Bitcoin Forum

ISIS impregnates 9-year-old girl

http://nypost.com/2015/04/11/isis-impregnates-9-year-old-girl/ (http://nypost.com/2015/04/11/isis-impregnates-9-year-old-girl/)

<< A 9-year-old girl is pregnant after being raped by ISIS savages in Iraq, a report said.

"The abuse she has suffered left her mentally and physically traumatized", said Yousif Daoud, a Canadian-based aid worker who recently returned from the region. "This girl is so young she could die if she delivers a baby. Even cesarean section is dangerous."

At least 10 different men with the Islamic State were said to have sexually assaulted the child, the Toronto Star (http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2015/04/09/yazidi-girls-kidnapped-by-islamic-state-return-traumatized.html) reported. >>

Another noble deed in the name of the God by the religion of Peace.

Hope they burn in hell, these monsters.

(Where's Ironman when you need him the most)

Why guys twist things? It was 10 sex rapers who did and it is not in the name of Islam. They did it for self satisfaction. In fact, Islam was the religion which abolished killing femal infants, bad sexial attitude towards female etc... Please don't mix action of people with religion. You can't even find a verse telling to rape a woman in Qur'an.

Is this story legit? How is it even possible for a 9-year-old to get pregnant.


Everything ISIS does is in the name of Islam whether you agree with it or not or whether they've distorted or perverted Islam for their own political motives.

I don't know about the story. A girl can reach puberty from the age 9. A girl in hot place can reach puberty earlier than a girl in cool place.



They are only claiming they are. It doesn't make Islam is doing. They are some intelligent psychos who have some political gains in mind. If Islam is telling them, then twister's statement can be true, but it isn't and hence, it is wrong. So please don't spread misconceptions.

In the media ISIS is portrayed (and accepted by the public opinion) as the voice of radical islam. Across the islamic world tons of ppl supporting them and agrees or partially agrees with their views. IN the meantime apart from some theatrical moaning the moderates are silent. Sorry to say but in this days they are the "public face" of islam.

I understand what you are saying and I do believe media is the problem. As far as I have seen, US* medias are more active in making Islam bad. Most people who support them are going for political gains and most of them are non-Muslims. Anyway, I think, I alone can't do anything when widely influenced medias spread lies. :(

* I am not an anti-US. See wiki.

Fuck ISIS. fuck the world governments for taking their time. fuck religions.

Everything in Islam or Christianity is down to a persons interpretation of their individual books of fairytales. ISIS just choose to interpret the koran in a way that permits most of their behavior. I doubt most muslims abide by the book as it was 'intended' (whatever that is) but with all religions people pick and choose which bits they want to ignore or follow. If you followed the koran or bible as it was literally described in the western world you'd be thrown in prison or a mental institution. Islam and Christianity have no place in modern civilized society but weak people still need to believe in them to give their life some meaning or 'guidance' whether they use that to do good or bad.

Somebody needs to drop an atom bomb on them

ISIS works under their own name, its like claiming Christians are the KKK.

No twist, just saying as I see it. I know it's hard for you to see the truth as you yourself are a Muslim but the fact is most terrorist in the world do practice Islam and then they do deeds like:



I can understand that you must defend this but these Islamic groups are doing these kind of things in name of god to whatever they consider un-islamic.

Not going to argue on this any further as I know that no matter what you will not see it since you yourself practice Islam.

http://quran.com/2/228

Sura 2:228

"But the men have a degree over them [in responsibility and authority]."

"Wives have the same rights as the husbands have on them in accordance with the generally known principles. Of course, men are a degree above them in status"

I can find the same kind of bullshit in the bible if you like if you're going to accuse me of 'islamaphobia', all religion contains this kind of bullshit, I've noticed on top of the usual Christian apologists we have on this board a bunch of Muslim apologists have finally found out about Bitcoin, I guess we're more diverse with more people now but we also have more intolerant assholes to contend with.

Yea its all to blind their followers, we are in the universe shooting through space and ppl think we are the only ones. sigh.

No, all of them not

Prove it then.

Buddhism, is not a religion. Probably the only "way of life" that is correct in terms of LOGIC. Even the Dalai Lama says that if Science proves an assumption made by Buddhsim wrong, then Buddhsim would have to adapt.

I respect Buddhists more than most religions, they still have some pretty crazy bullshit rules like things about sex for example which I can't agree with though.

As long as they are open to change, i "back" them up. However, most of them are 100% closed minded to any change or other considerations, which in my opinion is a very ancient way of thinking.

There is a religion called sikhism, they have a book which they abide by, i have read it all and found no bullshit in it

That's my thing as well but as you say they may budge on one or two things but even if they believe in something horribly persecutive and opressive ( and you can tell they know it is ) they won't do anything if they're convinced it's 'morally' right.

I am not telling I am demying what they are doing. They are doing worst things. Also how you got "most"? Many people are there who don't practice Islam who are terrorists. It's just, media highlight whatever Muslims do. Also to tell they are practicing "Islam", they have to follow the rules. If they ain't following rules, how can they be practicing Islam? They are making they are on religion.


The verse talk about family life. There are many reasons for the higher decree to men. In most places, where woman has power, the place are ruined especially if they have higher power in family. I have seen many families being ruined because of higher power for women. However, it doesn't mean men can oppress or hurt women. There are strict rules regarding this.

Go fuck yourself, the idea that the Qu'ran is dictating men are in higher status to women and doing a complete u-turn on the subject in the same fucking line just shows what hypocrites religious people are.

 

Allow me a minute or two to disprove that while I argue with this moron about Islam.

Wow narrow-minded for the fucking win, the blindness is real with this one.

Well it is coming from an American news source in a sense it doesn't hurt to check up on it
May be on field report or unconfirmed rumors, if it sells it gets published since no one does the fact checking later (assuming they could die considering the location, unless someone went to check the German hosptial in question)
We are reliant on the feed that said checking sources is good and their seems to be enough evidence to confirm this claim, one the girl is in a German hospital not mentioned which one, second it mentioned the camp name and location + circumstances, so it is legit.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/isis-9-year-old-pregnant-after-being-gang-raped-by-militants-could-die-1496017
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/isis-germany-open-trauma-centre-sex-slave-women-raped-by-militants-1480631

This is a shame, I don't think Islam says : 'get pregnant' the young girls.
I have a lot of friends (from a various religions) and none of them is like ISIS members, I think Islam doesn't teach these things and they don't know the real Islam. Every commandment was given in a specific period of time (epoch) and always know that the time changes... and the especially the things change.

Wow, took me about five seconds.

http://realsikhism.com/index.php?subaction=showfull&id=1250025034&ucat=7


If there is one thing I've learned about religion, all religions have an obsession over where you stick your penis.

Uh oh, even the BBC are reporting it lol :D

http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/rs/relationships/sikhloveandsexrev1.shtml

How can you not realize how backward and ignorant your views are here? But this is one of the biggest problems with Islam with its institutionalized sexism that treats women as second class citizens so that's why its ok to rape or beat them to death. There's no logic in it other than trying to pathetically justify your beliefs. To say where women have power families are ruined is ridiculous. Most of the time, in most cultures or countries, it's usually the fathers that end up screwing up the families Islam included.

Actually evidence to me has shown to be pretty even in respect to who ruins families and who doesn't, it's just that one particular view is often reported on more depending on who's doing the reporting, on one end you have the socially conservative religious nutcases and on the other you have the equally batshit misandrist matriarchs, all screaming that their gender should be the one in charge.

Well all the media around the world can't be telling lies, they can get prosecuted in some countries for giving out fake news. But as I said it's hard for a Islam practicing muslim to believe this. Therefore, I won't try to convince you.

And if you're talking about Men/Women equality. Tell me how many Marriages is a male allowed? 4 right? Meaning a man can have 4 women at the same time as his wives.

And how many are women allowed?

Well apart from their belief ion god. Sikhs are usually nice/peaceful people but not always so. See this sword fight: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvertGZkwF4


I wouldn't expect any great arguments from someone who makes these sorts of statements:

I'm giving him a chance to disprove me so he can't claim I'm 'persecuting' him for his beliefs :D

No thanks.

It is talking about husband-wife things especially divorce. Here are the verses:

2:226 - For those who take an oath for abstention from their wives, a waiting for four months is ordained; if then they return, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.   

2-227 - But if their intention is firm for divorce, Allah heareth and knoweth all things.   

2:228 - Divorced women shall wait concerning themselves for three monthly periods. Nor is it lawful for them to hide what Allah Hath created in their wombs, if they have faith in Allah and the Last Day. And their husbands have the better right to take them back in that period, if they wish for reconciliation. And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but men have a degree over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise.   

2:229 - A divorce is only permissible twice: after that, the parties should either hold Together on equitable terms, or separate with kindness. It is not lawful for you, (Men), to take back any of your gifts (from your wives), except when both parties fear that they would be unable to keep the limits ordained by Allah. If ye (judges) do indeed fear that they would be unable to keep the limits ordained by Allah, there is no blame on either of them if she give something for her freedom. These are the limits ordained by Allah. so do not transgress them if any do transgress the limits ordained by Allah, such persons wrong (Themselves as well as others).

The verse you quoted says they have equal rights in husband-wife issue but men have higher decree than woman. There is no u-turn there.

Sikhs are having a long history of bloodshed and warfare, most of it against the Muslims. To their credit, they were the ones who stopped the complete Islamization of Punjab.

Maybe the interpretation is wrong, sex is allowed but desires of wifes of others are to be fought and overcome

This a good app to read the thing and its meaning - https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.khalsa.DhurKiBani&hl=en

I suggest you read and tell me what you found, i dont trust anything anyone says. I research myself. Remember there are morons telling bitcoin is a ponzi company

You just did it in the same fucking line again!

"The verse you quoted says they have equal rights in husband-wife issue but men have higher decree than woman."

Oh and great, yeah, forcing women to wait 3 months to divorce their husband and if they have a child they're supposed to tell everyone about it, gee wiz, that sound really tolerant and equal.

Also, comparing religion to Bitcoin is bullshit, since Bitcoin is simply maths, I also can't fathom how you believe that anything in these books is 'open' to interpretation, it just shows that you're being dishonest and picking and choosing things you either agree with or disagree with to legitimise religion.

Whats the problem killing a lot of terrorists concentrated in a single place?

It's because you're thought process clearly can't extend beyond what you experience in one minute of your life.

