GostHacked Posted March 12, 2015 Report Posted March 12, 2015 I agree. I don't know what so many in the Middle East follow the Koran word for word. Why do some Christians follow the bible word for word? Quote
Shady Posted March 12, 2015 Report Posted March 12, 2015 Why do some Christians follow the bible word for word? I don't know. Luckily, they're not as big of a problem. Quote
Rue Posted March 13, 2015 Report Posted March 13, 2015 (edited) Marcus I know its a profound concept but popularity does not determine whether someone's message is credible. But I tell you what, using your analogy Hitler was and remains a great man o.k.? Now move on.Lol. -the more popular your Godess/God,the more likely you will catch herpes- Rue 2015 Zip over his head Edited March 13, 2015 by Rue Quote
Hudson Jones Posted March 16, 2015 Report Posted March 16, 2015 They're bat-shit crazy. They throw stones at women to kill them as punishment. Their former president believed in the 12th Imam end times prophecy. Their violently anti-women, anti-Jew, anti-gay, anti-freedom of speech, anti-human rights, etc. You continuously spread misinformation through exaggerations and straight out lies. Here is what Wikipedia has to say about stoning in Iran - Another chance for you to learn, but I'm sure it will be another example of you seeing the truth and then repeating the same lies in the future: Stoning Further information: Stoning and Rajm Stoning to death was blocked as legal punishment by Khomeini's order in 1981. In 2012 it officially was removed from the code and replaced by an unspecified death penalty. In theory, it could still be used as a punishment because the penal code allows judges to impose sentencing according to "valid Islamic sources" and sharia punishments, although it is unlikely due to the fact it would contradict current Iranian civil and penal laws. Stoning is legal for "zina" (sex crimes). Many Muslim jurists in Iran are of the opinion that although stoning can be considered Islamic, the criteria under which it can be imposed as a sentence are stringent. Because of the heavy burden of proof needed to reach a guilty sentence for adultery the penalty is hardly ever applicable. The person could also be sentenced to be hanged rather than stoned. Following vociferous domestic and international controversy over stoning in the early years of the Islamic Republic, the government placed a moratorium on stoning in 2002. In January 2005, the Iranian judiciary spokesman Jamal Karimirad was quoted as saying, "Stoning has been dropped from the penal code for a long time, and in the Islamic republic, we do not see such punishments being carried out", further adding that if stoning sentences were passed by lower courts, they were overruled by higher courts and "no such verdicts have been carried out." In 2007 and 2009, Western organizations claimed the moratorium was broken in two cases for men being stoned for murder and adultery. In 2008 Iran's judiciary scrapped stoning in draft legislation submitted to parliament for approval. The 2012 penal code officially ended the punishment of stoning in Iran. Quote When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always. Gandhi
Rue Posted March 16, 2015 Report Posted March 16, 2015 (edited) Now that's interesting. Once again Hudson Jones engages in a personal attack against someone he disagrees with calling the person a liar. Par for the course. Now I will make a point of filing a complaint since I have been told to dos o when I think someone is engaging in personal attacks but before I do I think it important to point something out. Hudson Jones went to Wikepedia and went to Capital Punishment in Iran to quote the words he did to then provide himself a platform from which to accuse Shady of exaggerating, misrepresenting and lying about stoning in Iran. But what is interesting is he skipped other comments from Wikepedia. If you type in Stoning on google or yahoo then go to Wikepedia you will see when you scroll down under the sub-headings: " Usage Today" and then "Countries where stoning is included in national or regional laws " and then under "Iran" other comments- Hudson Jones ignored that state stoning remains as a possible form of punishment under the Iranian penal code. So while accusing shady of being a liar and engaging in misinformation, he ignored the very source he quotes from. How is that not misleading I ask?. In fact in June of 2013, the Iranian Supreme council reinserted stoning in the penal code for adultery. That is a fact. Hudson Jones statement and attempt to use Wikepedia to misrepresent is now called out. That section was reinserted and it also applies to other sexual acts. That is public domain. You can find it for yourself. Human Rights Watch for example in June of 2013 openly challenged Iran for reinstating stoning. If anyone is actually interested in the topic selective Wikepedia surfing will not give you a clear picture. There is an excellent article, "Stoning Women In The Islamic Republic of Ian: Is It Holy War or Geder Violence", which can be found at the Arts & Social Sciences Journal with the citation, Kush and