[QUOTE=Liberal]
Could you please read my post in which I said, “They’re all over the place. With rare exceptions, they just don’t have the entrepreneurial balls to become famous.”? Thanks in advance.
[/QUOTE]
Doesn’t “entrepreneurial” have something to do with business? Not fame, I think.
[QUOTE=mangeorge]
Doesn’t “entrepreneurial” have something to do with business? Not fame, I think.
[/QUOTE]
Nope, “entrepreneurial” has to do with which has to do with capitalism which means you are making the money yourself and not getting it from the government. That rules out the left-wing completely. 
[QUOTE=Slypork]
Nope, “entrepreneurial” has to do with which has to do with capitalism which means you are making the money yourself and not getting it from the government. That rules out the left-wing completely.
[/QUOTE]
So I’m an entrepreneur? Cool. 
I must be pretty ballsy, for a liberal (no limo). Not to be confused with a libertarian.
Funny thing is, most welfare recipients seem to be conservative. Felons, too. :eek:
Saudis also fit in there, to get us back on the OP.
Peace,
mangeorge
I might need to take up a collection (money) here in the near future. I’m going to object to my company (Chevron) about their dealings with Saudi Arabia, using this issue as an example of their human rights abuses.
I’ll post the reply, if my power doesn’t get turned off first. 
I think I’ll cite this CNN story rather than the Fox News story. Personal preference, you see.
[QUOTE=Frylock]
Are you referring to Saudi citizens, or to Americans and others in Saudi Arabia?
When they think the sentence would never be carried out, do they have some support for this opinion? Is it common for sentences like this not to be carried out?
-FrL-
[/QUOTE]
The Saudis, Sudanese and others who wander through my office. They said that King Abdullah would never let such a thing happen.
(You remember King Abdullah? The one who never answered my letter? But I digress.)
So anyway, the general impression was it was a hick judge who was out of control.
[QUOTE=What Exit?]
He’ll be okay, too many people agree with him.
You probably made the mistake of including one offhand word that allowed the PC police to go after you for that and ignore the barbarity of the act you were condemning. It does not take much, but **Silenus ** would appear to have avoiding this ‘pit trap’.
Jim
[/QUOTE]
A little late back to the party, but this was in response to my post about how when I posted a similar rant, I was labeled racist and close-minded. But, I see now through page 3 of this thread, there are still those looking to castigate those who choose to judge barbarity rather than applaud justified outrage. Scary. As I think I said in my own thread many months ago, it is really humans in general (here and there) that sadden me.
[QUOTE=silenus]
That OP went through about 3 revisions before I thought I had one that would fly. You should have read the first one - racist would have been the mildest thing I was called! Then I had a drink and thought about it, then re-wrote.
[/QUOTE]
ha! see, my problem back then was having the drinks first and writing second!
[QUOTE=Slypork]
Bullshit. I thought that after 9/11 people would read about the lunacy of extremist Islam and be so outraged that they would rise up against the loons and round them all up. Nope. We ranted and raged and then went on our way.
I thought after Daniel Pearl was beheaded and the video was spread around the world that maybe we would go after these whacko’s and wipe them out. Nope. We talked for a little bit about how horrible it was, talk radio ranted and then it was brushed aside.
[/quote]
I sympathize, but wiping out 1 billion Muslims is a lot to ask of 200,000 troops. Nevermind that it would be the Holocaust X 200.
Well, if we can’t persuade the Christian fundamentalists who live among us and who speak English (and it’s hard to deny that they too threaten peace throughout the world) then how can we straighten out people on the other side of the world?
I’ll go along with that, but why did we invade Iraq? If we had focused on Afghanistan there’s a chance we might have made some progress. But instead we shifted the world’s focus off of the Islamists and onto the neocons.
[QUOTE=Paul in Saudi]
Few of the Saudis in my school have heard of this. It is not a big news story in the Arabic press. On the other hand it is in the local English-language media and most of my teachers have heard about this. They were all of the opinion that the judge was an ass and the sentence would never be carried out. Most called for the rapists and the judge to be beheaded.
[/QUOTE]
Thank you for the perspective, that said…
While this thread is RO about a woman unfairly being punished for something that was not her fault, what it comes down to is anger about some fundamentalists policies that are still affecting a culture which is refusing to progress into a more contemporary version of itself.
So is calling for multiple beheadings really a good thing? (Not saying *you * are calling for them) It just seems like your defense of the Saudi people wasn’t really a strong one.
[QUOTE=sqweels]
I sympathize, but wiping out 1 billion Muslims is a lot to ask of 200,000 troops. Nevermind that it would be the Holocaust X 200.
[/quote]
So, from Slypork’s statement:
You decided to interpret that to mean that he wanted to exterminate 1 billion Muslims. You also appear to implicitly accept that 1 billion Muslims were all cheering the beheaders on.
Since you raised the issue of the holocaust, may I remind you that the de-Nazification program that followed WWII did not involve the mass extermination of 70 M Germans.
