Warning: graphic violence
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/27/world/asia/flawed-justice-after-a-mob-killed-an-afghan-woman.html?_r=1
But mob justice is so desired in the US ... our police aren't violent enough, right? Lynch law is such a tradition in parts of the US.
Unfortunately, investigations of such things in Pakistan for instance, show that they alleged crime never happened, it is one angry neighbor lying about another. This is why lying is prohibited in the Decalogue ... that obsolete system of laws. I would suspect that early Jewish society had mob justice same as described in your article ... after all, there were no police. And "refuge cities" only applied to accused murderers.
All otherwise peaceful and tolerant Muslims, I'm sure.
and suddenly i am ok with torture.
but unfortunately with the way west is today, islam will not be destroyed in this time.
Quote from: CloneKai on December 28, 2015, 07:46:41 PM
and suddenly i am ok with torture.
but unfortunately with the way west is today, islam will not be destroyed in this time.
In Orthodox Judaism, gossip is considered second after murder, as a sin. This is because gossip destroys people's reputations ... and in some societies leads to mob violence. Of course if someone did something antisocial in front of a bunch of unbiased witnesses ... they are probably crazy.
Islam won't be destroyed in our time, nor anything else. Ups and downs for sure. I see no reason for extermination of whole cultures or whole peoples ... for obvious reasons.
The sad thing is my first instinct was to check the date on this story, because I know this has happened before this year.
Quote from: Baruch on December 28, 2015, 10:17:45 PM
In Orthodox Judaism, gossip is considered second after murder, as a sin. This is because gossip destroys people's reputations ... and in some societies leads to mob violence. Of course if someone did something antisocial in front of a bunch of unbiased witnesses ... they are probably crazy.
Islam won't be destroyed in our time, nor anything else. Ups and downs for sure. I see no reason for extermination of whole cultures or whole peoples ... for obvious reasons.
where does torture stand, how many steps below gossip.
Quote from: Baruch on December 28, 2015, 10:17:45 PM
Islam won't be destroyed in our time, nor anything else. Ups and downs for sure. I see no reason for extermination of whole cultures or whole peoples ... for obvious reasons.
i was thinking more along the lines of smoking them with weed and then putting them in indoctrination camps. :confused2:
Quote from: CloneKai on December 28, 2015, 07:46:41 PM
and suddenly i am ok with torture.
but unfortunately with the way west is today, islam will not be destroyed in this time.
It's very difficult to destroy an ideology, especially when it preys on the young and gullible mind.
Quote from: CloneKai on December 29, 2015, 04:03:20 AM
where does torture stand, how many steps below gossip.
Torture isn't forbidden. Otherwise matzo balls would be forbidden ;-) Neither is killing (if G-d tell you to) ... this is a warning to in-laws ;-))
Coveting of another's wife, property or ass (gay folk are not left out) is forbidden. So basically all advertising and consumerism is a sin (I am not joking here). Of course just because something is identified as a sin, doesn't mean the rabbis nag you about it, particularly if they are also guilty.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on December 29, 2015, 04:59:18 AM
It's very difficult to destroy an ideology, especially when it preys on the young and gullible mind.
Wars on adjectives are absurd. Even wars on nouns. You can only make war on people. Using words to fight words, is fighting fire with fire. To fight fire with water ... means fight words with silence. On this forum people's powder is dry however.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on December 29, 2015, 04:59:18 AM
It's very difficult to destroy an ideology, especially when it preys on the young and gullible mind.
difficult, yes. But i think it can be done. especially by the west.
they know how europe became less religious.
they know which environment produces radical muslim, and which produces so so muslim.
and they know how religions work.
they have so much more resources and money as compared to the muslim countries.
But of course it is democratically unfeasible. which politician will do something which will have so many bad effects in short term and only start producing fruits maybe half a century later. and maybe even then, not clearly benefit the voting population.
Quote from: CloneKai on December 29, 2015, 07:08:08 AM
difficult, yes. But i think it can be done. especially by the west.
they know how europe became less religious.
