• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

Maggot

"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood"
Supporter
Full Member
Minuteman
  • Jul 27, 2007
    25,902
    29,191
    Virginia
    What can ya say?




    PESHAWAR, Pakistan (Reuters) - Taliban gunmen in Pakistan shot and seriously wounded on Tuesday a 14-year-old schoolgirl who rose to fame for speaking out against the militants, authorities said.

    Malala Yousufzai was shot in the head and neck when gunmen fired on her school bus in the Swat valley, northwest of the capital, Islamabad. Two other girls were also wounded, police said.

    Yousufzai became famous for speaking out against the Pakistani Taliban at a time when even the government seemed to be appeasing the hardline Islamists.

    The government agreed to a ceasefire with the Taliban in Swat in early 2009, effectively recognizing insurgent control of the valley whose lakes and mountains had long been a tourist attraction.

    The Taliban set up courts, executed residents and closed girls' schools, including the one that Yousufzai attended. A documentary team filmed her weeping as she explained her ambition to be a doctor.

    "My friend came to me and said, 'for God's sake, answer me honestly, is our school going to be attacked by the Taliban?'," Yousufzai, then 11, wrote in a blog published by the BBC.

    "During the morning assembly we were told not to wear colorful clothes as the Taliban would object."

    The army launched an offensive and retook control of Swat later that year, and Yousufzai later received the country's highest civilian award. She was also nominated for international awards for child activists.

    Since then, she has received numerous threats. On Tuesday, gunmen arrived at her school and asked for her by name, witnesses told police. Yousufzai was shot when she came out of class and went to a bus.

    Taliban spokesman Ehsanullah Ehsan said his group was behind the shooting.

    "She was pro-West, she was speaking against Taliban and she was calling President Obama her idol," Ehsan said by telephone from an undisclosed location.

    "She was young but she was promoting Western culture in Pashtun areas," he said, referring the main ethnic group in northwest Pakistan and southern and eastern Afghanistan. Most members of the Taliban come from conservative Pashtun tribes.

    Doctors were struggling to save Yousufzai, said Lal Noor, a doctor at the Saidu Sharif Teaching Hospital in the Swat valley's main town of Mingora.
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    Ahhhh, Islam. Wonderful isn't it? At least she no longer has to worry about dishonoring her family and being stoned to death or burned up with acid if she were raped.
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KYpatriot</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ahhhh, Islam. Wonderful isn't it? At least she no longer has to worry about dishonoring her family and being stoned to death or burned up with acid if she were raped. </div></div>

    Actually I dont think yuo can blame Islam. She was Islam, yet had the vision and courage at only 14 to speak out. The problem is Taliban, or more generally, intolerance. That seems rampant in many places.
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    @#$%ing SAVAGES in the Taliban!! Stupidity and intolerance run a muck.

    Takes a "real man" to shoot a bunch of unarmed, defenseless girls (probably from behind too)!!
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: maggot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KYpatriot</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ahhhh, Islam. Wonderful isn't it? At least she no longer has to worry about dishonoring her family and being stoned to death or burned up with acid if she were raped. </div></div>

    Actually I dont think yuo can blame Islam. She was Islam, yet had the vision and courage at only 14 to speak out. The problem is Taliban, or more generally, intolerance. That seems rampant in many places.</div></div>

    No - do you not get that she was speaking out against sharia and was killed for it? The problem is Taliban? Would she be tolerated in Saudi? Pakistan? Yemen? Sudan? You wanna find me a free Islamic society?

    Go ahead with the PC tolerance thing if you want....but look at the situation in EVERY country where Islam rules and then objectively tell me it isn't the problem.

    Or perhaps through an amazing coincidence every advocate of sharia law and Islamic theocracy just happens to be independently intolerant. Of course it has nothing to do with thousands of madrassahs indoctrinating six year olds to hate Jews and the West.

    I have been in market places in the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar....and if you think the plight of women is much better there you are sadly mistaken. One thing the sum total of my experience in the middle east with Islam taught me: where Islam reigns, freedom doesn't. Islam and freedom are mutually exclusive.
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: maggot</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
    Taliban gunmen in Pakistan shot and seriously wounded on Tuesday a 14-year-old schoolgirl who rose to fame for speaking out against the militants,
    </div></div>

    The only word that I can think of is---> <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="color: #FF0000">DUH!</span></span>

    WTF did <span style="text-decoration: underline">SHE</span> think would happen?
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KYpatriot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: maggot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KYpatriot</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ahhhh, Islam. Wonderful isn't it? At least she no longer has to worry about dishonoring her family and being stoned to death or burned up with acid if she were raped. </div></div>

    Actually I dont think yuo can blame Islam. She was Islam, yet had the vision and courage at only 14 to speak out. The problem is Taliban, or more generally, intolerance. That seems rampant in many places.</div></div>

    No - do you not get that she was speaking out against sharia and was killed for it? The problem is Taliban? Would she be tolerated in Saudi? Pakistan? Yemen? Sudan? You wanna find me a free Islamic society?

    Go ahead with the PC tolerance thing if you want....but look at the situation in EVERY country where Islam rules and then objectively tell me it isn't the problem.

    Or perhaps through an amazing coincidence every advocate of sharia law and Islamic theocracy just happens to be independently intolerant. Of course it has nothing to do with thousands of madrassahs indoctrinating six year olds to hate Jews and the West.