The banning of Islam from formerly Muslim governed Spain did not involve mass exterminations.
The near total removal of Jews from all Muslim majority countries, (now almost completely accomplished) including the so called “secular” ones, did not normally involve extermination campaigns, except in the initial stages.
The ongoing removal/ethnic “cleansing” of other non Muslim minorities is being done at a slower pace and continues to this day. Where this is not openly sponsored by the governments, it is at least government protected or, just as effectively, ignored by the government law enforcement agencies. A form of terrorism that technically falls short of being actively genocidal and does not attact the ire of that mostly criminal organisation known as the United Nations.
As for your statement:
Preposterous.
[QUOTE=bbs2k]
Thank you for the perspective, that said…
While this thread is RO about a woman unfairly being punished for something that was not her fault, what it comes down to is anger about some fundamentalists policies that are still affecting a culture which is refusing to progress into a more contemporary version of itself.
So is calling for multiple beheadings really a good thing? (Not saying *you * are calling for them) It just seems like your defense of the Saudi people wasn’t really a strong one.
[/QUOTE]
I was not defending anything or body. I was reporting on the talk in my office. A factual occurrence.
Sorry, I should have added to this:
[QUOTE=bbs2k]
(Not saying *you * are calling for them)
[/QUOTE]
That I didn’t think you endorsed it either. I was just highlighting a head-shaking moment for myself when I thought, well in the big picture that doesn’t solve anything at all.
[QUOTE=Aquila Be]
So, from Slypork’s statement:
You decided to interpret that to mean that he wanted to exterminate 1 billion Muslims. You also appear to implicitly accept that 1 billion Muslims were all cheering the beheaders on.
[/quote]
Snarkily. The slogan “Kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out” comes to mind. The US certainly can’t distinguish ordinary Muslims from whackos for out-wiping, nor avoid provoking many of the former from joining the latter.
That was easy; there was party membership and above-board officialdom. And the Nazi movement was short-lived enough that ordinary Germans were able to distance themselves from it after the defeat. (And indeed there was massive ethnic cleansing of Germans from Eastern Europe at the hands of the Soviets.)
I’m not the one who introduced the phrase “wipe them out” to the discussion. And again, it was easy to sort 'em out.
Christian fundamentalists want to provoke Armageddon in order to bring on the Rapture. And the invasion of Iraq has brought considerable instability. I have no trouble laying that and the recent provokation of Iran on Christian fundamentalists.
And the US has been trampling on international law and heaping contempt both on existing international institutions and the very idea of them. Many Christians say not only that there can not but that there should not be world peace until Jesus returns.
But I agree that Muslims are worse. Much worse.
Another (minor) development. The Economist this week has a little sidebar on this case. It made it through the censors for some reason. (When I got here, they used to censor crossword puzzles.)
I mentioned again at the office. People were fascinated to discover people in on the internets were talking about it.
[QUOTE=Paul in Saudi]
Another (minor) development. The Economist this week has a little sidebar on this case. It made it through the censors for some reason. (When I got here, they used to censor crossword puzzles.)
I mentioned again at the office. People were fascinated to discover people in on the internets were talking about it.
[/QUOTE]
Maybe you could introduce them to the equally fascinating notion that effectively whipping women for being raped marks a society as not being fit to share the century with the rest of the planet too?
The sooner we develop alternative energy supplies and can leave SA and the rest of the barbarians to feck off back to the Dark Ages the happier I’ll be.
[QUOTE=tagos]
Maybe you could introduce them to the equally fascinating notion that effectively whipping women for being raped marks a society as not being fit to share the century with the rest of the planet too?
The sooner we develop alternative energy supplies and can leave SA and the rest of the barbarians to feck off back to the Dark Ages the happier I’ll be.
[/QUOTE]
What a bunch of bullshit. Listen to yourself sometime, you goofy jackass.
[QUOTE=Mosier]
What a bunch of bullshit. Listen to yourself sometime, you goofy jackass.
[/QUOTE]
You favour whipping women for these ‘offences’? you think it perfectly fine and civilised?
Noted.
[QUOTE=tagos]
You favour whipping women for these ‘offences’? you think it perfectly fine and civilised?
Noted.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t, and apparently the Saudis don’t either. It sure is fun attacking a big straw man though, isn’t it?
What’s NOT civilized is to say “I wish we didn’t need something (insert hated ethnic/religious group) people have, so that we could just let them all die.”
Seriously, who’s the barbarian here?
I guess it’s me, since I also look forward to controlled fusion bankrupting Saudi Arabia. They’ve had huge wealth for decades but prefer lavishing on the oligarchy rather than progress to a more liberal state where all have freedom and opportunity. I have a great deal more faith in relatively advanced states like Qatar and Jordan, and I have to admit some not-yet-dead hope for postwar Iraq.
In the meantime, I’d like to see expanded oil production in Alberta. Canada’s aready beating the Saudis in oil shipped to the U.S. We could leave them in the well-deserved dust.