Men has higher decree than women but how could it possibly mean men can do whatever they like on women? An Indian president have higher decree than citizens, how could that possibly mean he could do whatever he likes to them?


I undertand. We(in general)  both may not be able to convince each other.

Yes, a man can have a maximum of four wives. There are strict rules if one man marry more than one wife.

I will give you a simple answer for that. Milk four types of animals, say goat, cow, camel and donkey. Pour them in a pot/bucket/flask and mix them. Can you now identify which is from which? It is the same with having babies. If you have four husbands, it won't be easy to who is child's father? But this is not the case for a man.

Do I really need to explain this? Because you're going to wipe out more innocent civilians than 'terrorists'. Would it be ok to drop a nuke on the Whitehouse and wipe out half of Washington just to get rid of one of the biggest terrorists in the world? Is it ok to kill Obama's kids and any tourists in the vicinity as well in the process? No.

They have equal rights as couples but man have higher decree than woman. My English is not good enough to express what is in my mind. Is there anybody who understand what I am "really" saying and repharase it better to Lethn?


After divorcing or after death of husban, woman have to wait because if they marry another man at that time, the husband will become father of the child of previous husband. It is to solve this problem.


Comparing religion to Bitcoin? I didn't get you.

What?  :o

How is that related to inequality in Islam where a man is allowed to have four wives at one time and woman are not?

OMG so you meant if a women had four husband it won't be easy to tell who was the father of the child?? That's your argument for the in-equality?? This is absurd.

(Oh and btw there is a thing called DNA test for that.)

The men should rot in hell. These crimes are on an increase and any punishment seems less for them. I just pray that the girl lives.

LOL. I think he's comparing women and their babies to buckets of milk which you might get confused between them the more you have. He's just trying to bizarrely justify these things but the justification is coming from a place of complete ignorance.

Sad to tell you this.... but if she lives, she faces decades of humiliation and isolation. The girl is from the Yazidi community. And in those parts of the world, death is more preferable than getting raped. No one will marry a rape survivor, and most probably even the parents will disown her.

When a woman is having sex with four husbands* in between very short time(some days), how can they know who was child's exact father? Now read what I said above. I hope noe you get it.

* Not at a time.

Edit: 311 answered. I know when we say, it is wrong and illogical. When others say, it is correct and logical.

I think the same, all the isis member should be 'judged' because they should pay for their action and after justiced (death penalty).

To the best of my knowledge, they saved the hindus from forced conversion to islam

Unfortunately there are plenty of non-terrorist people around them.

We should blame ISIS not Islam (itself). Because I think you know they are not real muslims, and their abominable actions does not represent the real Islam.

I did get it, read my edit above.

But I still don't understand how is this an argument to the in-equality in Islam where men are given more power over women.

Women's right should be the same, if a man is allowed to have 4 wives at the same time and fuck with them, than the women should also be allowed to have 4 husbands and fuck with all of them, if that is what they prefer.

+1

Death is not a solution for the small girl. Just because the society will ill treat her, she should die? She does not even know what has happened to her and what the meaning of "rape." She has a whole life with her. I can understand that people prefer to die rather than live in such situations but if prayers do work, I will pray that she lives a peaceful life as she deserves it. Death is only for those who have committed a sin.


I have known about rape victims who have managed to lead a peaceful life and leave behind those scars.



I want them to be physically tortured and then die a miserable death. This would teach a lesson to the others and they will shiver before thinking about committing such a crime.

All of them do except buddhism. It has some rules that i wouldn't agree with but the key is reaching the nirvana ;)

The only hope for her is a life in the Western world. If some EU nation or the United States grant her asylum status, then she might be able to live a peaceful life. If that does not happen, then I am pessimistic.


That is a popular myth. Why convert to another religion when you have to save your original religion (Hinduism)? Sikhism evolved as an independent sect within the Hinduism. The divide between mainstream Hinduism and Sikhism was artificially created after the mid-20th century, to serve some vested interests. Earlier, Sikh gurudwaras used to contain sections for Hindu idols. These idols were removed, after radical anti-Hindu Sikhs succeeded in controlling the Akhal Takht.

Originally, Sikhism was just a Hindu sect, just like the Swaminarayans (BAPS) or the Hare Krishna (ISKCON).

Yes this is also another valid option for them, they have not the right to 'live' after all those things that they did in those place and especially to those people.

Because there is no equality and men make the rules to suit their own perversions and desires. Men are jealous and possessive creatures and wouldn't be able to handle If a women was to have multiple partners and if they did they would call them sluts and shame them, but of course it's ok for men to do this because that's what they desire. Always double standards in religions.

pretty sure mohammed fucked a 9 year old as well

Can you post the proofs?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_youngest_birth_mothers

Enjoy the read, Yup t is possible

A girl can start menstruating when they are 9 years. It mostly happens in hot areas. However, many of them won't be physically and mentally eligible to carry a child or give birth.

I think abortion is what they are going to do but is her health enough for doing it? Any mentions about this in any news?

DISCLAIMER SO I WONT BE MISUNDERSTOOD: What they did is a crime without compare. And certainly that age is young to get pregnant. However I have to strongly raise hands with your latter statement. Just because statistically it is harder and the society is diffferent does not make it "unnatural" for 11-12 years old that started menstruating to have intercourse and get pregnant and bear children and give birth. Our societies nowadays are far from "natural" in so many ways. I am assuming where are you from the legal age is 18 or 21? So how about the countries where it is 14? Are they "unnatural" just because they are different?

Today I learn there is no biological differences between a 9yo and a 14yo, thanks to words written in a book called "Our laws Vs their laws"...

It start blinking where the moral and ethical grounds make not doing such thing not right along with the society's approval. But isn't this how it is today? Eventually society empowered by modern medicine decided on a certain age. Because they are the majority it became the law. Because we simply "do not know", Some people disagrees with us. It would be the case of your country against the U.S. legal age. Because of course those criminals of ISIS are below humans and they deserve the most severe punishment.

When you have a roach infestation, do you 'punish' them?

Oh my God!! What we people have become. It's really shocking to read such news. It's really heart breaking. God plz help the little girl.

Muhammed did it himself....they are just following their (false) prophet.

Truth hurts, some muslims are doing it for the sake of Islam. Where there is Islam there is a war happening, its sad but true..

Because of some bad people, the whole community is having a bad name. I am not against of any religion but all the good people from Islam should do something against these organizations.

Thanks, religion. Another fine contribution to modern civilization.

Totally agree with this. Instead of blaming any religion, the good people should help to stop such crimes and support the girl. May be this can bring a change and other girls wouldn't suffer. It takes only one person to help and others will join in.

Seriously this is unbelievable , how could they rape a 9 years old ? These aren't humans they are something way worse, I hope nobody has the faith of that little girl.

Why do they kill people from their own religion? They are politically retarded persons...


Yes, absolutely right. The problem is ordinary citizens can't do much against bombs and guns. We will have to get a good militia and military support. Many political things are playing. Also if Muslims are the first to raise it, many people will take the small side of it and tells they are raising terorism and bad civil war. It is also another problem. However, if every person can stand together, Muslims and non-Muslims, we could help each other and even if we couldn't stop it, we could at least, reduce it.

 But I don't know things like "atom bomb" should be dropped as there are many innocent people and innocent prisoners there. A secret rescue and then a big attack is the best we can come up with IMHO but this isn't easy, because we have yet to know who are the "real" supporters and "head". Only a leader from them can help us better which I don't think is easy.

Edit:


IMHO Islamic punishment should be prosecuted, "stoned to death". This may interpreted by others saying I am spreading violence. But I think, without these type of punishments, they will continue this worst act.

BTW, does the report says "a" girl or are there more? :(

This is an interesting person, why someone declared himself muslim kill another muslim in name of a God (Allah)? I don't think they are real muslims, but who knows...


I think it was only one girl, but I am still search more articles online.

You can easily know the father of the child by dna test. This is not written in koran?

According to Sunni scriptural Hadith sources, Aisha was six or seven years old when she was married to Muhammad and nine when the marriage was consummated.[11][12][13][14][10][21] For example, Sahih al-Bukhari, considered by many Sunni Muslims as the most authentic book after Quran, states:

Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

—Sahih al-Bukhari, 7:62:64
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisha#Age_at_marriage

Don't slaughter them.  Slaughter their families.

then slaughter them

all of these fuckers need to be killed.

Others might have also traumatized. This also tells they aren't doing abortion but waiting for her to give a birth. I hope she has physical and mental strength for this and..., what will happen to the baby? ???

DNA can give estimated results not accurate.


Age is still a doubt. It is either nikkah was done when 'Aisha was 7-9 years old and started living with prophet at the age of 10-12 or nikkah was done when 'Aisha was 6-7 and started living with prophet 9-10. Only thing that is sure is there was a 3 years gap.


I don't think they have a family and even if they have, family members probably are innocents but may not all. I don't agree with killing innocents.

Re: Age is still a doubt. It is either nikkah was done when 'Aisha was 7-9 years old and started living with prophet at the age of 10-12 or nikkah was done when 'Aisha was 6-7 and started living with prophet 9-10. Only thing that is sure is there was a 3 years gap.

Also "rape" and "marriage" is different.

Thoughts on this? <below>

In cert cases (almost always) the DNA test can confirm who is the father, so I think it is more accurate than you think.

DNA tests can exclude with 100% accuracy and include with 99.99% probability. That's enough in my book. (My book is science.)

We can consider a science a sort of religion, and a religion a science. I can believe in them, but you can believe only in one (science) I suppose you are not a religious person.

Rape or marriage, the fact that the girl is still a child and not mature to think. In muslim world there is no courtship, Mohammed most probably buy the child from his father and call it marriage.

Your religion Mohammad Zakir is good for you. You can buy as many child as you can and rape them and call it marriage. Nice religion.

In muslim world women is considered property by men and women cannot decide on its own.

All hail islamic state! They are muslim warriors of Allah! America will fall! Era of islam is beginning!

You're saying that as if he did nothing wrong. I am just appalled.

Having sex with a Minor, either through marriage or rape is wrong and illegal and people who do that are called Pedophiles.

It is illegal in almost the world rape or have sex with a minor, only in the Islam was allowed but now I think this thing  stopped.
Maybe Muhammed Zakir was wrong and he didn't want to say that thing.