    I have been in market places in the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar....and if you think the plight of women is much better there you are sadly mistaken. One thing the sum total of my experience in the middle east with Islam taught me: where Islam reigns, freedom doesn't. Islam and freedom are mutually exclusive.

    </div></div>
    This is not intended as, or to start, a religous discussion. Its only noteing (recent)history and commenting on how it could have gone differently. If it starts trouble or mods feel it inappropriate, delete, but please dont ban.


    You fail to reaize that we did have and could now have the same sort of situation in our country. Read <span style="text-decoration: underline"> TheCrucible</span> by Arthur Miller. The story of the oppression and religous intolerance in this country in the early days. Or consider what would have happend if the (im)moral majority)and televangelists like Jerry Falwell, and Jimmy Swaggert had not shot themselves in the corporate dicks in the 80's. Women forced to wear long dresses, veils over their faces, and hats in church...etc. It could have happened here. Consider the Inquistion, not here, but in most of Latin America, it wasn't much different than what the Taliban are doing now. A differnt flip of the coin and we could have it. Islam just seems to be the main purveyor today.
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This is not intended as, or to start, a religous discussion.</div></div>

    5, 4, 3...
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: maggot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KYpatriot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: maggot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KYpatriot</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ahhhh, Islam. Wonderful isn't it? At least she no longer has to worry about dishonoring her family and being stoned to death or burned up with acid if she were raped. </div></div>

    Actually I dont think yuo can blame Islam. She was Islam, yet had the vision and courage at only 14 to speak out. The problem is Taliban, or more generally, intolerance. That seems rampant in many places.</div></div>

    No - do you not get that she was speaking out against sharia and was killed for it? The problem is Taliban? Would she be tolerated in Saudi? Pakistan? Yemen? Sudan? You wanna find me a free Islamic society?

    Go ahead with the PC tolerance thing if you want....but look at the situation in EVERY country where Islam rules and then objectively tell me it isn't the problem.

    Or perhaps through an amazing coincidence every advocate of sharia law and Islamic theocracy just happens to be independently intolerant. Of course it has nothing to do with thousands of madrassahs indoctrinating six year olds to hate Jews and the West.

    I have been in market places in the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar....and if you think the plight of women is much better there you are sadly mistaken. One thing the sum total of my experience in the middle east with Islam taught me: where Islam reigns, freedom doesn't. Islam and freedom are mutually exclusive.

    </div></div>
    This is not intended as, or to start, a religous discussion. Its only noteing (recent)history and commenting on how it could have gone differently. If it starts trouble or mods feel it inappropriate, delete, but please dont ban.


    You fail to reaize that we did have and could now have the same sort of situation in our country. Read <span style="text-decoration: underline"> TheCrucible</span> by Arthur Miller. The story of the oppression and religous intolerance in this country in the early days. Or consider what would have happend if the (im)moral majority)and televangelists like Jerry Falwell, and Jimmy Swaggert had not shot themselves in the corporate dicks in the 80's. Women forced to wear long dresses, veils over their faces, and hats in church...etc. It could have happened here. Consider the Inquistion, not here, but in most of Latin America, it wasn't much different than what the Taliban are doing now. A differnt flip of the coin and we could have it. Islam just seems to be the main purveyor today.

    </div></div>

    Your argument is founded on a <span style="font-style: italic">fictional</span> allegory, written to surreptitiously mock McCarthyism (a necessary thing as we see from the fruits of socialism eeking its way in), which examines a period in American history wherein people utilized superstition for political means and settling grudges-- we see this throughout islam to this day, particularly now in Egypt where the muzzie brotherhood has taken hold. It devolves from there...

    Long dresses, oh my! The horror! When will us men be freed from the oppression of pants and start rocking Lt. Dangle's free-from-oppression look? Dangle Dukes, de oppresso liber!

    Veiled faces? Really? Not even the Puritans did that, nor did Falwell and Swaggart advocate for such things. Many black women as well as Traditional Catholics still wear hats or chapel veils (which don't cover the face) in church. It's oppressive for a woman to choose to cover her head for an hour a week? LOL.

    What have we gained with your <span style="font-style: italic">liberte</span>, <span style="font-style: italic">egalite</span>, <span style="font-style: italic">fraternite</span> style of freeing people from "oppression", but the oppression of women through pornography and the complete lack of respect it engenders for both sexes; women who are judged on their body--which is but maybe a decade of its material essence without injurious surgeries and the psychosis that inspires-- and not their ability to raise children, have a conversation, or do any manner of ACTUAL contribution to the family aside from ordering takeout; Etc.

    It is NOT oppression to maintain a societal model and the necessary culture to keep moving forward for the common good of all without allowing personal injury (just look at Affirmative Action and the sneers it inspires for the insulting injury of this mindset), rebellion to a point a social and moral decay, or otherwise expect something of people. Turning 18 is not a green light to murdering one's own self-worth or ability to maintain a modicum of bloody decency. It is not oppression to expect your daughter to not dress like an abject whore. It is not oppression to do anything seen in the USA or Europe from centuries ago to today's small pockets of sane, rational, moral people. It is, however, oppression to disallow a choice in aligning oneself to that, or to throw acid in the face of a girl--or shoot her in the head as the case in question relays-- as part and parcel to one's basic cultural model and political means to achieve it.

