Slashdot Mirror


Journalist Arrested For Tweet Deported to Saudi Arabia

New submitter cosmicaug writes with an update to yesterday's report that journalist Hamza Kashgari had been arrested by Malaysian police acting on a request conveyed from the Saudi government via Interpol. Now, says the BBC, "Police confirmed to the BBC that Hamza Kashgari was sent back to Saudi Arabia on Sunday despite protests from human rights groups. Mr Kashgari's controversial tweet last week sparked more than 30,000 responses and several death threats. Insulting the prophet is considered blasphemous in Islam and is punishable by death in Saudi Arabia. Mr Kashgari, 23, fled Saudi Arabia last week and was detained upon his arrival in the Malaysian capital Kuala Lumpur on Thursday." Writes cosmicaug: "Sadly, the most likely outcome is that they are going to execute this man for three tweets."

604 comments

  1. Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    nt

    1. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by CrzyP · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The guy knew the consequences. I'm not saying its right from a human rights perspective, but he knew would could happen. The law is relative in different countries. Throwing someone in prison here for theft is the same as chopping off a hand of a thief in the old Iraq, relatively speaking. I'm sure people there who respect their laws are saying us Americans are a bunch of pussies for throwing people in prison instead of more serious punishments. In my opinion it should be an eye for an eye in the world. But back to what this guy did, he shouldn't be put to death, maybe a slap on the wrist will do it, but still. he knew what he was getting himself into..shit, he fled the country after doing it.

    2. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by leromarinvit · · Score: 5, Insightful
      --
      Proud member of the Ferengi Socialist Party.
    3. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wow. Just Wow. In 2012 you want to defend these camel molesting savages with political relativism.

      It's probably a little too deep for you to grasp, but there are some ideas among the civilized world that are so fundamental we call them "human rights". Everyone who is human enjoys them no matter what they worship or which piece of earth they occupy.

      Among those "human rights" is the right not to be beheaded when speaking your mind. Even you benefit from these rights - that's why you get to say stupid shit on the internet without fear of having your head ripped off. To execute, or even to prosecute, anyone for tweeting about anything at all is an abomination and unacceptable to civilized human being.

    4. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by hairyfeet · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Riiiight, and hey, while we're at it we can just do a final solution on the poor and most of the city dwellers right? I hate to break the news to ya sparky but we simply haven't developed a technology to replace gas yet and we have too many environmental groups to ever let us develop the oil oil in the gulf, which FYI will probably end up being developed by the Russians who'll then sell that oil to the highest bidder, most likely China.

      The electric cars are a joke, you are talking $15,000 average price for the battery pack and it will last MAYBE 7 year under ideal conditions, and freezing cold snaps like we are having now or a normal southern summer will cut that time probably by a good third, most of the southern rural areas, you know, those places where the city folk get the FOOD from? yeah those, well i hate to be the bearer of bad news but a good chunk of it has no rail or public transport of ANY kind so you are looking at several trillion to develop an electric rail and mass transit system. Oh and good luck getting the money for that since more than 90% of the republicans in congress have signed Grover Norquist's "No new taxes on teh rich EVAR!" pledge and will never renege on that for fear of the "read my lips" effect, and finally you are in the middle of a recession (I'd personally argue its a depression and the government safety nets are simply masking the worst effects) and you have more than 15% of the population at or below the poverty level so good luck getting them the money to sell that used gas hog that's paid for for a brand new green car. of course without a vehicle you can watch unemployment soar, again especially among the rural states since it will be cheaper to sit on welfare than it will be to work and without gas they simply won't have a way to look for a job, or go to a job if they found one.

      So we really only have THREE choices friend, choose one. 1.-We drill locally and develop our own resources while working on new tech, perhaps with bounties for fuel efficiency breakthroughs, 2.-We tax the rich and uberrich at 75%+ rates so we will have the funds to develop the massive amount of mass transit we will require and to basically give the poor cheap affordable green electric cars, or 3.- We give these crazy jihadists our money. which shall it be? You can't just raise gas taxes to $6 a gallon and magically get everyone to ride the buses that don't exist in many state ya know. Hell go to a state like AR or MS sometime, in AR there is the CAT bus line which covers less than 1/6th of the capital city and that's it, that's all. hell most towns don't even have taxis so if you don't have a car i hope you can walk that 30 miles to the store!

      As for TFA the dumbass deserves to die for being an absolute total idiot. You are in a crazy jihad country so you tweet something nasty about their God, when these people will kill you for drawing a fricking cartoon, and then what do you do? to get away you go to ANOTHER crazy jihad country! Wow, that's really fricking smart, much better to run to an Islamist state than say Canada or the UK or pretty much anyplace that doesn't kill you for saying Muhammad sucks huh?

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    5. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Seeing as our dictator in the US has banned drilling for oil in our gulf, despite a federal judge saying he doesn't have authority to do so, and he has refused to let us pipeline oil from Canada, I don't think we can follow your suggestion. Now if we want to throw said dictator out of office something can probably be done then, but not until then.

    6. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Deus.1.01 · · Score: 1

      It dosen't matter if you are a Vi or Emacs worshipper, and it dosen't matter if use BSD or GPL.

      THAT SHIT ISNT RIGHT NOR JUST FOR ANYBODY on ANY PART OF THE GLOBE! And i proclaim pretty basic ethical standards to support that assertion.

      Ok...not going to do more in this thread, but i just want to reply to the (past) inevitable espousal of bullshit from the usual cro magnon group who attest to cultural determinism and inductive logic.

      Go fuck yourself.

      --
      My -1 Troll is actually a +1 funny. And my -1 flame is actually a +1 insightfull.
    7. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Moral relativism for the win.

    8. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by ddtracy · · Score: 0

      He signed a contract when he got his visa/entered the country and reminded that he would be judged under the saudiarabian laws. Still he decided to break saudi laws (no matter what you think about them) while being in saudi arabia. He is stupid and put himself into this mess. Would you go to germany and start talking about freedom of speech and holocaust in germany? No, I don't think so because local laws would have you put in jail for the next 10 years. But outside of germany you are free to do as you please, and so was this idiot. He should have waited until he left saudi arabia before making those comments where he would not be making himself a criminal.

    9. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      America doesn't want to stop buying oil from them. Ask us in Canada, we tried. So we're selling it to China instead.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    10. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by erroneus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      While I agree with you morally, we can't have a "civilized" society as we know it without the things we have from other countries at Walmart prices.

      The GP is spot on. We have too many problems to sort out before we can even think about pushing our influence to "better the world." Right now, we have our own religious nut-bags trying to run the government here. As soon as we can get over our own God addiction, we can start preaching to the rest of the world to grow the hell up.

      The world would be a better place if we could get over the multitudes of self-interested parties trying to protect their wealth while destroying the world. But if you want to preach, you had better start convincing the foot soldiers who make it all possible to stop serving "the bad guys." Problem with that is if you were to convince the US foot soldiers to stop supporting the bad guys, there will be some OTHER really bad guys who have some guys you can't reach to convince will come over here and start pushing their will all over us.

      The fact is, we have some really bad people on all sides playing the same games. They ALL need to stop at once bcause the moment one ceases aggression, someone else will come along to take over.

      It's one thing to boycott products which are not necessary. It's another to boycott the world's life blood. There's more riding on this than you can possibly imagine or want to consider. Anyway, I'm glad you aren't making decisions.

    11. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Nicknamename · · Score: 1

      "Well-regulated nuclear power"? "Government-invented green energy"? "Other giant public boondoggles"? How about coal -> gasoline (Fischer-Tropsch...)? Nah, too simple. And it doesn't involve the Government. And it would work. And it doesn't include any of our other sacred cows. And it was used by Nazis and the Apartheid regime, or some bullshit like that. That's a lot of accumulated ebil. Better come up with some sort of green energy invented by paraplegic Black Muslim Lesbians with Down Syndrome. Or let the Religion of Peace enrich itself even further. What could possibly go wrong? At least they are nice to homosexuals. Oh wait...


      EBIL!!!11

      --
      Hitler hates pedophiles.
    12. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by siddesu · · Score: 2

      The problem with the civilized world is that it depends on the dipshits for its freedoms (or at least the freedoms to travel, use plastics and fertilizers). So, the civilized world is treading a very careful path between standing up for its ideals and protecting those freedoms.

      That is why you get paradoxical situations like the civilized world sponsoring a war against a regime in one country and supporting the regime in another, although both regimes are equally abhorrent.

    13. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could be because our President is a Muslim and he is trying his damnedest to help is fellow Muslims.

    14. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by deburg · · Score: 1

      nasty about their God, when these people will kill you for drawing a fricking cartoon,

      The tweets was about Mohammed, not God. Anyway, it was more like a one to one talk between 2 men (the journalist and Mohammed).

      to get away you go to ANOTHER crazy jihad country!

      actually he was on the way to New Zealand. And Malaysia was just a transit point. It's easier to get out of SA to another Islamic country than straight to NZ. Plain dumb luck that Saudi pushed the warrant through Interpol fast.

    15. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Waccoon · · Score: 1

      But then you're depriving them the wealth and access to technology that would help lift them out of the stone age. That's why we should never feel guilty about outsourcing.

      </bs>

    16. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For talking about human rights, why does your post use language to dehumanize these people?

    17. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. Just Wow. Did you read his post? He said that the guy shouldn't be put to death, but instead should get a slap on the wrist. Aside from that, his primary point was that the guy should have been smart enough to figure out what the consequences were before he took action. One can know what the law is and be careful not to break it even if it is an oppressive law...so saying that the guy was asking for it is not, in and of itself, an approval of the bad law.

    18. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or we could actually work together and design more aerodynamic cars, use trains to transport goods, get high speed rail lines inbetween cities, make sure our cars get the best gas mileage possible, car pool, ride a bike for short trips (or long trips)...

      And the electric car isn't that bad, but the price shouldn't be as high as it is, and they haven't developed a bare-bones pick-up truck or car yet to appeal to the middle-low income masses.

    19. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 1

      Its not about political relativism.

      Its about not doing stupid shit when you're in somebody else's country.

      If you get caught doing something illegal, especially when you know its illegal, in another country, don't be fucking shocked if they come after you for it.

      Yeah, it sucks that its illegal, no it absolutely shouldn't be illegal. But it is, he got caught, and he's probably going to get fucked one way or another for it.

      --
      If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
    20. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately Human Rights is a concept in name only since the entire world only signed a pledge on it, and the declaration of Human Rights is not a binding piece of international legislation. Until it becomes law it is meaningless paper trotted out by the west to sound superior.

    21. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 1

      Not going to happen in a world dominated by religions that put the almighty and rules from their holy books ahead of human dignity.

      --
      If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
    22. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Alunral · · Score: 1

      This would be true if "theft" were the same as "tweet". It's not one of those "Crime is a crime" things. This is someone saying something that others didn't like.

    23. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. Just Wow. In 2012 you want to defend these camel molesting savages with political relativism.

      Please refrain from mislabeling Arabs as camel molesters. They're much more into sheep, dude. Some guys in our unit, when we spent some time outside of Basra, had a collection of videos, usually night shots, of these guys screwing barnyard animals. Sounds perverse on our part, but the compilation, set to the appropriate country-western music, was fucking hilarious. These Hajjis would screw anything -but- a woman. Great culture.

    24. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      I probably shouldn't respond to an AC, but its so full of fail i just had to chime in. lets see your solution is 1.-design more aerodynamic cars (which the poor can't afford to replace their clunkers now, making a slicker car won't change that) 2.-use trains to transport goods (the lines are in serious disrepair and would be unable to handle the increased load without billions invested) 3.- get high speed rail lines inbetween cities (this will cost a good two hundred billion easily) 4.-make sure our cars get the best gas mileage possible (see 1) 5.- car pool, ride a bike for short trips (or long trips) (the rural states are RURAL and therefor this is wholly impractical, and you certainly aren't gonna live close enough to ride a bike, not unless you enjoy the sounds of gunfire since the inner cities in most of the rural state's capitals are "Welcome to the jungle" time).

      So your "solution" requires technology and infrastructure that doesn't exist, would cost conservatively several hundred billion which with 90% of the right having signed a "No new taxes on teh rich EVAR!" pledge is impossible to raise, and even if you treated it as a matter of most urgent national security would be a good 20+ years before a single benefit would be had. the only things you suggested that wouldn't cost insane money simply is logistically impossible as trying to carpool when you work 40-70 miles away from work is damned near impossible to get everyone on the same page and bicycles work in NYC and LA, not in AR or MS.

      So I'm sorry but your solution is about as practical as saying "We'll put big girl panties on all the cows and turn their farts into fuel!".

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    25. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      China spends over $100bn/year on renewable energy, you guys spend less than $2bn. Several European countries seem to think they can rely on them in the very near future. You have options, you just seem to have rejected many of them on ideological or false scientific grounds.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    26. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I can't be bothered to tear your whole post apart so I'll use just one part to illustrate your ignorance:

      The electric cars are a joke, you are talking $15,000 average price for the battery pack and it will last MAYBE 7 year under ideal conditions, and freezing cold snaps like we are having now or a normal southern summer will cut that time probably by a good third,

      1. Only on Slashdot does the logic "it doesn't suit me, therefore it must be useless to everyone" fly.

      2. There are electric cars on the market right now that don't have those problems. Your information is way out of date.

      3. There are plenty of organisations and individuals using their electric cars successfully today. Explain that.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    27. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      We have too many problems to sort out before we can even think about pushing our influence to "better the world."

      Nonsense, we do a lot of good around the world. From development funds to assisting with Libya.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    28. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by metacell · · Score: 1

      Someone has to challenge the bad laws. What would you say to Gandhi?

      "You knew the Brits were going to come after you when you started talking about 'passive resistance' and violating their monopoly by spinning one cotton thread and manufacturing one gram of salt per day. You knew what the law said, so don't act fucking surprised when they come after you."

    29. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by flyneye · · Score: 1

      Don't worry about it. We are assured on a daily basis that Islam is a beautiful peaceful religion reflective of Allahs love for mankind. Worrying about this fellow who somehow offended the just tenets of his religion is wasted. I'm sure they will correct him in a loving way and rejoice with welcome to have their brother back in the fold.
      We shouldn't imagine anything bad comes from Islam or we would be complete fools to call it a religion rather than a cult and still tolerate it with our freedom of religion. If we start showing intolerance, who would be next? Scientology? The Moonies? Krisna-consciousness? Macintosh users?
      Makes ya think, doughnut?

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    30. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is still a chance, use the force Luke.
      If we nuke the living piss out of the Oil bearing Islamic countries, we can call it a conquest, give it to China in payment of debt. In 50 years or so when the radiation dies down, they can go re-tap the wells.( Of course they'll use loads of expendible people, but then China has loads of expendible people.) Meanwhile we can start shipping incarcerated gangbangers to backwoods Alaska to clear the way for tapping our oil keg up there. When we're done we can just feed them to the bears or let them become part of nature again, either way it is a green way of offsetting their carbon footprint.
      Just gotta be smart about this and honest with ourselves.
      Politically correct diatribe is neither smart nor honest.
               

    31. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by metacell · · Score: 1

      First of all, tax the rich at 75%+? Are you stupid? What do you think is going to happen when you tax the people earning the most money so much that 3/4 of it is gone before they ever even see it. In some cases that will be taxing the rich until they are below the poverty line.

      75% income tax for the rich, doesn't mean the rich will pay 75% of their income in tax. There are so many ways for the rich to avoid tax, like stock options, job benefits, tax exemptions, and so on, which are not available to the poor or middle-class. I'm not sure a drastic increase in the tax rate for the highest income brackets would make that much difference to the actual incomes of the rich.

      You also need to remember, that when we include sales tax, alcohol tax, and so on, in the equation, the middle class pays as large a percentage of their income in tax as the rich do. The US-American tax system is nearly flat in that range.

      That being said, I'm not sure it would bring in that much money anyway if we could tax the rich, because they're so few compared to the middle class.

    32. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by operagost · · Score: 1

      As soon as we can get over our own God addiction, we can start preaching to the rest of the world to grow the hell up.

      You think moral relativism is the solution? Ironic.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    33. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      ...we can't have a "civilized" society as we know it without the things we have from other countries at Walmart prices....

      This is a fundamental fallacy in your thinking. "Civilized" society as we know it has no dependency on material things, but relates to how we treat each other.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    34. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by HeckRuler · · Score: 1
      While I agree with you morally, we can't have a "civilized" society as we know it without the things we have from other countries at Walmart prices.

      What? Yes we can. We exploited the third-world nations of Korea, Tiawan, and Japan after WWII and now they're first world nations. China looks like they're moving the same way. Oh so slowely they're developing a middle class, who won't tolerate oppressive abuse.

      But that's talking about cheap goods. The topic is the repressive oil-producing countries. That's cheap gas, not goods. And again, YES, we can have our "civilization as we know it" without cheap gas. There are alternatives, expensive gas, and jesus christ dude, taking the bus will not be the end of our civilization. Flying internationally may return to being a thing for the upper crust. oh noes.

      We have too many problems to sort out before we can even think about pushing our influence to "better the world."

      This is just so wrong on two levels. First, we will always have problems, crisis, and things to distract us. A few years ago the complaint would be that we're too freaked out from a couple buildings falling over. Before that would be that we're too busy seeing if our leader got a blowjob. Important stuff. Apparently. No, we will never be more ready to deal with the world's problems then we are right now. There will ALWAYS be this level of problems. They come in different flavors, but there will always be this amount.
      But this statement of your is wrong in a different way: We don't WANT to "push our influence to make a better world". We just want to stop sucking on the teet of oil nations. We most certainly don't want to invade oil-rich nations, that's turns out to be an absolutely retarded idea. Who would have guessed. (Me and most of my political party, that's who). We don't even particularly want to have the soft push that diplomats and businessmen have behind close doors. Or the cultural victory of having McDonalds and Starbucks on every corner.

      No. What we want to do is to stop empowering these oppressive nations. Set ourselves up to use alternatives to oil.

      But if you want to preach, you had better start convincing the foot soldiers who make it all possible to stop serving "the bad guys." Problem with that is if you were to convince the US foot soldiers to stop supporting the bad guys, there will be some OTHER really bad guys who have some guys you can't reach to convince will come over here and start pushing their will all over us.

      Whoa whoa whoa.
      You're saying that if we convince people to stop enlisting to exert pressure for a change in our foreign policy... that "other really bad guys" will come and "push their will all over us"? You mean Canada is going to see a dip in our troop enrollment and take that opportunity to invade us? Really? Did that make sense when you typed it?

      It's one thing to boycott products which are not necessary. It's another to boycott the world's life blood. There's more riding on this than you can possibly imagine or want to consider.

      Come on, we want to stop having a "world life blood" and start using alternatives. There are plenty of ways to power the grid. There are ways to store that power make use it portable. There are a bucketload of technical, logistical, political, and social problems. What I'm working on in this post is the social one. The world would be a better place if we didn't use so much oil. Do you honestly believe otherwise?

    35. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.earthlings.com/ this is the real world, even in countries like USA and world wide. When Human will start not to act as monster!?

    36. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YES.NO weapons and no travellers should anymore travel in countries, who governments acting as monsters and have no respekt to other humans and ANIMALS
      like you will see here. The worst I ever saw and I cannot understand, how montreuse human can be. And why no one is stopping them for ever. Monsters like this should not live on our earth. Some one who is doing such terrible killings and misstreatings, will also kill and mistreat children and women. Thats for sure! http://www.earthlings.com/

    37. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 1

      Except Ghandi wasn't so stupid as to be surprised that the Brits came after him since he studied law in England, he knew what he was doing, he was making a cause, and he had plenty of local support as well.

      You think this guy is going to get the same level of local support in Saudi Arabia that Ghandi had in India against a foreign occupancy?

      --
      If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
    38. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      While I agree with you morally, we can't have a "civilized" society as we know it without the things we have from other countries at Walmart prices.

      Yes, god forbid we stop making a few people ludicrously rich at everyone else's expense.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    39. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by erroneus · · Score: 1

      Do you think "morality" is the sole (soul?) domain of religion? You've been drinking the koolaid haven't you.

    40. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by erroneus · · Score: 1

      When things get scarce, THAT is when civilization breaks down. This is when you will see clearly what people are willing to do to other people when they want something bad enough. A simple example of "civilization" breaking down might be found in what happened when alcohol was prohibited in the U.S. Did we have the same or less civilization during that time? I don't think it needs more illustration than that. But I hold that it is precisely because we live in a land of plenty that we enjoy the peaceful civilization we have today.

    41. Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      When things get scarce, THAT is when civilization breaks down. This is when you will see clearly what people are willing to do to other people when they want something bad enough. A simple example of "civilization" breaking down might be found in what happened when alcohol was prohibited in the U.S.

      You are still mistaken. So our cheap plastic toys are gone. Our cheap cell phones. We actually don't "need" either one to live. Most people would adapt just fine, and there won't be a break down in civilization as we know it because the supply of cheap new things stopped coming. There are still items available, and perhaps not everyone gets to drive that big bad cadillac escalade. So what. They'll adapt. Now if you prevented them from having any car at all, then you'd have problems.

      BTW, prohibition wasn't a total breakdown in society either, it was just short of a rebellion against a group of "we know what you need better than you people"

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  2. A second just Justice.... Please by del_diablo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As far as I know, most western countries have a policy that states "If a man will be executed upon being sent to a country, you are not allowed to send this man to the country, nor are you allowed to deport him to a country that may deport him to the country in question", or something similar. Disregard the lack of Lawyer shargon, but instead: Why was this rule not followed?

    1. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by TuomasK · · Score: 5, Informative

      Western country.. Malaysia?

      --
      The truth or interpretation..
    2. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Malaysia isn't a western country and probably doesn't have that rule.

    3. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Ogi_UnixNut · · Score: 5, Informative

      Probably because he wasn't deported from a western country? He was deported from one Muslim country (Malaysia) to another (Saudi Arabia). AFAIK Malaysia is very friendly with Saudi Arabia, so it's no surprise they deported the guy back as soon as they could.

    4. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That only applies to countries that themselves don't have the death penalty. Malaysia does have the death penalty. Besides that, this is still probably even a crime in Malaysia, since they have Shariah law. I think he was only deported to Saudi Arabia for his trial because he is a citizen of Saudi Arabia.

    5. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by rabbit994 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because Malaysia is mostly Muslim and they think it's totally cool that Saudi Arabia wants to execute this guy over bashing "the prophet".

      Note, when you are fleeing a country for religious reasons, don't flee to another country that is same religion as one you are fleeing from. Double if it's the same state religion. Pick a place that doesn't care like Netherlands or Belgium.

    6. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Because Malaysia is not a western country but a corrupt 3rd world nation?

      Thing is Malaysia does not have an extradition treaty with Saudi Arabia. It does have such treaties with other countries including the USA: http://www.kln.gov.my/web/guest/bd-bilateral_treaties
      So it is technically strange for him to be extradited so easily.

      But whatever it is, it's a majority muslim country, so not a good destination/stopover choice for him.

    7. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by joocemann · · Score: 1

      Something tells me that this expression of religious fundamentalist violence will not be noticed by the war on aforementioned....

    8. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 1

      Who knows, maybe the news will spread, there will be a global response, and Saudi Arabia will cave to diplomatic pressure and simply jail him for life instead of execute him. It happens every so often for women sentenced senselessly in Arab nations.

    9. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by icebike · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Malaysia isn't a western country and probably doesn't have that rule.

      Malaysia probably has just the opposite rule, considering The Malaysian constitution states that Islam is the state religion.

      One has to wonder why this guy would flee to any Muslim Majority nation, let alone one with an official "state religion" of Islam.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    10. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Skapare · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Nevertheless, Malaysia will be one of the targets for the coming "occupy" protests over this.

      --
      now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    11. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by ilguido · · Score: 4, Informative

      It seems he was fleeing to New Zealand, he stopped in Malaysia because it is an airline hub.

    12. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by nedlohs · · Score: 4, Informative

      Because Malaysia has the death penalty, outside of wartime treason, themselves (unlike most western countries, the USA being the only exception) so why wouldn't they extradite somewhere else that also does?

      Of course Malaysia isn't a Western country no matter how hard you squint either.

      On a side note, Saudi Arabia executed someone for witchcraft last year, so one can only assume the burden of proof isn't exactly high. Or they actually have real live witches casting spells of course...

    13. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by znrt · · Score: 0

      Because Malaysia is not a corrupt western country but a corrupt 3rd world nation?

      ftfy

      Thing is Malaysia does not have an extradition treaty with Saudi Arabia. It does have such treaties with other countries including the USA: http://www.kln.gov.my/web/guest/bd-bilateral_treaties

      it's just natural for corrupt western countries to have agreements with corrupt 3d world nations. corruption is the coincidence.