Amar, Arts Social Sci J 2014 5:1 if you are interested. Unlike Hudson Jones, when I provide articles they are not editorials that simply contain someone's subjective opinion that agrees with mine. This article explains the laws of stoning. According to Human Rights Watch 10 Iranians face death by stoning at this time. There were 76 stonings reported from 1980 to 1989 by Amnesty International ,another 74 between 1990 and 2009 by the Inernational Committee Against Execution. There have been no publically reported stonings since 2009. Iran is ranked number 2 in the world for the rate of capital executions each year. At this point they all appear to be by hanging. Some claim that there is a moratorium on stoning sentences in Iran. However what is public knowledge is that on July 21,2014, in the province of Ghaemshar,the Judicial council sentenced a man to death by stoning for adultery, possession of weapons, alcohol and rape. It is also known that a woman Sakineh Mohhamadi Ashtiani was released on March 20,2014 from Iranian prison. She had been sentenced to stoning death in206 for the killing of her husband and adultery and then had her sentence reduced to 10 years but was released after about 8. The death by stoning is still in the penal code and its why the UN has asked for its removal. Edited March 16, 2015 by Rue Quote
guyser Posted March 16, 2015 Report Posted March 16, 2015 Now I will make a point of filing a complaint since I have been told to dos o when I think someone is engaging in personal attacks but before I do I think it important to point something out.Good idea ! Dont forget to report yourself too while you are at it. Do you need help finding where you do/did the same thing? It really is easy , denigrating my dad, telling people they live in moms basement, .....but you know there is lots more. Now be a fair one and report yourself. No? Typical then. carry on. Quote
Bob Macadoo Posted March 16, 2015 Report Posted March 16, 2015 Good idea !Dont forget to report yourself too while you are at it.Do you need help finding where you do/did the same thing? It really is easy , denigrating my dad, telling people they live in moms basement, .....but you know there is lots more.Now be a fair one and report yourself.No?Typical then.carry on. .....I think you forget he's a "lawyer".....hmmmm? Now you see your error. Quote
Hudson Jones Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 After Netanyahu announced what most already know, about his stance on Palestinian State, the comment boards in Washington have exploded in horror over his statement. At least with a facade of a desire for peace, Americans could back Israel. Netanyahu has ripped that away. I hope the people of Israel are aware that a vote for Netanyahu is a vote to sever support from the US. Quote When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always. Gandhi
Rue Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 (edited) Lol baiting me about past posts won't detract from what Hudson Jones stated and the fact he won't retract his statement. Edited March 17, 2015 by Rue Quote
SpankyMcFarland Posted March 19, 2015 Report Posted March 19, 2015 (edited) The correlation between despotic internal policies and nuke use so far has not been that great, has it? One of the world's nicer countries chose to use nukes and since then some horrible regimes have refrained from doing so. The principle cause of such restraint has been deterrence. Israel has lots of deterrence against Iran - well over a hundred nukes that no politician in the US other than Ron Paul dares to talk about. And Iran will not try and strike Europe or the US. India and Pakistan hate each other far more than Israel and Iran do and yet even they have managed to avoid a nuclear exchange in their ongoing border wars. I would say that Iran is better run than Pakistan and less dangerous to the West. If Israel doesn't agree then Israel should do what it thinks it must. Edited March 19, 2015 by SpankyMcFarland Quote
Rue Posted March 19, 2015 Report Posted March 19, 2015 Well Spanky is it, that is you name, an interesting point you made. It is true you can't get more out and out tension than between Pakistan and India. Then again I suppose you could say it was a miracle during the cold war the Soviets and the Americans didn't start a nuke war over Cuba, etc., or say between China and the US over Korea. I doubt we know how close we may have come to some nuke wars. I personally believe the US headed off two Soviet attacks on Israel. Some people believe there is a thing called MAD,mutual armed deterrence. Me personally I would prefer no one had nukes. No one. I also personally believe Iran has had a gew nukes for some time given to them by North Korea. Whether this is a battle over their being able to build their own or a cover store for even worse weapons, no one can say. However for me, unlike Bug Guy I think the regime of Iran has extremist views and I believe Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait and the UAE do not trust the US, not just Israel in dealing with Iran and if Iran is loaded, Saudi Arabia has indicated it will also reserve its right to get loaded. . Its bad enough North Korea has them with that fat little boy what'shis face.Kimmy. Quote