    Arthur Miller references... sheesh.
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    [/quote]
    sheesh. [/quote]

    Judgeing from that rambleing mess, and your earlier, extremely racist comment about cutting Islam out like a cancer, your apparently a very troubled soul. Intelligent, yes. Troubled. Yes. Respectfully, Get some help.

    Maggot out.
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: maggot</div><div class="ubbcode-body">^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
    sheesh. </div></div>

    Judgeing from that rambleing mess, and your earlier, extremely racist comment about cutting Islam out like a cancer, your apparently a very troubled soul. Intelligent, yes. Troubled. Yes. Respectfully, Get some help.

    Maggot out.</div></div>

    And once again Islam is an ideology, not a race. So, definition fail for you. Would I be equally troubled if I advocated for the eradication of Marxism or any of its variants? Or does that not fit into your agenda enough?

    It would have been less rambling had I not followed the waypoints of your own rambling, and incorrect, mess. I can't turn a turd into gold. Literary alchemy ain't my bag. Shall I re-write your rambling mess for you and respond? It would be so Kierkegaard.
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: maggot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KYpatriot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: maggot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KYpatriot</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ahhhh, Islam. Wonderful isn't it? At least she no longer has to worry about dishonoring her family and being stoned to death or burned up with acid if she were raped. </div></div>

    Actually I dont think yuo can blame Islam. She was Islam, yet had the vision and courage at only 14 to speak out. The problem is Taliban, or more generally, intolerance. That seems rampant in many places.</div></div>

    No - do you not get that she was speaking out against sharia and was killed for it? The problem is Taliban? Would she be tolerated in Saudi? Pakistan? Yemen? Sudan? You wanna find me a free Islamic society?

    Go ahead with the PC tolerance thing if you want....but look at the situation in EVERY country where Islam rules and then objectively tell me it isn't the problem.

    Or perhaps through an amazing coincidence every advocate of sharia law and Islamic theocracy just happens to be independently intolerant. Of course it has nothing to do with thousands of madrassahs indoctrinating six year olds to hate Jews and the West.

    I have been in market places in the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar....and if you think the plight of women is much better there you are sadly mistaken. One thing the sum total of my experience in the middle east with Islam taught me: where Islam reigns, freedom doesn't. Islam and freedom are mutually exclusive.

    </div></div>
    This is not intended as, or to start, a religous discussion. Its only noteing (recent)history and commenting on how it could have gone differently. If it starts trouble or mods feel it inappropriate, delete, but please dont ban.


    You fail to reaize that we did have and could now have the same sort of situation in our country. Read <span style="color: #3333FF">TheCrucible by Arthur Miller. The story of the oppression and religous intolerance in this country in the early days. Or consider what would have happend if the (im)moral majority)and televangelists like Jerry Falwell, and Jimmy Swaggert had not shot themselves in the corporate dicks in the 80's. Women forced to wear long dresses, veils over their faces, and hats in church...etc. It could have happened here. Consider the Inquistion, not here, but in most of Latin America, it wasn't much different than what the Taliban are doing now. A differnt flip of the coin and we could have it. Islam just seems to be the main purveyor today.
    </span>
    </div></div>

    This made me laugh. You can't be serious. Falwell and Swaggart would have had women wearing veils in church.

    Holding up as Comparison the inquisition and the witch trials of 600 and 400 years ago to the unending and continuous stream of conscious barbarity from the outset of "The religion of peace..." to it's present day iteration is just absurd.

    It is the problem. No one else does this shit. Looking for tangential instances or ancient offenses to compare to this ongoing savagery is unpersuasive in the extreme.
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    impliedfacepalmr.jpg


    2542178244521.gif
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    Are you really implying that our Constitutional republic would somehow be tolerant of a sharia law type environment? Do you really think that Jerry Falwell was on the verge of turning us into a totalitarian theocracy, and that this impending coup d'etat was so dangerous yet so easily derailed when a televangelist had an affair?

    Why should Islam be given any more respect or tolerance than Communism? Or Fascism? Or National Socialism?

    Its funny. When we fought WW2, we as a nation said we were fighting Nazis, not Germans per se. The ideology was the evil enemy, not the German people. Now we are being told for the sake of political correctness that the opposite is true, that certain people are the enemy, not their ideology Islam. Perhaps we should think about which method is more honest and yielded results.

    Ironically, we learned last year that our own government believed returning soldiers ought to be watched because they could have developed threatening right wing strict-Constitutionalist ideologies, but simultaneously the same government constantly reminds us that we are not fighting Islam as an ideology, but only misguided individuals. Hmmmmm. Why is it that beliefs held by predominately white male populations are politically safe to condemn, but that beliefs held by predominantly brown populations in poor third world countries we should be careful not to insult, despite the fact that their ideas are completely antithetical to the ideas upon which we base our nation? They are the kind of ideas that result in oppression when given its full expression, and yet the ideology is not the problem? Would you give any respect to an analysis of WW2 that said that ideas of National Socialism really doesn't deserve any blame for the horrors of that war? Maggot, that is the argument you are making whether you realize it or not.

    The fact is, despite all the liberal notions to the contrary, not all ideologies have equal merit to those who believe in liberty. Some people's choices really are better than others, and some ideologies that enslave people, such as Communism, Fascism, and Islam, really ought to be opposed by thinking people who believe in freedom.
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KYpatriot</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Are you really implying that our Constitutional republic would somehow be tolerant of a sharia law type environment? Do you really think that Jerry Falwell was on the verge of turning us into a totalitarian theocracy, and that this impending coup d'etat was so dangerous yet so easily derailed when a televangelist had an affair?

