loves the very bestest, have at it.

I just see no reason for us to get involved.

 

[JoeB131]

Your whacky cult was started by a polygamist wife-beater.

You are, of course, too chickenshit to say that to Osomir.

And don't try it now. You've had plenty of chances to condemn Islamic wife-beating, and have chosen instead to call for the killing of Jews and to condemn Mormonism.

Here's the thing. I don't care about Islamic Wife Beating. It'll stop when the Islamic Wives stop putting up with that shit.

Just like it stopped when Christian wives stopped putting up with that shit.

Just remember this used to be considered appropriate if the b*tch served the wrong coffee..

 

[daveman]

Your whacky cult was started by a polygamist wife-beater.

You are, of course, too chickenshit to say that to Osomir.

And don't try it now. You've had plenty of chances to condemn Islamic wife-beating, and have chosen instead to call for the killing of Jews and to condemn Mormonism.

Here's the thing. I don't care about Islamic Wife Beating. It'll stop when the Islamic Wives stop putting up with that shit.

Just like it stopped when Christian wives stopped putting up with that shit.

Just remember this used to be considered appropriate if the b*tch served the wrong coffee..

"You are, of course, too chickenshit to say that to Osomir."

Yup, I called it.

 

[JoeB131]

Why do you have to lie all the time? Nobody carpet-bombed Baghdad, you dolt.

So are you conceding the other examples of Dresden, Hiroshima and Belgrade?

U.S. Bombing - The Myth of Surgical Bombing in the Gulf War

Despite all these public proclamations about limited casualties from so-called surgical and precision strikes there would appear to be much greater destruction and much higher numbers of dead and injured in Iraq and Kuwait. Early first-hand accounts provided glimpses of the possibilities of more than surgical damage to Iraqi targets. From my discussions with Ramsey Clark, this is certainly the case. For example, Captain Steven Tait, pilot of an F-16 jet fighter which escorted the first wave of bomber aircraft and who was the first American to shoot down an Iraqi plane, described his bird's eye view of Baghdad after the first hour of allied bombardment: "Flames rising up from the city, some neighborhoods lit up like a huge Christmas tree. The entire city was just sparkling at us."

The sheer amount of explosive tonnage dropped over Iraq and Kuwai also, I think, tends to undermine any assumption of surgical strikes. Air Force General McPeak, Air Force commanding general, proudly proclaiming, "Probably the first time in history that a field army has been defeated by air power," estimated that some 88,500 tons of bombs have been dropped in over 109,000 sorties flown by a total of 2,800 fixed-wing aircraft. Of these flights somewhat over half were actual bombing raids while the remainder involved refueling, bomber escort, surveillance, and so forth. Of the actual bombing missions, about 20,000 sorties were flown against a select list of 300 strategic targets in Iraq and Kuwait; about 5,000 were flown against SCUD missile launchers, and some 30,000 to 50,000 against Iraqi forces in southern Iraq and Kuwait. In all, more than 3,000 bombs (including sea-launched cruise missiles) were dropped on metropolitan Baghdad. The total number of bombs dropped by allied forces in the war comes to about 250,000. Of these only 22,000 were the so-called "smart bombs" or guided bombs. About 10,000 of these guided bombs were laser-guided and about 10,000 were guided anti-tank bombs. The remaining 2,000 were radiation guided bombs directed at communication and radar installations.

 

[JoeB131]

[

If you don't like idiotic false analogies, don't use them.

America = Nazis

is as valid as

you = Hitler

But when you operate in The Fog of Hate as you do, you can't see the difference.

Guy, when are you going to stop whining about me.

Okay, I am terribly sorry I hurt you little feelings last year by being right about.. everything.

I know it was more than your fragile ego could take, but let it go, man.

The rest of the Wingnuts are all like "Mitt Who? I never wanted that guy! I hate Mitt!"

 

[daveman]

Why do you have to lie all the time? Nobody carpet-bombed Baghdad, you dolt.

So are you conceding the other examples of Dresden, Hiroshima and Belgrade?

U.S. Bombing - The Myth of Surgical Bombing in the Gulf War

Despite all these public proclamations about limited casualties from so-called surgical and precision strikes there would appear to be much greater destruction and much higher numbers of dead and injured in Iraq and Kuwait. Early first-hand accounts provided glimpses of the possibilities of more than surgical damage to Iraqi targets. From my discussions with Ramsey Clark, this is certainly the case. For example, Captain Steven Tait, pilot of an F-16 jet fighter which escorted the first wave of bomber aircraft and who was the first American to shoot down an Iraqi plane, described his bird's eye view of Baghdad after the first hour of allied bombardment: "Flames rising up from the city, some neighborhoods lit up like a huge Christmas tree. The entire city was just sparkling at us."

The sheer amount of explosive tonnage dropped over Iraq and Kuwai also, I think, tends to undermine any assumption of surgical strikes. Air Force General McPeak, Air Force commanding general, proudly proclaiming, "Probably the first time in history that a field army has been defeated by air power," estimated that some 88,500 tons of bombs have been dropped in over 109,000 sorties flown by a total of 2,800 fixed-wing aircraft. Of these flights somewhat over half were actual bombing raids while the remainder involved refueling, bomber escort, surveillance, and so forth. Of the actual bombing missions, about 20,000 sorties were flown against a select list of 300 strategic targets in Iraq and Kuwait; about 5,000 were flown against SCUD missile launchers, and some 30,000 to 50,000 against Iraqi forces in southern Iraq and Kuwait. In all, more than 3,000 bombs (including sea-launched cruise missiles) were dropped on metropolitan Baghdad. The total number of bombs dropped by allied forces in the war comes to about 250,000. Of these only 22,000 were the so-called "smart bombs" or guided bombs. About 10,000 of these guided bombs were laser-guided and about 10,000 were guided anti-tank bombs. The remaining 2,000 were radiation guided bombs directed at communication and radar installations.