They define it as probability. Yes, it can tell who is your father sometimes but not all time and you will have to rely on probability mostly. When paternal parent issue comes, when 4 husbands are invloved, it is not that easy. Also think what they will do if more than one sperm fertilizes the egg? It is very complex and lead to complex situations. This can theoretically be enough but practically it isn't.(not always)


'Aisha was matured when 'Aisha started living with prophet. 'Aisha was 10-12 years old and in hot places, girls tend to reach puberty faster.

Nope, it wasn't "bought". It was nikkah.

Muhammad(PBUH) only married to ONE virgin and that is 'Aisha. All others were widows. If prophet was pedophiles or rapist, marrying more matured girls or virgins would have made sense.

Also in old traditions, the bond between two persons/familty were increased through marriage. This is also another reason of that marriage.

No, he doesn't sees anything wrong with it.

I think everyone gets all that.  People also know that some of this is nuts.

Using what someone did several hundred years ago to justify things being done today is fairly thin logic.

"This prophet did this, that prophet did that" is a cop-out.

Nothing will get resolved until people stop pointing to some paragraph in any holy book or whatever and using it as an excuse for what they themselves decide to do.

It's not OK to rape 9 year old girls.  It's not OK to sell 9 year old girls.  Women, as batshit crazy as they are, have rights too.  Every person walking this planet has the same inherent right to a life free from interference from crazy people as does the next one.

These wack-jobs from ISIS need to be killed, by whatever means, as do the rest of the Allah jihadists.  anyone that supports them, the same.  there is no talking to them or reasoning with them.  Anything but bullets and bombs is a waste of time with these people.

The christians did their crazy shit too, although that's behind us in a militaristic sense- and good riddance.  This latest tide of religious wackadoos has access to more modern technology and need to be beaten down pronto before they get their hands on deadlier shit than they already have.

Whats the difference? if it is bought or nikkah. You are just translating it to your language.

12 even she reach puberty and does not have mature mind and mature body is still a child is still underage no matter how hot the place.

The reason it is Old traditions does not make this right.

Well this was only pointed out because there was an argument made that ISIS is not Islamic because Islam doesn't allow that and this was provided to point out that it was done in Islam and it was allowed.

Also, whether it can be proven by dna testing that who's the father of the child or not is a different matter, the point is, if a man is allowed to have 4 wives at once in Islam, than women should be allowed the same.

And it doesn't matter if she was 9 -10 -12, the point is she was a kid and it also doesn't matters if he did it once, it still makes him a pedophile for having sex with a kid.

It's morally wrong and disgusting and it doesn't matter if you had sex with 1 kid or many.

@TechLaser: Rapes are done forcefully, but this marriage ain't. Rapes are absolutely not ok and 10 ISIS members and others must be punished. Also, how do you know a 12 year old girl isn't matured? You can't decide whether someone is matured or not. Yes, science give is approximate idea but not only people from 18+ are matured. There girls who are matured whose ages are 10 years or so.

@twister: It was marriage. It doesn't prove Islam allows someone to rape another.

I understand what you are saying about equal rights. But we all have different views.

Pedophiles means a person who is sexually attracted to children. This is not the case here. I can quote things but as it has some sort of connection to religion, you will avoid it. Anyway, once we set our mind, no one can convince us.

Maybe you can stop here, because it seems you are defending the ISIS members and Islam. The truth is well know and if someone want to know more about Islam (he should ask his friend or go to a Mosque, I think he can find what he is searching).

Again, you're not getting the POINT.

The point is, it is Immoral, wrong and frankly fucked up to have sex with a kid, it doesn't matter if you call it marriage or rape.

Why can't you see this?, I just don't get.

Do you really think a 12 year old girl is matured?? If you had a daughter would you allow her to get married at the age of 12??

Yeah it seems that Muhammed Zakir doesn't know the means of "rape" a minor , it is illegal and really really incivil. I think that thing can't do in the name of a religion (in this case Islam).

yep, I get that.  Islam is the latest religion to spin it's crazy out into the world to an astonishing degree.

those that want Sharia law implemented in nation states are the next stop in the crazy train express.  this includes ISIS.  this includes those who want it in the UK and elsewhere.  keep your crazy book in your church.

....and your pecker in your pants around adolescent and pre-adolescent girls.  that would be a good place to start.....

I suppose, but science is open to change and interested in truth, whereas religion is interested in its own truth, and controlling that truth. That's an important distinction. Religion is not objectively verifiable, science is. Religion is faith in what it preaches because they say so and they have a monopoly on salvation, science is faith in the truth of what can be demonstrated to be true. That's the opposite of a religion to me.

They seem to think that marriage constitutes as consent even when it isn't, the real answer is of course that in their culture when a woman is married of she's viewed as little more property that the husband owns and it's something that marriage has done to women for centuries. It's pathetic seeing you some of you guys try to be apologists for the likes of these fantatics, if you're so disinclined to stop this kind of opression and violence you really need to fuck off, freedom is for everybody, not just a few self-appointed individuals.

Yes, they define it as probability because that's what it is. Only in religion do they teach you a "fact" that is not a fact. I also don't think you understand 99.99% probability. They can only establish 99.99% probability of who your father is as well. Do you think he is not your father because they can't say 100%?

Two sperm from different men cannot fertilize the same egg. It's biologically impossible. You are not countering scientific facts with anything credible.

I find it odd that the parents of this child will kill this child because it destroys their pride and not the rapists. Very backward and barbaric traditions.

I will not read the other posts at all, but my comment on this would be;

Are these humans?

Rape is the same crime, regardless of the religion of the perpetrators.  

I hope for these men that they are treated exactly as criminals of any religion, anywhere, would be treated.  

And if they must be killed for what they have done, I hope that they are killed without anger or malice - simply because the world is better without them, and not to satisfy anyone's outrage or thirst for vengeance.  

Killing in self-defense, in defense of others, or to make the world better is very sad, and a heavy burden.  But killing for rage or for vengeance or for greed also demeans the value of life.

It's OK, Muhammad himself had sex with 9 year old girl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisha#Age_at_marriage).

Well, that's one theory.

No they are not humans, an they are not muslims because as Muhammed Zakir said here in this thread a muslim doesn't rape a Minor  :( but it seems in this case there is something wrong.

Once they bought the child from its father it is not called rape it is called marriage.

Well ask the other muslims and they say Muhammed Zakir is not a real muslim.

Edit Found this link


Pedos since the beggining

The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death)” (Bukhari 7.62.88).

http://800whistleblower.com/horrifying-islamic-state-militant-announces-marriage-to-terrified-7-yr-old/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook#

No no that is not a marriage, who is the stupid who bought a child ....


Most probably you are right.

I don't even understand what they accomplish by this. It's hard to wrap your head around an adult male raping an adolescent. They've done numerous things that are inhumane. No telling that they do to children that doesn't make it to mainstream media.

I disagree. As the number of chromosome matches increases, the probability of 2 people sharing the same set of chromosomes decreases. Beyond a point, you can statistically conclude that there is a match. DNA can't be considered as court evidence if all it gave was estimated results.

Even a father has no right to sell his daughter to anyone. They are kids not vegetables that you can buy in market.

What is wrong with you? The kid was kidnapped from her parents, just because she belonged to the Yazidi religious group. No one "bought" the kid.

So is TechLaser spreading FUD? It seems legit  ::), there is a categorize of people that only want to ruin the discussion with this type of phrase. Well done TechLaser, now can we move on ?

No one is more pissed off about these guys than the Kurds, you look at the interviews the media has with them and independent journalists and they hate ISIS with a passion one was saying "They aren't human, they're monsters" because of how they tricked this guys daughter and messed around with them when they were trying to escape ISIS controlled territory.

These guys have had a bone to pick with the Suni Arabs and the like in particular since the days of the Ottomon empire.

That's the problem with every religion.   Followers distort it for their own purposes.   People like to pick and choose which parts they want to listen to.

Even in ISIS, instead of following the religion they claim to be so devout to, they'll use it as an excuse to get rid of rivals and so on who speak up against them, none of it is real, never follow the fanatics in any walk of life, especially the ones who talk about how morally superior they are.

It is only an excuse as you said, if you remove them the religion part I'm sure they will continue to do the same (so the religion doesn't matter at all).

Kurds are the most effective fighting force right now against the ISIS. However, the NATO is against giving any sort of political or technical support to them, due to the fierce opposition from Turkey.

Yep, I know all about the history, as I said, the Kurds have a bone to pick with ISIS over the Ottomon Empire of which Turkey is essentially the remnants of, in regards to the PKK as well they have imprisoned their leader too so that's naturally got a lot of people riled.

This higher decree refers to Patriarchal society and it's proven to be better than matriarchal society. At the same time Islam guarantees equal rights so I don't see any problem there.
This is evident from Islam giving inheritance and all other rights to women 1400 years back while Europe/Christendom denying inheritance rights to women until last couple centuries.
Islam is credited to give complete rights to women and that too in an ancient male-dominated society of savages who used to bury infant girls alive.

I explained this at another forum sometime ago.I hope you understand. Islam doesn't encourage polygamy nonetheless it's allowed under certain conditions. Even if we consider that DNA test is available and accepted in all places(which is not the case third world countries have less than 50% literacy rate) there are many other complications for Polyandry one of them explained below.  
http://thebot.net/threads/a-non-muslim-on-a-islamic-country.304541/page-22#post-3272988

PKK was formed after the Turkish government banned the usage of Kurdish language in public places. These sort of measures are childish. Look at what is happening in Eastern Ukraine. They banned the Russian language in a country where 80% of the population uses it as a home language. The result: tens of thousands of sq.km of land lost to the rebels, along with the largest coal fields and industrial zones.

She was mature at the time of consummation and married with consent so why do think it's wrong? Women in hotter climates attain puberty earlier.
Also if you read her biography you'll know she was an accomplished women and served Islam for decades after Prophet's death.
And also feminism is being discussed so I'll share this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Camel .She commanded thousands of Muslims on battlefield.

WTF is wrong with you? How can a 9-year old kid attain "maturity" to engage in sexual relationships? I expected you to counter his argument by saying that there is no evidence to prove that she was 9-year old at the time of marriage. Disappointing.

I suggest you read Aisha's journals and narrations. She always praised and followed Prophet's teachings throughout her life till she died at the age of 64.
If she never mentioned a single issue with her marriage throughout her life and was most happily married then I don't see what's the problem with you.

All this doesn't proves anything.