      So it is technically strange for him to be extradited so easily.

      not the least, see above.

      But whatever it is, it's a majority muslim country, so not a good destination/stopover choice for him.

      with this i can fully agree. poor thing should have fled further away. after all it was just muslim fundamentalism chasing him, it's not like it was american imperialism who was afer him and there would be no safe place in the world to hide anyway.

    14. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Paracelcus · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I would rail and rant about the savage, barbaric, murderous monsters, but upon reflection, the USofA kills dozens of people of questionable guilt primarily to make local prosecutors and police officials look good! So aside from the fact that (here) the condemned get a drug cocktail that presumably does not hurt (much), the Saudis use a sword to saw your head off (it's slow & bloody)! Anybody who would travel to this medieval shitpile is asking for it.

      --
      I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
    15. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Informative

      Pick a place that doesn't care like Netherlands or Belgium.

      Maybe you meant this as a joke, but both the Netherlands and Belgium arrest people for insulting religious figures, expressing particularly unpopular opinions, and (for Belgium) going out in public wearing clothing associated with unpopular religions. If you want references, just google for either country plus "hate speech", "holocaust denial", or "veil ban". These are hardly countries that "don't care" about thought control.

    16. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't that (airport) international territory then? That makes the arrest similar to stopping a plane mid air forcing it to land because someone aboard has committed a crime.

    17. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      That's the part I'm wondering. Either this guy was really dumb, didn't have much choice (maybe he couldn't get a visa to a better country for some odd reason), or maybe he was intercepted while his escape plan was still in motion (maybe he had to go to Malaysia first because they're so friendly with SA, and step 2 was to jump from there to someplace better, and he was caught before that point, faster than he thought he'd be).

    18. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by sosume · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Malaysia was responding to an Interpol warrant. The real question is why Interpol cooperates in prosecuting thought crimes. Some heads are going to roll, and not just that of the arrested journalist..

    19. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by ilguido · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well the original report (from the Guardian) reads:

      Police in Kuala Lumpur said Hamza Kashgari, 23, was detained at the airport "following a request made to us by Interpol" the international police cooperation agency, on behalf of the Saudi authorities.

    20. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Grishnakh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The question isn't whether the country has total freedom of speech and religion, it's whether the target country will deport this guy for this offense.

      If a country doesn't like Islam too much, and bans people wearing Islamic veils in public, then it's quite likely that someone showing up there from an Islamic country, on the run because he insulted the Islamic religion, probably isn't going to be deported.

    21. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by CadentOrange · · Score: 5, Informative
      I can't tell if you're being serious of facetious. Malaysia has this thing called the Internal Security Act, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_Security_Act_(Malaysia). It has been used frequently to put down opposition, most notably during the 1980s as part of Operation Lalang.

      Be assured that any "occupy" protests will be dealt with swiftly and severely.

    22. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by tragedy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's only ever treated as "international territory" when it's a convenient fiction for the host nation. No nation that I'm aware of has a problem arresting people that it wants to arrest off planes that are just passing through. The US and other western nations certainly don't.

    23. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Considering the volume of air traffic between Saudi Arabia and Malaysia, it is entirely possible that this was simply the first step in his travel plans.

      I am an expert on fleeing countries, having watched most of the Bourne and Mission Impossible franchises (except for the hour long car chases - I fast forward through those), and can unequivocally state that your first mission (should you choose to accept it) is to clear datum. Take the first plane, submarine, camel or rickshaw out of the immediate jurisdiction of the people whom you have irritated. Then, it is just an exercise in staying ahead of inter-jurisdictional cooperation.

      Thankfully we have Interpol available to efficiently process detain-for-extradition requests for international terrorists such as individuals who voice their opinion.

    24. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Grishnakh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's a different problem in the USA. At least the people being killed are supposedly guilty of a real crime, mainly murder (I don't think you can be executed for anything less). Everyone in the world agrees that murder is a heinous crime and that people shouldn't be allowed to just murder others and not be punished for it somehow. The problem is that the judicial process used to try and convict these people is severely flawed, so that occasionally non-guilty people are executed for a crime they did not commit, like Troy Davis.

      This, while certainly bad, is still a far cry from a country where people are routinely executed for things which should not be crimes (and even more, shouldn't be capital crimes, rather than slap-on-the-wrist crimes), such as leaving the Islamic religion, saying bad things about it, having sex outside of marriage, and many other petty things that here in the West simply aren't crimes at all for the most part (except for some silly European countries where for some dumb reason, they do prosecute people for "insulting a religion", but the penalty is usually a small fine like $100, i.e. slap-on-the-wrist).

    25. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being a nazi may earn you a short prison sentence, but they won't execute you there.

    26. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by viperidaenz · · Score: 0, Troll

      I can't think of a better way to deal with occupy protestors. Come on people! Occupy Malaysia! I'll be watching and cheering you (the authorities) on via the internet!

    27. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by viperidaenz · · Score: 2

      ... terrorists such as individuals who voice their opinion

      Especially if they do so in less than 140 characters.

    28. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by mandelbr0t · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised that Interpol allows membership from nations that would so badly abuse human rights and civil liberties. I've always considered Interpol "one of the good guys". I guess not.

      --
      "Please describe the scientific nature of the 'whammy'" - Agent Scully
    29. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      So we can be a puppet again arrest him like we did Kim Dotcom?

    30. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by anagama · · Score: 4, Insightful

      At least the people being killed are supposedly guilty of a real crime

      Like Al Alwaki, an American citizen Obama executed by drone strike because of youtube videos? At least that is all we have to go on because he was never indicted, never charged, never given a trial before being "deprived of life" as REQUIRED in the constitution. Are you saying posting videos on youtube which the Feds don't like should be a death penalty offense? Because that's where we're at right now -- state sponsored murder due to content of speech. Seems like we're more on an equal footing with SA rather than morally superior.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    31. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Stripe7 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Now here is something for Anonymous to take up. A man being executed as there is no "Freedom of Speech" in that area of the world.

    32. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Surt · · Score: 2
      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    33. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in Belgium :

      Most Belgians I know are very open towards religions, and don't really care about it as long as you don't bother them with it. We are much less religious than the US, for example.

      There's no ban on all Islamic veils, only on burka's, and the main reason is that it's very difficult to identify someone wearing a burka.

      I think there is a growing dislike though, because of some groups who want to impose sharia in Belgium ( Sharia4Belgium ) , who have disrupted some debates on Islam, and are generally good at causing trouble.

      I think the first victims will be the peaceful muslims, who will end up getting hit by both sides.

      Back on topic : I don't think they would extradite him, because the public outrage would be too great. However, He might still get killed here by some fanatical Muslim groups ( this has already happened in the Netherlands ).

    34. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Genda · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Add to that the recent execution in Texas of a man virtually everyone with a IQ outside of single digits is certain was innocent, and its pretty clear that looking good, looking hard on crime, and being a righteous Christian hard-ass (sweet Jeebus my brain hurts just putting those words together into a single fscked-up gestalt!) trumps integrity, dignity, humanity or compassion. The U.S. isn't as screwed up as the Middle-East, but there are religious idiots working hard to get us there!

      I have to agree that Interpol's complicity in this is shocking and bodes poorly for the global state of Human Rights.

    35. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by timeOday · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Yes, it is somewhat different because none of the following stories will lead to state executions, but it's a little surprising how easily a tweet or something like that can get you imprisoned in the US. It certainly doesn't require any actual violent actions (quoting Glen Greenwald):
      • A Staten Island satellite TV salesman in 2009 was sentenced to five years in federal prison merely for including a Hezbollah TV channel as part of the satellite package he sold to customers;
      • a Massachusetts resident, Tarek Mehanna, is being prosecuted now "for posting pro-jihadist material on the internet";
      • a 24-year-old Pakistani legal resident living in Virginia, Jubair Ahmad, was indicted last September for uploading a 5-minute video to YouTube that was highly critical of U.S. actions in the Muslim world, an allegedly criminal act simply because prosecutors claim he discussed the video in advance with the son of a leader of a designated Terrorist organization (Lashkar-e-Tayyiba);
      • a Saudi Arabian graduate student, Sami Omar al-Hussayen, was prosecuted simply for maintaining a website with links "to groups that praised suicide bombings in Chechnya and in Israel" and "jihadist" sites that solicited donations for extremist groups (he was ultimately acquitted);
      • and last July, a 22-year-old former Penn State student and son of an instructor at the school, Emerson Winfield Begolly, was indicted for - in the FBI's words - "repeatedly using the Internet to promote violent jihad against Americans" by posting comments on a "jihadist" Internet forum including "a comment online that praised the shootings" at a Marine Corps base, action which former Obama lawyer Marty Lederman said "does not at first glance appear to be different from the sort of advocacy of unlawful conduct that is entitled to substantial First Amendment protection."
    36. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by demonlapin · · Score: 2

      similar to stopping a plane mid air forcing it to land

      If you're in a country's airspace, you'd better believe they'll force that plane to land if they want you badly enough.

    37. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      Even with countries that have the death penalty (like the US), this would have been a clear-cut argument for political asylum. Probably should have fled to a country that doesn't execute people for words...

    38. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by mbone · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The US no longer has transit visas (except IIRC for UN diplomats). Everyone on a plane that transits the US is forced to get off and go through customs and is there subject to interrogation and arrest.

    39. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I guess I forgot that part; my brain must still think it's 2008 and Bush is still in office, when all we had to worry about was getting hassled for not staying within "free speech zones" when we spoke out, rather than the horrors that have happened under Obama.

      Interesting how back in the '08 election time, people were comparing Osama and Obama (as their names only differ by one letter), and sure enough, the two aren't that different: they both acted to murder people outside their countries without any due process or rule of law. You say that, with Obama, we're now on an equal footing with Saudi Arabia; coincidentally (or not?), Osama, Obama's near-namesake, is from SA!

    40. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      USA being the only exception

      And Japan, which isn't western but is usually included in such comparisons.

    41. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please leave the planet you whiny bitch. You're useless.

    42. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Dahamma · · Score: 2

      On a side note, Saudi Arabia executed someone for witchcraft last year, so one can only assume the burden of proof isn't exactly high. Or they actually have real live witches casting spells of course...

      Maybe it was a Harry Potter convention, in which case it was probably justified.

    43. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by kefkahax · · Score: 1

      Speaking of Troy Davis. Here in Georgia (USA), sex outside of wedlock IS illegal (so is anal sex).

    44. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being an uncloseted Nazi will earn you a lifetime in prison.

      You don't get to be free until you either stop being a Nazi or hide your Nazism.

      The only difference between the German way and the Saudi way is that only one of the two countries has the death sentence.

      This makes Germany more civilised, of course, but I don't think any of us doubted that.

    45. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      As you said, which isn't Western.

      Belarus would also be arguable, but again being old Soviet Union would not be Western...

    46. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Informative

      That's the part I'm wondering. Either this guy was really dumb, didn't have much choice (maybe he couldn't get a visa to a better country for some odd reason), or maybe he was intercepted while his escape plan was still in motion (maybe he had to go to Malaysia first because they're so friendly with SA, and step 2 was to jump from there to someplace better, and he was caught before that point, faster than he thought he'd be).

      According to Wikipedia, he was heading to New Zealand to apply to political asylum, and was arrested en route.

    47. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This Jihad thing is a bigger deal than you think. Lock and Load.

    48. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      Like when a woman is raped by her brother and then arrested for adultery? But then it becomes international news and the court will let her out if she marries her brother? Yeah, maybe they'll commute his sentence to life in prison after then kill him.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    49. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by mpoulton · · Score: 1
      --
      I am a geek attorney, but not your geek attorney unless you've already retained me. This is not legal advice.
    50. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

      Nope. Aeroplanes may be regarded as the territory of the nation where they are registered (but often aren't when on the ground). Airports are regarded as the parts of the country containing them, with the occasional exemption for border control (for example, Schiphol airport has the schengen line running right down the middle of it) to make life easier for customs and border control, but even on the 'other country' side of the lines the local laws still apply.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    51. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It's a different problem in the USA. At least the people being killed are supposedly guilty of a real crime, mainly murder (I don't think you can be executed for anything less)"

      There's actually no difference at all. Things are only a "crime" if they're against the written law in a particular country.

      Now, whether you agree with the law being broken is just or valid is another question entirely.

    52. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      You sound like a liberal, moral relativist.

      My usage of the term "real crime" should have made it obvious I don't consider written laws equal.

    53. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Casca1 · · Score: 0

      Because most of that area is % Islamic in religious preference.

      The worst part about this, is not that it only took three things to bring him the death sentence. After all, killing three children brutally is numerically equivalent, if nowhere near the same from a moral standpoint.
      What makes this worse is that simply put, he is to be considered, period, whether occurring or not, considered for Death Penalty, based upon an OPINION he holds or feels that is different from everyone else. That they proclaim to worship the same deity, that religiously they derive their Allah from the same being of Divinity that I do is appalling.
      My God may not be happy when someone sins, but... That's between God and said individual. If that action hurts no others, it is NOT OUR BUSINESS. Prove God doesn't agree. Since it cannot be, then there remains the possibility I am right, and the imaginary you wrong. Until you can prove that beyond the might makes right method, you are debating a philosophical point, a belief, based upon faith.

      Faith, as defined by Merriam-Webster, (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust

      I put my complete trust in a Deity that won't require my death if I stub my toe and curse. It may be that said Deity will condemn me to eternal damnation, but, it was my choice.

    54. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 1

      I love how drone killings are murder when Obama orders them, but proper and appropriate dealings when ordered by Bush. Nice going.

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    55. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed; it would appear that in Malaysia, a different brand of uprising would be required. More of the "Arab Spring" variety than "Occupy".

    56. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Arancaytar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Holy shit. This is a flagrant abuse of Interpol. It should result in both Saudi Arabia and Malaysia being completely kicked out immediately, and ideally blocked from issuing any extradition requests or international warrants whatsoever.

    57. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by anagama · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The drone killings were bad when Bush did it. Obama has simply gone to the next level. Bush didn't kill Americans. Bush averaged 6.5 drone attacks per year. Obama is managing to get one in every four DAYS. With respect to drone attacks, the astounding fact of the matter is that Obama is 14x more evil than Bush, and considering what an evil SOB Bush was, that's amazing.

      http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2012/02/04/get-the-data-obamas-terror-drones/

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    58. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      A smart man would have moved to New Zealand before posting the tweets. Hard to be intercepted for doing something you had not done, after all.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    59. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In any Islamist country they would be executed for similar crimes. And then executed again just to make sure they are truly dead.

      America is too soft.

    60. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by mr100percent · · Score: 2

      Oh come on, stop assuming that Malaysians are OK with such a thing. That's flat-out false; Malaysia's interpretation of the Quran is very very different than Saudi's. Malaysia's version of Islamic law doesn't even punish adultery, while Saudi considers it a capital offense.

      Malaysia is bound by an extradition treaty, do they even have any legal leeway to deny such a request? Unlike the US/UK, Malaysia probably doesn't have any laws forbidding deportation if they will be tortured/executed. To use a Florida example, when Clinton handed Elian Gonzalez back to the Cubans as part of a custody trial, Clinton wasn't endorsing communism (although many Americans loudly screamed that he was).

    61. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      As far as I know, most western countries have a policy that states "If a man will be executed upon being sent to a country, you are not allowed to send this man to the country, nor are you allowed to deport him to a country that may deport him to the country in question", or something similar. Disregard the lack of Lawyer shargon, but instead: Why was this rule not followed?

      And Muslim countries have a policy that states "lets kill as many non-Muslims, Muslims who don't take us seriously, and Muslims of the wrong sect as w can without bringing serious repercussions. What do you expect when you follow the ideal of a paedophile warlord.

    62. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Ihmhi · · Score: 5, Funny

      What was lacking is subtlety. You have to be careful when talking about Muhammad. He is a very important figure and they don't appreciate anyone saying something they consider to be blasphemous.

      If you're going to insult such a revered figure, try to be more subtle.

    63. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by cgenman · · Score: 1

      While it is a far cry to execute a convicted murderer vs a tweeter, the US does clearly have huge racial and socioeconomic bias inherent in the system. Criminals that are poor, black, and of lower IQ greatly disproportionately receive the death penalty over middle-or-upperclass white people of normal intelligence.

    64. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by dargaud · · Score: 2

      ...he insulted the Islamic religion...

      I read the tweets and I don't have a clue why they are considered an insult, much less to an imaginary entity. Can someone elaborate on that ?!?

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    65. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Add to that the recent execution in Texas of a man virtually everyone with a IQ outside of single digits is certain was innocent, and its pretty clear that looking good, looking hard on crime, and being a righteous Christian hard-ass (sweet Jeebus my brain hurts just putting those words together into a single fscked-up gestalt!) trumps integrity, dignity, humanity or compassion. The U.S. isn't as screwed up as the Middle-East, but there are religious idiots working hard to get us there!

      I have to agree that Interpol's complicity in this is shocking and bodes poorly for the global state of Human Rights.

      Add to that the recent execution in Texas of a man virtually everyone with a IQ outside of single digits is certain was innocent, and its pretty clear that looking good, looking hard on crime, and being a righteous Christian hard-ass (sweet Jeebus my brain hurts just putting those words together into a single fscked-up gestalt!) trumps integrity, dignity, humanity or compassion. The U.S. isn't as screwed up as the Middle-East, but there are religious idiots working hard to get us there!

      I have to agree that Interpol's complicity in this is shocking and bodes poorly for the global state of Human Rights.

      TO HELL WITH THE HUMAN RIGHT...

    66. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nuke em all, it's the only way to be sure.

    67. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by gtall · · Score: 1

      "paedophile warlord"? Before he was that, he used to knock over camel trains for living, then he married his main squeeze, went off into the mountains suffering late stage schizophrenia, hears voices, and a new religion was born. Like that's never happened before.

      You can always tell a religion is scam when the top banana sez there'll be no top bananas after him.

    68. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder how that applies to Julian Assange... UK -> Sweden -> USA -> sparky chair... As an aussie I will be fully pissed if this comes to pass - although at this stage I expect our rational American friends will not go all the way on this.

    69. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      On a side note, Saudi Arabia executed someone for witchcraft last year, so one can only assume the burden of proof isn't exactly high. Or they actually have real live witches casting spells of course...

      Real live "witchcraft" doesn't involve the casting of magic spells, depending on which version of it you're reading into. People have this image of folks dancing naked around a fire, chanting to Hecate so that they can smite their evil neighbour or something, but mostly, contemporary witchcraft is a naturalistic approach to the environment and our place in it, and a search for knowledge of how to effect certain changes... usually that last part involves making traditional herbal medicines from things like dandelion (the leaves and petals make a tea that's very good for bladder infections and anything else you'd need a diuretic for, and the roots can be boiled to make a pretty good coffee substitute that's also good for kidney and liver troubles). Some practitioners of witchcraft do believe in gods/goddesses, some don't, and some don't really care whether gods/goddesses exist, as long as they leave you alone. There is real science behind the medicines found in witchcraft, and many of those medicines have found their way into western medicine (you don't seriously think that Charles Frederic Gerhardt was the first person to boil willow bark, do you?). Sometimes "witchcraft" can entail directed prayer, which some practitioners do call a "spell", but that's mostly a question of perception, and some practitioners of witchcraft prefer to think of it as the subconscious mind performing the act in question... you would be surprised what the human mind is capable of, if you set your scepticism aside and let it happen.

      That being said, when you read about somebody being stoned by a village full of fanatics for witchcraft, it's usually because those fanatics believe the "hocus pocus, you're now a newt" type of witchcraft, and not the traditional "wise woman" or "wise man" type of witchcraft.

    70. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by timeOday · · Score: 1

      In any Islamist country they would be executed for similar crimes. And then executed again just to make sure they are truly dead. America is too soft.

      Why are you jealous of them? What great thing has extremism brought them?

    71. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by styrotech · · Score: 1

      Considering the volume of air traffic between Saudi Arabia and Malaysia, it is entirely possible that this was simply the first step in his travel plans.

      Yep, a large proportion of the asylum seekers and refugees from the middle east that eventually make it to NZ come through Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur being one of the major air hubs between NZ and the rest of the world.

    72. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      There are no moral absolutes, even for something like taking a human life. How is executing an accused murderer morally better than the murder in the first place? You're still taking a human life, no matter how you sugar coat it, and most of the time, there is still a chance you will be proven wrong about their guilt. (that's actually why most developed nations got rid of capital crime decades ago)

      The more amusing, and confusing, side to the debate is that an awful lot of people who have no problem with the moral implications of accidentally executing the wrong person are also adamantly against something like abortion, even when it may be medically necessary for the mental or physical health of the mother. How is it that you can be for the taking of one life, on the grounds that it's necessary to protect society, and against the taking of another life even when that act will demonstrably save a life? Where does the line get drawn? And what happens when we start throwing other monkey wrenches into the equation, like if the mother was raped? By her father? and so on.

      I'm not trying to start an argument, though I have little doubt that the above example will start one. For that, I apologize: I'm just trying to point out that morality *is* relative by its very definition. Everybody has their own limits on what they will and will not accept. While we mostly agree on certain points, like that murder is wrong, there are always going to be contexts where some people believe that killing isn't wrong, or where they redefine it as "justice" so that they can sleep at night.

      And no, I'm not trying to say that I'm perfect in my liberalism. There's just as much hypocrisy on the liberal side of the debate: I'm completely 100% against the death penalty. I believe that the justice system should be focused on preventing crime from reocurring, and not on punishment. To me, that means looking at the underlying social causes for crime, and addressing those. And yes, I am also a pacifist and a tree-hugger. But I am also pro-choice. I believe that at the end of the day, there's nothing we can do to stop a mother from aborting her fetus if that is what she really wants to do, and we would be much better off as a society if she can do that safely and legally. And there's a certain hypocrisy to that: I abhor the idea of taking a life as punishment, but I am ok with taking something that could be considered a life in order to protect another (and no, I am not going to get into a debate on when a fetus is considered alive). For me, the line gets drawn where there is a clear and present danger, and as long as that danger is removed (through incarceration for example), I don't believe we should be taking a life.

      The fact that people disagree on this kind of thing should make it absolutely clear to you that morality is relative. If it was absolute, there would be no debate.

    73. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by GumphMaster · · Score: 1

      Actually, this seems so fast that I'm sure they used their border control measures to deny entry and immediately return the journalist to his point of origin. Much cheaper and more expedient than actually holding an extradition hearing and potentially allowing appeals.

      --
      Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
    74. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would you say that? Saudi Arabia is an ally of the "west", so we have their back. It has nothing to do with "democracy", "freedom" or any of the other fictitious concepts we throw around so casually. We invade Iraq to get the big bad guy, yet the Saudi's are the worst of the bunch. Its all smoke and mirrors. Its simple imperial politics and resource grabbing.

      Hell, Osama bin Laden's whole ISSUE with the United States was our support for the evil regime in Saudi Arabia. You know, them being Saudi revolutionaries and all that. Err, I mean "terrorists".

    75. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder what would happen if a Saudi salesman tried to sell an Israeli TV channel...

    76. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      Who are you to decide what should and shouldn't be a crime in a foreign land?

    77. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by mikael · · Score: 1

      Malaysia is half Chinese Christian and Buddhist, half native Muslim. Muslims prefer state employment, Chinese like being self-employed and running their own businesses. That holds the country together providing nobody tries to upset the boat.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    78. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well the executed the person for various crime comitted under the "disguise" of wichcraft, so it does not really compare.
      But islam is a "political religion" where there is no separation of religion and state.
      (as was the catholic religion untill relatively recently, and many others still are).

      The issue with "apostasie" is that it close the justification of using the coran as the base for the law, and therefore break the whole legal fundation of the local laws.
      It is interesting to see that the US accepted to have the coran as a (read the) base for the constitution and laws of Irak.
      This means that in Irak (and afghanistan) under us "protectorat" the situation would be exactly the same.

      In practice the unluck of the guy was that he had "too much success", many things are possible in KSA as long as you do not attract too much attention.
      Hopefully he will be able to claim that he was "misunderstood" and was thinking of his fiancé and not of the prophet...
      But otherwise, he's "cooked".
      And nobody will really want to intervene in the internal affairs of a foreign contry over one person.

      The way out would be to say that either you do not have laws against apostasy and it's "ok", or you do have laws, and therefore not being apostate might be out of fear and not faith, so you remove the possibility of your fellows to have a sincere faith, wich is a form of apostasy and since you want the death penalty for this you should have it, starting with "you"...
      But nobody cares enough...