    Why should Islam be given any more respect or tolerance than Communism? Or Fascism? Or National Socialism?

    Its funny. When we fought WW2, we as a nation said we were fighting Nazis, not Germans per se. The ideology was the evil enemy, not the German people. Now we are being told for the sake of political correctness that the opposite is true, that certain people are the enemy, not their ideology Islam. Perhaps we should think about which method is more honest and yielded results.

    Ironically, we learned last year that our own government believed returning soldiers ought to be watched because they could have developed threatening right wing strict-Constitutionalist ideologies, but simultaneously the same government constantly reminds us that we are not fighting Islam as an ideology, but only misguided individuals. Hmmmmm. Why is it that beliefs held by predominately white male populations are politically safe to condemn, but that beliefs held by predominantly brown populations in poor third world countries we should be careful not to insult, despite the fact that their ideas are completely antithetical to the ideas upon which we base our nation? They are the kind of ideas that result in oppression when given its full expression, and yet the ideology is not the problem? Would you give any respect to an analysis of WW2 that said that ideas of National Socialism really doesn't deserve any blame for the horrors of that war? Maggot, that is the argument you are making whether you realize it or not.

    The fact is, despite all the liberal notions to the contrary, not all ideologies have equal merit to those who believe in liberty. Some people's choices really are better than others, and some ideologies that enslave people, such as Communism, Fascism, and Islam, really ought to be opposed by thinking people who believe in freedom.




    </div></div>

    This will be my final post on this subject. I really didnt want to see it go where it has gone.

    -We dont really have a Constitutional republic anymore. We have a military-industrial oligarchy.

    Description of oligarchy - American Heritage® Dictionary
    Government by a few, especially by a small faction of persons or families. Those making up such a government. A state governed by a few persons.

    -Do I think the Falwellians would have taken power had they had the opportunity? Yes, not all at once but just like Hitler took Europe a little piece at a time at first, then more and more and more. I lived in Lynchburg Virginia, Jerry's home town in the late 70's early 80'sand I saw firsthand what that ideaology did to the locals. I feared it then and I despise it now. I can move side ways and see where they would have taken it <span style="color: #FF0000"> had they been able to</span> .

    -Frankly, I have no particular problem with Communism, National Socialism, or any other ideaology...as long as the people under it are free to choose. What I despise, is not any particular system, but tyranny, and the whole concept of tyranny, whether its Commie, nazi, Islam, Catholicism, Martian, or any other. I know youll say something like" but these systems lead to tyranny." I disagree. Ignorance, greed, and deceit, and things of that nature lead to tyranny, regardless of what form they take on. IMHO there is something much deeper and more sinister at work behind the scenes, but Im gonna stop there.

    -As to the insinuations about my being a 'lberal'...hogwash. I am a realist, neither to the right nor left. As Jefferson said, "Here we are not afraid to follow the truth where ever it may lead." Thats whats important, not my opinion, or yours. The wisdom of truth. I dont posess it entirely, but I seek it above all things, and Im learning. Do the same...mabey you'll find it. More valuable than gold.
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    Im such a miserable liar. I have one more thing to say; the thing I should have said at the beginning.

    <span style="font-style: italic"> <span style="color: #CC9933">Prayers for the little girl who got shot, and her family. </span> </span>
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    yay for religious myopia and historical denial.

    Just as much savage shit has been perpetrated under the 'lamb of god' as under the crescent moon. Think Christians don't rape, kill and maim and think it's ok so long as it's against people who aren't Christians... look at the early Christian raids by Christian Lebanese on refugee camps as the IDF sent up flares to guide the way... but wait, only muslims use violence to further their religious hatred... must have been a case of 'sorry, I was drunk and she fell on my dick before I shot her...'

    Turkey a pre-dominantly Muslim country, no stupid Sharia. To equate the Taliban with the whole of islam and billions of muslims is to equate Christianity with the thoughts and actions of the Westboro fucks.

    The Constitution does not tolerate ANY religious dominance or any religion being either offically sanctioned or otherwise - yes, that includes Christianity - deal with it. we're free to follow or not any religion we want but not to force our religion on others through the legislative process.

    What I find amusing is how you're all shocked at the actions of a group of people in a country that MANY of the morons on here and this thread have advocated 'glassing'. You do realize that you'd have 'glassed' this brave girl in the process whose death you're pretending to give a shit about if only to wax lyrical about islam.

    Mention was made of the reports of vets being a securty concern. I agree that those concerns are themselves concerning and deeply cynical in how they view vets coming home from serial deployments and who are probably needing and deserving of special recuperative attention rather than suspicion. However, to judge the 'brown people' against our beliefs is actually in itself anti-thetical to the Constitution. Judge by what standard? By what right? The rest of the world can do whatever it wants, the Constitution gives us no right to think one way or another about it in regards to policy.

    I say let the world be, it's not ours to police, and it was never ours to meddle with as was deemed fit. If you're all shocked at inhuman actions then just see what goes on in an average day in Mexico. Not a day goes by without some poor sod having his head sawed off without first undergoing some heinous torture... still, didn't stop the Pope from visiting one of the largest Catholic countries in the world.... perhaps turn the other cheek was in reference to 'I've hacked through this side of your neck, now for the other....'
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: maggot</div><div class="ubbcode-body">



    This will be my final post on this subject. I really didnt want to see it go where it has gone.
    </div></div>

    Pity. Usually people with a sound foundation won't back down if they actually believe what they say is truth. They'd, typically, keep at it unless they're truly just lazy or indifferent to the truth for which they initially "put em up". Maybe you could be president.