The women and men who are practicing Islam, their right should be the same.

If a woman is married to 4 husbands, then she will choose who she wants to fuck/suck and make kids with.

You keep saying it makes sense but it doesn't. But you're blinded by your faith, so you can't see pass it.

And about AISHA, doesn't matter if you say she was matured or she was happy. She was a kid and it was wrong. If you had a daughter, would allow her to get married at the age of 9 and let her be happy with an old guy?

She might have been happy with her married life. But that doesn't mean that it is legal to marry off kids at the age of 9. Until a girl is 18 years of age, and thereby attaining legal majority, she should not be allowed to marry. Whether she wishes to marry before that age or not is irrelevant here.

It was not considered "illegal" at that time and it was socially accepted. Even the worst critics of Prophet didn't bring this up. It was first pointed out in early 20th century.

Islam obligates it followers to obey law. But why do westerners fuck like animals before 18? I understand that fornication is considered normal in west but it's worst than marrying earlier as there is risk of unwanted pregnancy which follows abortions or illegitimate children. 
But it's hard to explain such ethics to westerners.

All this doesn't proves anything.

The women and men who are practicing Islam, their right should be the same.

If a woman is married to 4 husbands, then she will choose who she wants to fuck/suck and make kids with.

You keep saying it makes sense but it doesn't. But you're blinded by your faith, so you can't see pass it.

And about AISHA, doesn't matter if you say she was matured or she was happy. She was a kid and it was wrong. If you had a daughter, would allow her to get married at the age of 9 and let her be happy with an old guy?



[/quote]



I totally agree with you dear. I don't understand how can be people so cruel to small kids. They can't even imagine the pain of the young girl she might be going through at this very moment when we are talking all nonsense about her.

Legality isn't the big deal here - it's the ethics and morality that are lacking and the herd mentality. No one dares to stand up for fear of retribution and no change is instilled. But yeah - it's easy to sit here and judge with us in a society which actually got to the point where we can talk about morality openly.

Religion isn't to be blamed. The reality is that some people are just shit and have no moral compass or ability to think for themselves or the courage to stand up for what they believe. Hence these atrocities occur.

excuse me but this is disrespectful to blame the wrong doing of a certain people based upon their religion. there are so many sexual assaults and child transactions going on in the USA and you are looking over the border to find wrong doings and say its done as per their religion.

just another hate speech.. again

She was 9.  Even children that are being captured by ISIS now, upon release, in some cases side with them as they have been indoctrinated.  It's called Stockholm Syndrome.

What choice did this girl have but to serve and follow.  It was all she knew.  Besides that, had she spoken out if she had an issue what would have been the consequence?   That is a serious question, what would her fate have been if she'd just decided she wanted out?  Was that even an option and what would have befallen her if she had chosen that route?

you are taking the wrong doing of a certain number of people and blaming their religion?

is that correct?

what is your religion may i know?

When in response to something, someone says Mohammad married a 9 year old girl as a religious justification, isn't that cause to blame the religion?

I don't know where you get that assumption from.  I was commenting on a specific situation.

I don't have a "religion".  while I think there is something else out there, and am not an atheist, nor an agnostic, all organized religion has shown itself to be insane.  the men/people that run them are insane and turn them into a circus where only they are right, everyone else is wrong, and all the while they are serving their own purposes and manipulating those that choose to follow them.   From Catholic priests molesting young boys to Mullahs advocating jihad, they are all evil and they are all batshit crazy.

I follow no such organization.

Response to Jayasabi:

'Aisha and prophet's Nikkah was done when 'Aisha was 7-9 years old and they started living together(consummation) when 'Aisha reached maturity, i.e., 9-12 years old. 'Aisha was mentally and physically matured. 'Aisha was very happy with marriage. If both wife and husband is okay, what's the problem? Also how can a marriage be compared to rape? Both are different.

Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 6, Number 299:
Narrated 'Abdur-Rahman bin Al-Aswad:
(on the authority of his father) 'Aisha said: 'Whenever Allah's Apostle wanted to fondle anyone of us during her periods (menses), he used to order her to put on an Izar and start fondling her.' 'Aisha added, 'None of you could control his sexual desires as the Prophet could.'

Edit:


Well said. Don't blame religion for some psychos' actions.

The problem I have with this is 1) it comes from a religious text which is very unreliable by nature of it being a religious text, and 2) it's not possible for me to conceptualize a 9-12 year-old being "mentally and physically matured" because we live in a time when 9-12 year-olds are without question not mentally and physically matured at that age. Perhaps under a very different value system and many hundreds of years ago, it was socially acceptable to marry and boff children because no one had the sense to know better, but the fact remains that we now know better, and it's not justifiable now.

In our society, we don't consider marriage and rape exclusionary. Rape is capable of taking place inside of a marriage. It has to do with consent. You can be married and not provide consent. And one aspect of consent, is the ability to give consent. And as a society, we do not consider children to be able to give consent because even when they are saying yes, they are too young to understand the emotional and psychological things they are saying yes to. These are important things in our world today that your religious books do not even consider because the concepts did not exist at the time.

There is plenty of text in Islam on all the issues you just mentioned. You are too dumb to research and just making a perception based on falsehood portrayed by western media. If you'll go through Islamic social code you'll find it a perfection and miracle itself.

Actually the subject here is how it's NOT.

I am not saying he is a dump. He just haven't gone through it fully. Just have taken some parts. We humans do it. What he said is what he understood.

I have one question. If what you said in 1 is true that you don't beleive in religious text, how could you believe in 2?


Actually I thought you were doing a honest discussion but I was wrong. You are an anti-Islamic person. Accept nothing but spread hatred.

Got it - so from your world view, if someone disagrees with the koran being "perfect and a miracle" he is an anti-Islamic person who does nothing but spread hatred.

Logical errors:  Misrepresentation, ad hominem, reframing the argument, sophistry.

Muhammed, are you thinking about marriage with nine year old girl? If you aren't, then why you doesn't follow the way of your prophet? He had some experience with nine year old girl, as well as subject guys. Am I right that it seems as a kind of legitimate excuse? If the prophet says that having sex with children is fine, then who are we to criticize him?

That's was a horrible news.
But what can we say if someone or some group conqueor some territory , they can do anything they want to.
So that territory must be avoided or something terrible will happen for example rape cases. Even they must leave their own homeland  :(

Nobody here is 'dumb'

there is plenty of text to point to all sorts of things, in all religions.  this is the problem with these sorts of groups and their use of these religious texts.  they warp them to their purposes.  want to lie?  It bad, or maybe it's not.  want to kill?  that's wrong...unless it is not.  and on and on and on.

it is incumbent on those that follow these sects to hold them accountable and to separate the good from the bad.  the problem is that the leaders are corrupt, so those that are supposedly leading are leading, but they are leading people off a cliff, so people need to think for themselves and say enough is enough with this religious theocracy madness.

people need to step away from these organized brainwashing schools and ask simple, basic questions.  the "leaders" of these religions would prefer that people did not, as if they did they'd realize they were being fooled all along and made to dance to the tune of these individuals for their own power and satisfaction, all in the name of whatever deity they choose to point at.

Just saying what I see, members of ISIS are Muslims and they're killing and raping innocent people in the name of Allah Jihad, are they not?

Wasn't Saddam a Muslim? Wasn't Osama Bin Laden a Muslim. Open your eyes and see the last 10 years terrorist attacks all over the world, recent ones include, attack in France, Australia, Pakistan(Children), Kenya(Children). All done by Islamic Terrorists.

I am just stating the obvious and I understand if it pains you as you must be a Muslim yourself but it is the truth and the truth stings.

Well said, yes, and I agree with Pentax's interpretation. And that's what its all about, interpretation. However we cannot ignore the fact that these acts are being done in the name of a religion in which they themselves site references from their biblical texts, Qu'ran, as justification for their evil. There are many interpretations of the Bible which create all sorts of different  "versions" of Christianity, and every religion will have people who interpret things differently.

All that being said, I haven't seen any Hindu groups, Christian groups, Jews, Buddhists, etc. conducting mass killings, beheadings, raping - children included. It is very hard to try and interpret these other religions teachings into these levels of evil... I can't understand why the Islamic religion seems to have multiple groups that seem to get this interpretation of their religion, they seem to easily be able to justify these things with passages from the Qu'ran. Whatever this book has in it, from their perspective, has definitely aided the groups actions. Whether you call that an attack on the religion itself or not, I am not sure. I personally hold the individuals accountable for their actions but I do believe the same individuals, if raised on another set of religious beliefs, would not feel the need to be committing the acts they are committing now.

I have nothing against Muslims and in fact have a few Muslim friends and, to my knowledge, they do not want to kill, behead, or rape me. I have not read the entire Qu'ran, mainly just certain sections that are being interpreted for me  :-\ .... but I can't be alone with thinking "Why do these groups get such interpretations from the Qu'ran?  Why are other religions not fueling large movements of people conducting these levels of evil?"

I have read cases where Christians, Hindus and all other castes have been involved in such crimes. Some say buddists never committed this crime then here goes a case: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2176747/Buddhist-monk-repeatedly-raped-teen-years-impregnated-her.html


I don't know why everyone connects such incidents with a religion as other people who assault girls do it for fun or because they are MENTALLY SICK and they have no right to live.

If not religion, then people blame the country. That's the reason I don't believe in any religion/country/case. I only believe in HUMANITY and if one is a good human, they will never hurt or assault any girl.

In this case, the people are mentally sick and hence they assaulted that innocent child and such people have no right to live whether or not they belong to any religion.

All this makes sense once you realize that there is no actual God. It's just people being people.

Yes. Not people but criminals.

I would say your comparing two different things... the case you posted about a Buddhist is one person, of a certain faith, raping a girl.  He is not raping the girl and citing buddhist beliefs as the justification for doing it. Your not going to be able to find a buddhist belief that can be twisted into "its ok to rape a girl" and your probably not going to be able to easily 'spin' any reference in the Bible, unless you just completely make up a belief that doesn't exist. ISIS and other organizations that stem off from the Islam religion seem to quote specific and detailed references in the Qu'ran which gives them the 'feeling' that they have a God, prophet, or whatever behind their actions.


