News The girl who was stoned to death for falling in love

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the troubling rise of honor killings in Iraq, particularly following the fall of Saddam Hussein, which has led to increased visibility of such acts due to modern technology. Participants note that while these killings are often attributed to fundamentalist beliefs, they are deeply rooted in cultural practices rather than religious doctrine. The conversation highlights the challenges of establishing a stable democracy in Iraq, where tribal affiliations and conservative attitudes can undermine women's rights and freedoms. There is a consensus that the internet plays a crucial role in exposing these brutal acts, potentially fostering change. Ultimately, the dialogue underscores the complexity of Iraq's societal issues and the need for a deeper understanding of the cultural factors at play.
  • #61
It should be clear that those are conditions for ending the fighting, but just in case there could be some misunderstanding, he says it explicitly:
If you fail to respond to all these conditions, then prepare for fight with the Islamic Nation.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
drankin said:
Interesting that Art replies to my post is with an conveniently edited speech. LOL.
Copyright prevents us from quoting texts in full so I posted the pertinant pieces ignoring the usual religious preamble.

Nowhere in the pieces omitted does Bin Laden mention fighting to convert the west to Islam which is the statement I was rebutting.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #63
Art said:
Nowhere in the pieces omitted does Bin Laden mention fighting to convert the west to Islam which is the statement I was rebutting.
9/11 conspiracy theorists show pictures of the Pentagon with no plane parts in them and use them as evidence that no plane hit the Pentagon, neglecting to acknowledge that there are plenty of pictures that do show plane parts strewn-about the lawn and inside the Pentagon.

Posting quotes that don't contain statements pertinent to the argument does not mean that such statements don't exist and it is dishonest to imply that it does. You must have seen the quotes where Bin Laden states explicitly that the west must convert to Islam or die. We've discussed it many times here.

Bin Laden also wants us out of the Middle East, but that isn't the only reason why he kills Americans.

Also, regarding the usage of the word "crusade" - it has many meanings that can be very general, but the applicable one here is the concept of the "holy war", a term Bin Laden often uses. This is, for Bin Laden, a global Islamic crusade.

Here are links to a number of Bin Laden speeches: http://iraqwar.org/binladenquotes.htm

In any case, we're getting waaaaay off topic...

[edit] - Here is an article discussing some of the history and evolution of Bin Laden's purported motivations. It discusses, for example, the fact that his first primary motive was the presence of American troops in Saudia Arabia. After we left, his motives changed. This implies to me that he's just looking for excuses to justify mindless hate.
In 1996, when he issued his declaration of war against American interests, the primary offense he mentioned was the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia. They had used military bases in the kingdom during the 1991 Persian Gulf War and remained there afterward at the request of the Saudi royal family. Having "Crusader warriors" near the holy shrines of Mecca and Medina was a grave insult to all Muslims, bin Laden and other conservative members of the faith complained.

U.S. troops largely withdrew from the kingdom by September 2003, but their departure did not end al Qaeda operations in the region. Instead, sympathizers of the group have since increased their attacks on interests of the United States and others they consider to be enemies in the kingdom.

Bin Laden has continued to list U.S. support of the Saudi royal family -- which he regards as corrupt and beholden to outside interests -- as one of his biggest grievances. But he has also displayed a politician's instinct by tapping into two other issues that have inflamed public opinion in the Middle East more recently: the war in Iraq and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11090-2004Nov24_2.html
 
Last edited:
  • #64
russ_watters said:
9/11 conspiracy theorists show pictures of the Pentagon with no plane parts in them and use them as evidence that no plane hit the Pentagon, neglecting to acknowledge that there are plenty of pictures that do show plane parts strewn-about the lawn and inside the Pentagon.

Posting quotes that don't contain statements pertinent to the argument does not mean that such statements don't exist and it is dishonest to imply that it does. You must have seen the quotes where Bin Laden states explicitly that the west must convert to Islam or die. We've discussed it many times here.
etc...
This is from one of the sources you quoted (btw most have broken links)
The imagery and style were different, but bin Laden's message to "the people of America" was the same: You still don't understand why we are at war with each other.
obviously he is right about that :rolleyes:
The article continues
This is the message which I sought to communicate to you in word and deed, repeatedly, for years before September 11th," the fugitive al Qaeda leader said in a videotape aired around the world on Oct. 29. "But I am amazed at you. Even though we are in the fourth year after the events of September 11th . . . the reasons are still there for a repeat of what occurred."