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
    -We dont really have a Constitutional republic anymore. We have a military-industrial oligarchy.
    </div></div>
    To a degree, I agree. I presently do not recognize the current government as valid, having ripped to shreds the Constitution which gave it all authority; to borrow a phrase from circles in which I travel, I'm a sedevacantist insofar as 1600 Penn Ave. While some might argue the authority from God line, I'd have to then submit to every bridge troll or gang-member/criminal enterprise who wishes to tax me for "being on their turf". I digress.

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
    -Do I think the Falwellians would have taken power had they had the opportunity? Yes, not all at once but just like Hitler took Europe a little piece at a time at first, then more and more and more. I lived in Lynchburg Virginia, Jerry's home town in the late 70's early 80'sand I saw firsthand what that ideaology did to the locals. I feared it then and I despise it now. I can move side ways and see where they would have taken it <span style="color: #FF0000"> had they been able to</span>.</div></div>

    That you lived in a particular part of a massive country does not an equation to Hitlerian takeover make. Falwell and crew did not have a massive army or the entirety of Virginia on their side, and Hitler's takeover of everything outside of Germany was militaristic in nature. He didn't convince the people of Poland to acquiesce to his lunacy and megalomania, he stomped their necks and subjugated them. You're conflating two disparate things.

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
    -Frankly, I have no particular problem with Communism, National Socialism, or any other ideaology...as long as the people under it are free to choose.</div></div>

    This is puerile to a massive degree. Where do you draw the "free to choose" percentage line? 51% for a majority rules? 60% for a definite majority along 3/5's upset? 75%? What constitutes the "this is no longer OK since not everyone/acceptable-everyone chose it"?

    No, Maggot, you MUST, MUST, MUST sift the ideology on its own merits for you will NEVER find 100% of the population good to go with all aspects of a system put in place by ANY ideology-- even if they don't come out and march in the streets with picket signs declaring it so. Further, you must, through this, determine the best for the common good and individual persons-- crap, we just entered objective morals territory... have fun arguing relativistically within an objective framework.

    Communism, for example, fails massively even on paper because it takes away the ability of people to get ahead with a stranglehold on the market; and the market, being the economy, determines lifestyle; and lifestyle, combined with culture, determines overall societal happiness-- and communist countries are doldrums bro. Doldrums. Its entire marketability is towards the so-called downtrodden. It subsists itself on greed by marketing itself as the answer to class systems-- in reality just a massive upheaval of them. Yet, in doing so, Marx theorizes the need for an OLIGARCHY to restore order to the proletariat after the societal upheaval of its implementation. This is accomplished by a "short" dictatorship which never remains short. Sort of a "once we're married, I'll stop beating you because I'd never beat my wife" mentality. It defies the nature of human beings. "Oh, you're gonna leave me!? We're married now, woman! *Thwack*"

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
    What I despise, is not any particular system, but tyranny, and the whole concept of tyranny, whether its Commie, nazi, Islam, Catholicism, Martian, or any other. I know youll say something like" but these systems lead to tyranny." I disagree. Ignorance, greed, and deceit, and things of that nature lead to tyranny, regardless of what form they take on. IMHO there is something much deeper and more sinister at work behind the scenes, but Im gonna stop there.
    </div></div>
    Some systems are objectively tyrannical by the principles they posit.
    -----
    ty·ran·ni·cal/t&#601;&#712;ranik&#601;l/
    Adjective:

    Exercising power in a cruel or arbitrary way.
    Characteristic of tyranny; oppressive and controlling.

    -----

    Islam has Shariah law, and this is part and parcel to islamic society. Secular muslim societies/states relegate this to only personal and family matters. These are exceptions to the rule. Shariah, if you actually study it, is arbitrary and cruel as all get out.

    Similarly, other ideologies operate in a cruel and oppressive manner. Communism does this most plainly with its hand on the market as the economy is going to determine lifestyle, etc. In seeking to maintain its hold, it spins further into the cultural sphere-- as it is very plainly against natural law and human nature to be so subjected to the constant bombardment of state controls in place to maintain power.

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">-As to the insinuations about my being a 'lberal'...hogwash. I am a realist, neither to the right nor left. As Jefferson said, "Here we are not afraid to follow the truth where ever it may lead." Thats whats important, not my opinion, or yours. The wisdom of truth. I dont posess it entirely, but I seek it above all things, and Im learning. Do the same...mabey you'll find it. More valuable than gold.</div></div>

    You have reduced truth to nothing more than opinion, Maggot. Jefferson didn't follow truth as Truth. I find it funny you say you're not a liberal and then run headlong after Jeffersonian thought, for the man practiced liberalism; Jefferson was probably well intentioned as you are, but the man fell flat on his face and blatantly plagiarized Locke's <span style="font-style: italic">Treastise</span> for the Declaration of Independence. Locke, as you might recall, was essentially the father of Classical Liberalism. As Liberalism is wont to do, it has devolved into the present sphere to whit such craziness could be written from someone espousing to follow truth and finding nothing but fallacy in refusing to acknowledge what truth there is-- without delving into a look at it through a systemic eye and getting accused of being all tyrannical and shit.