I guess this could depend on what your regions version of a "criminal" is? 
Unfortunately the same mis-interpreted statements in the Qu'ran could still be imposed by a Government, ruler, or whatever. If we eliminate all religions & God, we will just be listening to our 'rulers' and what they deem is or is not a crime. And this would probably end up different throughout the world. I am not sure which one I want at this point... Government or God?  is none of the above an option?   :-X

I do not give a shit about a Quran or anything when someone rapes a 9 year old, he is a criminal!

I agree with you, I was just pointing out that religions have their own versions of what they determine a crime and how those criminals are handled. You and I thinking they are criminals means nothing if they are on the other side of the world being ruled under someone who doesn't see a problem with it. Obviously the 9 year old rape of a girl is probably not the best example because I would *hope* most religions out there would not come anywhere near condoning this behavior.

This. They are not human or people, they are only incivil criminals.

+1
This is not ok in Islamic law either. It's just the cold blooded rape of a child. No religion or society would accept it. I'm sure these guys have rationalized it somehow. By invoking, oh... I dunno.. GOD!
And let me guess. Anyone who disagrees should be killed in the name of God.

+1000

It is their rules not the rules by their GOD but they are continuing to do those things in name of him (Allah) and this is really stupid.

Dude, I don't know where you live, but in the civilized societies we put people in jail. And the presence of the holly ghost has not been convincingly proven.

Well that's what is scary to me and what makes me lean towards questioning the Islamic religion, I'm not sure you can rationalize the rape of a 9 year old with most other religions but they seem to be able to do it while using references from the Qu'ran. If anyone were to start quoting any reference from the Bible to support raping a 9 year old, there would be no merit. But when you see quotes like:

“Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you. Deal firmly with them. Know that God is with the righteous.” Quran 9:123
“Muhammad is God’s apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another.” Quran 48:29
“The unbelievers among the People of the Book [Bible] and the pagans shall burn for ever in the fire of Hell. They are the vilest of all creatures.” Quran 98:6
“Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate.” Quran 9:73
“Let not the unbelievers think they will ever get away. They have not the power so to do. Muster against them all the men and cavalry at your command, so that you may strike terror into the enemy of Allah and your enemy…” Quran 8:59-60
... and more
source: http://freethoughtnation.com/what-does-the-koran-say-about-nonbelievers/

It just seems like there is a lot of extreme hatred inside of the Quran towards those that do not believe in their religion. *Some* Christians have the same viewpoint about those that don't believe in their religion but usually accept that their God will deal with it and just end it with "they will go to hell". I'm fine with that peaceful mentality, whether or not I agree with the religion.

You can believe what you want until you start imposing or forcing the belief on others and it seems like the Quran instructs such things to happen?

Hopefully I am just ignorant to true Muslim beliefs, the Muslims I know personally I do not talk much to them with regards to religion because I know its a sensitive subject.

 :'( poor little girl . I wish she can suffer this situation and become free from these problems.those evil devils used this 9 year old girl to satisfy their need I mean how can even this for it.god help that girl

I am comparing a RAPE with a RAPE. The reasons may be different but I don't care why did the person commit this crime but the only thing that matters is that he committed the crime. He may quote many reasons but that does not make his crime meaningless. A criminal always thinks what he has done is right and quotes a religion or another reason for his crime and then people start debating on it. This indirectly SUPPORTS the crime saying that here religion is at fault and NOT the criminal as he committed the crime because his religion tells it is right. Does this mean that all people who belong to that religion should commit such a crime? Why not blame him instead of the religion?

I agree that some beliefs are wrong but it's finally the person who commits a crime and not all people who belong to that religion commit such crimes.

In other cases, people blame movies/alcohol/the girl's character and say that their crime is justified. It's wrong as the criminal committed the crime because he WANTED to commit the crime. Here as well those criminals wanted to assault that girl and hence they did it no matter what they believed in.

I sincerely hope we are headed toward war crimes tribunals for ISIS.

If at all they are brought to justice, they will be killed in combat. Justice will be swift.
Osama didn't go to trial in a tribunal.

Trial is nothing but bureacratic waste of time, we all know their deserved sentence. They can choose between quick death on the battle field, or slower death on the electric chair.

However, I'd like to add some less civilized options... Such as butt rape, combined with endless and midieval-style torture.

If we also torture them the way they are torturing others then what will be the difference between us and them. Let's not become one of them to punish them.

He wants them to feel the same pain. It probably isn't a good idea as that will become a usual thing which may result in more violence.

I've read some wrote they should receive an atomic bomb for 'kill all them" and I don't support this idea, what about all the people that are living near their places. It will be a catastrophe if someone will use a nuclear weapon for exterminated all their "fighters".

I support the tribunal way, they should be judged and after receive the death penalty.

They believe that nobody will do the same to them. And that is why they're acting this way.  ::)

Humanity should be turned off while you're making any judgements related to their activity, because they're not humans. Animals don't deserve your tolerance. Their execution should be cruel enough to make them think a bit, pure logic and no amotions here. :)

I really don't believe in violence being the right answer, but ISIS and the people who support this way of life are one of the few people I keep thinking of making an exception for.

Neither me supporting "atom bombing". They are many innocents and captives living there. I don't want them to die for these worst-than-animal creatures.


No emotions from my side. I meant if governments alsp started doing what you said, many may start doing more thinking "governments do that sort of things, so why not us?" and after some time, it become a normal thing. However, I alsp think they should get a harsh punishment, stoned to death or so.

That's the solution you guys have for everything isn't it?

eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot

you know how humanity would look like?
blind, toothless, without hands and legs

on the other side someone has to clear the crap which US foreign policies are causing


the sad truth is that we will probaly see much more of atrocities like that.
war against isis is just starting to get warmed up...

I agree absolutely. If you don't act like humans then don't expect to be treated like one. I think the Punishment for Child Rape should be..

"Hanged from Penis till Death"

Something like this : https://i.imgur.com/IgOtlyz.jpg

WARNING: The link is - FTW NSFW - "do not click it"

I'm in favor of destroying ISIS by nuclear bomb or whatever.  They have already destroyed cultural legacy of middle east by their attacks on libraries and ancient sculptures. They are killing innocent humans mostly Muslims and at the same time Islam and peaceful Muslims around the globe are targetted by media.
Most of established Islamic countries are fighting against so called "Islamic" militants including my  country Pakistan. The war against Taliban have killed 60,000 Muslim civilians so far.
These militants represent a very small percentage 0.01% of 1.7 billion Muslims and I myself living in a militancy hit province of Pakistan know that they are not fighting for Islam. They are funded by Foreign Powers for terrorism in muslim countries.

An eye for an eye will make the whole world will blind. It isn't the solution my friend. The only solution, we should make them not happening again. As I see, it can be only done by education.

Sorry to tell Sithara: Most of these worst people are brainwashed when they are kids and many of them are sleeper cells. It is hard to find them and even if could, it is hard to educate them. Their heart will be frozen and they will be like robots. Only accept commands from master and nothing is accepted from others.

I don't stick with "atom bombing". It will kill many innocents. I am sure there is another way but I guess, by the time we found better way, it will be too late.

well also if islam isn't telling them to do it, it still "allows" them to do it and they still do it IN THE NAME of that religion. And expain me: Why is ISLAM ALLOWING child marriages? Look @ yemen, saudi arabia and the other islamic countries. And explain why authorities had nearly never taken any action against married girl's families or husbands?? I don't wanna know the number of unknown cases... but i am sure there are thousands of similar cases in the islamic world. And yes, its a huge difference if somebody rapes a child, and is officially declared as a pedophillic raper and gets into jail (europe/US/western counties) or if the law (sharia) simply allows you to "rape"(marry) underaged children with the religion (ISLAM) being a principle of law.


just some of the articles i ve read:

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/09/14/yemen.childbirth.death/index.html?_s=PM:HEALTH
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1213168/Fawziya-Abdullah-Youssef-dies-labour-Child-bride-12-dies-Yemen-struggling-birth-THREE-days.html
http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/yemengirl.asp
http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2013/sep/11/yemen-child-bride-dies-wedding

That may be an interesting solution to resolve the problem! Better than an atomic bomb  ;D.




Yes of course, why should they use a nuclear weapon against their 'people" or better criminals?

Hunting them down one by one may would be entertaining, but that would take a lot of time and resources and we would end up with more extremist across the muslim world. Actually until today only the Mongolians were able to deal with large numbers of fanatics and pacify these areas, perhaps we should learn from them :).

http://th04.deviantart.net/fs49/150/f/2009/216/d/8/homicide_for_dummies_by_zoking16.jpg

 :D

Have you looked more into Yemeni child marriages? There are Christians, Jews etc..., not just Muslims. They aren't outlawing just because of Islam, it is tribal actions.

A person can marry a physically and mentally matured girl. However, if she don't like it, they shouldn't force her to marry. Even if Islam allows to marry a physically and mentally matured girl, Islam tells to find a good bride which suits her better and not to force it.

The countries you tell makes their rules. They have made many rules wich Islam hasn't told, for example, imprisoning a man who drink alcoholic drinks without license or in public.

See this:

ISIS is indeed odd and singular if you look at it against military history.  They seem to be continually outdoing themselves to find the absolute worse most horrible and cruel actions.

They aren't much different from most tribal groups and even the Samurai or the Romans, it's just the sheer scale of it all that seems to be frightening most people, they also don't operate under any real rules despite what they claim, this is a power play and they simply have no problem being as violent as they like to anybody in order to achieve this. This is simply the true face of empire building and what it looks like, the only difference is a lot of what the other powers does is behind closed doors, while granted, they don't execute people ( much ) in the end political opponents tend to either end up dead or in jail or caught doing something equally horrible.

I suppose the biggest difference between ISIS and the rest of us, is we've evolved in the way we've dispatched people yet they're sticking to the medieval scripture they follow to do it instead, if you ever wanted to see what the middle east is like during the crusades I guess this would be it.

Actually I find the opposite effect, after a certain number of atrocities the mind snaps shut with a conclusion, "Just kill the bastards."  No discussion of religion or philosophy or cause and effect is further necessary.

Dunno, I am an Anarchist, so I find it easier to see the parellels :P

Are you a real anarchist? I don't believe you  ;D. See something about anarchism ....

By numbers and destruction they are not even close to most of the conquerors across history. The difference is in the information flow. We've heard only stories about the deeds of the romans, huns, mongolians, etc. This one is happening almost real-time in our living room thanks to the media coverage.