    79. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by ddtracy · · Score: 0

      Because this guy is stupid beyond belief. He decided to break local laws and regulations in a state that is the 'mothership' of this religion and that actually enforces these laws with severity. Laws that he before getting visa/entry to country signed off that he was under. No matter what one thinks about these laws, and other countries stupid laws that suppresses freedom of expression, this guy decided to insult them too. And no matter where you go you are always under local laws, break a law in USA, England, Europe, Scandinavia, Israel no matter where you are from, those local laws applies even though you think they are foolish. He should have waited until he was in different jurisdiction and then tried to 'promote' freedom of speech instead of setting in back a few decades.

    80. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by ddtracy · · Score: 0

      No more pedofile than the vatican where the age of consent is 12 no matter if the child has reached sexual maturity or not. Only in 1910 England decided to change the age of consent from 10-12 (depending on where) to a higher age. In spain the age of consent is 13, Austria 14, whether they take notice of 'reaching sexual maturity' or not I do not know. And..do not forget the torah, bible, talmud and the new testament...some go as low as 3 months.

    81. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by ddtracy · · Score: 0

      That is the bible you are quoting and not shariah. They might be synonymous but they are certainly not the same.

      Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT

      'If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.'

    82. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by ddtracy · · Score: 0

      Muhammed was a historical person and is very well documented by non-muslim sources that lived at the same time. All the way from kings, to scribes and historians. Most other if not all of the other prophets have no documentation whatsoever. My professor once told me only ignorants deny his existence. Denying that he existed even though there are facts to support this is not the same as denying him being what he claimed to be.

    83. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read the tweets and I don't have a clue why they are considered an insult, much less to an imaginary entity. Can someone elaborate on that ?!?

      Saying Muhammed's name in a Welsh accent is enough to cause Muslims worldwide to throw a hissy fit and demand death to anyone who'd insult their misappropriated Jewish god and his flying horse riding nutjob of a messenger. It seems best to avoid any country that would deify, in all but name, this unoriginal man who combined existing scripture with schizophrenia and a strong libido to come up with with the shit sandwich that is Islam.

      Bhumibol Adulyadej and Muhammed are normal everyday guys who like nothing more than to suck the dicks of stray dogs. I once saw Muhammed pull his cheeks so far apart that his insides fell out. No-one can truly understand Islam until they've cum inside Muhammed's cavernous anus.

      Posting anon because Islam is the religion of peace.

    84. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by sr180 · · Score: 1

      Sorry, Malaysia is significantly more complex than that. First you have the ethnic Malays, they speak Bahasa in a dialect similar to Indonesia. Officially they are Muslim, practically its very different. Freedom of religion is somewhat protected in the Malaysian legal system (outside of the Sharia courts). Then you have the Chinese. Generally the Chinese are Christian or Buddhist as you mention. There is also a significant Indian population which has their influences as well. In the major centers you have a (somewhat) significant expat population - helping to modernise the country. It makes for one very big melting pot of culture, and not that they dont have their problems, they seem to be succeeding at multi-culturism much better than anyone else.

      --
      In Soviet Russia the insensitive clod is YOU!
    85. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now here is something for Anonymous to take up. A man being executed as there is no "Freedom of Speech" in that area of the world.

      ... and without backlash from drug cartels trying to kill them. Might even gain some respect and garner good will if they took up the cause.

      Course that alone might keep them from doing it. ... it would just be for the lolz.

    86. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hell, Osama bin Laden's whole ISSUE with the United States was our support for the evil regime in Saudi Arabia. You know, them being Saudi revolutionaries and all that. Err, I mean "terrorists".

      Oh ... those evil Saudi dignitaries ... you mean like Osama Bin Laden's family? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_Laden_family

      Please, pull the other one.

      The Bin Ladin's were (are?) trying to control the Arab world the same way certain other families are the major power brokers behind other parts of the world.

    87. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      Part of that may be systemic bias, the other part may very well be perfectly fair. After all, I'm pretty sure poor people tend to commit murders and other violent crimes more often middle-class or rich people. I'm also quite sure that black people tend to be poorer on average than white people (I won't get into the causes for this, historical, etc., just that that's the current state), and as said before, poor people tend to commit more violent crimes than others. Finally, what makes you think lower-IQ people wouldn't commit more violent crimes than smarter people? It should be pretty self-evident that smarter people understand consequences better (and maybe also their odds at getting away with something if they do contemplate committing a crime) than dumb people, and would thus avoid doing things to cause them to wind up in prison. So it shouldn't be any surprise that poor, dumb people, and also socioeconomic groups that tend to be poorer, would be over-represented on death row.

      Now, it wasn't completely clear from your writing, but if you're talking about only people who have been convicted of violent crimes, and you're alleging that those groups get the death penalty for the same crimes more often than richer white people (I don't know if this is true or not; it seems that you might be implying that, not sure), then that would be a problem, and can probably be chalked up to richer people having better lawyers, which obviously isn't fair at all, or possibly due to juries being biased, which isn't fair either and would show another reason why juries aren't really a very good idea.

    88. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      There are no moral absolutes, even for something like taking a human life. How is executing an accused murderer morally better than the murder in the first place? You're still taking a human life, no matter how you sugar coat it,

      I never said it was. Please point to where you think I said that.

      What is obvious, however, is that it is morally wrong to murder people (this is different from self-defense BTW), while the same is not true for "insulting" a religion. If you can actually defend something like "insulting" a religion as making it OK to murder, or a "crime" like "being too westernized" and "disgracing your family" as making it OK to murder, then there is something seriously wrong with you and your moral compass.

    89. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      If you think it's OK to murder people for merely expressing their opinion, then you are a fucked-up person and there is no hope for you.

      Note, however, I don't advocate invading said foreign lands and forcing our (superior) morality on them (aside from the fact that our government here in the USA is just about as bad, but that's beside the point), because that never works in practice. People have to change on their own. But that doesn't mean we have to enable their barbaric behavior in any way; we should shun them instead.

    90. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Nicknamename · · Score: 1

      That is the Old Testament you are quoting. Also, two different pieces of writing which emerged out of similar socioeconomic contexts might be similar.

      --
      Hitler hates pedophiles.
    91. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and never a good sign when the "prophet" receives revelations to enhance his sex life. Muhammed was well known for his oddly convenient revelations that allowed him extra wives and exemption from the commandment against marrying a divorced woman. Yeah, God commanded him to marry a nice bit of tail that his adopted son had divorced. Muslims, seriously, how fucking obvious does it have to be before you realise that this Muhammed was just one in a long line of huxters?

    92. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by cavreader · · Score: 1

      The majority of civilians in the Muslim dominated countries actively collaborate with those seeking to suppress their freedoms using religion and explicit violence. The uprisings in the Arab world have accomplished nothing except provide a distraction so the Islamic dominated political groups can expand their influence under the cover of the "Democratic" uprising. This is what happened during the Iranian revolution in 1979. The visible leaders of the 1979 revolution were not Islamic fanatics. They were mostly college students that were advocating liberalism and progressive ideologies. The Islamist political groups were in a minority prior to the revolution. While those leading the revolution were busy holding hostages and taking advantage of a weak US President the Islamic groups were organizing and implement their political strategy to take control and it worked perfectly.

    93. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is real science behind the medicines found in witchcraft, and many of those medicines have found their way into western medicine (you don't seriously think that Charles Frederic Gerhardt was the first person to boil willow bark, do you?).

      Real results, sure. Real science? Scoff.

      Also, witches tend to get stoned because the religions of Abraham (that is to say, the religions of over half the Earth's populace) all agree that killing witches is righteous. Whether they be wise old biddies or newtcrafters.

    94. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Obviously, a lot of Americans (including almost all Republican voters, and half of the Democrat ones) want to make this country a lot more like Saudi Arabia.

    95. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      You're the one that threw the phrase "liberal, moral relativist" like it was an insult. :) Personally, I don't take it as an insult: I take it as a compliment, because I am a "moral relativist", in that I recognize that morality is relative to the beholder. But when I encounter somebody who seems to believe that it's an insult, I feel an obligation to point out that we're all relativists, whether we recognize it or not.

      Personally, no, I don't think that those issues you mention is worth killing somebody. I thought I had made myself abundantly clear that I'm against the death penalty for any sort of crime, because I don't believe that *punishment* serves the purposes of *justice*, and that a criminal justice system should be focused on preventing crime from happening, and not on punishing the wicked.

      But that morality is relative. It is based in my own upbringing, my own education, and the beliefs of those I held as role models when I was developing my own ideas on how the world works. Such violence is absolutely abhorrent to my own view of the world, but I also have no doubt that to the people making the laws in Saudi Arabia, it is just, and the will of god. And as absolutely cold and heartless as it makes me seem, the journalist in question should have known not to insult the prophet on a day dedicated to his memory, in a country where apostasy is a crime. Somebody who wasn't Muslim could probably have gotten away with it (after all, it isn't apostasy if you're not Muslim to begin with, though there would have still been consequences), but it was unwise, at best, and fleeing through another country that follows the same laws was similarly unwise (why on earth didn't he flee to Europe to claim asylum? there's a large number of European countries you can fly to direct from Riyadh, and no risk of extradition on a stopover). If you want to change the system, you need to work within the confines of that system. If you push too far, too soon, you risk galvanizing your opposition in such a way that you'll never convince them to see things your way.

    96. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Yes, it is somewhat different because none of the following stories will lead to state executions, but it's a little surprising how easily a tweet or something like that can get you imprisoned in the US.

      Where there is far too high of a chance you will be subjected to prison rape, get infected with AIDS and ultimately die a slow painful death. So it may not be a pro forma state execution, but it may still be a state execution.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    97. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      If you think it's OK to murder people for merely expressing their opinion, then you are a fucked-up person and there is no hope for you.

      Grow up. Speech is a tool. It can be dangerous or harmless. Who are you to decide which it is in all cases?

      Note, however, I don't advocate invading said foreign lands and forcing our (superior) morality on them (aside from the fact that our government here in the USA is just about as bad, but that's beside the point),

      This is not beside the point at all. How do you think George Bush Jr got all those people in Iraq killed? He never shot anybody himself, or pressed the button to bomb them. But he used speech to tell others what he wanted done. Aside from some Americans, most people around the world consider his expressions of opinion so criminal that he should be tried for them and convicted by the International Court of Justice.

      The same is true with Bin Laden, BTW. Do you think he personally bombed people in NY? No, he used speech to express his opinion on what should be done. Most of the same Americans who defended Bush were quite happy to see Bin Laden murdered for expressing an opinion. Funny, eh?

      So yes, it's OK for laws to regulate expressions of opinions.

    98. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Phrogman · · Score: 1

      Real Science no, of course not. Using boiled willow bark as a remedy for various ailments based on praxis, very very likely.

      As for the killing of witches - its worth noting that the word translated as "witch" is in Hebrew the word for "poisoner" - but that to ignorant Europeans the two meant the same thing.

      All of the Abrahamic religions are in essence illogical and violent at their core. Despite the surface message of peace and love etc, most have been the inspiration for massive amounts of human suffering, torture, murder, abuse, rape and depravity.

      Monotheism is Evil, wearing a friendly smile.

      --
      "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
    99. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      You're a fucking moron, and no better than the Nazis, the Saudis, and anyone who seeks to restrict speech and control thoughts.

    100. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      Oh noes! Godwin Alert! You lose.

    101. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by deburg · · Score: 1

      Malaysia has this thing called the Internal Security Act

      Please note that the ISA (Internal Security Act) was enacted by the British during the post WW2 period for use against communist insurgents that were plaguing the country then. ISA was then extended due to activities by Indonesian saboteurs and the 1969 racial/political riots.

      It has been used frequently to put down opposition, most notably during the 1980s as part of Operation Lalang.

      The current usage of the ISA as a brickbat was introduced then PM when he was voted out of the ruling political party. Much progress on Malaysia's democracy was lost that time.

    102. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Thanks for sharing your research with us. I suppose everyone has to have a hobby.

    103. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck you you fucking prick

      Lighten up, Francis.

    104. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Shut up, you stupid fuckwad. Godwin himself even thinks you're a moron; there's nothing wrong with making comparisons to Nazis, unless you're a vile person like yourself who thinks "speech codes" are a good idea.

    105. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool so that makes it okay? I wonder if you land at an international airport, if they will send you to the vatican for special treatment for posting this fact..

    106. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      and more importantly, not beheaded

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    107. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      this is wrong

      beheading someone for a tweet is clearly far more wrong

      in fact, in life, every single judgment you can make is a matter of degrees. there is no value taking an idealized point of view and judging all governments from it, becaus eno government will ever reach your standards. your stadnards are unrealistic

      no government that has ever existed or ever will exist will not do something wrong. so to say "this government did something wrong and that government did something wrong so they are all the same" is a useless way of thinking about the world

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    108. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by I(rispee_I(reme · · Score: 1

      I am a human being who believes murder is wrong no matter where it takes place.

      Are you suggesting that capital punishment in the U.S. somehow excuses Saudi Arabia's behavior?

    109. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On a side note, Saudi Arabia executed someone for witchcraft last year, so one can only assume the burden of proof isn't exactly high. Or they actually have real live witches casting spells of course...

      She weighed the same as a duck! What further proof are you looking for?

    110. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by kaliann · · Score: 4, Informative

      Tweet said: "I have loved things about you and I have hated things about you and there is a lot I don't understand about you. I will not pray for you"

      The tweets were put out on Mohammed's birthday (a BIG holy day) and were assumed to reference the prophet. I'm guessing that both the hate and the not praying are considered no-nos.

      He is reported to have apologized, which may have confirmed his guilt for those in Saudi Arabia looking to convict him of blasphemy/apostasy, which is a capital offense in Saudi Arabia.

    111. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Cimexus · · Score: 1

      Problem is, most direct flights from Saudi Arabia are to other Muslim countries (for the simple reason that that's where most trade, business and family ties will be for people wanting to travel to/from SA). This guy was detained while transiting through Malaysia to another destination. Might be quite hard to find direct flights from Saudi Arabia to places like the Netherlands that don't pass through 'hostile' territory on the way.

    112. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Cimexus · · Score: 1

      Lol what?

      The US is the WORST example to use here, as unlike virtually all other nations (Western or otherwise), America has no concept of 'transit'. You physically have to clear US immigration and customs if your flight passes through the US, just as if that was your final destination, even if you are only there for a 90 minute refuelling stop/plane change. It's ridiculous.

    113. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by mr_snarf · · Score: 1

      The airport in Kuala Lumpur (capital of Malaysia) is very commonly used as a sort of 'hub' when travelling to/from Australia/New Zealand to/from elsewhere in the world. Its not surprising he had a stop over there. Source: I'm a West Australian and find that 'KL' is frequently used in conversation to mean that specific airport.

      --
      printf("Goodbye cruel world!\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b");
    114. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      I don't think anyone would put Belarus in the category of "civilized states". It's a totalitarian state that's worse than Russia in many ways.

    115. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by kaliann · · Score: 1

      On average, black defendants are assigned more severe punishments than whites for the same crimes. This includes capital crimes, where black defendants are much more likely to be sentenced to death.

      There is plenty of research available on this topic, and I encourage you to look into it. It's something worth knowing as a citizen, as the justice system is - in a way - representing you, a member of The People.

    116. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      No, I'm suggesting that the system of laws and government of Saudi Arabia is for Saudi Arabian citizens to decide, not Americans or Europeans.

    117. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because Malaysia is another dip shit third world tinpot government. I should know I lived there before. Just because they can spend millions whitewashing their image using some dodgy PR company doesn't make them a developed nation.

    118. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      In my city the only thing they did was destroy an inner city park with their tents and hung out rent free living off the council facilities for 108 days.
      The only follow-on effect of their protesting is there is now a company being paid to re-landscape the park.
      The only occupy protestors with any credible cause would be the ones who occupied wall street.

    119. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by tragedy · · Score: 1

      The US is a pretty bad offender. I'm pretty sure there aren't many nations, however, which would have a problem forcing people out of any area that could be considered "international" into their own jurisdiction when they have someone they want in their clutches.

      I will admit that the US is pretty bad. In modern US jurisprudence they've virtually eliminated the concept of jurisdiction. They tend to consider their own citizens subject to US law wherever they go and other countries citizens subject to US law in their own countries. I believe that there are several court cases in the US affirming the right of the US to kidnap people from other countries to face trial in the US. Those are very bad examples to set for the rest of the world and only encourage actions like the one in the article since they leave one of the loudest potential voices for human rights in the world mute.

    120. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by I(rispee_I(reme · · Score: 1

      I'll see your "Saudi Arabia is a sovereign state" and raise you a "humanity transcends borders".

    121. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These people were all extradited to the USA, via an interpol request, to face their "crimes"?

    122. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      Would you like to trade your "humanity transcends borders" for a "Saudi Arabians aren't human", or would you prefer a "Saudi Arabians are human, so their ideas transcend borders"?

    123. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by flyingsquid · · Score: 5, Informative
      This makes a complete mockery of Interpol's constitution. This is taken directly from the constitution on their web site:

      "Article 3. It is strictly forbidden for the Organization to undertake any intervention or activities of a political, military, religious or racial character."

    124. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Ltap · · Score: 1

      It's similar to the classic "crime" of Wrecking during the Stalinist Purges. Anyone who could remotely be considered to be undermining the Russian economy could be convicted of it and it was considered a form of sabotage. In this case, they didn't care what he said; instead, they cared that he had said it in a way others might have read it or heard it. The idea was that, by taking a liberal stance with Islam, he might encourage others to do the same. The Saudi monarchy uses a conservative version of Islam to reinforce its rule, so undermining (or disagreeing with, which to them is undermining) their interpretation of Islam is undermining their authority. Which it is, in a way, but there shouldn't be anything wrong with undermining a despotic regime.

      Consider the Papal theocracy (the papacy) in Europe, or simply in Italy until the mid-19th century. When your head of state, head of government, and head of religion are the same person (or if you head of state and head of government draw their authority from religion), objecting to or disagreeing with the state-enforced religion is undermining the basis for rule ("divine right") for that ruler. Without this excuse, the populace have a tendency to see that the ruler is manifestly unfit and ... remove him from rule. Which is what the Saudis are afraid of, especially since this has happened very recently and is happening right now, very close to them. What they are relying on is the understandable coincidence of liberal political beliefs and liberal religious beliefs in the same people, so the latter can be an excuse to haul people away to stop them from implementing the former. Any sort of anti-authoritarian or believer in free speech and thought is an automatic opponent to them, because by expressing themselves freely, they encourage others to do so as well, and if people were to express things freely, they might just do something like express their hatred of the reigme.

      I hope that clears things up for you.

      --
      Yet Another Tech Blog
      (but so much more, including game and movie reviews)
      http://yanteb.peasantoid.org
    125. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by I(rispee_I(reme · · Score: 1

      No. The former has no trade value. As for the latter, those ideas are too inhumane to be human.

      Cheer up; it'll soon be spring all over again.

    126. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by schlachter · · Score: 1

      Is interpol supposed to decide which laws it should up hold? Or is it a police force that can assist when a person has committed a serious crime before fleeing his country of origin? Not rhetorical, just don't know where the boundaries are.

      --
      My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
    127. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by CadentOrange · · Score: 1

      Malaysia has this thing called the Internal Security Act

      Please note that the ISA (Internal Security Act) was enacted by the British during the post WW2 period for use against communist insurgents that were plaguing the country then. ISA was then extended due to activities by Indonesian saboteurs and the 1969 racial/political riots.

      This wonderfully illustrates the famous Ben Franklin quote: "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." It also goes to show that laws are rarely repealed, only "embraced and extended".

    128. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Cimexus · · Score: 1

      Yeah true. If a country really wanted someone I doubt they'd give a crap whether they'd cleared immigration or not.

      I suppose I was just venting since those stupid US rules are painful and make travel from where I live to quite a few countries impossible to do without giving ten fingerprints and all my personal information to the US Govt. *grumble*

    129. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Securityemo · · Score: 1

      Human morality is relative, but it isn't absolutely relative. It's based in animal instinct, and that instinct is constant even if it's not equally strong in everyone or potentially distorted by neurobiological disorders or injury. These religions have heaped needless made-up constructs on top of these. Also, living in relative poverty might have a lot to do with it.

      --
      Emotions! In your brain!
    130. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parent is modded "informative", yet the Netherlands just pushed a EU demand to release the blogger, and offered him a safe haven. I.e. you are totally wrong and uninformed. You are referring to the hilarious "hate speech" trial concerning Mr. Wilders. He won, they crushingly lost. No one was arrested, you made that up, you shouldn't do that. Tssk, tsssk.

    131. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by dargaud · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I didn't know they prayed to their prophet (which I have no doubt did exist), I simply assumed it refered to their god.

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    132. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by ocularsinister · · Score: 1

      I don't deny your figures, but I suspect that cause may not be so much that Obama likes drones more, rather the fact that drone technology finally went from mediocre to very good over the last few years. It is understandable that under such circumstances their use would increase.

    133. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but it's Islam too. If rape cannot be proven (requiring *four male witnesses* since female testimony is inadmissable) then the accusation of rape then becomes a confession of Zina (unlawful intercourse) on the part of the female victim, the punishment for which is often stoning. You can deny this is the case but this happens all the time in the Middle East. Clearly somebody over there agrees with this interpretation of the Shariah. Christianity has nothing to do with this topic. Let me know when you find a news article of a Christian stoning a woman to death for the crime of being raped.

    134. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      It's required that all Muslims pray for Muhammad. He publicly refused ("I will not pray for you"). That, among other things, sealed the deal.

    135. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      Bin Ladin was opposed to the Saudi *monarchy*, not the religious aspect of the society governed by Shariah. Nothing about the enforcement of Shariah would change. In fact, it would likely get a lot worse without the secular leaning Monarchy to help moderate things. That's not even mentioning what it would do to the country's relations with the west. A revolution in Saudi Arabia, with today's dependence on oil, would mean an end to modern civilization as we know it. With an inability to ship food cheaply around the world, billions would die. The world economy would collapse. People would turn to their survival instincts and rioting, rape, and murder would be a daily occurrence everywhere. You want democracy in Saudi Arabia? Be careful what you wish for with your pollyanna hippie nonsense.

    136. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      Say Canada attacks the US, and I join Canada's ministry of propaganda, creating war propaganda promoting the murder of innocent civilians. Say I contact sympathetic Americans and convince them to ... shoot up places like Hassan, or blow stuff up like the Christmas day bomber, or any other of Awlaki's many examples. Now you could argue that all I did was talk, and that I didn't actually do anything directly to kill Americans, but that's like saying the Mafia don is innocent because he doesn't do the killing by his own hand -- merely ordering it. Now normally I could be arrested, but let's say i'm hiding in some Canadian cave somewhere and that's not possible. Does that mean i'm immune from all punishment? Does my status as an american citizen make me immune from any response at all, since to kill me would be unconstitutional? Sorry, but constitutional or not, I would need to be silenced. Awlaki was an admitted terrorist and just because he happened to be American doesn't mean he didn't deserve exactly what he got. I'm not a huge fan of Obama, but in this case, I think he made the right choice.

    137. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      Monotheism is Evil, wearing a friendly smile.

      *smirks* Matthew 7:15: "Beware false prophets who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravening wolves". Don't the Christians say that Christ was the "lamb of god"?

      (and no, I'm most emphatically not a Christian, nor a monotheist, actually...)

    138. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

      Interpol is definitely a police force that assists when a person has committed a serious crime, and therefore it definitely should strictly limit the laws it upholds. It is not acceptable for a supposedly free nations to assist theocracies to uphold laws that would be recognized anywhere else as unjust. If those nations refuse to differentiate between actual crimes and insults to make-believe sky-fairies, then Interpol should refuse to entertain their requests at all. Better that a real criminal escapes than a non-criminal gets murdered by the state with the help of the international community.

      I'm trying to come up with a more clearcut example of this than "Interpol should not help a theocratic nation to capture a fugitive facing the death penalty for blasphemy", but that's pretty much it.

    139. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And... that is pretty much no excuse if one is fleeing a Muslim country for having tweeted something blasphemous to Islam. "I'd like to go to New Zealand.. totally cool if I stopover in Malaysia" is a level of convenience a carefree tourist may indulge in. It's critically important for a wanted man to plan routes better.

    140. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by tyrus568 · · Score: 1

      Actually, what these posts remind me of is a recent case down here in Texas where a 12 year old girl shot her father in the back of his head while he was sleeping and killed him - and was then found not guilty of anything, including even manslaughter, because she claimed that she had been sexually abused by him. There was apparently little evidence for the abuse (not that I'm saying it didn't happen). Apparently the incident that left her fearing for her life was when her father walked in on her while she was taking a bath and made a pass at her. She told him to leave the bathroom and he did, saying she would 'regret it.' She then waited until he was asleep before shooting him in the back of the head. It was ruled self-defense.

