Saudi Rape Victim Gets 200 Lashes and Jail

[luke]

I think Pirty is just someone who doesn't enjoy debating and arguing. Not everyone like's it or is up for it. It doesn't always mean they're closed minded. I know plenty of people who just don't want to deal with debates and arguments.

There are some things I will never debate or argue, pure and simple. I take those things far to personal and it would not be beneficial to me or anyone to get into any type of conversation about it.

As for getting to the truth, we never will, because in my opinion, there is no such thing as truth but the one you make for yourself and that truth changes for everyone. The world will never see eye to eye on what the "truth" is.

The world is full of people who want to debate and those who don't. Let each do as they please.

sorry yeah, point taken. i take it back about pirty being closed minded. but if she doesn't like to debate - why post up stuff accusing people of having an agenda or lying? i mean is she doesn't want to substantiate those claims - why make them? if people don't want to get invovled, don't post anything - ignore them. theres plenty of other posts here

i don't necessarily agree with you on the truth thing though, it depends on the subject. i mean if you take the invasion of iraq and was it justified - were the reasons given true - there is 'truth' to be found. if we talk about if an invasion of iran is warranted - there is a 'truth' there. if we're talking is hugo chavez elected, does he have the support of his people, are britain and america interested in venezuela because of oil - theres 'truth' there. if we're talking americas reasons for the embargo on cuba - theres truth there. if we're talking is israel illegally occupying palestinian land - theres 'truth' there ( a world court ruling )

anyway, sorry pirty for calling you close minded

[Skylace]

I think Pirty is just someone who doesn't enjoy debating and arguing. Not everyone like's it or is up for it. It doesn't always mean they're closed minded. I know plenty of people who just don't want to deal with debates and arguments.

There are some things I will never debate or argue, pure and simple. I take those things far to personal and it would not be beneficial to me or anyone to get into any type of conversation about it.

As for getting to the truth, we never will, because in my opinion, there is no such thing as truth but the one you make for yourself and that truth changes for everyone. The world will never see eye to eye on what the "truth" is.

The world is full of people who want to debate and those who don't. Let each do as they please.

sorry yeah, point taken. i take it back about pirty being closed minded. but if she doesn't like to debate - why post up stuff accusing people of having an agenda or lying? i mean is she doesn't want to substantiate those claims - why make them? if people don't want to get invovled, don't post anything - ignore them. theres plenty of other posts here

i don't necessarily agree with you on the truth thing though, it depends on the subject. i mean if you take the invasion of iraq and was it justified - were the reasons given true - there is 'truth' to be found. if we talk about if an invasion of iran is warranted - there is a 'truth' there. if we're talking is hugo chavez elected, does he have the support of his people, are britain and america interested in venezuela because of oil - theres 'truth' there. if we're talking americas reasons for the embargo on cuba - theres truth there. if we're talking is israel illegal occupying palestinian land - theres 'truth' there ( a world court ruling )

anyway, sorry pirty for calling you close minded

I understand what you are saying but still don't agree with you on the "truth" part
Believe me you can bring the valid points you just stated (which I do agree with) and those who do feel it was justified will still have their sense of the "truth". The truth is what you see.
It's like and atheist and believer debating the existence of God, both will bring their points to the table and their defenses and will still have their own truth. The same is said for political debates.
While I can't stand Bush I know there are some who will look at him now and in the future who will think he is wonderful. Case in point, (not Hitler) but Vlad the Impaler, by most Western view points he was a sick and violent leader but in Eastern Europe he is a national hero.
Billy the Kid (a personal favorite of mine) in my book wasn't as terrible as legend but I got into many debates with people about he was nothing but a "No good horse thief and murderer". We both had the facts, we both knew about him, but the truth was we perceive that information very differently based on our own experiences and belief systems.

And the truth is, this is a deep philosophical debate that will continue through the ages

[luke]

I understand what you are saying but still don't agree with you on the "truth" part

back at'ya!

Believe me you can bring the valid points you just stated (which I do agree with) and those who do feel it was justified will still have their sense of the "truth". The truth is what you see.

no, see, i think the truth is what the evidence supports - remove all the layers of political, media and doctrinal obfuscation of the issues and the truth can be found. you have to evaluate each of the arguments, everything - against what the evidence supports. granted sometimes it can be hard, and sometimes the evidence only surfaces years later, but - not on every subject, but most - there is a truth.

It's like and atheist and believer debating the existence of God, both will bring their points to the table and their defenses and will still have their own truth. The same is said for political debates.

yeah i agree with that, thats why i said it depends on the subject. but most of the subjects we talk about do have a truth, even if carefully hidden by those who benefit from maintaining the lie

While I can't stand Bush I know there are some who will look at him now and in the future who will think he is wonderful.

again i agree, but you'll have to evaluate the reasons why? because he stopped saddam from using wmd? no ... like the ex fed chairman greenspan said, its oil. now if you think that america has the right to control the worlds resources, then yeah - bush is champion and what he did was right.