Europe became secularized only after a 30-year war between European countries of different Christian denominations - that war was horrific and devastating. Perhaps the Muslim countries need to do the same (like Iran versus Saudi Arabia, or Shiites versus Sunnis). But it's not something one can order - like a prescription at the pharmacy. And so the West has no answer to secularize the Muslim countries. Ataturk tried in Turkey, look what's happening now.
Quotethey know which environment produces radical muslim, and which produces so so muslim.
and they know how religions work.
they have so much more resources and money as compared to the muslim countries.
Whenever the West does any interference in the ME, hordes of liberals/leftists go on protesting such policies. So the West is not unified in those endeavors. Secondly, the West only interferes when its own interest is at stake. And even then, the action taken is often murky.
QuoteBut of course it is democratically unfeasible. which politician will do something which will have so many bad effects in short term and only start producing fruits maybe half a century later. and maybe even then, not clearly benefit the voting population.
Democracy is a bitch. Don't think it can remedy the situation in those countries.
Have China invade and occupy Middle East. Then Muslims will hate the Chinese. This is called the Final Outsourcing of America.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on December 29, 2015, 10:09:45 AM
Europe became secularized only after a 30-year war between European countries of different Christian denominations - that war was horrific and devastating. Perhaps the Muslim countries need to do the same (like Iran versus Saudi Arabia, or Shiites versus Sunnis). But it's not something one can order - like a prescription at the pharmacy. And so the West has no answer to secularize the Muslim countries. Ataturk tried in Turkey, look what's happening now.
there can be more than one way to do something.
and there is no guarantee that war will remove religious from the society or even weaken it. And i don't think that if the !slam world starts burning in huge fucking wars, people will enjoy watching Americans and Europeans living their beautiful safe life behind hundreds of billion of dollars of military hardware. many people will want take the destruction and war there too.
The west is the best hope for destroying religions. religious societies will keep on believing that their personal myth is the best solution to all problems and thus might not go in the right direction.
Quote
Whenever the West does any interference in the ME, hordes of liberals/leftists go on protesting such policies. So the West is not unified in those endeavors. Secondly, the West only interferes when its own interest is at stake. And even then, the action taken is often murky.
Democracy is a bitch. Don't think it can remedy the situation in those countries.
west barely ever interfere in a right way. and liberal are right in raising voices against it, because Americans only do more harm than good. Afghanistan doesn't look good after 15 years of fucking it. and huge amount of countries were involved here.
i and i am sure alot of people will support intervention, if we get some good results, even if it means more deaths.
But America wants to make other countries democratic or atleast that what they say. i am pretty sure if all Afghan got a vote, the first thing they will vote for is their personal interpretation of sharia law, or whoever scream sharia most loudest.
I don't want that. i don't think everyone should have a political voice. As long as everyone is getting education, and good standard of living. hardly anyone will rebel. and as times goes by, people will stop supporting stoning or amputation or whatever crazy punishment they find in some religious text. why, because a person morals does not come from a text book, but from the surrounding.
this can be done and the richest and the most powerful countries can't just say its not their job.
a small example might help.
Israel and Gaza case.
in the last war they killed over 2000 people and 500 of them children. they gave different excuses for these casualties. but would that matter to the relatives of these people, their friends, no. In that war, they probably created more terrorists than they killed. and they didn't solve anything. i think rockets some times still flies from there.
instead, Israel can reoccupy Gaza. but not for more settlements.
they have to remove Hamas from power.
Make education compulsory till high school. even if they have to punish the parents.
teach them in ways that can make them less religious, knowing that religious indoctrination is happening at home.
create jobs for them. allow them to buy and sell properties. just allow them move up social and financial ladders.
but don't give them a political voice.
would there be violence, yes.
would liberal protest against these actions, yes.
but won't these people progress, become more successful, more happier and more liberal?
i think they would, in one or two generations.
Its quite hard to make a kid stop playing angry birds on an ipad, and go to mosque.
its even more difficult to make a kid stop playing angry birds on an ipad, and go blow himself or herself up, especially when that kid never been exposed to violence.
Generally, rich people are less religious.
generally, educated people are less religious.