      This has troubled me. Apparently the reason the jury found her killing in self-defense was because there had been a previous incident where the man had choked a woman (although I don't believe he was found guilty in court of anything, I believe there was only a police report), and this showed a history of past violent behavior. Everyone seems to believe that the girl was justified in what she did, except for her grandmother, who says it was an injustice and that "her claim of abuse was the perfect excuse to get away with what she did because no one would believe a 12 year old girl would kill her father for no reason."

      Everyone else seems to be applauding her. It makes me uncomfortable because I see VERY few situations where it would be morally justified to shoot a civilian in the back of the head and murder them while they are asleep. I think what bothers me is that this girl may go through the rest of her life feeling justified in doing what she did, perhaps even proud. I personally believe that if you kill someone, especially while they are sleeping, the death should bother or even haunt you for the rest of your days. I obviously wasn't on the jury for this case and so defer it to those who had the most information, but everyone seems to just assume that she was okay to do this. Even in "temporary insanity" cases where someone has shot and killed their lover for cheating, the person usually is found guilty of at least manslaughter, even if they just put them on probation, to show that what they did was wrong.

    141. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by tyrus568 · · Score: 1

      Forgot to mention.... the case left me wondering if the girl would, when she reaches 18, benefit from her father's life insurance policy? It seems wrong to shoot someone in the back of the head while they are sleeping, and then to collect on their life insurance.

    142. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by arobadog · · Score: 1

      Proper reply CadentOrange. It seems quite a few Slashdotters have no clue about Malaysia politics. An "Occupy" type protest in Malaysia would be quickly broken up. For a recent example, see the Bersih rally from July 9, 2011 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bersih_2.0_rally).

      --
      ...moving very slowly and winning footraces with smug satisfaction.
    143. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did no one else catch the level of subtlety used here? Nicely done sir, nicely done...

    144. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Zharr · · Score: 1

      We live in interesting times.

    145. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      UN diplomats won't have transit visas either, as they get G visas. And as such, they're not subject no arrest either. Basic Diplomatic Immunity. Of course, establishing such immunity can involve a few questions, so there is a very limited bit of "interrogation".

    146. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Being prosecuted" - "was prosecuted" - "indicted".

      Sorry, but the Freedom of Speech does not mean that you won't ever be prosecuted. Prosecution is a criticial part of the legal process in which freedoms and duties are weighed. The freedom of speech is limited; planning a terrorist act is a relevant limiation. Hence, when people operate close top the edge, it is appropriate for the prosecution to prosecute, and for juries to acquit.

      As a jury member I'd probably acquit the seller of Hezbollah TV. And there is the undisputed fact that he did transfer money to Hezbollah, a terrorist group under US law, so I respect the right of other jurors to convict him. After all, I won't claim a right that I don't grant to my peers.

    147. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      Real Science no, of course not. Using boiled willow bark as a remedy for various ailments based on praxis, very very likely.

      As for the killing of witches - its worth noting that the word translated as "witch" is in Hebrew the word for "poisoner" - but that to ignorant Europeans the two meant the same thing.

      Actually that's a modern misunderstanding. It was the Septuagint, a Greek translation (and the first translation of the Torah) that created the label for poisoner, not the original Hebrew Torah, or Pentateuch. The original Hebrew word itself used in that passage was "M'khashephah" which seems not to translate all that well, though some interpretations are, "whisperer", or "spellcaster", the root of the word having something to do with cutting off.. but wasn't "poisoner", in any case. The Greeks had no good equivalent for the term and so went with "pharmakos ". That's where the poisoner thing came in. http://thedomainandrealms.0catch.com/Library/witch.html http://www.necroticobsession.com/forums/76/43022 Unfortunately the original site proteuscoven.org is no longer around for reference, which is where the above two pages got their info.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    148. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      Thanks.

    149. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Whatanut · · Score: 1
      Also from the Guardian...

      But Interpol later denied that its notice system had been involved in the arrest of Kashgari. A statement issued by the agency said: "The assertion that Saudi Arabia used Interpol's system in this case is wholly misleading and erroneous." Interpol, the statement said, "has not been involved in the case involving a Saudi blogger arrested in Malaysia and deported to Saudi Arabia. No Interpol channels, its National Central Bureaus in Kuala Lumpur and Riyadh nor its General Secretariat headquarters in Lyon, France were involved at any time in this case."

      --

      yvan eht nioj
    150. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uuuuum good thing he wasn't shipped off to the US. They execute people there too!

    151. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Genda · · Score: 1

      BIG WHOA... just for a second

      Please explain to me, how strategic drone assassination has greater moral reprehensibility than... Oh, I don't know, how about carpet bombing a the capital of a country that didn't do anything to us? I think a pretty strong case for Shock and Awe being considered a war crime can be made by any fifth grader. Using drones, or robots, or any other technology that keeps American soldiers out of harms way, while surveiling and potentially assassinating people engaged in war against us, seems to me to be an optimal strategy. This of course does not excuse gross violations of international law, treaties or acceptable humanitarian practices (of which America has had a very hard time honor over the last decade.)

      Don't get me wrong. I am not happy with Mr. Obama's performance on a lot of fronts. I am however clear that it is almost impossible to elect a man in this country today with the desired capacity for intelligent choice making, moral integrity, human compassion and operational courage required to fulfill on the promises that Obama made in his election speeches. Real change is almost impossible to attain as long corporations own the government and ignorant, superstitious, masses choose leaders on the basis of who they'd like to get drunk with.

      The only thing I find more reprehensible about Obama than Bush, is that Obama actually seems to have something resembling a moral center and for sure a measurable IQ, and therefore should know better than be participating in these atrocities. Sadly his many compromises include letting the people who dug us into this hole continue digging.

    152. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by bgibby9 · · Score: 1

      20/20 hindsight ;)

      --
      http://www.gibby.net.au
    153. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by kefkahax · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the update on the sodomy thing. I definitely didn't verify that information. It's not like either of those things are enforced here anyway. Just one of those things that's stupid for ever existing to being with.

    154. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      That's not a quote. it's the life of a woman in Afghanistan.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    155. Re:A second just Justice.... Please by Paracelcus · · Score: 1

      But you see, IT WAS TEXAS! In Texas there is an old saying "he needed killing" Ah gay-uss thay-ut he nee-ud ee-ut!

      --
      I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
  3. Remember kids by NiceGeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Separation of State and Church = good.

    1. Re:Remember kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      States of Religion of Peace do their utmost in order to separate Church from their state. Any excuse to attack the Church is good, if you ask them.

    2. Re:Remember kids by Pharmboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Differentiating "church" from "reality" is even better.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    3. Re:Remember kids by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How many people have you seen executed in the name of religion lately?

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    4. Re:Remember kids by artor3 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Snark if you must, but it's been a long time since anyone in the US faced execution for stating that Jesus was a good, inspirational man, but not God. In fact, I'm not even sure that such a thing has ever happened. People have been killed by lynch mobs, but that's not a question of separating church and state, it's a question of people not being barbarous murderers.

      In fact, according to Wikipedia, even as far back as the late 17th century, the British colonists' laws only punished blasphemers with some months in prison and a couple hundred dollars in fines. It's not nothing, but it's certainly not death.

    5. Re:Remember kids by jholyhead · · Score: 0, Troll

      True. In the US, they prefer to execute on the basis of skin colour. /trolling

    6. Re:Remember kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      However, Islam is actually both a religion and a government rolled into one. That is why Islam has so much conflict with western views of duality (government and religion fulfill separate functions).

    7. Re:Remember kids by halivar · · Score: 2

      The whole point of moving to America back then for most folks was to get away from religious persecution. The idea that no one should die because they have a different faith was ingrained in America from the most enlightened deist to the the most devout puritan.

    8. Re:Remember kids by couchslug · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Religion = bad, and the current (YMMV over history) worst is Islam.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    9. Re:Remember kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless of course you were a witch.... then!!! by golly it was 10x worse.

    10. Re:Remember kids by Devout2 · · Score: 0

      Religion = bad

      I know of one popular exception to this.

    11. Re:Remember kids by sjames · · Score: 2

      Salem witch trials ring a bell?

    12. Re:Remember kids by steveha · · Score: 4, Informative

      How many people have you seen executed in the name of religion lately?

      Me, personally? None.

      But in Muslim countries where they follow Islamic law, there are lots of religious crimes for which people are executed.

      In this case, the crime is "apostasy", or leaving the faith. I don't know of any person in recent history being executed for leaving the Christian faith in any of its variations; but in Islamic law apostasy can be and is punished by death.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy#Islam

      Another crime for which one can be executed under Islamic law: homosexuality. Note that I am not saying I personally consider homosexuality a crime (I don't), I am saying that under Islam this is a crime, it is punishable by death, and this actually happens in the real world.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_Islam#Legal_status_in_modern_Islamic_nations

      So, either you need to find an explanation for why the above examples are not executions "in the name of religion" or you need to consider your point invalidated.

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    13. Re:Remember kids by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      And this is why several states have a clause in their constitution forbidding any non-Christian (With various definitions of Christian) from holding public office. They didn't become the *United* states for some time, remember.

    14. Re:Remember kids by tragedy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's the way they teach it in elementary school, but the Puritans were not exactly the most religiously tolerant folks. They did face laws in England restricting the ways religion could be practiced, but they didn't want to overturn the legal principles of state controlling religion, they just wanted to change the specifics of the law so that everyone would be forced to practice their way. When they set up in the Americas they promptly got to work enforcing religion as law. You may remember such examinations of their society as _The Scarlet Letter_ and historical events such as the Salem witch trials.

    15. Re:Remember kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The response of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Book_of_Mormon_(musical) has been described as "measured".[42] The church released an official response to inquiries regarding the musical, stating, "The production may attempt to entertain audiences for an evening, but the Book of Mormon as a volume of scripture will change people's lives forever by bringing them closer to Christ."

    16. Re:Remember kids by artor3 · · Score: 2

      Those trials weren't about heresy. They were a textbook case of mass hysteria. You could be a perfectly good Christian, never speak a word of blasphemy, but if you had a nervous tick or some unusual luck or (God help you) schizophrenia, people would panic, accuse you of being a witch, and kill you.

      Even if we pretend that those trials were about heresy, they took place over three hundred years ago, nearly a century before the United States even existed as its own entity. I suppose you think the French are no better than the Saudis because of the werewolf trials that took place there during the 15th century?

    17. Re:Remember kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, they were entirely community based, not government.

      As grandparent said, it's not a question of separating church and state.

    18. Re:Remember kids by Tom · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Do you only count court-ordered execution? If not, a doctor was shot in the US in 2009 by anti-abortionists.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    19. Re:Remember kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GP is an ass, but has a point. Remember this case the next time the people running for office start telling you the US is a 'Christian nation'. Or how we should mandate prayer in public schools. The same attitudes in Saudi Arabia aren't just something the West left back in the dark ages, they're still here. We can slide back into that time without vigilance.

    20. Re:Remember kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      People can talk bad about the British but of all the "evil colonizers" they're far from the worst. You think Gandhi would have succeeded or even be well-known if it were a different bunch that controlled India?

      I wonder how well the Native Americans and other aboriginal peoples would be doing today if they were under the Greater Saudi Empire? Would they still be able to keep their traditions and names? How well would the atheists do?

      It's like that civilization game, if you're this tribe that never got further than bows and arrows, and the rest of the nations have got cannons, odds are you're going to be screwed. Sometimes you're actually lucky a less evil country screwed you first. Look at Australia and New Zealand, they're doing very well. The aboriginal peoples might complain but imagine if the Indonesians took them over instead. Look what happened in East Timor.

      I suspect even that the average Muslim is better off being a citizen in a Christian country than a citizen in a Muslim country. Yes there will be discrimination in the Christian country, but he is still less likely to get in trouble because of his religion - no state religious police to enforce behaviour and even choice of clothing. In many muslim countries muslims face _deadly_ discrimination from muslims- see the shia vs sunnis wars. And yet many muslims go to other countries and then try to make them more like the places they left...

    21. Re:Remember kids by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      Um, ever hear of John Scopes? He spent some time in prison for committing the "crime" of teaching things in violation of "Christian principles", and that was not too long ago. And don't think for a second the Christian fascists, erm I mean republican party isn't drooling all over themselves waiting to arrest any and all that refuse their religion.

    22. Re:Remember kids by LDAPMAN · · Score: 1

      Actually, there were MANY more witch trials and killings in europe than there ever were in America. Some would even argue that the environment here was safer since diversity of religious practice was generally accepted.

    23. Re:Remember kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      How many people have you seen executed in the name of religion lately?

      Me, personally? None.

      But in Muslim countries where they follow Islamic law, there are lots of religious crimes for which people are executed.

      In this case, the crime is "apostasy", or leaving the faith. I don't know of any person in recent history being executed for leaving the Christian faith in any of its variations; but in Islamic law apostasy can be and is punished by death.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy#Islam

      Another crime for which one can be executed under Islamic law: homosexuality. Note that I am not saying I personally consider homosexuality a crime (I don't), I am saying that under Islam this is a crime, it is punishable by death, and this actually happens in the real world.

      If people in other nations allowed religious people to act on behalf of the state, at least some of those states would do he same thing. The issue is not Islam vs. not Islam. The issue is letting religious people write and implement the law. Before the enlightenment, christian europe had the same issue.

      One way to rid the world of this injustice is to make people see religion for the fairy tale it is. Another is to make people believe that religion is about kindness to others, and the correct way to implement laws does not involve atrocities. I am a pragmatist. I want the former, but I will be happy with the latter.

    24. Re:Remember kids by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Do you only count court-ordered execution? If not, a doctor was shot in the US in 2009 by anti-abortionists.

      You mean are acts of violence by fundamentalist individuals, subsequently prosecuted and punished severely for the crime, count the same as religious persecution institutionalized by government fiat?

      Hmmm... yea, sure. Exactly the same. DAMN you, Theocratic religious tyrannical US government!!!

      --
      "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
      --- Jerry Garcia
    25. Re:Remember kids by maccodemonkey · · Score: 1

      I hear the colonists had a propensity for burning witches.

    26. Re:Remember kids by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      You mean are acts of violence by fundamentalist individuals, subsequently prosecuted and punished severely for the crime, count the same as religious persecution institutionalized by government fiat?

      On /., yes. You must be new here... ;-)

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    27. Re:Remember kids by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      The Brits treated the Maori reasonably well. Without going to full on genocide like the Spaniards did against many South American Indian groups, it's hard to see how the indigenous peoples of Australia could have fared much worse. For the most part I have to say the French were probably the most decent colonial power, the Brits somewhere in the middle (greatly dependent upon which colonial areas we're talking about) and the Spanish and Belgians the very worst.

      Try to tell a Peruvian Indian that their ancestors' lot would have been worse under a Muslim regime.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    28. Re:Remember kids by artor3 · · Score: 1

      You need to learn to read context. The GP was replying to someone who insinuated that the US is in similar shape regarding separation of church and state. Which means that his post was spot on, and yours was a non-sequitur.

    29. Re:Remember kids by sjames · · Score: 1

      I'm just saying most countries have had dark times. That doesn't make them bad today and it's no excuse for not coming into the 21st century now. Instead, it demonstrates that any society CAN overcome such dark times.

    30. Re:Remember kids by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      I don't remember that being a capital offense, which was his point...

    31. Re:Remember kids by artor3 · · Score: 2

      As a matter of fact, I have heard of John Scopes. Have you? It doesn't seem like it, except maybe in passing, because otherwise you'd know that he did not spend time in prison. He was fined $100 (equivalent to ~$1000 in present day dollars), which was overturned by the appeals court on a technicality.

      Now please, think very hard about whether you want to draw a moral equivalency between a $1000 fine and a death sentence. Try to remember that the post you're responding to acknowledged the fines, and merely stated that people weren't executed for blasphemy.

    32. Re:Remember kids by pdabbadabba · · Score: 1

      Yes, in discussing the importance of the separation of church and state, of course we only count state-sponsored executions. It would be one thing if crimes like the one you mention were systematically under prosecuted -- maybe then those private crimes could be imputed to the state (such as many lynchings in the first half of the 20th century). But I've never seen any evidence to indicate that to be the case when it comes to religious belief. The individual who committed the murder you mention is currently serving life in prison without parole-eligibility until 2060.

      It's beside the point but I feel like piling on: a doctor killed for performing abortions by religious fundamentalists is also a pretty strained example of someone being killed for their religious beliefs.

    33. Re:Remember kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks to people removing religion from most decisions of law and politics in this part of the world, none recently. But a few centuries ago it was routine to do so in Europe, and religiously-motivated wars killed a great many people. Religion had its chance to make the world a better place, and instead made things worse because people had different opinions about it and started killing each other over it. This soured people's attitude towards religion for good reason. Now people can practice religion as they like, but in western countries the state no longer allows people to impose it on others against their will, and matters of law are religiously neutral. In Saudi Arabia, however, Medieval approaches to law and religion are still in force. It's not the only country where this is the case.

    34. Re:Remember kids by steveha · · Score: 1

      The GP was replying to someone who insinuated that the US is in similar shape regarding separation of church and state.

      I just read all the postings in the thread, and you are correct. The GP didn't quote the insinuation or refer to it, and the insinuation was below my threshold so I didn't see it.

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    35. Re:Remember kids by antifoidulus · · Score: 0

      I do want to draw a moral equivalency because he was only fined instead of killed because the fascists didn't have enough power to kill him. Had the fine gone through then the fascists would have demanded more and more until they got the death penalty for insulting their made up friend. Don't think for a second that the Republican fascists don't want to kill non-believers, they just know it's politically unpalatable at this point to say so, they are attempting to gain power little by little until they DO have enough power to murder non-believers. The only difference between the Republicans and the Saudi mullahs is the amount of power they currently wield, don't think for a second that if the Republicans have that power(which they so desperately want) that they wouldn't be doing what the religious police in Saudi Arabia are doing.

      ANY use of force to enforce religion is a violation of human rights, don't play the moral relativism card because it simply doesn't work.

    36. Re:Remember kids by anagama · · Score: 1

      From a British perspective, Puritans were dangerous terrorists -- they went so far as to kill King Charles I because they believed he was debauched.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    37. Re:Remember kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Separation of State and Church = good.

      The United Kingdom has absolutely no separation between church and state. The Queen is Supreme Governor of the church of England, and rules in the name of God. There are bishops in the House of Lords (the upper house of parliament).

      And yet, the country as a whole is far less religious and has far less hard line religious views than the USA.

    38. Re:Remember kids by gtall · · Score: 1

      Yep, every week in the town squares across the colonies, every friday night was Witch Night. People came down from the hills to watch the spectacle. Beer was served, as well as donuts (they had odd tastes back then). You could get a program for $.02. Bands played at half time, which was necessary so they could reload the pyre with more fuel. On special occasions, they had diving boards with scoring. Of course, the witches and wizards were no match for the current Olympic divers, but they did okay. Medals were awarded for the best dives into the fire. Sports writers were esteemed back then and wrote it all up for the Monday papers. Bookies did a brisk business among the non-religiously inclined and generally gave pretty good odds for the sharply dressed condemned.

      It was a special time, and about as true as your "propensity".

    39. Re:Remember kids by Torvac · · Score: 1

      super bad. always amazing how we live in a technolized world that proved religion wrong in so many ways, but still people follow the braindead storys that a few goat herders came up with 2000 years ago. you cant prove its wrong so it must be true, wtf ?

    40. Re:Remember kids by Cytotoxic · · Score: 1

      I do want to draw a moral equivalency because he was only fined instead of killed because the fascists didn't have enough power to kill him. Had the fine gone through then the fascists would have demanded more and more until they got the death penalty for insulting their made up friend. Don't think for a second that the Republican fascists don't want to kill non-believers, they just know it's politically unpalatable at this point to say so, they are attempting to gain power little by little until they DO have enough power to murder non-believers. The only difference between the Republicans and the Saudi mullahs is the amount of power they currently wield,.

      The fascists your are drawing moral equivalencies with were Democrats.

      Learn some history before you try to cite it for your petty team red / team blue partisan politics.

    41. Re:Remember kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      never mind the fact there were MANY more people in Eurpoe than there were in America. Some would even argue that the environment there was safer since diversity of religous practice was much more accepted.

    42. Re:Remember kids by Kittenman · · Score: 2

      The whole point of moving to America back then for most folks was to get away from religious persecution. The idea that no one should die because they have a different faith was ingrained in America from the most enlightened deist to the the most devout puritan.

      Nonsense. The whole point of moving to America (in those days, the colonies) was to do your own type of religious persecution.

      --
      "The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
    43. Re:Remember kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ya, but in America, religion means everything OTHER THAN "christianity". Christian beliefs are required for government service in the united states.

    44. Re:Remember kids by artor3 · · Score: 1

      Speaking of history, is that an angelfire link? Got any interesting BBS postings on the subject you'd care to link to?

    45. Re:Remember kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A fetus isn't a "baby" any more than an egg is a chicken. Troll harder.

    46. Re:Remember kids by Pharmboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Religion = bad

      I know of one popular exception to this.

      No, you don't. You might think you do, but you don't. Everyone thinks THEIR religion is the exception. You aren't unique, just wrong. Even those that take atheism so serious to the point of it being "a religion" (ie: Leninism or militant anti-christianism) are just as bad.

      The problem lies in having a belief system, not the content of the belief systems. Beliefs system don't require facts, so facts can't persuade them, no matter how obvious or proven the fact.

      It is possible to believe in a higher power without following a belief system. It is possible to think that science can prove that some kind of "god" started the universe. You might be right or wrong, I don't claim to know, but this isn't the same as "religion". Religion, where you are TOLD what to think and discouraged from thinking freely, IS inherently bad, whether you or the mods understand it or not.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    47. Re:Remember kids by ddtracy · · Score: 0

      You are forgetting the keyword: TECHNICALITY

      What to say they won't change it to capital punishment in the future and some poor bastard that can't get away on a 'technicality'...
       

    48. Re:Remember kids by powerlord · · Score: 1

      It's beside the point but I feel like piling on: a doctor killed for performing abortions by religious fundamentalists is also a pretty strained example of someone being killed for their religious beliefs.

      However the killers being prosecuted for murder, in a country that is still majority Christian (predominantly Catholic and Protestant), does point toward separation of church and state.

      --
      This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
    49. Re:Remember kids by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      I never said fascists cannot change parties. The democrats at that point in time became Republicans en masse after the civil rights act of 1965. Times change, if you are going to try to tell me to check my history, you probably should do a half-assed job of checking yours as well. Nice try though.

    50. Re:Remember kids by halivar · · Score: 1

      Where, exactly, was there an "accepted" diversity of religious practice in Europe? Like, say, any time before the Confederation of the Rhine?

    51. Re:Remember kids by nibbles2004 · · Score: 2

      Actually you have that backwards, the Puritan's did'nt escape religious persecution in England, they where the ones doing the persecution, why they left for the colonies was they didn't like that there was religious tolerance in England to an extent and they wanted to create a puritan nation in the colonies.

    52. Re:Remember kids by kaliann · · Score: 1

      Umm, Massachusetts Bay Colony executed Quakers for their religious beliefs. Feel free to read up on the Boston Martyrs Boston Martyrs.

      The Salem witch trials were no picnic either, but those were pretty much hysterical purges where no one was being punished for their actual beliefs: they were being killed for having the bad luck to be accused of witchcraft, a crime which is only relevant from a religious perspective.

    53. Re:Remember kids by jrumney · · Score: 1

      Or more recently, a homosexual was stoned to death in the US in 2011.

    54. Re:Remember kids by halivar · · Score: 1

      Clarendon Code. You have no idea what you're talking about, and you need to read up.

    55. Re:Remember kids by advocate_one · · Score: 1

      right misery guts as well... banning Christmas, Easter and Whitsun... insisting that all church interiors were stripped of frippery and painted white instead... closing taverns and pubs

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    56. Re:Remember kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Snark if you must, but it's been a long time since anyone in the US faced execution for stating that Jesus was a good, inspirational man, but not God

      Are you sure that Al Awlaki would have been murdered if he were christian?

    57. Re:Remember kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So your claiming that you don't have a belief system? That is just ignorant. Everyone has a belief system. Sure, yours may be based on a system of facts that you "believe" to be correct. I have a belief system based on facts I "believe" to be correct. To claim you don't have a religion or a belief is just as ignorant and destructive as saying your belief system has ALL the facts.
      No one has all the facts. no one has exactly the right answer to EVERY question. that's why we have a Justice system judged by your peers in the US.
      You MUST be told what to think initially, or else you would never know HOW to think. That is what Growth id based off of.

