Canada Kicks Ass
Part of me died when I saw this cruel killing

REPLY

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next



GhostDog3 @ Mon May 08, 2006 9:37 am

Its a start and you can always ask for help ;)

   



LittleBastard @ Mon May 08, 2006 9:43 am

Here's CBC News story about this tragic event! 8O

Zahra Kazemi News Story

   



MissT @ Mon May 08, 2006 9:45 am

Haha it was a joke GhostDog! Wetter.. dry... get it?

Ok, it was lame, I know. (But admittedly with a truthful element, I cannot be bothered to read either of them right now. So if I need help, I will remember to ask..thanks!)

   



tritium @ Mon May 08, 2006 10:04 am

Image

The Muslim faith is nothing but a cult. Muhammad raped, murdered children and women as he invaded villages.

This is one their prophets. ROTFL

   



Thematic-Device @ Mon May 08, 2006 10:14 am

GhostDog3 GhostDog3:
The best way is to simply read the books instead of relying on Internet addresses for some answer that ar mostly incorrect wetter its the Bible or the Koran.


I don't speak arabic so I do in fact have to rely on these (often flawed) translations. The internet site I cited contains the three most popular translations.

   



Hardy @ Mon May 08, 2006 1:52 pm

Just a little follow-up:

It turns out that the killing on the videotape is not of the journalist, that aspect of it is a hoax. The killing shown was committed two years ago by a Kurdish terrorist group, and the victim was a Nepalese man, who was killed along with 11 others (edited out). Someone went to a lot of effort to take the older, clear videos, edit them and and make them all grainy and blurry before passing them off on the Sunday Times. That's not to take anything away from how horribly wrong her murder was, but someone is obviously going to a lot of work to get a knee-jerk reaction out of people.

So far, neither Shia or Sunni factions have taken responsibility for the killing, but have both suggested that the other is to blame.

It really saddens me the way the people behind the invasion of Iraq don't seem to have learned anything from the period of 1946-1970. There was a reason that all of those third world countries were given self-rule, and that was because there was no viable way for a foreign power to control them. There still isn't, and there will never be. They had a brutal tyrant who treated the Shia and Kurds unfairly, but who nevertheless maintained order, with a secular government which treated women well. Hussein's secularism was why the CIA hired him and brought him into power in the first place, it was seen as a stabilizing influence in the area. Now Iraq is a bloodbath, complete chaos where rival fundamentalist groups compete to commit the largest and most shocking atrocities. Now there is a government where Islam is written into the constitution, and all that is left to be seen is which variety of Islam will ultimately lord it over the others. The future of Iraqi women, like that journalist, has never looked so bleak. Pathetic decision-making, with results which can only be said to be very, very sad.

   



BartSimpson @ Mon May 08, 2006 2:19 pm

This is islam as mohammed the child molester intended it.

It is a religion of submission (islam) and not a religion of peace (salaam) and this is to be expected from the adherents to the faith.

Christian fundamentalists anymore are few and far between and the people who are oft called 'fundies' really aren't.

There are literally millions of muslims who openly assert that they want to kill all the Jews and that islamic rule should be forced on the whole earth.

Then there's a host of them that call themselves 'moderate' but they play word games with the innumerable parts of the koran that advocate violence and they refuse to renounce these passages. Instead they play the liberal apologist game of saying that the koran is being 'misinterpreted'.

Well, then. I'm sure our friend Saint Lucifer should be able to assert that Mein Kampf was just 'misinterpreted' and that a handful of misguided people ruined the peaceful philosophy of National Socialism. :roll:

And, yes, I just compared the muslims to the Nazis.

Ask any dead Jew if it makes any difference who killed them or who wants to kill them.

   



BartSimpson @ Mon May 08, 2006 2:23 pm

Just for kicks here is a muslim imam's take on various subjects:

http://islam.tc/ask-imam/index.php

   



Bodah @ Mon May 08, 2006 2:42 pm

JustKate JustKate:
Did you read how that women died? Why don't I see posts of outrage? Horrified responses? No feelings here? No heart? What the hell is wrong with some of you?!

READ IT AGAIN!!!! I want justice for this crime! We are nations build on respect, we need to step forward and scream bloody murder when we see this stuff happen. We have Canadian representives there. What are they doing? We pay taxes that give them salaries. Something needs to be done about this. I'm pissed off! This women needs justice. Our troops are in that part of the world why? Because of this I believe!

Support Canadian troops at home.........Scream bloody loud about this crime for this women. That's why their there, to stop this crap from happening!


Its awfull and barabric if it happened, as someone has mentioned it may be a hoax. But it wouldn't suprise me if it did happened. Obviously other beheadings have happened and they are all awfull.

You mentioned you want people to become more outrage, its upsets all of us Im sure. But after watching people jumped to their deaths on 911 and reading stories and seeing parts of clips of other beheadings we are all a little numb.