Case in point, (not Hitler) but Vlad the Impaler, by most Western view points he was a sick and violent leader but in Eastern Europe he is a national hero.
Billy the Kid (a personal favorite of mine) in my book wasn't as terrible as legend but I got into many debates with people about he was nothing but a "No good horse thief and murderer".

i don't really know anything about either of them

We both had the facts, we both knew about him, but the truth was we perceive that information very differently based on our own experiences and belief systems.

i can understand that, and thats why i say you have to evaluate why they believe what they do.

And the truth is, this is a deep philosophical debate that will continue through the ages

i've been a part of a deep philosophical debate?!

[Skylace]

Yes you have been the part of a deep philosophical debate! you must feel as dirty as my bathroom now.

Okay, back on topic people! *clapping hands*

[Marcella-FL]

what was the topic again?

[faceless]

HOTDOGS, GERRCHA HOTDOGS!

[luke]

onions and mustard please

[Aja]

Anyway As I was saying .....What the hell was I saying ..U have all got me confused

[nekokate]

[web]https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7121025.stm[/web]

----------------------------------

That's a bit much. I really hope those marchers are holding a very minority view - they must know it's not going to help the world view of Islam to be marching in the street for someone to be killed over a stuffed animal.

I mean, sure, if I were in the Sudan and I was naming something, I think I'd have the common sense to steer clear of the name Mohammad, but this is mental.

[s]One thing I don't really get about this - if it's insulting to name something Mohammad, how come so many parents name their sons Mohammad? I'm willing to bet that a number of the people involved in prosecuting her for naming that bear hold the name themselves.[/s]

EDIT: I just read an article about it linked from the same page I posted up. I think I get it now.

[Mandy]

Please note the propaganda / racial incitment in the way the BBC is reporting this.

"Thousands of people have marched in the Sudanese capital Khartoum to call for UK teacher Gillian Gibbons to be shot."

I bet ANYTHING that hardly anyone on the march thought Gillian should be shot. And if a loony few did, then we should look into their mental state/background, and if they are agent provocateurs.

This is like everyone on an anti-war or anti-Israel demonstration being slandered by the BBC by highlighting an extremist poster or "shouter".

Someone should analyse the BBC report for "bias" / "agenda". This BBC report is NOT designed to calm the situation, but to incite it.

E.g. why run with title "Shoot UK teacher, say protesters" .. is that ALL they were saying ? Or you only publicise the most extreme thing heard.

There is no context to the demonstrations, no background that the demonstration might be more than just about Gillian, but the background that the Sudanese feel attacked by the west. They are also acutely aware of what happened in Somalia, with the US backing an ethiopian invasion, or that the West crave Sudan's mineral Wealth.

[nekokate]

Please note the propaganda / racial incitment in the way the BBC is reporting this.

"Thousands of people have marched in the Sudanese capital Khartoum to call for UK teacher Gillian Gibbons to be shot."

I have bet ANYTHING that hardly anyone on the march thought Gillian should be shot. And if a loony few did, then they we should look into their mental state/background, and agent provocateurs.

This is like everyone on an anti-war or anti-Israel demonstration being slandered by the BBC by highlighting an extremist poster or "shouter".

Someone should analyse the BBC report for "bias" / "agenda". This BBC report is NOT designed to calm the situation, but to incite it.

That's a fair point. I wonder what they were marching for, then? Just for a tougher sentence or something?

They also fail to mention that the Sudan, according to another article, is typically very forgiving of visiting Europeans and would have seen this merely as ignorance, and not a big deal. They're making it sound like everyone over there is a rabid nutter.

[Mandy]

p.s. Maybe Sudan is the next target after Iraq (if Iran is being seen as too big to take on).

https://www.blackagendareport.com/index. ... 3&Itemid=1
Ten Reasons Why "Save Darfur" is a PR Scam to Justify the Next US Oil and Resource Wars in Africa



This BBC report seems to be part of the drum beat to demonisation & then invasion.

The hatred against Gillian I think is being fed that she is British and might be regarded as part of a missionary invasion.

[nekokate]

p.s. Maybe Sudan is the next target after Iraq (if Iran is being seen as too big to take on).

https://www.blackagendareport.com/index. ... 3&Itemid=1
Ten Reasons Why "Save Darfur" is a PR Scam to Justify the Next US Oil and Resource Wars in Africa



This BBC report seems to be part of the drum beat to demonisation & then invasion.

Sounds like a good thread for the GG section to me.

[faceless]

Here's video of the protests - the guy with the machete seems pretty certain... but others seem to be just out enjoying themselves.

https://www.humyo.com/F/51931675/EMBED

[Mandy]

Thanks faceless .. one guy amongst thousands.