      This guy made a choose. Now he has to live with the consequence. Is it right? well, in that country it is. And it is the way it is. I feel badly that not all the world has the freedom The US and some other countries do. It sucks that Americans are so damn spoiled, but don't go saying only *YOUR* belief system is the right one. That makes you just as bad as the Muslims who are beheading this guy over a few tweets.

    58. Re:Remember kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some say that the witchy behavior was caused by Ergotism.

    59. Re:Remember kids by Doctor+Faustus · · Score: 1

      The whole point of moving to America (in those days, the colonies) was to do your own type of religious persecution.

      Not for everyone. Pennsylvania is so much bigger than all the New England states because the Quakers who founded it left everyone alone about their religion. There was no reason for them to break up on religious lines.

    60. Re:Remember kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missouri_Executive_Order_44

    61. Re:Remember kids by Tom · · Score: 1

      Yes, in discussing the importance of the separation of church and state, of course we only count state-sponsored executions.

      Accepted. Put in that context, you are right.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  4. Malaysia is Muslim by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    If you commit a crime, don't go to another country that also considers it a crime. If he had made it to Australia, he would have been ok. If he'd been spreading child porn in the US, a similar thing would have happened (although not executed, and who knows what kind of fair trial people get in SA).

    Unless you have a way to show that one moral system is better than another, you can't say one country's laws and preferences are better than another.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True. However, do not try to link one's opinion to an ideal the same to one that is a physical act. Further more, I fail to see how you would try to say the two are even more similar.
       
      Humans have done some of the most horrendous acts to one another in the name of a 'God'. I don't think they understand the gravity of the situation, and how it is perceived beyond this rock by others (gods or otherwise).

    2. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's very simple indeed. Freedom of though, discuss or manifest its simple better system than one without this. The Sharia is a violation of human rights and all the very basic freedoms.

      Unfortunately, almost every other moral system is better than this.

    3. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Unless you have a way to show that one moral system is better than another, you can't say one country's laws and preferences are better than another.

      Luckily, it's actually very easy to compare laws and judicial systems, and find one - as informed by specific philosphical/moral tenets, and codified in a constitution - to be, in fact, plainly superior. That is, if rationality plays any role in the mechanisms by which you evaluate such things. I don't fee any urge to use crazy magical thinking as a standard by which to compare systems, so I have none of the trouble that some people - strangely, toxically - have with the need for moral relativism in order to remain politically correct and not hurt anyone's feelings.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    4. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Interesting

      However, do not try to link one's opinion to an ideal the same to one that is a physical act. Further more, I fail to see how you would try to say the two are even more similar.

      OK, I'll try to explain it.

      Spreading child porn and blaspheming against god are both speech. That is it, there isn't any serious argument on this point.

      In America, we oppose spreading child porn, in part because sometimes it hurts kids, but also because we tend to view sex-offenders as scum, and label them as scum for the rest of their lives. We prevent them from living close to schools, we create websites to easily look up where they live. It doesn't matter if no kids were harmed in the making of the porn, we still label them as such. Note, I am not a supporter of child porn, just trying to show how morally, these two things are similar.

      In Saudi Arabia, blaspheming against god can ruin the lives of others, if you manage to convince them to be bad, etc. It also labels you as scum, undesirable, someone to be avoided. Their punishments for the particular crime are harsher, but in many ways it is similar to our child porn laws.

      Now, I am personally opposed to condemning people for blasphemy, and I think anything that hurts little kids is horrible, but this is based on my own personal beliefs. I can understand the beliefs that the Saudis have that would make them come to different conclusions.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    5. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by phantomfive · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Everyone's morals are based on something. I don't know what yours are based on, but clearly they don't include "not hurting anyone's feelings," (although somehow they do include "not disappointing your bird dog").

      Other people have morals based on other things, including not hurting people's feelings. How can you judge yours to be better, except to claim that your beliefs are better?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    6. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by mbone · · Score: 1

      Unless you have a way to show that one moral system is better than another, you can't say one country's laws and preferences are better than another.

      Sorry, but I do say that dictatorships are worse than democracies, and Saudi Arabia is a ferocious dictatorship.

    7. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Humans have done some of the most horrendous acts to one another in the name of a 'God'.

      And your point? Humans have done horrible acts in the name of other stuff too.

      Lots of atheists are fond of the delusion that religion is the source of most evils. Fact is out of the top 10 genocides of last century only a minority were done in the name of religion. The rest were done by atheists, or tribal people trying to kill the other tribes.

      So even if you get rid of religion, groups of people will still kill each other on a per group basis. Much of it boils down to tribe vs tribe. Doesn't take much to get supporters of hockey/football/soccer teams to kill/bash each other. Not sure about emacs vs vi but who knows ;)...

      Anyway, I guess this is one of those things members of the Atheist tribe (and many other tribes) do to feel superior to the other tribes: The other tribes are inferior and do terrible stuff, we are not like them, we are superior, so I can now feel good about myself. Wake up, you're behaving just like them.

      Lastly, you can try to get rid of religion, but people being people will just find another one. Most people have a need to belong to some group. I know a number of atheists who are fanatical members of the Cult of Apple. Which so far is relatively innocuous but I don't see much in terms of good deeds and altruism from them. So the "net positive contribution" of their new religion is unproven. If you hate the existing religions so much, maybe you bunch can go work out a new belief system that is a better substitute (more positives than negatives), so that people can "belong to it" and the belief system can "self-reproduce" (otherwise it's pointless). You better be careful to ensure that it really is better in practice. You might find it's not such an easy task.

    8. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I love good, strong, arguments based in evidence. Not that I disagree with you, but is there a reason that suddenly you start relying on arguments that are about as meaningful as, "Sorry, but I DO say that god exists." Woohoo, good for you.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    9. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by ScentCone · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How can you judge yours to be better,

      Really? You can't summon the perspective to see that a moral system that stones women to death for teaching their daughters to read is fundamentally, objectively inferior to a system that doesn't do so?

      Who cares if moral systems are based on different things? When they're based on death worship, for example, they are inherently, irrationally self destructive. When a moral code is based on lies (say, about the nature of the world around you) it is a code that embraces untruth as its foundation. Do you really find no means, in your own reckoning, to separate such a value system from one that seeks and acknowledges reality?

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    10. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      When a moral code is based on lies (say, about the nature of the world around you) it is a code that embraces untruth as its foundation.

      Well that is the start of something rational, if only you had expanded it.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    11. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

      As far as dictatorships go, Saudi Arabia hardly qualifies as one of the worst. Quite the opposite, really. The pragmatic approach to diplomacy taken by the leadership there has been stabilizing force in the region. It's rare you see a government on good terms with both the West and the East, but Saudi Arabia clearly is. Also, they have a relatively liberal attitude on personal freedoms, when compared to neighboring countries. I'm not saying it's all happy fluffy bunnies and pretty rainbows over there, but you've got to give them some credit.

    12. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by loshwomp · · Score: 2

      Unless you have a way to show that one moral system is better than another, you can't say one country's laws and preferences are better than another.

      Since SA regularly executes people for "sorcery", I'm pretty sure I could identify a superior legal system or two.

    13. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by tragedy · · Score: 1

      Just to nitpick a bit, isn't Saudi Arabia a ferocious kingdom rather than a ferocious dictatorship?

    14. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Spreading child porn should be illegal anywhere in the world.
      Though I wouldn't mind having sex with a sexy blonde when I was 10 years old, I wouldn't have wanted this to be recorded and spread to child pornography sites for everyone to view for the rest of my life, at least not without my consent, and it wouldn't have any meaning for me to have sex before that age

      What are you suggesting? That child porn should be legal and everyone should be able to view porn by visiting youporn, just as they do now for adult porn?

    15. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by amiga3D · · Score: 2

      So you equate blashpemy with child porn? Seriously?

    16. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by mbone · · Score: 1

      Every absolute monarchy is a dictatorship.

    17. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      out of the top 10 genocides of last century only a minority were done in the name of religion. The rest were done by (...)theists

      Those genocides were committed in the name of the respective state religion. Stop being an apologist for religion.

    18. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 1

      Fact is out of the top 10 genocides of last century only a minority were done in the name of religion. The rest were done by atheists, or tribal people trying to kill the other tribes.

      What?! Hey, shithead, exactly which genocides ever happened in the name of atheism?!

      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
    19. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Since SA regularly executes people for "sorcery", I'm pretty sure I could identify a superior legal system or two.

      Clearly the base of any good moral system is the rejection of sorcery, is that what you are saying?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    20. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by phantomfive · · Score: 0

      Is that supposed to be an argument for or against something? Seriously?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    21. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by arose · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ding, ding, ding. We have yet another person who doesn't understand that analogies are not eqalities.

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    22. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Devout2 · · Score: 1

      So yeah, the world should legalize child pornography for everyone's shale. This will open a whole new world of goodness and opportunities, especially for the poor people's children. They will no longer be taught how to beg and send to do so, but rather how to accept rape with a smile, so that their family will have a chance at a better future, even though its more likely that they will spend the money buying Whisky, and making their child/children's life/lives even more ideal.

    23. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by loshwomp · · Score: 1

      Clearly the base of any good moral system is the rejection of sorcery, is that what you are saying?

      No. Rather, the legal system should not acknowledge the existence of "sorcery" nor any other paranormal bullshit.

    24. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What?! Hey, shithead, exactly which genocides ever happened in the name of atheism?!

      Why so sensitive? Someone blaspheming your religion?

      Marxism/Communism. A bunch of atheists getting together to "change the world" through force. Not that dissimilar from a bunch of religious fanatics getting together to "change the world" through force.

      See also:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist%E2%80%93Leninist_atheism
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_in_history

      People use the same reasoning all the time to link religion with evil - "Spanish Inquisition", "Stalinists" whatever dude. Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander.

    25. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I know what you mean. The only thing keeping poor people from raping their kids and selling the videos are the laws against it. They're all a bunch of drunks, with no moral sense whatsoever. In fact, they might be considered a lower class, or even caste. Is that what you are trying to say? Because it sounds like it.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    26. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sure, why not? Go after the people who actually hurt the children, rather than wasting time arresting people who look at pictures/videos.

      Can't do that? Too bad.

    27. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      You can't summon the perspective to see that a moral system that stones women to death for teaching their daughters to read is fundamentally, objectively inferior to a system that doesn't do so?

      Depending on what you mean by that, not really. I definitely disagree with it personally, and I see nothing wrong with criticizing it if you disagree with it personally, but unless someone can present evidence of absolute morals, I wouldn't say it's "objectively" bad or "inferior."

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    28. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Devout2 · · Score: 1

      I'm trying to say that kids are too young to know what's good for them. If child pornography gets legalized a whole new world of exploiting kids to make money may be opened for the low lives, and that is not good for our children at all, especially the ones who already haven't had the best of luck so far.

    29. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I'm trying to say you don't have a strong, logical base for your moral system, at least not one you are capable of describing. And most likely if you can describe it, if we pull it apart, we will see it is based entirely on your preferences, what you already believe, and any logical explanations will be post-hoc explanations, without any real base.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    30. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If his equating the two is so outlandish, you should be able to come up with some rational argument as to why, instead of just throwing out your own moral outrage.

    31. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Devout2 · · Score: 1

      I didn't have any ethics in mind. What I had in mind is a poor, insecure 8 year old being told by his/her alcoholic parents that the only way to make do is to is to follow that "gentleman" and do as he says, and look happy or else "we'll all end in the street and die".

    32. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      And what you have there is a perfect example of a Think of the Children rhetorical technique. Good job.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    33. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Devout2 · · Score: 0

      You are not giving any counter-argument to my understanding of why legalizing child pornography would hurt a lot of children.

    34. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What?! Hey, shithead, exactly which genocides ever happened in the name of atheism?!

      They don't have to be "in the name of atheism." They can be for reasons other than religion without specifically being for "being against religion."

      Being an atheist does not bestow one with automatic, moral and ethical superiority. There are still terrible, terrible people with dumb ideas who don't follow a religion.

    35. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are such an inferior subhuman, piece of shit, that it would literally be impossible for a man of intelligence to argue with you, and it would be useless and a waste of time too.
      Please castrate yourself, and everyone related to you, so that you do not spread your pathetic genes through the already contaminated genepool, you stupid mutt.

    36. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 1
      No, none of that is a genocide in the name of atheism, sorry. Atheism simply lacks that certain something that would make it a goal or even an excuse for such means.

      Why so sensitive? Someone blaspheming your religion?

      Atheism is to religion as not collecting stamps is to a hobby, anonymous shithead. Stop reproducing brainless claims of the pious idiots and think for yourself.

      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
    37. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      I guess in your world there are no absolutes? In mine child predators are evil. You go on and rationalize it any way you want but I can guarantee you we wont be on the same side no matter how you want to argue it. Absolute freedom is okay until you start victimizing others with it. There is something wrong with people that see children as sex objects.

    38. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 1

      They don't have to be "in the name of atheism."

      Yes, they do, that's what GGP meant: genocide motivated by atheism. There was never such thing on the face of the Earth unless e.g. a Christian called a Muslim "atheist" or vice versa - on grounds of that there is only one dog, "MY" dog and whoever does not believe in it (my dog) is an atheist, as could be expected from the religious.

      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
    39. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Portrayal of children as sexual objects is wrong. I'm not going to argue the point since you'll rationalize it to make it seem fine and then I'll rebut it and it's pointless to go round and round with you over it. If you see no problem with child pornography you're not rational to start with. Certain principles are absoulute to have any kind of civil society and protection of children from predators is one that is paramount. If you disagree then we are so far apart there is no basis for discussion.

    40. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Nope, just an expression of amazed disbelief that someone would equate the two. Seriously.

    41. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 1

      People use the same reasoning all the time to link religion with evil

      No, you have it backwards, it's the religious apologists who use it against non-believers. They've been doing it for EVER.

      Weinberg had it correct: "Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion."

      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
    42. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by bky1701 · · Score: 2

      Both are pretty much witch hunts. One is literally a witch hunt. Perhaps your own cultural bias prevents you from seeing the same undercurrents in them. Those wacky Muslims and their blasphemy; but lock those people with kiddy porn up forever! Yeah, totally different things... right.

    43. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      that a moral system that stones women to death for teaching their daughters to read ... I wouldn't say it's "objectively" bad or "inferior."

      Really? You can't wrap your head around the built-in inferiority of a moral code that mandates death for one gender doing something that the other gender is allowed to do?

      unless someone can present evidence of absolute morals

      Being killed isn't absolute enough for you? You get to learn to read, and she gets killed for learning to read. There can hardly be a more glaring, plain-as-day distinction. I feel pretty badly for you that you can't, personally, connect the dots between that stark contrast and the moral code that embraces it. Would you only be able to find the "absolute" in the immorality of such a value system if, perhaps, you were a girl about to be killed for having been able to read this paragraph? What would it take for you to grasp the irreducible evil of a value system that values ignorance and death over knowledge and life? I thought I just give you a no-brainer of an example, but I can see that your notion of "objective" doesn't include evaluating the state of being of objectively, measurably dead for doing something that doesn't harm someone else.

      I hope you don't vote.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    44. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Being killed isn't absolute enough for you?

      If you're asking me if I think it's proof that absolute morals exist, then no I don't.

      Would you only be able to find the "absolute" in the immorality of such a value system if, perhaps, you were a girl about to be killed for having been able to read this paragraph?

      I don't know, and that's irrelevant. What I would or would not do if I was in situation X is irrelevant to whether or not my current arguments are right or wrong.

      What would it take for you to grasp the irreducible evil of a value system that values ignorance and death over knowledge and life?

      Actual proof of not only absolute morals (such as a magical moral fairy), and, after that, proof that doing what you described is considered absolutely evil by the entity (or whatever decides what is and is not evil) that decides what is and is not evil.

      But I've yet to see any proof of that beyond, "But killing is bad!" Even more amusing is when I find atheists who claim to not believe in god due to a lack of evidence claiming that absolute morals definitely exist (as in, they definitely, without a doubt, exist) even when there is no evidence (that I know of) that they do.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    45. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fact is out of the top 10 genocides of last century only a minority were done in the name of religion.

      How do you define your "top 10 genocides". These are religiously motivated genocides (or attempts at genocides) from the top of my head, I don't know if they make it to your top-ten list though (and religion is of course not the only reason for these genocides).

      Srebrenica genocide - 8.000 Muslims (and also an unaccounted number of gypsies) killed by Christians
      Dersim Massacre - 10.000-40.000 Kurds (some of them non-civilians) killed by Muslims
      Iraq (mostly during the 1980s) - Kurds killed by Muslims
      Iran - Kurds killed by Muslims
      India (today) - Hindus killing Muslims
      Pakistan (today) - Muslims killing Hindu
      Ustase (Croatia, 1930s and 40s) - Catholic movement killing (with the support of Nazi-Germany) just about any non-Catholics (Orthodox Christians, Muslims, Jews, Jehovah's Witnesses et.c.)

      By the Ottoman Empire
      ----------------------
      Armenian Genocide - Muslims killing non-Muslims
      Assyrian Genocide - Muslims killing Christians
      Greek Genocide - Muslims killing Christians

      We also have the Israeli government and Israeli settlers that use (semi-)religious justifications for their actions against Palestinians (but the most striking attempts at pure genocide (the Sabra and Shatila massacres) was made via proxy by Christian groups). But the Israeli government tactic seems (since the creation of Israel) mostly to attempt to rob Palestinians from any possibility to sustain themselves within Israel (confiscating property, or destroying trade routes), not strictly genocide, but ethnic cleansing non the less.

      And, of course, there have been lots and lots of local genocides in Africa, committed by local Christian sects against small ethnic groups.

    46. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Sure, a lot of people hate child predators. A lot of people hate blasphemers too. "Hating someone," or thinking they are evil, based on preconceived ideas of right and wrong, is not the basis of a moral system.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    47. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by ScentCone · · Score: 1
      You're making the mistake of thinking that morals exist right along side gravity and hydrogen, like some sort of natural resource to be picked up and measured. You really can't imagine sitting down and, using reason, deriving a code of ethics that's based on reality, instead of imaginary magical beings? Morals are rules, and those rules are based on a value system. The value system is based on what you value. A value system that values death and ignorance is a dead and street. It's self destructive. A value system that's rationally derived from observing the fact that you're alive and have the capacity to reason ... that's not self destructive. One is inherently superior to the other, because adherents to the death-and-destruction framework cannot sustain themselves. Failure to exist is built into such a twisted system because it values its own destruction.

      If you can't understand that, then the need for "proof" is the least of your worries. You should worry about your ability to engage rationally with any concept placed in front of you. Your convoluted concept of being amused by imaginary straw-man atheists is a good case in point.

      What I would or would not do if I was in situation X is irrelevant to whether or not my current arguments are right or wrong.

      Your disinterest in applying a discussion about value systems to real-world examples is a solid indicator that you know you're wrong.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    48. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      If you can't see the similarities, that is a fault of your ability to see, or possibly my ability to explain.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    49. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I don't need to. I merely need to point out that a muslim could just as easily use the same argument that blasphemy hurts kids. Then I would go sit in the other room while you argue with the muslim guy over which is worse, blasphemy, or child porn. Remember that in a lot of countries, kids actually do run around naked.

      My point isn't that we should legalize child pornography. My point is, people who condemn others for their moral system, tend to not have a very well thought-out base for their own moral system. And that definitely includes you.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    50. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      You really can't imagine sitting down and, using reason, deriving a code of ethics that's based on reality, instead of imaginary magical beings?

      I'm an atheist, so I don't see why you can't. But all I meant to imply was that people who go against your system of morality aren't necessarily objectively in the wrong (since there is, to my knowledge, no proof of absolute morals). And that's what it looked like you were stating.

      A value system that values death and ignorance is a dead and street.

      Only if they wished to kill themselves. Typically, they oppress a certain group.

      One is inherently superior to the other, because adherents to the death-and-destruction framework cannot sustain themselves.

      My problem is with your wording. "superior" in what sense? Sustainability, I guess?

      You keep using words such as "immoral" and "evil" in a sense that implies that that's a fact. That is why I thought you might be implying that there is some sort of magical moral fairy that decides what is and is not evil rather than people just deciding such things for themselves.

      Your convoluted concept of being amused by imaginary straw-man atheists is a good case in point.

      "Imaginary straw-man atheists"? Whatever would those be? I assure you they're not imaginary, and it's not exactly a straw man, either. It was a simple statement that I am amused by such people.

      Your disinterest in applying a discussion about value systems to real-world examples is a solid indicator that you know you're wrong.

      How do you figure that? It sounds like a non-sequitur to me. If I told you that you would agree with me if you were in my situation and are therefore wrong, would you think that that would be valid? I fail to see how pointing out that it's not is a "solid indicator" that I'm wrong.

      But really, are you claiming to be a mind reader? I know I'm wrong? Interesting. You're just deluding yourself, then. Deep in your heart, you know you're completely incorrect (it worked for you, apparently).

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    51. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by tragedy · · Score: 1

      The way the definitions usually work, a dictatorship is run by a dictator, and a kingdom is run by a king (or some sort of royal). There often may be little functional difference, but there are often big differences in other areas, especially differences of perception. Otherwise most dictators would just declare themselves royalty. That was one of the biggest mistakes Napoleon made. He was already minor nobility, but a good chunk of his political support came from people who were sick to death of royalty, whereas it didn't endear himself much better to people who demanded royalty lead them because they didn't think of him as "true" royalty.

      So, for the question of whether Saudi Arabia is a dictatorship or a monarchy, the answer is that it's a monarchy, despite the similarities. Also it's certainly not an absolute monarchy, neither are dictatorships ever absolute dictatorships. Unless we're talking about an island with only one inhabitant, there's always a power balance. It may swing very much towards the monarch or dictator, or more towards the military, influential families or other groups, religious authorities or towards the people themselves. Some "absolute monarchs" spent their entire lives as virtual prisoners.

    52. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Portrayal of children as sexual objects is wrong.

      Objectively wrong? If so, how did you come to such a conclusion?

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    53. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Johann+Lau · · Score: 1

      lol? no. but making the claim it's that, and using that as an argument, that's an argumentum ad herpa derpa.

    54. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by GumphMaster · · Score: 1

      The fundamental problem getting from the Middle East to Australia or New Zealand is that it is hard to avoid a stop in Dubai, Singapore, Kuala Lumpur, or Bangkok. You have 50% chance of a Muslim country on route. You really have to go out of your way to avoid this possibility, and you'd only do that if you knew you were being pursued.

      --
      Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
    55. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Johann+Lau · · Score: 1

      why bother? to give sociopaths clues on what to fake?

    56. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by caitsith01 · · Score: 1

      Other people have morals based on other things, including not hurting people's feelings. How can you judge yours to be better, except to claim that your beliefs are better?

      So if I propose a system of government which includes a rule that citizens randomly murdering one another is not only acceptable, but necessary and commendable, you would have no way of concluding that my system is worse than our current system other than blind belief?

      Is North Korea's system equally valid with only an assertion of belief to distinguish it from ours? Etc etc.

      Using the word "morals" is slightly loaded IMHO, too. "Ethics" or "principles" would be more neutral language.

      --
      Read Pynchon.
    57. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Johann+Lau · · Score: 1

      how is pointing out that some people use atheism exactly in the same way religion is used, making it effectively a religion, with all the self-righteousness and intellectual dishonesty that comes with it, being an apologist for religion? you got it exactly wrong, sherlock. so maybe stop being an apologist for being fucking stupid and unable to read more than 3 sentences.

    58. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Johann+Lau · · Score: 1

      original claim: all evil comes from religion.

      response: hey no wait, look at all these "atheist massacres" (that doesn't mean "in the name of atheism", it rather means the absence of doing it in the name of a religion).

      you: RARGH RARGH I DO NOT UNDERSTAND MY HEAD HURTS.

      hope that helped.

    59. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Johann+Lau · · Score: 1

      No, none of that is a genocide in the name of atheism, sorry.

      that's fine, because the "in the name of atheism" thing is just a strawman you pulled conveniently out of your ass after all.

    60. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      I don't know that I "hate" them. I just don't see any reason to tolerate them. I do wonder what your idea of the basis of a moral system would be though.

    61. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      So if I propose a system of government which includes a rule that citizens randomly murdering one another is not only acceptable, but necessary and commendable, you would have no way of concluding that my system is worse than our current system other than blind belief?