We are in afgahnistan, and we are kicking ass. They think we dont have the stomach for it they are wrong. Ive seen docs on how women are treated in some parts of the middle east and its disgusting. I would never tolerate my mother or sister being treated like that, ever. To see how scared the women are its no way to live.

Im glad we are there.

BTW, I have a practicing muslim neighbor with a wife and two kids, he's a great guy and loves Canada.

   



Streaker @ Mon May 08, 2006 3:00 pm

Hardy Hardy:
Just a little follow-up:

It turns out that the killing on the videotape is not of the journalist, that aspect of it is a hoax. The killing shown was committed two years ago by a Kurdish terrorist group, and the victim was a Nepalese man, who was killed along with 11 others (edited out). Someone went to a lot of effort to take the older, clear videos, edit them and and make them all grainy and blurry before passing them off on the Sunday Times. That's not to take anything away from how horribly wrong her murder was, but someone is obviously going to a lot of work to get a knee-jerk reaction out of people.

So far, neither Shia or Sunni factions have taken responsibility for the killing, but have both suggested that the other is to blame.

It really saddens me the way the people behind the invasion of Iraq don't seem to have learned anything from the period of 1946-1970. There was a reason that all of those third world countries were given self-rule, and that was because there was no viable way for a foreign power to control them. There still isn't, and there will never be. They had a brutal tyrant who treated the Shia and Kurds unfairly, but who nevertheless maintained order, with a secular government which treated women well. Hussein's secularism was why the CIA hired him and brought him into power in the first place, it was seen as a stabilizing influence in the area. Now Iraq is a bloodbath, complete chaos where rival fundamentalist groups compete to commit the largest and most shocking atrocities. Now there is a government where Islam is written into the constitution, and all that is left to be seen is which variety of Islam will ultimately lord it over the others. The future of Iraqi women, like that journalist, has never looked so bleak. Pathetic decision-making, with results which can only be said to be very, very sad.


Terrific post, Hardy. Welcome to CKA! [cheer]

I'm wondering if it would be possible to put up a link or something that would substantiate the assertion that the killing shown was committed two years ago?

   



Jaime_Souviens @ Mon May 08, 2006 3:46 pm

Hardy Hardy:
...It really saddens me the way the people behind the invasion of Iraq don't seem to have learned anything from the period of 1946-1970. There was a reason that all of those third world countries were given self-rule, and that was because there was no viable way for a foreign power to control them. There still isn't, and there will never be...



Uh.... no.

The wave of independent countries in that era was not because of the difficulty of governing. The colonial powers were largely exhausted as powers because of a little event called WWII.

There was also optimism that with self-rule, the colonized would develop their own internal institutions and come to have indigeneous populations every bit as capable of government as provided by a colonial apparatus.

There have been obvious failures of this plan, but also some great successes, including India, several East-African countries, and I think, ultimately, South Africa.

The Middle Eastern countries, for the most part, received independence in exchange for assistance against the Ottoman Empire, and actually are a generation ahead of most the rest of these nations.

Your post makes it sound as if these peoples are essentially ungovernable and incapable of creating anything for themselves but a succession of dictatorships.

I think they can develop a modern civil society. In fact, I think that they have to; we're all getting a little closer year by year, and a billion people simply can't be left to wallow in brutal dictatorships.

But the process of bringing these people into the modern world will not be a pretty one with scenes of happy delighted people dancing in fields with doves and lambs. Perhaps there will be occasional moments like that, but there will also be severe dislocations, and people who exploit those dislocations to commit atrocious acts.

Hardy Hardy:
...They had a brutal tyrant who treated the Shia and Kurds unfairly, but who nevertheless maintained order, with a secular government which treated women well. Hussein's secularism was why the CIA hired him and brought him into power in the first place, it was seen as a stabilizing influence in the area. Now Iraq is a bloodbath, complete chaos where rival fundamentalist groups compete to commit the largest and most shocking atrocities. Now there is a government where Islam is written into the constitution, and all that is left to be seen is which variety of Islam will ultimately lord it over the others. The future of Iraqi women, like that journalist, has never looked so bleak. Pathetic decision-making, with results which can only be said to be very, very sad.


You make the old days seem pretty good, and the current times to be hopeless.

Perhaps it's a good time for a reminder :

$1:
The 1983 attack against Kurdish citizens belonging to the Barzani tribe, 8,000 of whom were rounded up by the regime in northern Iraq and executed in deserts at great distances from their homes.

The 1988 Anfal campaign, during which as many as 182,000 people disappeared. Most of the men were separated from their families and were executed in deserts in the west and southwest of Iraq. The remains of some of their wives and children have also been found in mass graves. A team of Human Rights Watch investigators determined, after analyzing eighteen tons of captured Iraqi documents, testing soil samples and carrying out interviews with more than 350 witnesses, that the attacks on the Kurdish people were characterized by gross violations of human rights, including mass executions and disappearances of many tens of thousands of noncombatants, widespread use of chemical weapons including Sarin, mustard gas and nerve agents that killed thousands, the arbitrary imprisoning of tens of thousands of women, children, and elderly people for months in conditions of extreme deprivation, forced displacement of hundreds of thousands of villagers after the demolition of their homes, and the wholesale destruction of nearly two thousand villages along with their schools, mosques, farms, and power stations.
Chemical attacks against Kurdish villages from 1986 to 1988, including the Halabja attack, when the Iraqi Air Force dropped sarin, VX and tabun chemical agents on the civilian population, killing 5,000 people immediately and causing long-term medical problems, related deaths, and birth defects among the progeny of thousands more.