LOL Anarchists bicker amongst themselves about who the 'real' Anarchists are, socialists/communists would tell you they're the real Anarchists and capitalists can't be Anarchists, I just consider Anarchism to be what it's described as, without rulers, as long as there's no hierarchy enforcing it's will on other people through violence I'd be pretty happy but that's pretty much all society is made up of right now.


Exactly snail2, that's what I'm saying as well, it's far more shocking to see it all on unfold and that's how the Jihadists like it, they want to scare the fuck out of you, in the same way our own leaders use constant streams of information about murder and crime to scare the fuck out of all of us even though when you actually look at the statistics there haven't actually really been as many homicides etc. as they're making out to be.

If the world was really all that bad, we'd be screwed right now but that just shows you how much people are all turning on ISIS in the end.

Yes it's totally normal to behave like that in such a situation. But we need to calm down and think rationally before acting against such people.

We are in agreement.  I was talking about consideration of the moral, ethical and cultural questions relative to the atrocities - saying "Okay, I figured this out.  Now let's kill the bastards."

Developing a cohesive and systematic plan to do that efficiently would be a matter for nations as well as individuals, and would take possibly years.  The Geneva Convention does not apply to ISIS.

yep, effectively dealing with this and similar situations takes coordination that has been to this point impossible to put together.

The world needs to wake up to the fact that this is their problem.  they must commit resources.  they must take this seriously.  they must assist in every way possible and stop waiting for someone else to solve the problem.  and that is only from the military side of the equation. 

If the world decided to stamp ISIS out they'd be done in a matter of months.  Drop the boots on the ground wherever they are now in great numbers and wipe them out.  hit them with massive, overwhelming force and keep a standing army of international anti-terrorist forces of serious size and resources, ready to deploy when necessary.  I'm not talking about the blue beret UN peacekeepers, I mean an army that sets out to destroy the enemy and goes in and attacks with overwhelming force. 

diplomatically all nations have to also agree to stamp this type of shit out and cooperate in good faith to do so.  Cut off their money, cut off the backchannel support they are getting from those that outwardly condemn this but in reality support it, cut off their safe havens.  Without resources and places to hide there is no nothing, even for these crazy assholes.  that sort of international cooperation will, unfortunately, never happen.

Nice reply, you are a real anarchist!
It is extremely difficult to find them, most will say "we are anarchst" and they will go to vote at the election  ::) (epic fail).




I think the isis members don't know what is the Geneva convention, or other accords. They should be killed, they don't deserve the life.

Would you include each and every member of the ISIS armies?

I ask because in the past...for example we handled differently the German average foot soldier than the SS or those in charge of the concentration camps.  Most were simply let go to go home, others were I think for them most part rightfully sentenced to death.

None of which you mentioned? How convenient! It's sad for you that instead of writing anything thoughtful you resort to attacks. It shows the strength of your argument. Here's a tip: it's not my job to go through your fairy tales to find justifications for your arguments. You're the one trying to prove your religion is so wonderful and perfect. And you're doing a terrible job.

I'm sick of people thinking religion is even an important question.

It doesn't fucking matter what religion someone is.  It doesn't even matter whether they find justification for what they're doing in religion.  What matters is what they do.

I would count it as real progress in the world if we didn't even know how many muslims, how many christians, how many atheists, etc, because everybody understood that the question was too darn trivial to even bother asking.

I really agree with this sentiment, but for as trivial we may find religion, we have to acknowledge the reality that religion is a guiding force in the daily lives of much of this world's inhabitants. In essence, you have identified the chief problem: some of us saying only actions matter, some of us saying that actions can have religious justifications. In the minds of the people who are guided by religion, you can't convince them their actions are wrong where they believe they have a religious justification to act a certain way.

It's doubtful any Westerner non-Islamic is going to go through the social code of the Koran and conclude it's "Wonderful and Perfect."  That's something a True Believer would say.

It looks to me like a bunch of basic rules conceived of in medieval times to force the illiterate and ignorant masses to obey. 

I'm good with that.  That means more Bacon for Me!

:)  You and I agree on this. It's still fun to ask True Believers to justify their stories, especially when they act so hostile about how great their religion is.

It seems that my previous attempt has been ignored. Well, let me try again. ::)

Same here. But I find this a common thing that whenever a rape, murder or terrorist case comes in front, people start finding the reason behind it and start debating on the religion/country/state of mind of the criminal rather than discussing the punishment for the criminal.

That's why I said on this general matter of ISIS atrocities "I'm through with the discusion."

In the case of ISIS I think that's the right approach.

twister found the punishment. Would it be strong enough to carry theur body upside down? ???

I dint get you. Burning them alive or stoning them to death is a decent punishment but I am not aware of the law in that girl's country. The criminals usually don't get a death sentence for rape.

For raping, in countries which claim to follow Islamic rules, they will get a death sentence, obviously, stone to death.

I don't like burning them nor a living being alive though.

Things are not that simple. Rape laws in many of the Islamic nations are biased against the victim. Most of the times, it is the victim who is punished, not the perpetrators.

I have seen some reports, so I thought that's how it is in such countries. However, if what you said is true, why do they claim they are following Islamic rules? ???

And yes. It's not easy to get a death sentence especially in a democratic country. Many people will cone with human rights flag if a death sentence is given. :-\

Nine or ten men raping a 9 year old girl is of course a horrible crime.  I would jail these men for that crime for a very long time, and you know what kind of punishment they would get from the other prisoners for their actions.

I referred to "Kill them all" in terms of action on the battlefield and with the methods of war only.   

This may be splitting hairs at this point, but what really is the difference between burning somebody to death and stoning them to death? Is it just a personal preference, or are you taking something else into account, because I consider them both barbaric forms of punishment.

Both are painful. However, I prefer stoned to death. Personal preference.

Islam is a religion of war, not peace. The sacred text pushes crusifing people, beheading them, and enslaving them for trivial things. There is no way to counter or make good of the pure evil that is in the Koran.

What makes things really weird, is that the Bible is actually more evil than the Koran, as god the father pushes rape, stoning, beheading, and more for trivial things. This doesn't take away from the evilness in the Korean, but goes to show that the majority of people on Earth believe in a religion whose history of crimes against humanity makes Terrorists look like saints.

All 3 religions, Judasim, Christianity, and Islam are inherently evil according to their texts. There is no way to counter it.

Probably too expensive for execution of criminals in general, but I like the idea of dropping them out of a high-altitude airplane over the middle of the ocean. 

Death, when it comes, is quick, clean, humane, and completely painless.   Terminal impact on the water literally happens too fast to feel physical sensation before the brain is destroyed.  But the condemned would have a couple of exciting minutes on the way down, to spend either screaming in terror or making peace with God, as he prefers.

Barbaric forms of punishment are required for crimes which are of barbaric nature. Simple jail terms, with access to 5-star food and video-game consoles will only encourage these sort of crimes. These people should be made to suffer.

That will make us, one of them. Don't you think.

We need to be civilized while dealing with such kind of people. You dont have to be a criminal when punishing a criminal.

I don't care. My first priority is to prevent these sort of barbaric crimes. There should be fear in the mind of every criminal, when he even think about committing these sort of barbarities. For that, such measures are necessary.

Actually, according to you, what is crime and who is criminal?

Oh yeah, every ISIS fighter needs a good blowjob. Of course you need to be a civilized person.

Just simply shot them in the head. We don't need to torture them (and became something similar to them), we need to get rid of them (together with everyone else who could ask for revenge) on a quick, efficient and economical way.

It's possible to use them as cheap working force. At the uranium mines, for example.

We also need some appointed volunteers to deal with fukushima and chernobyl consequences... Just let them to choose between shooting or removing the debris from the reactor room. If they'll decide to help then provide them some suitable treatment of radiation poisoning. And amnesty, in case of survival.

If this can be reported why can't it be stopped?
Stupid idiots have nothing better to do then torcher children.
That poor baby.

They are obviously afraid of ISIS. As you can see, people who told them is still anonymous.


They do almost all violent crimes.

Very good questions.
It seems that our politicians know just how to talk a lot, without taking any real actions to stop this tragedy and save this people, women and children.
ISIS is pure evil and I really hope that soon or later someone will stop them.
Powers like USA, Russia or China can do this at any moment but it seems there is no real political will to do anything.
Shame on them.

If I can say my personal opinion, regarding this fact:
If any government really want to stop their action or better all the isis members they can do it. The real reason is they do not want to stop ISIS.


Have you seen what is happening in Yemen, why saudi arabian government didn't take real action to stop the ISIS? Probably because it doesn't want. Why USA don't send military/soldiers to fight against ISIS?

Originally I was thinking on simple things like soil improvement or turning them to dog food, but your solution looks more efficient indeed :).

You answered it two times.

1) They probably don't want to.
2) Saudi Arabia doesn't do it. So USA wants them as a friend and attacking ISIS might make SA a foe. Just assumption.

Excellent solution!

There can be many more uses, in addition to cleaning Fukushima and Chernobyl. For example, these people can be used for clearing landmines from Sierra Leone and Angola.

But also, ISIS is Islam's war.  The radicals in ISIS are united in their religion, and come from many Muslim cultures and nations.  They would love to provoke the Great Satan (lol, what a joke) to rise up against them.  Then they could point fingers at US oppressing the poor victims yet again.   Then they could hide their soldiers and supplies and mosques in innocents' homes and mosques and create propaganda about the horrors of the US bombing innocents' homes yet again.

These propaganda and media plays are part of the scheme.  Just like they were with Arafat.  It's not new. 

I found this video Jon Stewart did recently very relavent :P

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rr7qsXLdBZI

Pure Islamaphobia. No matter whatever you qrite, you only have Islamaphobic intention. It ain't Islam's war by no means. It is some political psychos' war. It is obvious they are doing it for political gains and not for Islam. Also there are probably non-muslims involved in this.

Ahhh, the old Islamaphobia rebuttal, sorry, but I look at Islam the same way I look at all other religions, it's only the people who don't take their religion all that seriously to begin with that are the harmless ones, the fact that you can only go there are 'probably' non-muslims involved in this also speaks volumes, no one wants anything to do with fucking Sharia law, least of all the Muslims which flee Islamic countries to stay in the west.

Let me put this into perspective for you, there are very few things that communists and capitalists agree on, especially on the extremes, but the one thing that brings us all together is how much we detest religion.

It's certainly understandable why you would find what I have said unpleasant.