      Possibly, how would you determine that one is worse than the other? Doesn't the idea that "killing is bad," come from the idea that if we kill others, others might kill us? Killing isn't innately evil, it happens all the time in nature, and is natural.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    62. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      It's not my fault you're a retard.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    63. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Or maybe there is no similarity.

      In curiosity about your link to snopes there, why do you find it hard to believe? I don't like Romney's politics but he seems like a decent guy. Not pure as the driven snow mind you but decent.

    64. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Devout2 · · Score: 0

      I don't need to. I merely need to point out that a muslim could just as easily use the same argument that blasphemy hurts kids. Then I would go sit in the other room while you argue with the muslim guy over which is worse, blasphemy, or child porn. Remember that in a lot of countries, kids actually do run around naked. My point isn't that we should legalize child pornography. My point is, people who condemn others for their moral system, tend to not have a very well thought-out base for their own moral system. And that definitely includes you.

      Yours doesn't sound like a moral system... It sounds like "I'll do what I want and instead of saying directly I have no morals I'll twist everything around to make everything I do sound ethical". PLEASE, do tell me am I speaking ethics here? I am not. I am speaking whether a certain course of action hurts/exploits(because I'm sure you'll say hurt !=exploit) children or not.
      A muslim might use the argument that blasphemy hurts kids but that doesn't change the fact that it doesn't.
      A pedophile might use the argument that raping kids to make money from porn doesn't hurt/exploit them but that doesn't change the fact that it does.

    65. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I don't know if there is a good basis to say one morality system is better than another. Personally I think the absurdists have it right, that nothing really matters. In which case, anything you do is ok. No one feels bad about oppressing computers, so why feel bad about oppressing meat-bags? (Of course, if the soul is immortal, that's different, but my evidence to support that idea is limited. I'm still working on it though).

      That said, I do like living in a world with free speech, and where people are nice to each other, so I am happy to help contribute to such a society, even if ultimately it is absurd.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    66. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by chrb · · Score: 1

      There is a big difference between a child predator and someone who trades or views child pornography. The larger question is whether it should be legal to publish materials if a person is not involved in the original crime. E.g. should a video or photo of a crime be illegal if it may lead to incitement to others to commit the same crime, as is the case for child porn? At the moment this is treated differently by various legal systems, some ban racist stuff, Nazi stuff, rape stuff, racist stuff, blasphemous stuff... most people accept that there must be limits to freedom of speech, the question is what and the precise reasoning why.

    67. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      In curiosity about your link to snopes there, why do you find it hard to believe? I don't like Romney's politics but he seems like a decent guy.

      It was really surprising to me, because typically if you find out anything about a politicians personal life, it's something bad, and I'm used to seeing politicians as a fake veneer over a self-centered, hypocritical, ambitious person. Newt Gingrich is a perfect example of that, he looks so nice and friendly in this commercial, but I don't think he is. All good politicians have at least a little acting ability.

      So when I saw that, it surprised me, because it wasn't what I expected from a politician. Perhaps it showed that I've become a little too jaded in thinking of politicians. Hopefully there are others out there like that.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    68. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if the soul is immortal, that's different, but my evidence to support that idea is limited

      Had you accepted Jesus as the Lord, your soul would be immortal, and you would have the evidence. It's not late though.

    69. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by ddtracy · · Score: 0

      Tell that to communists promoting atheism all over Soviet.

    70. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by ddtracy · · Score: 0

      Yes, like atheism is to communism.

    71. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      It's not late though.

      Well praise the lord! Or mohammad. Or whomever.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    72. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The devil made you say the last two sentences. Repent! And ye shall be saved.

    73. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If someone's morals are as such, then they are immoral by definition. You can't teach consequences to a child without hurthing their feelings. You can't hold adults to account for their actions without hurting their feelings.

      Islam is not a thing. It's a group of people who identify themselves as Muslims. To insult Muslims is to insult Islam. People (which Muslims are) can be insulted by anything. It's a very handy excuse for killing non-muslims.

    74. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I repent.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    75. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry for you.

      When it comes to spreading child porn, there is a victim who's been physically abused, the child in the porn picture. Consuming child porn creates demand for more such porn, and it leads to real physical victimization of kids. And as for people who've diddled kids, they present a clear physical danger to kids. It's not just religious feelings that will be hurt here.

      On the other hand, when you send 3 tweets explaining that you have mixed feelings about "prophet" Mohammed, there is no physical victim. It's a victimless crime. It doesn't create demand for children to be abused like child porn consumption does.

      Comparing a victimless crime to a crime where there is a physical victim is morally reprehensible.

    76. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      good 4 u. I Hope u've not been reading new age because your ideas about ethics sure sound like what those dumb shits that call themselves masters tend to teach. No matter what how warm they are or what they can do stay away.

    77. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by hughJ · · Score: 1

      Would you agree there would be something that we could constitute as a form of evidence to objectively decide whether stoning women for reading is "good" or "bad"? If we were to perform a study on two otherwise identical cultures and find that either a stoning or non-stoning resulted in a greater average level of prosperity or happiness among the group, would that constitute evidence? Even without that hypothetical study having been done, would it not be reasonable to assume that either one or the other would probably produce a different level of prosperity, and hence be reasonable to assume that there are likely to be objectively better/worse modes of morality?

    78. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      The only thing that would, to me, constitute evidence of absolute morality (as many of his statements seemed to imply) would be to prove that some sort of magical moral fairy exists.

      Even without that hypothetical study having been done, would it not be reasonable to assume that either one or the other would probably produce a different level of prosperity, and hence be reasonable to assume that there are likely to be objectively better/worse modes of morality?

      I don't quite understand what you mean. I see morals as mere opinions. Different people value different things. I don't see why one of them being prosperous would have anything to do with it. If they invented their own system of morality to be prosperous, and they weren't prosperous, though, then they clearly failed to do that.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    79. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by chekkerness · · Score: 1

      A value system that values death and ignorance is a dead and street. It's self destructive. A value system that's rationally derived from observing the fact that you're alive and have the capacity to reason ... that's not self destructive. One is inherently superior to the other, because adherents to the death-and-destruction framework cannot sustain themselves.

      Whether they can sustain themselves or not is irrelevant.

    80. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 1

      You see? Wrong again. They've been promoting Stalinism, not atheism, just like North Koreans promote Il dynasty.

      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
    81. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 1

      response: hey no wait, look at all these "atheist massacres" (that doesn't mean "in the name of atheism", it rather means the absence of doing it in the name of a religion).

      Oh, hi. Talk to me when you learn not to contradict yourself, KTHXBAI.

      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
    82. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Treating a child as a 'sex object' (actually you mean someone who without their own volition feel attractions toward children) is totally, completely different from a child predator, you fucking moron. If all child pornography is evil and wrong in all cases, what if I told you that I have pictures that I took voluntarily of myself when I was eight that showed me masturbating? And spread those pictures onto the net? And since that time, and up to now as an adult, I freely spread them? It's still evil? Do you think this doesn't happen?

      You would be amazed what large percentage of child pornography is a child taking pictures or video of himself, alone, of his own ideas and volition and putting it online. How many twelve year olds with smart phones are taking compromising pictures of themselves and putting them online. You would be amazed at what small percentage of kiddie porn is actually adults molesting children. Just because when you think of child pornography you think of a fifty year old man cornholing a toddler doesn't mean that's what it is.

    83. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Johann+Lau · · Score: 1

      lol? where's the contradiction, hmm?

      next time you wanna come across all smart and hard and give me orders, don't just string words together with no relation to what you quote, muhah.

    84. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Johann+Lau · · Score: 1

      whatever makes you happy dude.

    85. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Johann+Lau · · Score: 1

      come on, you can go lower.

    86. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Not lower than you.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    87. Re:Malaysia is Muslim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? You can't summon the perspective to see that a moral system that stones women to death for teaching their daughters to read is fundamentally, objectively inferior to a system that doesn't do so?

      Don't be silly. Of course we can. Almost everyone reading this can. Because we have a belief system (religious or otherwise) that has taught us the values that allow us to place the value of human life above almost everything else.

      However, if you grew up in a country where different values were taught you would not instinctively hav the same opinion. You may well ask:

      Really? You can't summon the perspective to see that a moral system that allows people to ignore the words of the prophet, endangering society and placing us all at risk, is objectively inferior to a system that doesn't do so?

      It's all about perspective. When you learn that you will understand that persuasion, not rhetoric, is the only way to change the mind of someone who believes differently to you. And even then you may be unsuccessful.

      Who cares if moral systems are based on different things? When they're based on death worship, for example, they are inherently, irrationally self destructive. When a moral code is based on lies (say, about the nature of the world around you) it is a code that embraces untruth as its foundation. Do you really find no means, in your own reckoning, to separate such a value system from one that seeks and acknowledges reality?

      Who cares? Why, the people who hold that belief care. Unless you mean "I don't care".

      You make a lot of logic jumps in your argument. Remember, for all science has gotten right, it has gotten as much wrong. Even today, many of the scientific "facts" we teach our children in school we know to be false, or at least wildly incomplete. We are looking for the right answers, but are hampered by the fact that we are observing a system from the inside - we have no more chance of successfully determining the truth than a NPC inside EVE online has of determining the existence of DirectX, or the existence of the underlying operating system. All we can ever hope to do is deduce the rules that apply to us and how to predict them - and that is a lot, and is a worthy goal. But we shouldn't confuse that with the truth.

      And in the absence of absolute truth (something only religions can claim), there is no absolute anything, especially morality. Your perspective is yours, but do not make the mistake of believing it is any more correct than any other.

      I'm not saying we shouldn't say "Hey, that's wrong!", I'm saying we should be honest and recognise that it's our beliefs and perspective that make us choose a particular set of "rules", not any universal or even global imperative that we are right in what we believe. We need to accept that we need to do what we believe is right, even as we accept the possibility that our beliefs are misguided.

      The exception to this is a person who has a firm religious belief, who can, then, believe that they have an absolute truth (as given by God, or one of the Game Devs, GM's, or whatever). And they may very well be right. And their "proof" may make no sense to anyone else, but that doesn't make then wrong. Of course, it doesn't make them right either.

      Ultimately, believe what you will, but recognise that others have as much right to their beliefs as yo do to yours, and your inability to understand their beliefs for whatever reason doesn't necessarily invalidate what they believe. And this goes far beyond atheists and religious faithful.

  5. Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Sadly, the most likely outcome is that they are going to execute this man for three tweets."

    Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?!

    What is even worse is that Interpol acknowledges blasphemy as a crime.

    This may give the world the impression that religions have substance and may be respected.

    1. Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! by wcoenen · · Score: 5, Informative

      What is even worse is that Interpol acknowledges blasphemy as a crime.

      According to article 3 of Interpol's own constitution, they are explicitly forbidden to engage in matters of religious character. So either they were deceived about the nature of the "crime" or they ignored their own principles.

    2. Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This goes to show that there is now freedom of speech and one should be very careful what they type on the net. This is a very sad story.

    3. Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! by rabbit994 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Because you obviously don't understand how Interpol works. Interpol is basically a big forum where various police agencies around the world share warrants, police investigations and the like. When one member country says they have warrants for joe smith, Interpol simply distributes the warrant and information to all other members nations. Interpol doesn't check the warrant or see why it's being issued, they just make a note in Joe Smith record and when it's pulled up by another country custom officers, they just see, so and so has warrant against them issued by another country and details of warrant. It's up to individual country to make determination if they are going to follow the warrant or not. 99.99% of the time, warrants are for stuff that all members countries that are consider illegal. Murder, rape, child related charges, drug traffic offenses.

    4. Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! by Shompol · · Score: 2

      I was thinking the same thing, Interpol was supposed to be a respectable international organisation. I guess the staff located in the Middle East observe Sharia themselves...

    5. Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! by Shompol · · Score: 0

      Well, if they don't check the warrants, that means their constitution is meaningless, just like in the US of A. In Soviet Russia people were sentenced for life for telling a political joke. They could make a heavy use of Interpol back in those years, those labour camps don't work themselves, you know.

    6. Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! by sjames · · Score: 4, Interesting

      According to their own charter, they DO check the warrants. Ethical considerations demand that they do as well. They failed utterly.

    7. Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! by mbone · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Interpol's Wikipedia article says that "[i]n order to maintain as politically neutral a role as possible, Interpol's constitution forbids it to undertake any interventions or activities of a political, military, religious, or racial nature." That, and "[u]ntil the 1980s Interpol did not intervene in the prosecution of Nazi war criminals in accordance with Article 3 of its Constitution forbidding intervention in 'political' matters."

      So, Nazi war crimes are political, but insulting the Prophet is not religious. This does not surprise. Interpol's full name is the International Criminal Police Organization; it was called the the International Criminal Police Commission (ICPC) prior to 1956. Past Presidents of the ICPC include Ernst Kaltenbrunner and Reinhard Heydrich. When Heydrich was planning the Final Solution at the Wannsee Conference, he was President of the ICPC. If you think that this background gives me a certain lack of respect for the ICPO, you are correct.

    8. Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! by dwillden · · Score: 1
      I'd suggest you don't really understand Interpol either. The above cited article 3 of Interpol's constitution and it's explanation on the linked site gives a very explicit definition that clearly show's this arrest was in violation of Interpol's constitution. That warrant notice should have never gone out.

      From the above linked site:

      Interpretation The interpretation of Article 3 in the context of INTERPOL’s activities has been the subject of a number of INTERPOL’s General Assembly Resolutions.

      Deriving from those Resolutions and their implementation in INTERPOL’s practice throughout the years, the primary objectives of Article 3 may be defined as follows:

      To ensure the independence and neutrality of INTERPOL as an international organisation;
      To reflect international extradition law;
      To protect individuals from persecution.

      Article 3 applies to all of INTERPOL’s activities and is particularly pertinent to the processing of information via the Organization’s channels, especially in the review and issuance of INTERPOL Notices and the review of messages exchanged directly among its member countries.

      Italics and Bold emphasis added by me.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    9. Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 1
      The world's oil reserves for a mod point!

      Interpol's full name is the International Criminal Police Organization; it was called the the International Criminal Police Commission (ICPC) prior to 1956. Past Presidents of the ICPC include Ernst Kaltenbrunner and Reinhard Heydrich. When Heydrich was planning the Final Solution at the Wannsee Conference, he was President of the ICPC. If you think that this background gives me a certain lack of respect for the ICPO, you are correct.

      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
    10. Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      police have principles?

    11. Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still not quite clear on Interpols involvement. I see a lot of claims that they 'don't interfere' but from what I am seeing also said is that they supported the means of facilitating the warrant request and such. That seems like direct positive involvement, which contradicts the notion of not interfering. It is not valid to say they 'don't interfere' when their actions are part of the means used to kidnap this guy. Am I missing something that keeps this from being so obvious?

       

    12. Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 1

      Interpol is made up of people just like every other organization. Likely the agents responsible for communication between Saudi Arabia and Malaysia are citizens from those countries. So it is not weird at all that those agents would share a Sharia value system.

    13. Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 4, Informative

      More than that, the staff located in the Middle East is made up of local law enforcement. I don't think Interpol as a organization even chooses its own members. Interpol is just a framework for law enforcement in various countries to work together.

    14. Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! by thisnamestoolong · · Score: 1

      I don't care. If they don't check warrants, and they allow bullshit like this to pass through. Fuck them. Fuck their mothers, and fuck their fathers. There is no excuse for them to have been a part of this. They are knowingly making themselves accessories to the murder of a man who was simply expressing his opinion. As I said before, if all they do is blindly transmit the warrants, they don't have ANY reason to exist, they could be replaced by an Internet forum. If they DO check the warrants, then they failed miserably, and anybody involved ought to be tried and convicted for crimes against humanity. Fuck them. (Oh yeah, and double-fuck the Malaysians and the Saudis who are responsible for this sort of evil. I wish that Hell was real so that they could go there.)

      --
      To the haters: You can't win. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
    15. Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why isnt this being covered by KCBS.

    16. Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It goes without saying that any and all organisations under Nazi rule (ICPC was based in Austria at that time) would be appointed Nazi leadership, but it's quite clear from the Wikipedia article that the ICPC was dismantled at the fall of the Nazis and recreated as the ICPO by THE ALLIES to fulfill the same role as the pre-war ICPC.

      Considering Ernst Kaltenbrunner was executed for war crimes, and Reinhard Heydrich was assasinated, and that the ICPO was established after the death of both them and the Nazi party, I fail to see the relationship between INTERPOL and the Nazi party.

      I'm not debating whether or not ICPO as it exists now is evil or not, but the argument you make is quite ridiculous and just makes you look stupid and ignorant.

      Every organisation in Nazi occupied territory would of been either disbanded or comanded by Nazi leadership, this in no way reflects on a different organisation setup to fulfill the previous role under entirely separate leadership.

  6. This is what belief in skybeings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That grant wishes get you every time.
    Wont be long till it happens here in the USA.
    Just a matter of time.

    1. Re:This is what belief in skybeings by SuperTechnoNerd · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Wont be long till it happens here in the USA. Just a matter of time."

      MPAA:
      You have illegally downloaded Harry Potter Movies.
      You shall hereby be sentenced to death by hanging with a CAT-5 ethernet cable.

      By order of:
      The United Corporations Of America

    2. Re:This is what belief in skybeings by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      I doubt they'll hang you. You can't get money from dead people. It'll just be a 3.5 million dollar fine.

    3. Re:This is what belief in skybeings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can actually get money from dead people, which is why the UCoA will legalize organ trade ASAP...

    4. Re:This is what belief in skybeings by celle · · Score: 1

      "It'll just be a 3.5 million dollar fine."

          Then you might as well be dead anyway since in the USA "money is life". With that big a fine you'll never have any money again.

  7. Why don't they just strip him... by wisebabo · · Score: 2

    ... of his citizenship send him to a country where apostasy isn't a crime?

    Or would the number of tweets fom like minded citizens hoping to duplicate his fortune crash twitter's servers?

    1. Re:Why don't they just strip him... by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 0

      ... of his citizenship send him to a country where apostasy isn't a crime?

      Because executing him is a much more effective deterrent than, well, anything else they could do to him.

    2. Re:Why don't they just strip him... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Why don't they just strip him... of his citizenship send him to a country where apostasy isn't a crime?

      Why don't we do the same for statuatory-rapists? To them it is something serious that they want to stop, even though it seems silly and barbaric to us. Welcome to inter-cultural studies. People often suffer as a result of the people around them.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:Why don't they just strip him... by Mashiki · · Score: 2

      Well I can give you the long answer or the short answer. The long answer is way, way too long. But the short answer is, because in a theocracy you have no freedom of expression or speech. And in turn the only way to keep the common people in line is by using religious law, and the fear of persecution. And when you have the chance to persecute someone for it. You do it, to throw the 'fear of god' in the rest, so they don't step out of line. And in turn, you keep control over your country, state, or whatever by the blessing of whatever religious council.

      Now, remember this was the type of shit that caused the reformations in the Christian religion, from Martin Luther nailing his proclamation to the church doors to people attacking inquisitors. The difference between Christianity and Islam is, what? Bonus points if you figure it out before the next sentence. Islam believes it to be the 'pure and untainted' word of god. Therefore can not be changed in any form what so ever. So until they cross that hurdle, this won't change. Catholicism also believed this for a long old time, until the common folk rose up and tossed it away, and let's not forget the branching with the church of england, and so on.

      Theology and religious history are rather interesting subjects.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
  8. Moral High Ground by ISoldat53 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The US used to have the moral high ground to protest these sort of things. What a difference a decade makes.

    1. Re:Moral High Ground by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The United States would not have deported him because the crime is not a crime here and carries a death sentence where he would be deported to. He was deported by Malaysia which is a country whose state religion is Islam and has similar issues with religious freedom as Saudi Arabia (being if you're ethnic Malay, you are legally a Muslim). The US had nothing to do with this.

    2. Re:Moral High Ground by ScentCone · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What a difference a decade makes.

      What, because the US also now executes people for being insufficiently deferential to the state religion?

      Or is this just yet another misdirected, fuzzy-minded Julian Assange fanboy thing?

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    3. Re:Moral High Ground by wbr1 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Bull Shit. Maybe some citizens would protest but that is about it. Possibly, we would get a 'stern disapproval' from the state department.

      As much as I dislike our meddling in other countries directly (Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, the list goes on), and pushing our own BS morality diplomatically (ACTA, War on drugs, etc), we should as a government stand against things that run counter to freedom of speech, religion and other core aspects of our country.
      The problem is our government only gives lip service to those amazing and praiseworthy ideals, and uses them in the worst possible ways.
      But unfortunately as a people we have become a trampled, apathetic mass of idiots bemused by bread and circuses, and as long as our politicians feed at the tit of corporations and pander to their interests, and as long as we suck the oil dick of the middle east, we will continue to turn a blind eye to the issues of true importance.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
    4. Re:Moral High Ground by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Careful, you might be classified as a terrorist and detained indefinitely at a non-disclosed location. That's the new state religion!

    5. Re:Moral High Ground by Skapare · · Score: 1

      The USA does, if it continues to cooperate with Interpol.

      --
      now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    6. Re:Moral High Ground by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And to how many US citizens has that happened during the last decade? Which percentage of 313 million?
      Have you ever wondered how this went during the previous decades, for instance the fifties through the seventies of the 20th century?
      Bovine fecies.

    7. Re:Moral High Ground by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      worse, the US sends people to far away places to be tortured for no reason at all

    8. Re:Moral High Ground by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good question, but the answer will unlikely be known in our lifetime due to "national security".

    9. Re:Moral High Ground by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      the US sends people to far away places to be tortured for no reason at all

      [citation needed]

      Please be specific, especially on the "for no reason at all" part.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    10. Re:Moral High Ground by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      In other words, you're BSing, and you know it.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    11. Re:Moral High Ground by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting response to the parent. Please tell us more.

    12. Re:Moral High Ground by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "bribed someone to point a finger at some random person he doesn't like" is a reason. It's a despicable reason, but so is the US these days.

    13. Re:Moral High Ground by AtomicAdam · · Score: 1

      The US used to have the moral high ground to protest these sort of things. What a difference a decade makes.

      Right, ok FTA Article he was deported from Malaysia. How dare the US allow this thing to happen, /sarcasm

    14. Re:Moral High Ground by waives · · Score: 1

      Really? That's the part you think is important? Please go shoot yourself.

    15. Re:Moral High Ground by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Suspicion of terrorism, possibly due to having a name phonetically similar to a known terrorist or travelling to the wrong places while being middle-eastern.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    16. Re:Moral High Ground by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      That's the part you think is important?

      No, that's the only part that's worth talking about. Actors prepping for movies, and thousands of soldiers go through the "torture" part on purpose. That hand-wringing is best saved over people who are actual victims of it, not simply having Been Inconvenienced. So, yes, I'm more interested in the "for no reason" part, because that implies someone speaking pure BS. Which is easy to note, because of course they haven't responded.

      Please go shoot yourself.

      Well, at least we can tell you're a credible, thoughtful person. Oh, wait, you're not. You're a whiny ranter with nothing of substance to contribute, and only juvenile ad hominem claptrap with which to fill the white space.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  9. Prophets and prophecies. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Insulting the prophet is considered blasphemous in Islam and is punishable by death in Saudi Arabia.

    can not they pardon his life?

    JCPM: a blasphemer that didn't commit a blood crime and isn't an authority over peoples, why should he be punished to death?

  10. But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by JDAustin · · Score: 0

    With Islam, there is no such thing as moderate Islam.

    1. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by PPH · · Score: 5, Insightful

      With Islam, there is no such thing as moderate Islam.

      Turn the clock back 600 years or so (the difference in age between Christianity an Islam) and look at the behavior of the Catholic Church.

      Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition ....

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can keep looking back at what happened 600 years ago, I'll keep looking at what is happening now and what will happen in the future.

    3. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 1

      Turn the clock back 600 years or so (the difference in age between Christianity an Islam) and look at the behavior of the Catholic Church.

      Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition ....

      The Spanish were ruled by the Muslims for almost 800 years. Think that in that time they just might have picked up a few unfortunate habits?

      --
      "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
    4. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition ....

      ...or a wholesale child-raping institution...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And look back 60 years and the Democrats were the party of white racism in the south. Now things are different. What's your point? You aren't making one. Not a coherent one, anyway. Fuck off.

    6. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by PPH · · Score: 1

      Sorry. I must have missed the bit about all the torture and burning at the stake done by Muslims during that period. It seems to have fallen through the cracks of a culture that tolerated Christians, Jews and others.

      Its much more likely that today's Islam has picked up a few bad habits from Christians' past.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    7. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you also miss them kidnapping young virgin non muslim girls, converting them by force to islam then marrying them during the "golden age" of islam in spain?

    8. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by ilguido · · Score: 1

      With Islam, there is no such thing as moderate Islam.