    "What is truth?", once asked a man before he handed It over to be murdered. You will not find truth by reducing everything to what feels good, what everyone likes 100%, etc. Truth hurts, and it often hurts the most when you deny it to the point of refusing to just call something like it is-- only to find out the full degree of the Truth you have denied.
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: maggot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <span style="color: #FF0000">-We dont really have a Constitutional republic anymore. We have a military-industrial oligarchy.</span>

    Description of oligarchy - American Heritage® Dictionary
    Government by a few, especially by a small faction of persons or families. Those making up such a government. A state governed by a few persons.

    -Do I think the Falwellians would have taken power had they had the opportunity? Yes, not all at once but just like Hitler took Europe a little piece at a time at first, then more and more and more. I lived in Lynchburg Virginia, Jerry's home town in the late 70's early 80'sand I saw firsthand what that ideaology did to the locals. I feared it then and I despise it now. I can move side ways and see where they would have taken it <span style="color: #FF0000"> had they been able to</span> .

    -Frankly, I have no particular problem with Communism, National Socialism, or any other ideaology...as long as the people under it are free to choose. What I despise, is not any particular system, but tyranny, and the whole concept of tyranny, whether its Commie, nazi, Islam, Catholicism, Martian, or any other. I know youll say something like" but these systems lead to tyranny." I disagree. Ignorance, greed, and deceit, and things of that nature lead to tyranny, regardless of what form they take on. IMHO there is something much deeper and more sinister at work behind the scenes, but Im gonna stop there.

    -As to the insinuations about my being a 'lberal'...hogwash. I am a realist, neither to the right nor left. As Jefferson said, "Here we are not afraid to follow the truth where ever it may lead." Thats whats important, not my opinion, or yours. The wisdom of truth. I dont posess it entirely, but I seek it above all things, and Im learning. Do the same...mabey you'll find it. More valuable than gold. </div></div>

    Does anybody care to know what a Republic means? I personally like this deffinition. Concerning your comments on oligarchies, tyranny, democracy, and how they fall into disorder....

    "Hence, I propose that all the modes of goverment I have mentioned are pernicious because of the brief life of the three good forms of goverment and the malignity of the three bad ones. Prudent rulers setting up laws were aware of this shortcoming, and steered clear of each of these forms in itself, choosing a goverment that combined them all, judging it steadier and more stable, because one form can keep the other in check when there are a principality, an aristocracy, and a democracy in the same city. Among the men who deserved the most praise for such a goverment is Lycurgus, who consitituted his laws in Sparta in such a way that the kings, the aristocracy, and the populace all had their function. In doing this, he created a state that lasted for moe than eight hundred years, with the utmost glory to him and peae for Sparta. The opposite happened to Solon, who orginized te laws of Anthens. He only set up a democracy, which had such a short life that he saw the tyranny of Pisistratus arise before his death."
    -Machiavelli, <span style="font-style: italic"> The Essential Writings of Machiavelli</span> Edited and translated by Peter Constantine, Chapter Two: ON HOW MANY KINDS OF REPUBLIC THERE ARE, AND WHAT KIND THE ROMAN REPUBLIC WAS, Page 116

    Damn good book IMO. If anybody cares to read it.
    As for the girl....sad state of affairs that nobody was man enough to protect her. I'm sure because of her age she wasn't fuly aware of the realities of war, and the possible consiquences of her actions. Really good heart and she is a terrible loss. However...

    "An enlightened warlord knows that peasants do not really cae who is in charge of the goverment; or for that matter who ins the conflict. They are only interested in providing for their families. It is a good idea to have them on your side and you should maintain their goodwill by giving them something extra. If they determine that you are weak in spirit or intent, they will take undue advantage and assist the very people you are attacking, whether they are in accord with them or not. If you are good to them, the ywill mind their own business. This does not mean that you are to trust them under anu conditions. Regardless, when you subjugate them you don't have to trust them-they will fear you."
    -Sun Tzu, The Art of War, Book Two: Preperations for War, page 17, translated by Stephen E Kaufman

    High Binder: To expect a girl of 14yrs to know the consequences of her actions if kinda fooly IMO. Despite how exceptional she was she wasn't studying warfar, but medicine. I know for certain that I had limited understanding of those realities when I was that age compared to now. Then again maybe some people know this intuitively without training, teaching, or experience. I was not one of them.

    "Every citizen should be a soldier. This was the case with the Greeks and Romans, and must be that of every free state. Thomas Jefferson 3rd president of US (1743 - 1826)

    ^^There is a good reason why this was said, and should be followed. Be like the Greeks and Romans. Speaking of Rome....Americans are so bad at spreading our ideiology to other peoples. Rome did not become the powerful force it was by adopting the idealogies of others, but having foriegners of adapt the Roman way of life. Partially done by colonies....thinking of which...

    "Articule 4 - The States
    Section 3 - New States
    New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.

    The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State."

    There is a part in Machiavelli talking about the establisment of new colonies, and how it helps establish rule by dispersing the people who are repugnant to to your rule. Something to think about....maybe I'm rabeling....

    Tengu-over and out.
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EventHorizon</div><div class="ubbcode-body">yay for religious myopia and historical denial.