I first want to thank Ramsey Clark...​

Wow. Total credibility loss in the first seven words. Figures an America-hating terrorist-felcher like you would support Clark. You're just alike.

 

[JoeB131]

Can you actually refute the message, or do you just say, "Oh, Ramsey Clark".

Did we bomb Baghdad or not? Facts are the facts, guy.

 

[Osomir]

There have been some times in my experience where I wonder why mainstream Muslims don't rigorously denounce radical Muslims, and point them out. It is something I've wondered for years, with good reason.

I agree that Islam has a general PR problem. But for what it is worth there can be, and are some demonstrations against "radical Islam".

But mostly, I think we have unrealistic expectations in that department as well.

When was the last time a group of Christians in the US protested against the LRA? Remember the Mumbai terrorist attack in 2008? The same exact day about twice as many people were killed in Nigeria's Jos area (mostly at the hands of a Christian mob), and not only did we have good coverage of it, but I don't recall any protests in the US against such violence from US Christians.

Same with Yau Yau's current revolt in South Sudan, Or the Mai Mai rebel atrocities in Eastern DR Congo, the the actions of the Nagaland Rebels in northeastern India.

And that's fine. Just because we are all Christians doesn't mean that we identify with one another, or even know about one another. Hell according to public polls, most rural people in Afghanistan don't even know what happened on 9/11. Why would they protest? That isn't their Islam.

We generally know enough about Christianity (since most of us were raised in majority Christian societies and studying western history) to be able to put groups like the LRA, God's Army, or war criminals like Yau Yau and Charles Taylor into proper historical, cultural and religious context. We generally don't seem to offer Islam the same courtesy though and I don't necessarily think that is due to a malicious nature on our part, but simply due to not knowing any better due to an information gap.

Most flavors of Christianity strongly denounce the WBC. I would like to see the same of Muslims and radical Islam.

When was the last time you marched in a rally against the WBC?

 

[Osomir]

You are, of course, too chickenshit to say that to Osomir.

Why would he be scared to say that to me? I'm an atheist. I also don't particularly care if people want to practice polygamy as long as it is consensual. It really isn't my thing and I think it probably usually carries some problems / drama with it, but it's their choice, not mine and it doesn't hurt me.

Mormonism is a great example about how generalizations can rather miss the mark. Thinks like the Adam-God doctrine come to mind, or the God turning Cain black when he "marked" him. Not all Mormons believe such things, yet such notions persist as popular prodding points for non-Mormons.

 

[rdean]

US House GOP Blocks Violence Against Women Act

Marco Rubio Leads Charge Of 22 GOP Male Senators To Block Violence Against Women Act

You'd think they were "Muslims".

 

[Toro]

[

If you don't like idiotic false analogies, don't use them.

America = Nazis

is as valid as

you = Hitler

But when you operate in The Fog of Hate as you do, you can't see the difference.

Guy, when are you going to stop whining about me.

Okay, I am terribly sorry I hurt you little feelings last year by being right about.. everything.

I know it was more than your fragile ego could take, but let it go, man.

The rest of the Wingnuts are all like "Mitt Who? I never wanted that guy! I hate Mitt!"

^^^^
Bigot.

 

[daveman]

Can you actually refute the message, or do you just say, "Oh, Ramsey Clark".

Did we bomb Baghdad or not? Facts are the facts, guy.

We bombed Baghdad. We did not CARPET bomb Baghdad.

Dumbass.

Only an America-hating, Saddam-loving terrorist-felcher would say we did.

You know, like you and Clark.

 

[Osomir]

Osomir, Esmerelda, Jones, I'd like you all to stop pretending this post doesn't exist.

I have work and a family, instantly responding to your troll posts isn't on the top of my to do list there champ, particularly when you respond to long posts with one line of text. I haven't been ignoring them, I've just been busy.

As for 1854: I was using a case to demonstrate that even during a time in which Islam was much more intertwined with state legal codes even a slave woman didn't need four male witnesses to take a wealthy elite to court for rape. It blows your stereotypes right out of the water, and most Islamic majority countries today do not require four male witnesses within their legal system for rape cases against women. In fact the two largest rape capitals in the world where rape is also among the hardest crimes to prosecute are both Christian majority countries: South Africa and the DR Congo. Same with female related abuse cases.

As for theological opinions, any Muslim can give them. I've certainly met crazy people from all sorts of religions before. If you'd like to discuss the actual theology with me i'd be happy to do it with you outside of random internet youtube videos.

 

[Osomir]

Can you actually refute the message, or do you just say, "Oh, Ramsey Clark".

Did we bomb Baghdad or not? Facts are the facts, guy.

We bombed Baghdad. We did not CARPET bomb Baghdad.

Dumbass.

Only an America-hating, Saddam-loving terrorist-felcher would say we did.

You know, like you and Clark.

We did however drop cluster munitions on Baghdad which violated international law in terms of utilizing weapons that don't discriminate on areas with the civilian densities (aka cities). We've de facto mined much of Iraq with a weapon that has a large failure rate and a history of reeking havoc on civilians (especially children) for decades. While I hated Sadaam that was still a pretty shitty tactic on our part.