Eight years after he issued a written declaration of war against the United States, the theme of bin Laden's speech was disbelief that he had failed to make his point with the American people, even after the deaths of nearly 3,000 people on U.S. soil and a succession of bombings, beheadings and other forms of bloodshed around the world.

"This talk of mine is for you and concerns the ideal way to prevent another Manhattan, and deals with the war and its causes and results," he said, in what are believed to be his first videotaped comments in three years.

An examination of bin Laden's speeches over the years shows that the underlying message has remained consistent: Americans have repeatedly humiliated Muslims with a foreign policy that has propped up corrupt governments in the Middle East and perpetuated conflict in the region. Until you prevail on your government to stop, we will strike back.

He did not quote the Koran during his latest, 13-minute speech, and he also avoided the obscure historical references that peppered his previous statements. Instead, he justified his embrace of terrorism in layman's language, explaining his tactics as a logical response to what he depicted as U.S. aggression.

"Should a man be blamed for defending his sanctuary?" he said, speaking in a composed manner and using formal Arabic. "Is defending oneself and punishing the aggressor in kind objectionable terrorism? If it is such, then it is unavoidable for us."
and, again from your source, this from Ayman al-Zawahiri following 7/7
Rather than casting his jihad as an inevitable clash of civilizations, he frames acts of terrorism as justified by the US-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and offers to end attacks on the West if a full withdrawal is made from "Muslim lands."

"Blair has brought to you destruction in central London, and he will bring you more destruction, God willing,'' Zawahiri said, addressing the British people.

"As for you Americans, what you have seen in New York and Washington, what losses you see in Afghanistan and Iraq, despite the media blackout, are merely the losses of the initial clashes," he said. "If you go on with the same policy of aggression against Muslims, you will see, God willing, things that will make you forget the horrors of Vietnam and Afghanistan."

"To the people of the crusader coalition ... our blessed Sheikh Osama has offered you a truce so that you leave Muslim land. As he said you will not dream of security until we live it as a reality in Palestine,'' he said. "Our message to you is clear, strong and final: There will be no salvation until you withdraw from our land, stop stealing our oil and resources and end support for infidel [Arab] rulers."

Again no reference at all to converting the west to Islam by force. Now instead of making blanket references to 'quotes I must have seen' which I patently have not please provide actual quotes and references.

In fact the only ones I have seen making reference to using force to impose their 'belief' system on others is the west with it's 'western values system' and 'democratisation' down the barrel of a gun policies.

The part bolded in the text above (from your source I remind you) agrees totally with what I have been saying and has been reaffirmed many times by Robert Fisk who remains the only western journalist to have interviewed Bin Laden - in fact three times.

All conflicts have a definable cause which one may or may not agree with and even if one chooses to 'stay the course' regardless, it still makes sense to at least understand what lies behind the conflict. To dismiss one's opponents as mindless is in itself mindless.

I am interested in your explaining why you believe this conspiracy theory that Bin Laden and his cohorts lie to us about why he is waging war on the west and lie to us about his conditions for ending it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #65
Here's an article citing a report published today fully supporting my contentions;

Religious extremists in 3 faiths share views: report

By Claudia Parsons

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Violent Muslim, Christian and Jewish extremists invoke the same rhetoric of "good" and "evil" and the best way to fight them is to tackle the problems that drive people to extremism, according to a report obtained by Reuters.

It said extremists from each of the three faiths often have tangible grievances -- social, economic or political -- but they invoke religion to recruit followers and to justify breaking the law, including killing civilians and members of their own faith.

The report was commissioned by security think tank EastWest Institute ahead of a conference on Thursday in New York titled "Towards a Common New Thinking Against Violent Extremism and Radicalization." The report will be updated and published after the conference.

The authors compared ideologies, recruitment tactics and responses to violent religious extremists in three places -- Muslims in Britain, Jews in Israel and Christians in the United States.