jbg Posted March 22, 2015 Report Posted March 22, 2015 I wasn't sure whether to post this with Netanyahu, fracking, or immigration. Today I sat down, penned, and posted on Congresswomen Nita Lowey’s website about recent Obama administration policies. This letter speaks to my serious concern about the direction he is pursuing as President. His actions in so many areas are perverse and take aim at U.S. interests. At best they meet fringe agendas. At worst they're aimed at wrecking our country. Is this what he meant by "change"? An Open Letter to My Congressional Representative Regarding President Obama’s Policies Dear Representative Lowey: As a loyal, lifetime Democratic and member of the Jewish faith, I am watching with alarm our President's actions/antics concerning Israel's recent election. Currently, a very solid majority of U.S. Jews vote for the Democratic Party. Barack Obama's apparent intent to force Israel to accept both a nuclear Iran and indefensible borders cause me concern. It is entirely possible that Mr. Obama will seriously wound the Democratic Party by taking positions antithetical to U.S. as well as Israeli security. I understand Mr. Obama's desire to be considered a good and just man, and a world citizen. His oath of office and job is undying loyalty the United States. I believe he is grievously falling down on this job. Israeli policy is not the only area giving cause for alarm. His energy policies similarly show allegiance to either foreign interests or at best concerns of fringe groups. His determination to endlessly defer decision on the Keystone XL Pipeline appears aimed at pressuring a U.S. ally, Canada, on its environmental policies. It is not his place to be pressuring a fellow democracy on its policies, particularly when they involve a speculative concern on "climate change." U.S. interests are best served by having energy exports contribute to our balance of trade. Further, his unilateral decision to cease enforcing U.S. immigration law causes concern as well. His duty is not to Third World children; it is to citizens of the U.S. and localities impacted by the unfunded mandate of educating children, many of whom arrive without parents. In short, President Obama is pressing a "world" agenda at the expense of the country he has taken an oath of office to lead. This may persuade me, as well as other lifelong, loyal Democratic to "reassess" (to borrow Administration nomenclature on their intentions with regard to Israeli policy) their political home in the Democratic Party. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Big Guy Posted March 22, 2015 Author Report Posted March 22, 2015 Nice to see somebody do something active besides arguing on opinion boards. "At worst they're aimed at wrecking our country". Which is your country - America or Israel? Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
jacee Posted March 23, 2015 Report Posted March 23, 2015 Barack Obama's apparent intent to force Israel to accept both a nuclear Iran and indefensible borders cause me concern. It is entirely possible that Mr. Obama will seriously wound the Democratic Party by taking positions antithetical to U.S. as well as Israeli security. How is that wrecking y our country jbg? . Quote
jbg Posted March 23, 2015 Report Posted March 23, 2015 Nice to see somebody do something active besides arguing on opinion boards. "At worst they're aimed at wrecking our country". Which is your country - America or Israel? Barack Obama's apparent intent to force Israel to accept both a nuclear Iran and indefensible borders cause me concern. It is entirely possible that Mr. Obama will seriously wound the Democratic Party by taking positions antithetical to U.S. as well as Israeli security. How is that wrecking y our country jbg? . You're both way out of context. Before itemizing my problems on three issues, I wrote, above the "colon": "His actions in so many areas are perverse and take aim at U.S. interests. At best they meet fringe agendas. At worst they're aimed at wrecking our country. Is this what he meant by "change"?" My beef with his policy on Israel is below the "colon." And how is it potentially "wrecking the country"? If you would trouble yourselves to read today's headlines on Yemen, that part of the world is on fire. The U.S. and/or other Western nations may well be forced to intervene to prevent mass genocide or famine. What country has a better base for logistics and/or troop landing than Israel? Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
jacee Posted March 23, 2015 Report Posted March 23, 2015 You're both way out of context. Before itemizing my problems on three issues, I wrote, above the "colon": "His actions in so many areas are perverse and take aim at U.S. interests. At best they meet fringe agendas. At worst they're aimed at wrecking our country. Is this what he meant by "change"?" My beef with his policy on Israel is below the "colon." And how is it potentially "wrecking the country"? If you would trouble yourselves to read today's headlines on Yemen, that part of the world is on fire. The U.S. and/or other Western nations may well be forced to intervene to prevent mass genocide or famine. What country has a better base for logistics and/or troop landing than Israel? I think there's been enough unilateral action and interference by the Us so your argument holds no value to me. It would 'wreck' the US? Hyperbole. . Quote