The 1991 massacre of Iraqi Shia Muslims after the Shia uprising at the end of the Gulf war, in which tens of thousands of soldiers and civilians in such regions as Basra and Al-Hillah were killed. Estimates of deaths during that time range from 40,000 to 100,000 for Kurds, and 60,000 to 130,000 for Shi'ites.

A massacre of Kurds in 1991, which targeted civilians and soldiers who fought for autonomy in northern Iraq after the Gulf war, also resulted in mass graves.

In June of 1994, the Hussein regime in Iraq established severe penalties, including amputation, branding and the death penalty for criminal offenses such as theft, corruption, currency speculation and military desertion.

After the 2003 Invasion of Iraq, several mass graves were found in Iraq containing several thousand bodies total, and more are being uncovered to this day. While most of the dead in the graves were believed to have died in the 1991 uprising against Saddam Hussein, some of them appeared to have died due to executions or died at times other than the 1991 rebellion.


I didn't find a death count for the Iraq-Iran war, 1980–1988, which also killed hundreds of thousands in a pointless and brutal campaign.


It looks like it's been harsh there for at least two decades.

What's going on now is deplorable, and inexcusable, but it has been going on there for some time, and it's what we can expect for the immediate future.

I am an optimist, though, and do not believe this will continue on for long.

   



Thematic-Device @ Mon May 08, 2006 7:10 pm

BartSimpson BartSimpson:
Christian fundamentalists anymore are few and far between and the people who are oft called 'fundies' really aren't.


The phelps family, falwell, and robertson aren't fundies?

$1:
Then there's a host of them that call themselves 'moderate' but they play word games with the innumerable parts of the koran that advocate violence and they refuse to renounce these passages. Instead they play the liberal apologist game of saying that the koran is being 'misinterpreted'.


The exact same is true of christians, ever heard of apologetics?

You have yet to renounce a number of sections of the bible btw

   



jazzman @ Tue May 09, 2006 1:33 am

tritium tritium:
Image

The Muslim faith is nothing but a cult. Muhammad raped, murdered children and women as he invaded villages.

This is one their prophets. ROTFL


How do you know he raped, murdered children and women ?.

   



Scape @ Tue May 09, 2006 1:59 am

Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:
There was also optimism that with self-rule, the colonized would develop their own internal institutions and come to have indigeneous populations every bit as capable of government as provided by a colonial apparatus.

There have been obvious failures of this plan, but also some great successes, including India, several East-African countries, and I think, ultimately, South Africa.


You have a funny idea of what qualifies as successful self-rule considering that it was a direct counter-reaction to imperial colonialism. You cite South Africa that was given the gift of apartheid, India that had Gandhi overthrow British Imperialism and some east African countries??? Like what Somalia, Chad and Darfur??

   



Jaime_Souviens @ Tue May 09, 2006 3:52 pm

Scape Scape:
Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:
There was also optimism that with self-rule, the colonized would develop their own internal institutions and come to have indigeneous populations every bit as capable of government as provided by a colonial apparatus.

There have been obvious failures of this plan, but also some great successes, including India, several East-African countries, and I think, ultimately, South Africa.


You have a funny idea of what qualifies as successful self-rule considering that it was a direct counter-reaction to imperial colonialism. You cite South Africa that was given the gift of apartheid, India that had Gandhi overthrow British Imperialism and some east African countries??? Like what Somalia, Chad and Darfur??


Yes, Little Scape, there were local movements for self-rule as well. The original post I was responding to was addressing de-colonialization from Europe's point of view. Admittedly not the only view, but the one being discussed here. Pay attention to what's being posted and you won't have to expend any of your precious self-righteousness making irrelevant pronouncements.

I said South Africa, "ultimately", by which, I assumed, any intelligent reader would have immediately thought of 1994. Wikipedia also noted, "The country is one of the few in Africa never to have had a coup d'état, and regular elections have been held for almost a century." Which is a novel point. Again, though, pay attention.

India is a fine example of the development of self-rule. The shadows and cobwebs of your own mind would insist that if the Indians played a role in de-colonialization, then the whole process must have followed the agonistic tropes of post-modernism.

As for your last ineffectual blast, most would consider Chad as central African. (Especially since it's north of the Central African Republic, not east of it.) East Africa is usually reckoned the former colonies of British East Africa, where you'd find reasonable examples of successful government in Kenya and Tanzania.

Geez, Scape, you're often wrong, but you're usually not just lame.

   



REPLY

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next