    Just as much savage shit has been perpetrated under the 'lamb of god' as under the crescent moon. Think Christians don't rape, kill and maim and think it's ok so long as it's against people who aren't Christians... look at the early Christian raids by Christian Lebanese on refugee camps as the IDF sent up flares to guide the way... but wait, only muslims use violence to further their religious hatred... must have been a case of 'sorry, I was drunk and she fell on my dick before I shot her...'</div></div>

    But Christianity, and for the sake of the argument, Buddhism, etc. don't posit these actions as OK or even laudable. A break from that which is irrevocably laid down within the system is not indicative of the system in its practice. Duh. Example: I write 2+2=5. Math says it doesn't. Is it the fault of math that I, in using the excuse of math, or parts of math via the number system wrote 2+2=5? No. It's on me and my mathtardedness or refusal to acknowledge the truth of math, or math as a system to which, I, budding mathematician, have submitted or attached myself.

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
    Turkey a pre-dominantly Muslim country, no stupid Sharia. To equate the Taliban with the whole of islam and billions of muslims is to equate Christianity with the thoughts and actions of the Westboro fucks.</div></div>

    Not true. Turkey has no <span style="font-style: italic">state-sanctioned</span> Shariah being a declared Secular state-- much like Iraq and Egypt prior to our vainglorious NWO agendas there. I so regret I took part. Makes me ill. I digress. However, Turkey does allow application of Shariah at lower spheres. Allowance is approval, and thus, the only logical place we can go is it does have Shariah though not in a full scope as we might see in the new Egypt, etc. The Taliban, however, does operate under koranic islam and application of Shariah law per the Hadith, in emulation of mohammed. Afghanistan itself has islam as its sacred religion as number one of its constitution's preamble-- thus rendering islam the state religion and shariah application part and parcel to its political workings within the nation. Further down in Chapter One, Article Three we read the following: <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In Afghanistan, no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam.</div></div>

    What a frigging difference facts make, eh?

    Dissimilarly, Westboro folks do not operate under the ideology of anyone but that lunatic Fred Phelps. Christianity does not equal Phelpianism or whatever you want to call the system they follow. Phelps is not founder of the system of Christianity. Logical disconnect there, bro.

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
    The Constitution does not tolerate ANY religious dominance or any religion being either offically sanctioned or otherwise - yes, that includes Christianity - deal with it. we're free to follow or not any religion we want but not to force our religion on others through the legislative process.
    </div></div>

    This is true, but this isn't the argument. Red Herring!

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
    What I find amusing is how you're all shocked at the actions of a group of people in a country that MANY of the morons on here and this thread have advocated 'glassing'. You do realize that you'd have 'glassed' this brave girl in the process whose death you're pretending to give a shit about if only to wax lyrical about islam.</div></div>

    And I'm sure there were some real lovely little girls in Dresden, and probably some real sweet Japanese kids in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but war is a bitch and civilians die in it. But this was a targeted assassination, not an overarching tactical consideration. Logical disconnect. I do agree with the point I believe you're attempting to make-- sanctity of human life. Thus the ethical considerations of war-- what objective morality will you attempt to argue it from?
    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
    Mention was made of the reports of vets being a securty concern. I agree that those concerns are themselves concerning and deeply cynical in how they view vets coming home from serial deployments and who are probably needing and deserving of special recuperative attention rather than suspicion. However, to judge the 'brown people' against our beliefs is actually in itself anti-thetical to the Constitution. Judge by what standard? By what right? The rest of the world can do whatever it wants, the Constitution gives us no right to think one way or another about it in regards to policy.</div></div>
    No one said anything about brown people. Typical liberal glancing shot. This is an argument about islam, an ideology. Standard you say, and right to boot? Oh dear... is what's true here not true there, morally speaking; ethically speaking; objectively speaking? What a corner you've painted yourself into.
    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
    I say let the world be, it's not ours to police, and it was never ours to meddle with as was deemed fit. If you're all shocked at inhuman actions then just see what goes on in an average day in Mexico. Not a day goes by without some poor sod having his head sawed off without first undergoing some heinous torture... still, didn't stop the Pope from visiting one of the largest Catholic countries in the world.... perhaps turn the other cheek was in reference to 'I've hacked through this side of your neck, now for the other....'</div></div>

    Agree... until your delving back into 2+2=5. Narco cartels are not a rite, religious order, or society of apostolic life within the Catholic Church, nor approved by the Secular government of Mexico. Criminal activity is just that, criminal.
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Rome did not become the powerful force it was by adopting the idealogies of others, but having foriegners of adapt the Roman way of life. Partially done by colonies....thinking of which...</div></div>

    You've got everything upside down. They became powerful because they've conquered, they've gone to shitter BECAUSE they've adopted ideologies (especially plague called Christianity) and practices of peoples they've enslaved. The hordes imported into Rome DID NOT adapt to Roman lifestyle but CHANGED Roman lifestyle (with help of spoiled Romans themselves who became degenerated, lifeless, fat, spoiled, corrupt etc...) and eventually went into history as a failed superpower. Which kind of reminds me of someone....
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EventHorizon</div><div class="ubbcode-body">yay for religious myopia and historical denial.

    Just as much savage shit has been perpetrated under the 'lamb of god' as under the crescent moon. Think Christians don't rape, kill and maim and think it's ok so long as it's against people who aren't Christians... look at the early Christian raids by Christian Lebanese on refugee camps as the IDF sent up flares to guide the way... but wait, only muslims use violence to further their religious hatred... must have been a case of 'sorry, I was drunk and she fell on my dick before I shot her...'