      Turn the clock back 600 years or so (the difference in age between Christianity an Islam) and look at the behavior of the Catholic Church.

      Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition ....

      Except for the fact that the Spanish Inquisition was independent from the Catholic Church (as an organization), it was founded by the Spanish monarchs to take control over the Inquisition tribunals and so it served the monarchy, not the Church.

      Moreover 600 hundreds years ago secular trials weren't better than the Inquisition (actually they were worse).

    9. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Posting AC because I'm ashamed of my ignorance...

      Its much more likely that today's Islam has picked up a few bad habits from Christians' past.

      Wasn't the majority of Islam ripped off from other Abrahamic faiths anyway? (i.e. Christianity)

    10. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by advocate_one · · Score: 1

      It seems to have fallen through the cracks of a culture that tolerated Christians, Jews and others.

      they only tolerated those who accepted being in Dhimmitude... a second class status... something these medieval tw@ts want to inflict upon the entire world right now...

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    11. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by Dhalka226 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But why should we?

      This isn't a person's development we're talking about, where we can dismiss it by going "oh, poor Islam, his brain just isn't fully developed yet. Give him some time."

      This is an organization who has had a dozen lifetimes just in your 600 year timeframe to watch and to see how things work without being insecure, murderous pricks, and that's not to mention the however many more lifetimes they have had to "mature" to begin with. At this point there is little to say but that they are actively rejecting the concept.

      This is not a defense of Christianity, nor is it some ridiculous finger pointing as to who started it; I think all religions are a pox upon the world. But the idea that Islam somehow should get an extra 600 years to find itself before being criticized as extremist or intolerant is ludicrous. It's not the middle ages anymore.

    12. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      citation needed. Besides, the Quran specifically says forced conversion is forbidden (2:256)

    13. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "no compulsion in religion" is a Mecqua period verse which has been abrogated by later Medina's verses.

    14. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by PPH · · Score: 1

      Hey, at least they had a place for the not believers in their society. In countries with a state church (Catholic or some Protestant sect), they didn't label them Dhimmi (actually, a protected class with certain rights under Sharia). They just called them dead.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    15. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Leave the Catholic Clergy out of this!

    16. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They just called them dead.

      That's funny, that's how iraqis calls iraqis christians.

    17. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With Islam, there is no such thing as moderate Islam.

      Yes there is. The Koran defines them as 2nd class muslims, those which believe but do not wage jihad.

      The jihadi's get the virgins and sit with Mohammed iirc. The 2nd class mussies only get entry to heaven.

    18. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by couchslug · · Score: 1

      All religion is bad, but the past of Christian superstition doesn't make CURRENT Islam less toxic!

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    19. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by powerlord · · Score: 1

      citation needed. Besides, the Quran specifically says forced conversion is forbidden (2:256)

      Citation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_conversion#Islam_2

      Bad people will always use religion to justify their actions. To deny that they are happening helps no one. To accept that they are happening, and need to change is a step on the road to tolerance.

      I do not believe that the majority of Islam's current followers do not want violence or to oppress those who do not agree with them (so long as THEY aren't trying to impose their views on them), however so long as the Vocal Minority of people willing to pervert or subvert religion (whatever that religion) in pursuit of their own goals is all that people see in the media, their view of that religion will BE perverted and subverted.

      This happened in the 80's/90's with the Evangelical movement when preacher after preacher kept showing up in tabloid and scandal after scandal. It happened in the 90's/00's with the Catholic religion when the main thing people saw in the news was the abuse of underage parishioners by clergy. We're see ing it now in the 00's/10's with Islam where the radical Imams and their followers. Hopefully the non-radical element will gain strength, support, and a larger voice.

      --
      This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
    20. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by mjwx · · Score: 1

      With Islam, there is no such thing as moderate Islam.

      Turn the clock back 600 years or so (the difference in age between Christianity an Islam) and look at the behavior of the Catholic Church.

      Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition ....

      I expected it, I had my comfy chair out in preparation.

      It's a good analogy though, people forget that Christianity used to be as bad as Islam, if not worse. If it still had power Christianity would rival Islam in it's idiocy. The only reason we have rights for women, gays and in many cases, blacks is because people stopped believing in the invisible sky man and figured out that man determines his own destiny, not some fictitious creator.

      People like to beleive that Christianity is better when in fact, it's just not powerful enough to get away with it. Take a look at the kiddie fiddling in the church of today and how practically nothing is done about it.

      "Moderate" religion exists in places where religion does not hold power. The best way to reduce the power of religion is to drag more people into the middle class. This is the big difference between most Islamic countries and the west. In the west, the average person has money, a comfortable life. He does not need to seek a religious fantasy to give them hope that they could have a better life. The average person in the Middle east is dirt poor, working substance jobs or if they are lucky, for a pittance. You can bet your bottom dollar these people are moderate, they're just powerless. Much like in Christian countries a few hundred years ago, religion is wielded by the powerful few and used as a club to keep people under their heel. The old saying "religion is the opiate of the masses", so keeping a disenfranchised population "high" is a good way to keep them from rising up against a dictator.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    21. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why?

      Why should anyone turn the clock back 600 years?

      Why is it relevant for anything happening right now?

      Are you saying that some people aren't fully developed mentally/socially, and need another 600 years to "catch up"?

    22. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not the middle ages anymore.

      You are aware of the environments which huge numbers of the global population live in, right?

      The rest of the world isn't Western Europe or North America.

    23. Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... by PPH · · Score: 1

      It's relevant because we learn from history. Or we're doomed to repeat it.

      Christianity was what Islam is now. So Christians need to drop the 'we're better then you' crap. But Muslims need to take a lesson from the moderating influences of the West's Renaissance and Enlightenment. And not drag themselves through the same centuries of crap that we put up with in the name of Christianity.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  11. Meanwhile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the UK hate preachers who advocate terrorism get taxpayer's benefits and even get to shop at Morrisons.

  12. Wait. I'm confused... by TheGreatOrangePeel · · Score: 1, Funny

    Journalist Arrested For Tweet Deported to Saudi Arabia

    Right. Okay. Uhm. How do you deport a tweet? /smartass

    1. Re:Wait. I'm confused... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More like /dumbass if you can't parse that sentence.

    2. Re:Wait. I'm confused... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More like /dumbass if you can't parse a joke.

  13. Yeah, mod him down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    If it was "George Hotz gets slapped by Kaz Hirai and cries" and the comment "That's it I'm never buying Sony again" you'd have modded him to +5 Insightful.

  14. And these people are our strongest allies? by TellarHK · · Score: 2

    How much clearer does it need to be made to us, that our oil addiction is putting us in bed with some really, really objectionable regimes around the world?

    Don't get me wrong, I'm no hippie on a bicycle, and I don't hate Muslims or their faith (at least, no more than I dislike Christians or Christianity) but when you've got nations involved in the whole "execution for apostasy" game, cut them off. Yes, geopolitics is hard, but we should never have let ourselves get put in a position where we'd support any regime like this.

    1. Re:And these people are our strongest allies? by ArchieBunker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I would have stopped considering them allies the second it was known that 16 out of the 19 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    2. Re:And these people are our strongest allies? by amiga3D · · Score: 2

      The ruling family is our allies. Most of it's citizens are our enemies.

    3. Re:And these people are our strongest allies? by dwillden · · Score: 1

      When you can show that the Government of Saudi Arabia had a hand in selecting, training for, funding and directing 9/11, you point will have credence. Until then, give it up all ready.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    4. Re:And these people are our strongest allies? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      The ruling family are all Wahhabi to. They're not your allies, it's just that their hate for you is less than the fear of losing their throne to some kind of republican Islamic revolution a la Iran.

    5. Re:And these people are our strongest allies? by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 1
      Not that anyone showed that Afghan (or Iraqi) Government had a hand in it, but

      [The Taliban] gained diplomatic recognition from only three states: Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates.

      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
    6. Re:And these people are our strongest allies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A handful of individuals from a nation of millions did something evil, and you condemn the whole nation?

    7. Re:And these people are our strongest allies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of its citizens are enemies of the royal family because the royal family is propped up by money from oil and uses the money to buy weapons from its western allies and run a brutal police state. It's the royal family that needs to go, or at least change into something benign. Same for Bahrain and a bunch of other nasty monarchies/dictatorships in that part of the world. We are supporting them for all the wrong reasons. They won't last forever, and when the revolution comes we'll be on the wrong side.

      Of course, say that in Saudi Arabia and you'll end up in jail or worse. Hence the problem.

    8. Re:And these people are our strongest allies? by quax · · Score: 1

      The ruling family is the ones that created this religious extremism in the first place to control their population.

      They like to sell us their people's oil to enrich themselves and call themselves "our allies".

      They are not.

    9. Re:And these people are our strongest allies? by celle · · Score: 1

      The saudi government did have a hand in 9/11. They protected and supported radical clerics who had taught the 9/11 hijackers for decades. The government knew what was going on and thought nothing of it or the end result regardless of the various incidents and warnings in their sphere of influence.

    10. Re:And these people are our strongest allies? by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      I think you have it quite backwards. The citizens want democracy and love the US culture and lifestyle. It's the royal family that keeps buying guns from the US to brutally use on their population, and the royal family that uses its wealth to force right-wing ideas to be taught domestically to a public that doesn't want it. Opinion poll after poll shows that the Saudi public WANTS women to be allowed to drive, and wants an elected parliament and wants the right to be able to watch satellite TV legally. The whole "we can't allow democracy in the middle east because they would be worse than the existing dictators" is soo 2000...

    11. Re:And these people are our strongest allies? by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      That's not directly related. The US government never claimed that the Taliban had direct knowledge of or aided in the 9/11 attacks. They were toppled after the attack because they refused to hand over Bin Laden to the US without Bush first sending them evidence. The Taliban offered to try Bin Laden in Afghanistan but Bush did not agree to the idea.

      The Taliban were a corrupt and repressive group, but nobody accused them of helping with 9/11.

    12. Re:And these people are our strongest allies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha ha, the ruling family is our puppet, who keeps the rest of the citizens dominated under a repressive rule.

      So why do we allow that? Aren't we the heralds of Democracy? No, we are not, we are just oil hungry so we mess with other countries who have oil.

    13. Re:And these people are our strongest allies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would have stopped considering them allies the second it was known that 16 out of the 19 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia.

      Funny how some of them seem to be alive, and this is what the BBC dug up just a few shorts days after the event.

  15. Interpol by tmosley · · Score: 1

    Everyone involved in this fiasco should resign immediately if not prosecuted. This is insanity. If this poor man is murdered for this, then I want to see Khoo Boon Hui and Ronald Noble's heads on pikes.

    1. Re:Interpol by koan · · Score: 1

      Yes the answer to irrational behavior is always more irrational behavior.

      --
      "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    2. Re:Interpol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If an act achieves a desired goal, then it is rational.

    3. Re:Interpol by tmosley · · Score: 1

      Right, people in places of power should not be held accountable for their actions. And you wonder why every year the world become less and less free.

    4. Re:Interpol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me tell you about violence, if that's your solution then you better expect in return.

    5. Re:Interpol by tmosley · · Score: 1

      So we shouldn't seek justice for people who are murdered?

      Fuck you, coward.

  16. Mohammed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The pedophile?

    1. Re:Mohammed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No the traitor, the one that asked the Medina jews for protection when he was fleeing his family and weak, then killed them and took their wives as sex slaves as soon as he had enough followers in Medina.

  17. Back to the dark ages! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even the information age can't save us. Time for another set of religious dark ages: http://commonsenseatheism.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/timeline.png

  18. ONE LESS SAUDI TERRORIST IN THE WORLD !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It will be a good day at Hanging Rock when this very bad person has gone to his harrem in the sky !!

  19. Sure thing! by ArchieBunker · · Score: 3, Funny

    Just tell me where to buy the Mr. Fusion upgrade.

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    1. Re:Sure thing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      1) Replace coal fired electricity generation with nuclear power
      2) Use the coal now not being burned to produce electricity, to instead produce synthetic liquid fuels (Fischer Tropsch process, etc)
      3) Electricification of transportation (Electric commuter cars, electricified rail transport etc)
      4) Nuclear powered merchant shipping (by this stage ecconomies of scale in step 1 should have driven down the cost of nuclear plant, fuel assembly and spent fuel reprocessing, etc).
      5) Bring our soldiers home as foreign oil becomes increasingly irrelevant...
      6) Reprocess the spent nuclear fuel, vitrify the fission products and bury them in a deep hole, and send the rest of the spent fuel (unfissioned uranium and transuranics like plutonium) back to a reactor for another fuel cycle.
      7) Export advanced nuclear reactor technoloy to the rest of the world $$$
      = Cleaner air in our cities, reduced CO2 emissions, eleminate dependance on foreign oil, stop pissing of other countries by sending our soldiers to their neighbourhood, etc

      But no, instead of doing the above as an ecconomic stimulus, we (the western world) will spend billions/trillions on fighting wars in the mid east to secure our oil supply (money up in smoke?)

    2. Re:Sure thing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Just tell me where to buy the Mr. Fusion upgrade.

      Mr. Fusion only powered the time circuits, the time machine still required unleaded gasoline to move and hit 88mph.

    3. Re:Sure thing! by siddesu · · Score: 1

      That was in the 80s, man. Big Oil was still trying hard to kill the electric car back then.

    4. Re:Sure thing! by Walter+White · · Score: 1

      1) Replace coal fired electricity generation with nuclear power ...
      7) Export advanced nuclear reactor technoloy to the rest of the world $$$

      8) Profit!

      Seriously.

    5. Re:Sure thing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just tell me where to buy the Mr. Fusion upgrade.

      Mr. Fusion only powered the time circuits, the time machine still required unleaded gasoline to move and hit 88mph.

      Which, I never got that. How the hell is the hover conversion powered then? I would imagine the Mr Fusion would put out a hell of a lot more power (At LEAST 1.21 GW!) than a US DeLorean DMC-12's (~100 kW)? Or is Mr. Fusion only useful for generating power in a short burst?

      THESE ARE THE IMPORTANT PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTIONS OF OUR TIME!

    6. Re:Sure thing! by randyleepublic · · Score: 1

      It's not money up in smoke if you are a defense contractor executive!

      --
      Social Credit would solve everything...
    7. Re:Sure thing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      5) Bring our soldiers home as foreign oil becomes increasingly irrelevant...

      Good plan except for #5 there. Here's a hint at what's wrong with it: how much oil is there in Afghanistan?

      (money up in smoke?)

      Getting closer... what is Afghanistan known for?

      Modern capitalists are not stupid. Non-renewable resource = foreseeable end of profit. Renewable resource and control of associated law = endless and much larger profits.

  20. I think this story is incorrect! by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Islam is the Religion of Peace! George Bush and Barack Obama both said so!

    --
    "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
    1. Re:I think this story is incorrect! by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      Wait, so you're judging a 1.5 Billion follower religion based on what a dictator of a small country decreed as a law? Saudi Arabia's population is less than 2% of all Muslims, but that's even less relevant because it's a dictatorship. The majority of the world's Muslims do not support what's going on here.

    2. Re:I think this story is incorrect! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Islam IS a religion of peace. One of its core values is nothing can be done in anger. No war, no death, no judgement. If you feel anger during any of these actions, you are forbidden, by god (allah) to carry them out. This is intended to promote rational thought and remove emotion from the equation. I am new to the religion and do not recall the details (names etc) of the story, but there is a passage in the Quran where a religious soldier is about to kill an infidel during a holy war. Just before striking the final blow, the infidel spits in the soldiers face. The soldier can no longer kill him, because he feels hatred for him. This story can be interpreted many ways. I find it similar to having judges oversee a trial they have a personal opinion about. I find it similar to religious figures interfering in government decision making. I'm not saying Islam is any better than any other religion, or more peaceful.

      The problem is, like all religions, there are people who choose to follow parts of it and ignore other parts. Often taking the parts they choose to follow to tangential extremes. Every religion has fundamentalist and up until the past century (correct me if I'm wrong, which is entirely possible) many countries were still controlled by religion fundamentalists from most religions. Thankfully today, most Western countries are moving away from this. There are Eastern and Middle Eastern countries which still have a way to go.

  21. Well that explains a lot by koan · · Score: 1

    No wonder they are all such fervent believers, they get killed if they aren't.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  22. This is a violation of Interpol's constitution. by goodmanj · · Score: 1

    Interpol's constitution states:
    "in order to ensure the widest possible cooperation between the police authorities of its member States, it is strictly forbidden for organization to undertake any intervention or activities of a political, military, religious or racial character."
    http://www.interpol.int/About-INTERPOL/Legal-materials/The-Constitution

    How the hell did this get through Interpol's bureaucracy?

    1. Re:This is a violation of Interpol's constitution. by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 1

      You missed the point. Interpol does not intervene with religious matters. Interpol would be meddling with religious matters if it refused to cooperate with a member nation because it disagreed with its religious laws. So Interpol were being fair, in the fucked up sense of the word.

    2. Re:This is a violation of Interpol's constitution. by dwillden · · Score: 1

      No, you missed the point. The page that was linked continues to say that No Interpol messages related to religious matters will be processed and sent out. Saudi Arabia should have been politely but firmly told that such a warrant could not be published to the world via Interpol.

      Interpol had better start screaming bloody murder about either their system or their name being misused by SA and Malaysia in this arrest. The fact that the warrant went out over the Interpol system is a violation of the Interpol constitution, if it did. Otherwise the fact that it's been reported as the arrest occurring by Interpol is a violation of the constitution.

      It doesn't say that they don't intervene, it states that they will not be involved in any arrests or deportations or even publishing of warrants based on religious issues, as such warrants are, as in this case, pure persecution on the basis of thought crimes.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    3. Re:This is a violation of Interpol's constitution. by goodmanj · · Score: 1

      Yep. And the Interpol constitution has it right: when the special demands of religion collide with secular policy, it is better to refuse to grant special favors to any religion, than to try to appease them all. (The latter is both impossible and unfair to the non-religious.)

      True for islamists vs blasphemers, true for catholic hospitals vs birth control.

  23. Interpol Values by Xacid · · Score: 1

    Values:
    With such a diverse group of men and women, the organization's values play a particularly important role in maintaining a harmonious and effective working environment. The INTERPOL General Secretariat defines its values through the following qualities:
    Respect for human rights
    Integrity
    Commitment to quality
    Availability
    Team spirit
    Value for money
    Accountability

    Source: http://www.interpol.int/Recruitment [interpol.int]

    Action is taken within the limits of existing laws in different countries and in the spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

    Source: http://www.interpol.int/About-INTERPOL/Overview [interpol.int]

  24. So lemme get this straight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    INTERPOL will gladly help radical religious tyrants to enforce their religious intolerance all around the world.

    Do I have that right?

    1. Re:So lemme get this straight by Skapare · · Score: 1

      Wait for the Occupy and Anonymous protests to strike to find out.

      --
      now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
  25. The Age Old Art of Making an Example of Someone by dryriver · · Score: 1

    Ironic that we are in the 2nd Decade of the 21st Century, and anyone with the potential to make waves in any way is instantly charged/extradited/executed/crucified/smeared publicly, no matter where they are. Examples: Man tweets relatively insignificant crap about Mohammed - extradited to KSA and charged with Apostasy/Death Penalty. Man/Peace Activist in 70s reveals Israel has Nkes/WMDs - gets instant life-in-prison in Israel. Man leaks government war/diplomacy documents on the web - Charged with raping 2 women in Sweden/extradition to U.S. and Life Sentence Wanted (some want him executed, too). Socialist/Lefty Man gets ready to challenge Sarkozy presidency in France - charged with sudden nude sex assault on chamber maid in Manhattan Hotel, arrested on way to NY Airport, supposedly prevented from "fleeing" to France. British Man hacks U.S. gov computers looking for "UFO and Free Energy Evidence" - spends 10 years in will-he-be-extradited-to-USA-or-not-? limbo. The cases may be different, but the point of the actions taken against each man is the same. Punish-Him-And-Make-An-Example-Of-Him. Whether the laws should actually work this way is anybody's guess...

    --
    Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
    1. Re:The Age Old Art of Making an Example of Someone by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 1

      ... 20-something years old Pvt. reveals war crimes by the U.S. gets slandered by his own president and thrown into solitary confinement pending trial.

      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
  26. fuck you islam by FrozenFood · · Score: 1

    fuck you islam

    fuck you muhammed

    and people say islam is a religion of peace.

    "then again atheists aren't as likely to burn your house down" - Yhatzee

    1. Re:fuck you islam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually it's a religion of pieces. They blow you up, then leave you in pieces.

  27. A religion of peace? by YankDownUnder · · Score: 1

    According to the 10 Commandments: "Thou shalt not kill" It's strange that society and religion can re-interpret this to their perspective instead of standing on the reality of the meaning. It also goes to show that, as a "monotheistic" religion, Islam puts Mohammed above all other humans - and even God; wherein lies the inherent problem. This is exactly how Islam creates enemies - of it's own volition - and creates fear throughout the non-muslim world. Very sad, very sad. I'm fairly certain that God would think of this (and all other religious executions) as being an insult to His Creation.

    --
    YankDownUnder Veni, Vidi, volo in domum redire
    1. Re:A religion of peace? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 10 commandments do not apply to Islam.
      Here is the close passage:
      Koran 6:151 - And do not kill anybody that Allah has prohibited except when you have a right to kill

    2. Re:A religion of peace? by mr100percent · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What are you babbling about? As a Muslim, I know that Muhammad, peace be upon him, died 1400 years ago, while God never dies. You still say Islam puts him above God; the Being who created all of the galaxy and existence?

      Look, if Muhammad were alive today, he would not stand for such an injustice being done in his name. He was known to have people spit in his face and physically assault him, and he forgave them and spared them from punishment. What the Saudi dictatorship is doing is quite the opposite of Islam and islamic history.

    3. Re:A religion of peace? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He was known to have people spit in his face and physically assault him, and he forgave them and spared them from punishment. citation please.

    4. Re:A religion of peace? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      citation please.

    5. Re:A religion of peace? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      citation please

    6. Re:A religion of peace? by Necroloth · · Score: 1

      As a Muslim myself, I am in total agreement with you. The majority of Muslims are 'normal' however we're not as vocal as the minority and somehow the millions of us who go about our day to day business get tarnished by the brush of ignorance. And what can we do to shout about it when the media much rather play to the insecurities and grab headlines by giving all the attention to idiots who are ruining the religion?

  28. Thank you /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To follow up on my post above, I would like to thank /. for keeping anonymous option for posting. I have working relationship with many people of Islamic faith in Asia, I consider them all decent good people but my views may hit a nerve since it's about their religion and I rather not that happen over a simple post.

  29. Knock off the Islam-bashing by mr100percent · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Man there's a heck of a lot of trolls commenting here.

    Look, this is a problem of dictatorship, not of religion. The majority of the world's Muslims live in democracies and don't have such repressive laws. Muslims in America are aghast at such an unjust situation. Saudi is the backwards exception in the Muslim world. I'm a Muslim and I certainly don't support what's going on here.

    1. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The majority of the world's muslims live in democracies?

      Really?

      Do you consider the regimes in the middle east to be democracies?

      How about the kleptocracies in Africa (e.g., Nigeria, Sudan and others)?

      What about the repressive judicial systems in Malaysia and Indonesia?

      How about the intensely corrupt and violent system in Pakistan?

      Apostasy is a crime under Islam, right? Most Muslim-majority countries place Islam above secular laws, which means that offending the sensibilities of fellow Muslim citizens is a crime punishable by death.

      How is that in any way civilized?

    2. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by andy1307 · · Score: 1, Troll

      Look, this is a problem of dictatorship, not of religion.

      Bullshit. If executing a man for a tweet is unislamic, why do muslims let the keepers of the two mosques get away with an unislamic practice? Would the saudi dictators get a pass for opening a casino?

    3. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would the saudi dictators get a pass for opening a casino?

      It's good to be the king.

    4. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, if you bothered to look up population demographics, over 50% of Muslims worldwide live in democracies. Places like Senegal, Indonesia, etc.

      You're citing regimes in which a minority of the world's Muslims live. You can't judge the 1.5 Billion Muslims by Saudi Arabia, especially considering it's so small that there's 2x as many Muslims in China than Saudi.

    5. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2

      The majority of the world's Muslims live in democracies and don't have such repressive laws.

      What democracies? The ones like Malaysia, which deported this guy to his death?

      Or the one like the newly democratic Egypt, where they're seriously debating whether to allow women to sit in the parliament or not, and whether they should go Sharia all the way right there and then, or blend religious and civil code?

      Or the one like the newly democratic Libya, where al-Qaeda jihadi banner with shahada is now flying over the town hall?