But I don't even think you have the meaning of Islamaphobia right.

prince of Windsor or prince of the block between 5th and franklin I don't care... by the way the word impregnate, even if quite shocking, isn't appropriate, however the word rape (ie breach of the will of an individual, like me wanting to buy weed or INTC wanting to sell in China) is INACCEPTABLE. those opposing will die.

It is not a question about Islamophobia, I think ISIS has also political intentions not only a religious movement. So no one here really hates "Islam" (at the end, or am I wrong?).

I hate all religion equally, I'm an Anarchist :P

Isis is the best think that ever happened to the west... relatively they can look good (2 pigs, one with lipstick the others not, which one is the most good looking :D ((and the true ones will say, I don't care if they like it frozen (or cryspy lvl2) :D).

You read granthl? U can read gurbani? its all about being noble.. nothing about what u can or cant do which is what i like

wouldnt you try to defend your family from a villan?

funny in the west I don't think that most have an idea about anything else more than Cato vs Prot, Judaism, Islam and maybe a little bit of Buda sculpture seeing...

those on the no religion are left over of old soviet programs... sorry they are fucked up until they flash themselves to the light... so best advice : ignore.

remember $, it ain't by mistake... it's older than 1913...

I find religion to be a set of stagnant prediction market that have evolved to the consensus that there is a god of one form or another. Problem is the prediction market wasnt updated as people changed their minds based on scientific facts and evolution so people were forced to accept old truths of life which may have been proven false. Onething most of them agree on that can neve be proven wrong is the will to do good and how it will bring good things to you.

god, why can't anyone start a Horrible Chemical warfare against isis....

it will be resisted by all necessary means, including an alliance with the first One.

There are many risks when using chemicals..

History doesnt say so.. See hundreds of religious leaders who all claim they are the truth.

Because it is not precision munitions, quite the opposite.

Yes. For example, the United States used chemical weapons against the Viet Cong 4 decades ago, and the people there are still suffering from its consequences. In addition to the countless deaths and defects among the human population, the wild life and natural vegetation was also devastated in areas where the chemicals were used.

It will also unite people behind the ISIS.
The people who use chemical weapons will be seen (and rightfully so) as the real enemy.

Contrary to the popular belief, ISIS enjoys a lot of support in Iraq, especially from the Sunni Arabs. The US-backed Iraqi central government heavily discriminated the Sunnis for more than a decade, and it is one of the primary reasons behind the creation of ISIS. I would say that a majority of the Sunni Arabs in Iraq supports the ISIS.

What I'd like to know is where is she and if she was able to get medical help?
A child of that age is physically unable to delver it vaginally. I truly hope someone stepped in and got help for her somehow otherwise she will probably die trying to deliver it alone!

According to news, she is in Germany(IIRC) atm and doctors are waiting for her to give a birth. I still don't know whether she is physically and/or mentally enough to give a birth and also what will happen to child.

Edit: Relevant post.

Shocking that their communities & families would feel ashamed of them, they have suffered and need / deserve love and support not to be thrown on the scrapheap. The treatment of women, including how they are seen by Islam is just disgusting and beneath contempt.

Edit:

There is something seriously wrong with a society which condones such behavior . . . .How is it possible that young adolescent females are being seduced by such barbarism?

It's not Islam who view like that, it is bad people who do.

I think in tribal areas they value prejudices more than other things.

Put it this way, nobody got butt-hurt when we killed the Nazis. Slaughtering the SS was a good thing. Why?
Because pure evil just needs to be purged from the system.

And with that note in mind, I believe ISIS needs to be purged, today, not tomorrow but RIGHT NOW.

This is a part of the ISIS strategy. Make the non-Muslim girls (especially the Yazidis and Christians) pregnant by raping them, and then release them once it is not longer possible to perform the abortions. If I had nukes with me, I'd drop them in Riyadh and Doha to teach a lesson to those who support these barbarians.

When reading your post, what came into my mind is:

• ISIS want to make problems in families. (Why?)
• Babies will not be taken care by mothers, so... ISIS takes them?!

ISIS want non-Muslim women to give birth to Muslim children (whether it is voluntary, or by force). That explains it. Islamic extremists have always treated non-Muslim women as sub-human. ISIS is no exception to this rule.

We just need find a leader of ISIS and put end of this.
Using something like chemical things or nuclear warfare will make more casualities. Except the goverment are gathering and agree to put this end although it will traumatized targerted nation (ex for long term : handicapped person ) * like nagasaki and hiroshima effect

This is is disgusting.  And the various rationales in this thread arguing one side or another is also disgusting.  This was a tragedy of evil corrupting innocence and justice will come to those deserving.  Such is the will of things incomprehensible to any of us.

You are correct.  Killing Bagdhadi (Calif for the current Caliphate) would end this.  The Calif is responsible for carrying out the current Caliphate and it is his responsibility to wage war in order to meet the prophetic expectations.  But once ISIS is extinguished, there is still many other evil sects do deal with: Boka Horam and Al-Shabbab for example.

Which planet are you from? Why do you think ISIS leaders will be bothered?
ISIS in its current form should vanish before atrocities like this end.

It is true that in many cases, when the primary leader of a high structured, rigid nation is executed, the entire structure falls apart.  Where that is true of ISIS I don't know.

One would think that many men joined ISIS thinking it was another Al Queda/radical Islam-for-the-greater-good sect, and are now appalled at the atrocities they are ordered to do and support.  Internal dissent/lack of morale would make their forces far less capable on the battlefields, but there still must be an opposing force to take advantage of those weaknesses.

Hillary has been designed lawyer of ISIS. values are converging...

You sure about that?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSKeXpYtLiQ

Also, note that ISIS is not atrocity central but a JOKE for many in the Middle East.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yx0Gu0PlNjI

just as a quicky the people not finishing this monster inside the stomach of this kid are terrorist. purge and move on, no more damages.

when it comes to nuke the world they all are parading their knowledge,

when it comes to helping a child, they start to parade their morality and ethics...

logged.

Jail: A five-star retreat in the mind of bryant.coleman. Way to stay grounded in reality.

This is overly simplistic. It's not a case of want, it's a case of practicality and public tolerance. Nobody wants ISIS to kill people, but we're already bombing them and the public simply will not tolerate another troop deployment to fight an ineffective guerrilla war. Every US soldier has a family, and that family and the US public in general does not want their people dropped into a desert to fight a group that has very little to do with us. It's the same for Russia and China as well, whom ISIS cannot threaten. It's different for Middle Eastern countries, where ISIS gains pose direct problems to local governments.

However, it just so happens that pedophiles (the ones that raped the girl in this case) would get their barbaric punishment while locked up in jail.  From the other inmates.

What could be better?

Really, stoning and burning to death is barbaric in the eyes of the audience.  These are intended to make the audience fear.

That's true, but there are some things we generally accept as universal. Even though we have the death penalty, the penalty is agreed to be death, not intentional agony. That's why death penalties that inflict pain aren't tolerated.

Also, every major religion uses the threat of eternal punishment in hell to scare people into behaving. Fear has never worked, whether it was temporary pain or when it was accepted to be eternal torment.

LOL, you should tell those arguments to ISIS.  They seem to think that fear works.

I disagree.  But it probably works to an extent in some cultures.

No, that whole afterlife thing is mainly just the death cults.  Christianity, Islam, and several others in history.

But Jews and Buddhists for example don't really have afterlife-centric beliefs.  If you ask a rabbi, he'll tell you "souls come from God and they return to God."  And there's not really even so much as speculation about whether there is an experiential afterlife and whether it is filled with suffering or glory.   

If you ask a Buddhist, then depending on what path of Buddhist, he'll either tell you the question is irrelevant, or tell you that we are to be reincarnated until we have no more to learn - and there isn't much in the way of any belief about what happens after that point; "Nirvana" is a concept, not a place anyone expects to experience.  What they expect to experience on achieving Nirvana - is Nothing.  Pure oblivion, a complete cessation of experience.  And there are lots of variations on that belief throughout the Eastern hemisphere. 

These are MAJOR religions, with millions, and sometimes billions, of followers.  They just happen not to be the kind of death cults that drive this sort of violence.

Do you need proof? Check this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgujwijPwxo
http://www.damncoolpictures.com/2009/03/5-star-prison-in-austria.html

An inmate sunbathes on the deck of his bungalow on Bastoy:

http://i.guim.co.uk/static/w-700/h--/q-95/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/2/22/1361556950003/An-inmate-sunbathes-on-th-011.jpg

What is the difference with Epstein, and the 12 years old? he give her an after morning pill to clean his mess... not stupid... did billy did the same y. who else? to the camp where the works make free those doing it, not the receiving hand... (but don't worry it will mostly be automatized... the project move forward, and blueprint have to be tested). hc.

This is so wrong in all levels, the wrong things they do will not go un noticed and people should be ashamed to join the group and following their delusional leader who appears to be as psycho as they come.

I can't understand what you are saying, can you explain it more in a clear, readable and understandable way? Thanks.

poor you, I didn't realize... sorry.

you don't know nothing ain't bad... look (understand that you will have to be active) :

https://www.google.com/search?sclient=psy-ab&site=&source=hp&btnG=Search&q=dsk+under+age

https://www.google.com/search?q=epstein+under+age&btnG=Search&gbv=1

https://www.google.com/search?q=clinton+bill+lolita+express&btnG=Search&gbv=1

what's the difference? the clothes? the plans? the fact that the Will of an Individual was Breached? If you can get that, please present yourself to the next tagger available, you will be further processed thx.

So you came across a rehabilitation facility (as differentiated from a prison) in Austria- who has a much more progressive view of incarceration than the US to begin with, and for which no violent criminals would be housed in- and are representing all prison conditions to be like this. Is that the point you're making? Because that seems to be your point, that people who commit barbaric acts will wind up in a facility like this, so we better just brutalize them instead.

Most of the prisoners in Bastoy (Norway) were convicted of violent offenses, such as murder or rape. I don't think it is a nice idea to provide such people with 5-star facilities inside the prison. If I had the power, then I'll ship them either to the White Swan or to the Black Dolphin in Russia.

You know what?  I don't mind a prison where people don't suffer so much. 

If you can keep them separate from the population they'd otherwise prey on, and not fuck them up so badly that they can never rejoin civilization again, I'd say you're doing your job.

The problem with treating prisoners badly is that you make them harder and nastier and more out-of-step with your civilian society than they were to start with.  You fuck them up so badly that releasing them doesn't work all that well. 