    Turkey a pre-dominantly Muslim country, no stupid Sharia. To equate the Taliban with the whole of islam and billions of muslims is to equate Christianity with the thoughts and actions of the Westboro fucks.

    The Constitution does not tolerate ANY religious dominance or any religion being either offically sanctioned or otherwise - yes, that includes Christianity - deal with it. we're free to follow or not any religion we want but not to force our religion on others through the legislative process.

    What I find amusing is how you're all shocked at the actions of a group of people in a country that MANY of the morons on here and this thread have advocated 'glassing'. You do realize that you'd have 'glassed' this brave girl in the process whose death you're pretending to give a shit about if only to wax lyrical about islam.

    Mention was made of the reports of vets being a securty concern. I agree that those concerns are themselves concerning and deeply cynical in how they view vets coming home from serial deployments and who are probably needing and deserving of special recuperative attention rather than suspicion. However, to judge the 'brown people' against our beliefs is actually in itself anti-thetical to the Constitution. Judge by what standard? By what right? The rest of the world can do whatever it wants, the Constitution gives us no right to think one way or another about it in regards to policy.

    I say let the world be, it's not ours to police, and it was never ours to meddle with as was deemed fit. If you're all shocked at inhuman actions then just see what goes on in an average day in Mexico. Not a day goes by without some poor sod having his head sawed off without first undergoing some heinous torture... still, didn't stop the Pope from visiting one of the largest Catholic countries in the world.... perhaps turn the other cheek was in reference to 'I've hacked through this side of your neck, now for the other....' </div></div>

    Dude,

    You forgot to include Timothy McVeigh and Jared Loughner as examples!

    You losing your touch?

    Again, 400 years ago versus today for the witch trials vis a vis current Sharia doctrine? A few puritans manipulating the yokels in Massachusetts in 1670 or so compared to institutional canon today...: Seems pretty obvious to me but hey, I wear a tool belt every day and went to a state university!

    As to the Sabra and Shatilla massacres, yeah, I have some cousins who were involved in those attacks. The incidental element of the respective religions of both sides had almost nothing to do with it. It was part of a blood feud between the grandchildren of Palestinian squatters who got out of the way of the victorious Islamic armies that Crushed the Zionists in 1948! Of course the crushing part never happened and they never left, leaving the Lebanese of all clans, faiths and allegiances, stuck with them!

    The Lebanese who happened to be Maronite Catholics, emboldened by the Israeli's then in control, went for bitter payback after a decade of civil war. Not saying it was the right thing to do from the safety of My American office but there is another side to that tale as well.

    But back on point, the little girl was right in fearing the Taliban as they are savages and these acts are neither anomalous nor apocryphal in their extreme devotions, nor those of their paisan.

     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sharac</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Rome did not become the powerful force it was by adopting the idealogies of others, but having foriegners of adapt the Roman way of life. Partially done by colonies....thinking of which...</div></div>

    You've got everything upside down. They became powerful because they've conquered, they've gone to shitter BECAUSE they've adopted ideologies <span style="color: #CC0000">(especially plague called Christianity)</span> and practices of peoples they've enslaved. The hordes imported into Rome DID NOT adapt to Roman lifestyle but CHANGED Roman lifestyle (with help of spoiled Romans themselves who became degenerated, lifeless, fat, spoiled, corrupt etc...) and eventually went into history as a failed superpower. Which kind of reminds me of someone....

    </div></div> wow, I am sure that won't be offensive to anyone on this site. And, that is why we don't have religious conversations on this site. It turns to being offensive to people and fights begin. May be I need to wipe off my Jihad Tunic...
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    This is actually a very interesting thread. Let's not get it locked due to religious/political arguments.

    We are in the Third Jihad, Islam's latest attempt to take over the world. They are commanded in the Koran to convert or kill the unbeliever, which leads to heinous acts like shooting a little girl who speaks out against them.
    As they are religious fanatics, there is no reasoning with them. Allah has commanded it, therefore it must be so.

    They will destroy civilization if left unchecked.

    More here: The Great Caliphate


    1911fan

     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: queequeg</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
    Dude,

    You forgot to include Timothy McVeigh and Jared Loughner as examples!

    You losing your touch?

    But back on point, the little girl was right in fearing the Taliban as they are savages and these acts are neither anomalous nor apocryphal in their extreme devotions, nor those of their paisan.

    </div></div>

    Unlike others, I didn't mention McVeigh because he doesn't represent anything other than himself and a vew few people who think like him.

    Any muslim who thinks like the taliban is better of dead in my books. Any jew who thinks like the ultra-orthodox who attack other jews because they're not strict enough in their adherence is better of dead. Any christian who thinks it's acceptable to kill a doctor in an abortion clinic because he feels his beliefs are more important than the laws of the land is better off dead. Anyone who feels thier personal faith is deserving of being forcfully imposed on others and who translates that opinion into violent action deserves a swift ventilating. But the good news is these types of people are very few.

    Neither of those people are representative of their religions as practiced by the majority of those particular faiths, they're minorities but it's so much easier to post sarcastically 'the religion of peace...' and think how much better we are than those brown people.
     
    Re: Brave Taliban shoot 14 year old girl

    True could've worded it differently but that was not nowhere near the main point of my post...