"What is striking ... is the similarity of the worldview and the rationale for violence," the report said.

It said that while Muslims were often perceived by the West as "the principal perpetrators of terrorist activity," there are violent extremists of other faiths. Always focusing on Muslim extremists alienates mainstream Muslims, it said.

The report said it was important to examine the root causes of violence by those of different faiths, without prejudice.

"It is, in each situation, a case of 'us' versus 'them,'" it said. "That God did not intend for civilization to take its current shape; and that the state had failed the righteous and genuine members of that nation, and therefore God's law supersedes man's law."

This worldview was common to ultranationalist Jews, like Yigal Amir, who killed Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995, to U.S. groups like Christian Identity, which is linked to white supremacist groups, and to other Christian groups that attacked abortion providers, it said.

"Extremists should never be dismissed simply as evil," said the report. "Trying to engage in a competition with religious extremists over who can offer a simpler answer to complex problems will be a losing proposition every time."
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN1336685920070613
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #66
Art said:
Here's an article citing a report published today fully supporting my contentions;
Very appropriate and very timely.

When things are bad people often turn to religion with the expectation that 'believing' hard enough will make things better. An extention to that would be, if things are bad in one's community (tribe, clan, . . .), then it's the fault of those outside the group, and it becomes permissible to do violence to those outsiders. It has nothing to do with 'religion' - it has to do with individual psychology and the ability of the mind to rationalize the irrational.
 
  • #67
It is even not Muslims area!

The town – the region in general- is divided between Christian and Yazidi religions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yezidi). The tribe if the girl stoned her because she married a Muslim man from another city. Actually Arabs tribes who tried to protect her, but they failed because of their limited power after the American inavsion.

russ_watters said:
This is a very common occurrence in fundamentalist Muslim areas. What probably separates this from the thousands that happen a year in other muslim countries is the fact that with new-found freedom, it should happen less than it used to. But until the country becomes stable, the pockets of hardcore fundamentalism will have more ability to harm those who dare exercise their new-found freedom.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor_killing
 
  • #68
Astronuc said:
How will the Sunni, Shii, Yezidi, Kurds, . . . . overcome the old cultural ways which allow for such acts as 'honor killing'? Will they ever?

How will the world deal with such cultural contradictions?

The Yazidi are adherents of a pre-Islamic Middle Eastern religion with ancient origins.
 
  • #69
Bila Nabil said:
The Yazidi are adherents of a pre-Islamic Middle Eastern religion with ancient origins.
Thanks for pointing this out.

Yes, they are not arab necessarily, but primarily of Kurdish origin.

Such distinctions are often overlooked or ignored by those in the west.

The Yazidis' concern with religious purity, and their reluctance to mix elements perceived to be incompatible, is shown not only in their caste system, but also in various taboos affecting everyday life. Some of these, such as those on exogamy or on insulting or offending men of religion, are widely respected.
Which would explain the punishment inflicted upon this woman. If she attempted to marry outside her group, then this was perceived as a great violation of her culture.

After reading more, there is comment about banishment or expulsion. They simply could have expelled her - but it appears that some wished to make an example. Seems terribly harsh.
 
Last edited:
  • #71
Ratzinger said:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/15/world/middleeast/15iraq.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

General Calls Attack on Yazidis 'Ethnic Cleansing'
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12800852
NPR.org, August 15, 2007 · The death toll from four suicide bombings in northwest Iraq climbed to at least 250 on Wednesday, prompting a U.S. general to label the coordinated attacks on a small Kurdish sect "ethnic cleansing."

"This is an act of ethnic cleansing, if you will, almost genocide," U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Benjamin Mixon, commander of U.S. forces in northern Iraq, told CNN.

Mixon said the Yazidis — the Kurdish sect that was targeted — live in a very remote part of Ninevah province where there is little security and has been no need for military forces. However, the Yazidis are sometimes targeted by Muslim extremists, who consider the Yazidis to be infidels.

On Tuesday, four trucks loaded with explosives were detonated almost simultaneously, killing more people than any other concerted attack on a single area since the war began.
This doesn't bode well for the future stability of Iraq, whether US troops stay or not.