I suppose it depends what the intent of prison is. If it's to reform people and have them be functioning members of society when they're released, I think Bastoy is shows some promise. If it's to punish people in harsh conditions during and after imprisonment so they are likely to return to crime, the US prison system is exemplary.

Naw.  There are many levels and styles of prison in the US, ranging from minimal confinement to single cell lockup.  There are many, many facilities for druggies which are more like drug rehab facilities than prison.  Etc. 

It's probably the luck of the draw though than any top down philosophical decision.  You sure wouldn't want to be in the state penn in one of the very poor states like Mississippi.

Are you disputing that the majority of prisons do not make rehabilitation their primary function? The war on drugs has proven to be the death of rehabilitative prisons as they are overcrowded past their ability to function in a rehabilitative manner, even when they're specifically built to be so. Here's a nice and short synopsis of the changing role of the US prison system: http://www.adpsr.org/home/prison_history.  Perhaps if the war on drugs were eliminated, there would be less stress on the system and it could return to a more rehabilitative role, but that would require a seismic political shift in the national landscape, especially by the republican party. I'm hopeful, but not expectant.

I'm saying that I know of several large systems in Texas that are strictly for drug offenders, which are minimal security.  Boatloads of people go to those types of places.  Your article conveniently ignores this reality.  But Texas has money, it's pretty rich as states go.  The harshest, most horrible places will always be states short on funds and hence short on basic necessities for inmates.

Also, you might want to rethink the concept of the "war on drugs by Republicans" since most attorneys vote Democratic (at least historically, that may change with the flight away from Obama).  This means the main cash from the "Drug war", that of the courts, legal system and it's attorney inhabitants - are largely Democratic.....

I've never seen any marked improvement in drug law enforcement where the sheriffs or police chiefs were Democratic, for example, over Republican.  With the obvious exception of the Oakland/SF area, and maybe Oregon/Portland, before some drugs were legalized up there.  Try Louisiana for downright mean, harsh enforcement of drug law by Democrats.  The list could go on and on. 

In short, false dichotomy.   About as ridiculous as the "Republican war on women."

I don't want the prisoners to suffer either. But the problem here is something different. Consider a Somali migrant who has just reached Norway and being granted asylum status. He has no educational qualifications, and there fore he can't find a meaningful job. Now this guy decides to rape a few local women. (According to latest stats, the vast majority of the rapes in Norway and Sweden are being committed by people with an immigrant background). As a punishment for his crime, he is sent to the Bastoy prison, where he is allowed to have 5-star facilities and other options such as video-gaming and sauna, which would have otherwise been unavailable to him. Now this guy will tell to his friends: "Hey, look at me... I am enjoying my stay here... you should come here too". Now this is what I call "encouraging crimes".

The republican party is the one that stands in the way of legalization. That's the whole basis of the "republican war on drugs." I'm talking legislatively. It doesn't matter what party to local officials are when the republicans block reform on the national or state level. Those local police still have to enforce the law.

Why would I consider such a ridiculous scenario as people with no job prospects deciding to just be serial rapists? And if you're going to cite something as a fact, provide the basis for it. (Where are you getting the "latest stats" from?)

Best is a death sentence for those who commit rape and murder. They should be no mercy for such prisoners. When they aren't alive, they will never rejoin civilization. Prisoners are made to suffer as they have done wrong and committed a crime. Can't see people feeling bad for such criminals. They are not punished because they are good and deserve the worst treatment.

Those who rob and commit minor crimes can be spared and in that case, they shouldn't be treated badly in jail so that they come out and try to live their life in a better way.

I agree. When we hear about criminal acts we often want vengeance and blood. We want the bad guy to suffer. If only that made them repent. In fact it turns prison into finishing school for criminals. This is not a problem if the offender is a child killing axe murderer. But most crimes are not that bad and it may be better to try bringing petty criminals into the fold of society. Even though it is not as satisfying as torturing them in a cage.   

No they do not.  Local sheriffs have virtually unlimited ability to do what they choose.

And I'm highly skeptical of your belief there or has been any thing resembling a "republican war on drugs."  Yes Nixon, a repub, created it.  But Clinton and Obama have been perfectly fine with it.  What you've seen is individual states stepping forward and voting weed legal. 

I can't say it really matters to me if those states are largely Demo or Repub.   For sure your four border states are not going to vote weed legal, because of the horrific power it'd give the Mexican cartels to move right into the USA.  But all power to DC, Colorado, etc...

Doesn't Indian do the same to their own country female?

Can I question that? It seems to me that if one of those states legalized pot, the primary loser would be the Mexican cartels. The illegal status of MJ is essential for their survival. If I were a drug lord I would donate millions to any candidate that will fight to keep MJ illegal. It would be a disaster if people could grow their own.

Okay, let me translate that.  Lower PRICES for weed would be a proportional loss for the cartels.

But aren't we seeing, not lower but higher prices?  That's what I read at least about legal weed in Colorado. 

And believe me, you do not want these cartel gangsters positioning themselves at the borders of say, Texas and Arizona....this has nothing to do with weed being legal or illegal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_Drug_War

By the end of Felipe Calderón's administration (2006–12), the official death toll of the Mexican Drug War was at least 60,000.[79] Estimates set the death toll above 120,000 killed by 2013, not including 27,000 missing.[80][81]

If I were them I guess i would not give up without a fight. Perhaps some will try to strong-arm the dispensaries? But I did hear an interpretation about the price of weed in legal states. What a guy at a dispensary in Washington state told me was that the price is kept high to keep the weed from leaving the state. They could be profitable selling a quarter for $20. But then people would drive there and load up to sell in non-legal states. At least that was the thought.

But yeah,  the Mexican gangs are bad dudes. It's become a war for control of Mexico as much as a business.

If I was running a state quite likely I'd arrange a very cheap in state price.  There are a number of reasons for this.    I guess I can't see anything wrong with people driving in to buy it.  Nobody's going to drive 600 miles to save $20.

One interesting argument that I read somewhere about the Silk Road "on line sales approach" was that people were safer buying that way instead of going to their local ghetto street corner.   That does count on any list of pluses and minus as a plus.   Similarly they would be safer buying in a legal state.

Here is an interesting thread on Glocktalk.com forum, about legalizing weed in Texas.  This is a site largely populated by LEO and most of the discussion is about defense and weapons, but there are subforums on social issues.

You might be surprised what actual police think about the weed laws.

http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1576348

And look at what I found there....lol....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=A6c6eUeoa9Q

Exactly. Any drug legalization in the United States will wipe out the drug cartels in Mexico. Legalization means lower prices, and the cartels will see their profitability down by 99%. That said, Cocaine is a much larger revenue earner for the cartels when compared to Marijuana. And no one is ever going to legalize cocaine.

Interesting stuff guys. We got a little off track from ISIS pedophiles, but interesting. And you gota love Willy & Merle!  :D

for some reason this all reminds me of Sargent Stadanko.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQKzZh-ldCw

Welcome to Qatar, where practically you can marry a newborn baby girl.

"Here you go, enjoy your brand new wife!!"

Oh really?  1) Congressional Republicans Rail Against Legalization of Marijuana: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/31/colorado-marijuana-legalization_n_5638758.html  2) A republican congressman (Randy Harris, MD) promised to prevent a bill from proceeding through congress after DC residents voted to legalize marijuana. (Congress reviews all laws DC passes and can hold up any law it disagrees with.) 3) Republican presidential candidates on the record against legalization: Christie, Bush, Rubio, Walker, Cruz  http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/la-na-marijuana-republicans-20150509-story.html#page=1 4) The republican Attorneys General of Oklahoma and Nebraska have sued Colorado over its legalization of marijuana. http://abovethelaw.com/2015/05/marijuana-melee-nebraska-and-oklahoma-v-colorado/

There's more than substantial evidence to prove republicans are the party standing in the way of legalization. There are some republicans who favor legalization, as there are some democrats who favor prohibition, but they are exceptions that prove the rule.

No, there is near universal agreement that the black market is what elevates price. It was true with alcohol prohibition and it's the same with drugs. The illegality makes it profitable for those who are willing to take the risk, or have the firepower to be untouchable.

It is not the illegality, but the level of enforcement of those laws which creates high prices.

For example I once say a whole row of tables - maybe 25 - right across the street from the courthouse in Capestown, S Africa.  I asked one of the guys selling weed - "Dakka" was it legal.  He laughed and said "Oh, no, man.  But the police are busy with important things like murder and rape.  They don't care."

This would not have been a case where the "fact of illegality" affected price.  Or maybe just to the degree that some payoffs were involved.

The price could go up though if the state or federal government is taxing it enough.

Seems like I mentioned that earlier, but the legal price in Colorado is several times the illegal street price.  I don't live there and don't know the specifics ... and I don't use weed anyway, but it is quite interesting.

Oh sorry id didn't read all of these post since the thread is so big. I believe that making it legal would hurt cartels but my point is the price could be more costly due to regulations and the grower making superior quality weed.

Honestly I don't think you can look at the mexican drug-war tolls without taking into account the fact that mexico has been basically forced to take an absolute hardline on it by the USA. 

Left to themselves I think Mexico would probably have tried to find a different way besides committing the huge investment of lives that keep escalating the drug war.  But the US wants to stop drugs from coming over its own southern border by making Mexico take more loss of life for the sake of drug enforcement than the US is willing to.  The drug war in Mexico has largely been a proxy war fought with US money and Mexican lives, driven by pressure from the US. 

First of all, I understand that Mexico legalized personal weed use some time ago.  But there was something about that being due to police using the law to nab American citizens and exhort money from them.

Regardless, it isn't a proxy war.  Because it's a war between cartels.  Not police/federalis vs the gangsters.

The killing seems fairly indiscriminate.  Maybe to create an atmosphere of terror or something like that.

May be. But without the American support, the Mexican government won't be able to exert its control over large parts of Northern Mexico. That said, the cartels themselves get their money and weapons from various Hispanic gangs operating within the United States. The Mexican drug war is a war which is being waged in Mexico, which has nothing to do with the country itself.

Tomato, tomahto. It's the same difference. The point is prohibition gives cartels their power. They lose power and the incentive for violence when it's legal, the same way bootleggers did when prohibition ended. As for whether legalization increases or decreases price could go either way. Legalization could increase demand to the point where the price is higher than it was when it's illegal. I couldn't care less about this, market price has no bearing on whether it should be legal.