Rue Posted March 23, 2015 Report Posted March 23, 2015 Now you see JBG, if you support Israel it makes you anti USA. You clearly did not catch that in the earlier question to you. Which country do you support Israel or the US. This coming from someone we could have easily asked who does he support Iran or Canada using his analogy. Now back to your comments, you can now see the new hypothesis is that suddenly, presto, like kalabam out of the blue, Obama is anti Israel and therefore the US is, and you can't be an American. Got it? Good because for a second there I thought you didn't understand the unloyal American Jew card being played against you. You know how Jews are. Push come to shove we abandon our countries in favour of other Jews. We are klanish remember? These odious references of course will persist and so will the denials and this horse sheeyit hypthesis that US and Israeli interests are not the same and can not be. You read what John McCain said to Obama. The more Obama shows his true petulant colours, the less credibility he gets from Iran. Therein lies the irony. He thinks he is scoring brownie points with Iran over Israel and he's showing them he's a two faced, petulant child who has tantrums when he can't get his way. Obama is a prize jack ass. He thinks playing the anti Israeli card gets him respect with Iran. He has no clue why Iran would consider that a sign of weakness. Obama is a lame duck. How much damage he can do in the final year of office remains to be seen. He sold Israel, Saudi Arabia and Egypt out 7 years ago. The geniuses believe this is something new with him. OOOOOOOOH now you better watch it Bibi, Bam Bam is mad. Like McCain said, he's a lame duck idiot having a tantrum. Quote
marcus Posted March 23, 2015 Report Posted March 23, 2015 What country has a better base for logistics and/or troop landing than Israel? Uhm.. Kuwait.. Iraq... Bahrain... Qatar... Where U.S. already has bases. Nice try though. You're nothing but another Israeli Firster, willing to sacrifice the security and well-being of your adopted country for Zionist gain. Quote "What do you think of Western civilization?" Gandhi was asked. "I think it would be a good idea," he said.
jbg Posted March 23, 2015 Report Posted March 23, 2015 (edited) Uhm.. Kuwait.. Iraq... Bahrain... Qatar... Where U.S. already has bases. Nice try though. You're nothing but another Israeli Firster, willing to sacrifice the security and well-being of your adopted country for Zionist gain. Aren't Kuwait, Iraq, Bahrain,and Qatar are one step away from "Yemen-hood." Nice try though. You're nothing but a Jew-hater. Edited March 23, 2015 by jbg Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
GostHacked Posted March 24, 2015 Report Posted March 24, 2015 Aren't Kuwait, Iraq, Bahrain,and Qatar are one step away from "Yemen-hood." Nice try though. You're nothing but a Jew-hater. Iraq hosts the US Army's largest base in the Middle East. Qatar hosts the US Navy's 5th Fleet. Israel what? From what we have seen with the USA's ability, they can stage anywhere they want. Quote
jacee Posted March 24, 2015 Report Posted March 24, 2015 Aren't Kuwait, Iraq, Bahrain,and Qatar are one step away from "Yemen-hood." Nice try though. You're nothing but a Jew-hater.Oh the "Jew-hater" card again. :/People who criticize Israel's current right wing regime and killing of innocents are not anti-Semite, jbg. People who disagree with you get labelled "Jew-hater". What a crock. . Quote
Rue Posted March 24, 2015 Report Posted March 24, 2015 I am still working on the new Marcus allegation calling JBG an and I quote, " Israeli Firster". Jacee. I will get back to you though on whether JBG is a Jew, Zionist, American, false anti-Semite accuser, sob, etc. Interesting how though certain people come on the board and call people names and it passes as debate. I mean what next Jacee-should I call you names? I mean like you are hateful, or something like "Israeli middle fingerer"? Where do we take this now hmmm? Quote
Charles Anthony Posted March 24, 2015 Report Posted March 24, 2015 Folks, I am temporarily locking this thread so that you may stare at your own words a little longer to see how toxic this discussion has become. There is too much trolling with personal attacks destroying this discussion. Ch. A. Quote We do not have time for a meeting of the flat earth society. << Où sont mes amis ? Ils sont ici, ils sont ici... >>
Je suis Omar Posted April 10, 2015 Report Posted April 10, 2015 Big Guy: Even the most fervent pro-Israeli politicians, if forced to choose between their president and another nation will back their president. ----------- Recently voted number one most naive comment of 2015. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.