      Or the one like Iran, where they have revolted against tyranny, and then proceeded to institute a far worse one in its place?

    6. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by Ryanrule · · Score: 1

      It is a RELIGIOUS dictatorship. "I'm a Muslim and I certainly don't support what's going on here." You must do much more than "not supporting it". Do something asshole. This is your religion, no? Then speak out. Go there. Start a protest.

    7. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by mr100percent · · Score: 5, Informative

      That's the thing, Muslims don't. Saudi Arabia is a dictatorship that rules by a king who was installed by the British. Their meager population is 1.75% of all Muslims worldwide. Consider this, there are 2x as many Muslims in China than Saudi Arabia, should we judge Islam and Muslims based on that? (It's equally ridiculous)

      Saudi Arabia has been criticized by every other Muslim country for its backwardness and repression. There is no other Muslim country that bans women from driving, and Muslim leaders abroad have led the call to pressure the King to drop the ban. Millions of Muslims like myself have signed petitions calling on them to recognize greater religious freedom and human rights. As a Muslim, I'd like to see an Arab Spring in Saudi, but unfortunately the US government has been selling the Saudi government weapons and tools to suppress the population. The Saudi king doesn't really own cows, so why is he importing thousands of cattle prods and giving them to the police forces?

      Try actually talking to Muslims, or heck, reading Muslim blogs/tweets/newspapers, before you assume that we all support such an abomination. There's no place in the Quran where it says a king should ever rule over people.

    8. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      I guess in your case, it's democracies that don't make headlines in the news you read. Senegal, Albania, Bangladesh, Indonesia, etc. India isn't majority Muslim but there's more Muslims living in India than Pakistan. Over 50% of Muslims such as myself live in a democracy, and look at these other countries with pity.

    9. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by mr100percent · · Score: 2

      Sure, what can I do in New York, when Obama is selling billions of dollars of fighter jets, heavy guns, and cattle prods to the Saudi military and police?

      My local mosque sent signed petitions to the Saudi king asking him to please lift the ban on women driving. It's the opposite of 1400 years of Islamic history. I wrote in my blog and twitter how I want the Saudi King to step aside and allow democracy to take place, but it's hard to make that happen when the US government firmly stands behind them. I voted for Obama, but sadly he increased the support to Saudi, not decreased it.

    10. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2

      Senegal

      Haven't heard much about them, so perhaps you have a point there. Wikipedia says that they're mostly Sufi, which would help a lot - these folk tend to be much more liberal on many issues.

      Albania

      I wonder why Albania is the primary European hub of human trafficking (especially sexual slaves). Not saying that it has something to do with Islam - I simply don't know enough about Albania, though I do know that Islam explicitly permits female sexual slavery - but it certainly stands quite apart from most other European countries, even in Eastern Europe.

      Bangladesh

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Bangladesh#Persecution_of_minority_communities
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_Bangladesh#Societal_abuses_and_discrimination

      Indonesia

      You've got to be kidding me. Indonesia openly practices Sharia law in one of the provinces, not to mention all the stuff it has been sneaking in quietly elsewhere.

      Also, I've already given that link, but I'll do so again, and specifically this table. So much for progressive Indonesia.

    11. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by blind+biker · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, Saudi Arabia is the exception. And Malaysia, since they're extradating the guy for what shouldn't even be a crime. OK; so Saudi Arabia and Malaysia are the exceptions.

      And Pakistan, since there blasphemy is punishable by death.

      Alright, the Musim world is fine with these three minor exceptions, namely Saudi Arabia, Malaysia and Pakistan.

      Oh, and Iran, whee you can be sentenced to death for apostasy.

      I could go on, I really could, but I think I already made my point: you can excuse us, uninformed outsiders, when we make the broad conclusion that Islam is fucked up, generally speaking.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    12. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      Senegal, Maldives, Kazakhstan, Burkina Faso, Mali, Guinea, Azerbaijan, Turkey, Chad, Brunei, Gambia, etc. All countries with Muslim majorities and democracies. Add them all up, then add up the minority Muslim populations in places like India and Europe, and you have over 800 Million Muslims living in democracies. More than half the world's Muslim population. It's hard for me to believe that in 2012 I still have to explain to people that 80% of Muslims aren't Arab nor live in the Middle East.

      I didn't say any country was flawless, but they're not the terrorist hotbeds you seem to be making them out. Al Qaeda never took hold in Bangladesh, and although there are hundreds of millions of Muslims living in India, they got single-digit number of AQ terrorists. Indonesia is home to hundreds of religions, and despite some scattered friction on the local level, the public at large supports religious freedom. Your examples aren't really convincing; dozens of mosques in the US have burned down since 9/11, should I claim that America and Christianity have issues with tolerance? Sure, but let's look at it in the proper scale.

      Colombia is the cocaine capital of the world, and is also 90% Roman Catholic. Should we blame Catholicism for drug abuse then? Then why are you trying to link islam with human trafficking via Albania etc?

    13. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      Saudi Arabia is less than 2% of the entire world Muslim population, and its laws are condemned by other non-Saudi Muslims. You think that represents the Muslims anywhere outside its borders?
      Pakistan's blasphemy law was created by the British and has been on the books since before they got independence. You're looking at a country that has a literacy rate of under 50%. It's like vilifying Christianity because ignorant Alabamans burn mosques and ban gay marriage.

      I'm a Muslim and happily live in one of the democracies where such blasphemy laws don't exist. Shaykh Hamza Yusuf says that America is more aligned with Islamic principles than any other country in the world. I can practice my religion here and am not trying to oppress anyone.

    14. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look, this is a problem of dictatorship, not of religion.

      Bullshit. If executing a man for a tweet is unislamic, why do muslims let the keepers of the two mosques get away with an unislamic practice? Would the saudi dictators get a pass for opening a casino?

      If they could find a passage in the Quran, which could be extrapolated and bastardized to support it, then yes they could. Given they would have to overlook, ignore or discredit other parts of it in order to do so. This is no different to anti-abortion groups, KKK and numerous other groups which have policies and practices which are a bastardization of religious values with complete disregard for the values which are contradictory.

    15. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Kazakhstan ... Azerbaijan ... Chad ... Brunei ... Muslims living in democracies

      Really? That's your examples of democracies?

      I didn't say any country was flawless, but they're not the terrorist hotbeds you seem to be making them out.

      You misrepresent my words. I did not say that they are "terrorist hotbeds" or al-Qaeda. I said that their morals - and, in many cases, laws stemming out of those morals - are middle age variety. Most of them are quite content to stick to applying those laws and morals to their own territory, which is good - but nowhere near good enough.

      the public at large supports religious freedom.

      The public at large in Indonesia, apparently, also supports stoning people to death for adultery. I wonder what they'd have to say about apostasy.

    16. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by couchslug · · Score: 1

      The problem with religion is that religion endorses precisely such repression! There is no getting away from it, and "democracy" doesn't in any way mean that the net result of a democratic choice is a secular society.

      As a Muslim you cannot critically view a religion that defines your life. Those of us who are free of superstition can see them clearly.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    17. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dictatorship isn't the problem either. It's the combination of corrupt governance and fanaticism that is.
      Any form of governance can be corrupted, given the right social climate. Nationalism has been frequently abused for that purpose. Discontent with the current social order is also a popular tool. Even apathy and ignorance are enough, as evidenced in the US.

      Any ideology followed blindly by a vast majority of the population can be exploited for selfish interests. It doesn't matter if it's religious or not, although religion certainly is the most frequently abused because of it's popularity and because it's followers are already trained not to critically appease the dogma (Thou shalt have no other gods besides me).

      Religion may not be the problem, but it's frequently part of it, if history serves as any indication.

    18. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      Saudi Arabia is a dictatorship that rules by a king who was installed by the British.

      Care to cite something about this. According to this article Suadi Arabia was formed by conquest and not the British. In fact fear of the British kept the country fom being larger. You may be confusing Saudi Arabia with Jordan.

    19. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      What you're speaking on, are muslims living in democracies. Though the ones living under theocracies don't speak up, can't, or won't. Then again, there are plenty of them in western democracies who are turning around and trying to implement these laws in democracies and western countries too. We had a near brush with them in Canada(specifically ontario) a few years ago. The UK still is. Germany has a parallel court system, Norway and Sweden have serious problems with 'closed' zones.

      You can be a happy muslim living in a democracy where those laws don't exist. But it appears that others aren't, and would be much happier dragging the rest of the world back a few hundred years.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    20. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      hmm, this might be interesting - do you also think women should have full equality in everything, including education, free sex, choosing their clothing ? how about voting ?
      do you also support religious freedom, including freedom to have no religion and mocking any religion (in speach, writing or images) ?
      i'm really curious what does a self proclaimed free-thinking muslim actually is like :)

    21. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The public at large in Indonesia, apparently, also supports stoning people to death for adultery. I wonder what they'd have to say about apostasy.

      whattt? I'm an Indonesian and I can tell you that you are absolutely wrong. nobody here get stoned to death for adultery and nobody I know are supporting it. in fact, adultery among celebrities are a frequent 'news' topic and I just don't see anyone get prosecuted for adultery, let alone get stoned.

      and apostasy happens rather frequently too. while sometimes it gets frowned upon, pretty much nobody get prosecuted for apostasy.

    22. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Bullshit, you're the exception not the rule.
      The vast majority of them are savages, living in the fucking dark ages when it comes to the rights of other men, women and children, no matter the sexual or religious beliefs.

      These people should be left alone, in their own countries to do whatever stupid and savage things they find appropriate, we should not go there however they should not come here, we simply need to avoid these people until they kill each other off or come somewhere close to the year 1900 or beyond. As it stands now, these people are barbarians.

      Moderate me troll, feel free to, ask the women in muslim countries their thoughts (well,,.. try and ask them, if talking to them doesn't get your or them killed)

    23. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      minority Muslim populations in places like India and Europe, and you have over 800 Million Muslims living in democracies

      That's because they are minorities and have no say about how these governments rule their people. Why do you think so many people in the EU are very weary of muslims? If they ever represented a majority in a democratic country, we'd see a lot of Islamic laws appearing.

      Let's not also forget that even Turkey is officially somewhat of a democracy, they are turning more and more towards religious crazy-state. They, like most Islamic countries, prosecute blasphemy.

      Unfortunately the majority of Islam is where Christianity was centuries ago because most of its followers come from archaic 3rd world countries and have yet to shake their ignorant, violent and narrow-minded behaviour. Not that I want to defend Christianity (I wish we could keep everything religious off laws and governments) but at least they developed past the intellectual cavemen-stage.

    24. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      The British played a big role in it, it's known as the Arab Revolt when they encouraged the Arabs to rise up against the Ottoman empire and break away. The famed "Lawrence of Arabia" took place in it. The Saud forces were promised British support, which they got. And thus the dictatorship was born.

    25. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      Of course I do. Men and women are spiritually equal according to contemporary Muslim scholars. Women definitely deserve equal education, the ability to choose their husbands, wear what they want, and yes, vote.

      I love religious freedom, I gladly live in a place where we have a First Amendment and think it needs to be defended from government and people who want to eliminate it.

      These are so obvious that I think you are stuck in some sad stereotypes. You do realize that the largest Muslim countries in the world have had women leaders, like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, right?

    26. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Baloney, there's a reason the Indian National Congress beat the BJP in recent elections, because Indian Muslims voted. The whole idea that Muslims are a fifth column is a tired canard. In America, you have thousands of patriotic American Muslims in the armed forces, and many are buried at Arlington National Cemetery.

      And as for Turkey, people are severely overblowing the issue. When Bush and the religious conservatives were elected in landslide majority, did women's rights suddenly become jeopardized? Turns out all the hyperventilating by people was for very little.

      I think you "majority of Islam is backwards" idea is from some really bad data. Most examples of "bad Muslims" seem to come from either Saudi Arabia (dictatorship) or Pakistan (country with >50% illiteracy). Meanwhile, the Muslims who work at Intel's factories in Southeast Asia aren't backwards nor are the majority of quiet Muslims who stay out of the headlines.

    27. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice attempt to troll, but Pakistan's blasphemy laws were instituted by Gen Zia ul Haq, not the Brits. As for practising one's religion freely, read verses 2:190-193 of the quran, and then keep telling yourself that!

    28. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by advocate_one · · Score: 1

      and what's your position on those Muslims who decide to convert to Christianity or become atheists then?

      Also, you do realise that those Muslim countries that had women leaders are reverting to male theocracies? That proper democracy will become dead there...

      http://www.countercurrents.org/hoodhoy160309.htm

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    29. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      Lets see, Arab Revolt 1916-1918. Founding of Modern Saudi Arabia 1932. What Happened in those 14 years? The British and French were busy dealing with Egypt, Palestine and Transjordan and didn't do much at all on the Arabian Peninsula. It is also strange that if the King of Saudi Arabia was installed by the British then why would there have to be the 1927 Treaty of Jeddah to prevent Saudi attacks on neighboring British Protectorates? Yes the cause of Saudi Arabia was furthered by the downfall of the Ottoman Empire but, before the discovery of oil, Saudi Arabia was just a desert and few cared about it.

    30. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Word.

    31. Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no place in the Quran where it says a king should ever rule over people.

      No, but have you ever read the whole thing?

      I once researched it, decided on a well accepted and current English translation. I was all excited to read another major religious work for the historic and cultural value and personal enlightenment. Then I read it. I was so horribly disappointed. Here is what it said:

      Christians are evil. Kill them all.
      Jews are evil. Kill them all.
      All the misfortunes of the Arab world are because of the Christians and the Jews. Kill them all.

      *repeat ad nauseum* (seriously, cover to cover, that is all it has to offer)

      I had hoped to learn about another great figure of history (Muhammad) but I got nothing, nothing from the man in that text. If Muhammad was a prophet or a genius or something, the Q'uran sure does not indicate so. It reveals a very hateful and violent man.

      By then I had figured out that the Q'uran is only about 700 years old and comes way after the rich and wonderful Arab culture that predates Muhammad. I have nothing against Arabs, but Islam is a sham (more so than most religions) and has done irreparable damage to Arab culture.

  30. UK's Economist on US' Obama on Religion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.economist.com/node/21547241

    "BARACK OBAMA is a Christian whom millions of Americans insist on thinking of as a Muslim. Mitt Romney belongs to the Mormon church, which plenty of Americans consider a non-Christian cult. If ever there was an election campaign both main candidates had an interest in keeping religion out of, you might suppose that this was it. In politics, however, some opportunities are just too tempting to pass up. Whatever chance there once was for a religious non-aggression pact evaporated after one of Mr Obama’s recent decisions gave powerful new ammunition to those who accuse him of waging a “war on religion”."

    Thank God for Obama!

    "That said, it would be naive to expect such a compromise to stifle all Republican complaints. Well before this battle, Texas’s governor, Rick Perry, was wailing about gays serving openly in the armed forces and children not being allowed to celebrate Christmas in school. These he blamed on “Obama’s war on religion”. Newt Gingrich has been denouncing the president’s “secular-socialist machine” for more than a year. Yet Mr Gingrich’s own views on church and state are astonishing. He says he wants a government that “respects our religion”. Yes, you read that right: not religion (the former House speaker is “tired” of respecting “every religion on the planet”) but “our” religion. It is baffling that a serious candidate for president can have misunderstood the letter and spirit of the first amendment quite so thoroughly."

    To me it comes as no surprise that GOP people like the Bush family didn't acknowledge the terror exerted by Saudi Arabia. Here is a link to an interesting article "Did the Saudis buy a president? How much money has flowed from the House of Saud to the Bush family and its friends and allies over the years? No one will ever know -- but the number is at least $1.477 billion." http://www.salon.com/2004/03/12/unger_2/

  31. Green Energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just tell me where to buy the Mr. Fusion upgrade.

    What is trying to be done is to develop alternative or "green" energy. Unfortunately with the rancorous political dialog here in the US, it's being dragged down.

    I firmly believe that the only way for us in the US to fully develop other energy sources is for government involvement. I agree, it's not the best solution but US business is too short sighted to pursue that avenue on its own - and part of their short shortsightedness is from Wall Street pressure - got to have immediate returns, after all.

    In the meantime, all of the cutting edge alternative energy developments are being done in Europe and in China.

    I find that quite damning of our political and business environment.

    So, those Saudi assholes are going to keep doing their shit for a very long time - no thanks to us, the US.

    1. Re:Green Energy by geoffrobinson · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Yeah, it can't be by fracking or nuclear power. No, we have to rely on green energy.

      Let's bankrupt ourselves like Spain on the green energy=jobs wild goose chase.

      --
      Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
    2. Re:Green Energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Let's bankrupt ourselves like Spain on the green energy=jobs wild goose chase.

      Yeah its not like the western world has already bankrupted itself with the "if we make a few people billionaires for wearing a suit and talking a lot, the rest will trickle down"

      oh wait..

    3. Re:Green Energy by jez9999 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well-regulated nuclear power is green energy, in my book.

    4. Re:Green Energy by Devout2 · · Score: 0

      Until Mr Tsunami says hi

    5. Re:Green Energy by realityimpaired · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, it can't be by fracking or nuclear power. No, we have to rely on green energy.

      Fracking pollutes the ground water, and stirs up and softens clay... certain types of clay, such as leda clay, are particularly vulnerable to these seismic disturbances, and can lead to landslides and sinkholes. I have yet to hear a story about how Fracking is good for the environment.

      Nuclear energy, while it can be done safely if you're in the right part of the world, still leaves the chance for disaster. And I'm not just talking about Chernobyl, 3 Mile Island, or Fukushima-type disaster, I'm also talking about the dozens of other partial meltdowns that have happened. While on the whole, nuclear power does have a very good safety record, it also produces waste matter that has to be stored for decades before it can be recycled safely, and while I don't like pulling terrorism into a discussion like this, can you imagine the kind of fallout (literally) that could happen if somebody hijacked a shipment of untreated nuclear waste?

      Nobody who's sane is saying that we should be stopping all fossil fuel use and go 100% solar/wind as of tomorrow, and damn the consequences. But I don't think it's unreasonable to try to shift our use to energy production methods that don't cause damage to the environment, and that will still be around for our grandchildren. It'll be a gradual shift, of course, but it's naive to think we can continue with our current patterns for another hundred years. Switching to renewable sources can be done, though: Iceland is already running 80% of their grid from renewable sources (mainly hydro and geothermal). And if you'd like a larger area/population to compare with, Quebec is mostly Hydro, too, with renewable energy sources outnumbering non-renewable generators by 60:1. Mostly, it's just a question of deciding which types of renewable energy are most appropriate for the area, and building that type of generator, but industry doesn't have the will for it yet.

      Except, of course, countries like Spain and Denmark, where the government has taken an active role in the development of these technologies. There is no reason that the US demand for electricity can't be served by 100% renewable sources, if you're smart about where you put them, and what kinds you use.

    6. Re:Green Energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Whatever happened to the corrupt politicians to biofuel conversion project? That could keep us going for a while.

    7. Re:Green Energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well-regulated nuclear power is awaiting malfunction, in my book.

      Regarding the unfortunate person with a bad choice of words, if you don't agree with his execution, that's quite simple to solve.

      In principle, I'm against such solution, but then I cannot accept stoning (or beheading or any other way of killing) people in this present era we're living.

      And no, I'm not talking about violence. I don't have a Tweet account, but maybe I get one now.

    8. Re:Green Energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then it is clear you do not understand nuclear energy.

    9. Re:Green Energy by Zeroedout · · Score: 1

      Then it's clear you don't understand the longevity of radioactive waste.

    10. Re:Green Energy by Roogna · · Score: 3, Informative

      Then it's clear you don't understand modern nuclear power plant designs. There is far less danger from the radioactive waste coming from a modern nuclear power plant, then from any of the coal plants that have ever been built.

    11. Re:Green Energy by cloricus · · Score: 0

      Where are the coal versions of Fukushima and Chernobyle? Surely you can point to tens of examples easily as coal has been in use much longer and on a larger scale.

      --
      I ate your fish.
    12. Re:Green Energy by slick7 · · Score: 1

      Well-regulated nuclear power is green energy, in my book.

      This is true, and I fully agree. The only well regulated nuclear reactor is the Sun. More solar power!

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    13. Re:Green Energy by Jeremi · · Score: 5, Informative

      Where are the coal versions of Fukushima and Chernobyle? Surely you can point to tens of examples easily as coal has been in use much longer and on a larger scale.

      Why yes, one can -- of course, the exact examples you are looking for depend on what aspects of "Fukushima and Chernobyle" you are asking for coal-mining versions of.

      Are you asking about examples of sudden, unexpected disasters causing mass death or destruction of nearby cities? Okay, here are some:

            Ok Tedi disaster
            Buffalo Creek Flood

      Or perhaps you are asking about situations in which large numbers of industry workers were killed in an accident? Yep, we've got those too... thousands of coal workers die from accidents every year.

      Or maybe you're wondering about if there are entire regions whose ecosystem has been destroyed by coal? Yes, there are.

      Or perhaps you are asking about the slow-motion health and environmental damage caused by coal even when everything is working as designed? Yup, there's that as well.

      Nuclear certainly has its problems, but coal is much, much, much worse.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    14. Re:Green Energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The green is fine, it's the 'Fluorescent' bit which has me concerned.

    15. Re:Green Energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, Ok Tedi is a copper and gold mine, not a coal mine.

    16. Re:Green Energy by Cimexus · · Score: 2

      +100, Take that!

      Seriously though, good response. Nuclear isn't perfect (no energy source is and all come with risks), but it's the best option right now for baseline power load with zero greenhouse emissions. Supplement with wind and solar (in fact, even replace completely with wind and solar if the technology advances to the point at which it's practical to do so, but that time is not yet).

    17. Re:Green Energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously, WTF has OK-Tedi got to do with it. Answer - Absolutely nothing - it was just the first thing you pulled off Google (and you got modded informative). Ok-Tedi is a *gold* mine, which has over a long period of time as dumped tailings into the river system because it has no Engineered Tailings Storage Facility (there is only one mine in PNG that does -- and that was built much more recently).

      Ok-Tedi is a complete fuck-up, which has developed over a long time (there was absolutely nothing sudden about it) and is completely inappropriate to use as an example supporting your argument.

    18. Re:Green Energy by hairyfish · · Score: 1

      Wow. If ever a post need to modded to 6 this is it :)

    19. Re:Green Energy by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      Supplement with wind and solar (in fact, even replace completely with wind and solar if the technology advances to the point at which it's practical to do so

      Why? When you get to safe nuclear fission and even nuclear fusion, there's pretty much NO benefit to using wind and solar. They provide small amounts of power with an unreliable baseload, and we have enough nuclear material to keep us in nuclear power for 100000s of years.

    20. Re:Green Energy by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Compared to what? Coal? Okay, yeah, depending on how you frame it. But not compared to most other technologies.

      - Gas
      - Geothermal
      - Solar thermal
      - Hydro *
      - Wind

      Note that I have only included technologies that are capable of replacing nuclear for base load generation and are as or more reliable.

      * I know about dam failures in China, they don't count because they were not due to Hydro. I'm not including deaths from nuclear plant failure in hot weather that we have suffered from in Europe in the last decade.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    21. Re:Green Energy by Alex+Zepeda · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Where are the coal versions of Fukushima and Chernobyle? Surely you can point to tens of examples easily as coal has been in use much longer and on a larger scale.

      You mean like Centralia, Brennender Berg (it's been burning for over three hundred years), or Kingston Steam Plant?

      --
      The revolution will be mocked
    22. Re:Green Energy by Alioth · · Score: 2

      Spain did NOT bankrupt itself on the "green energy = jobs" wild goose chase. Spain was actaully one of the few countries actually complying with the sovering debt rules of the euro (France and Germany, the framers of these very rules was not).

      Spain's problems stem mainly frmo the following:

      - Eurozone interest rates during the boom were set to suit the French and German economies, and were far too low for the periphery. This resulted in an enormous construction bubble as well as enormous wage inflation.
      - When the bubble popped, construction almost instantly halted, meaning a lot of people ended up out of work. Exacerbating this was now that Spanish labour was uncompetitive because of the high wage inflation, leading to very high unemployment rates.
      - Spanish banks were pretty exposed to not only the thieving scum on Wall Street selling subprime mortgates as AAA-rated debt, but also exposed now to their own mortgage default problems as a result of the bubble popping, causing a credit crunch, driving more businesses out of business.
      - France and Germany still haven't learned: Eurozone interest rates are still set as to what the French and German economies need and are too high for the periphery. (Therefore I don't have any sympathy with the French and Germans when they whine about having to bail out other eurozone countries: they were a big part of the problem).

      None of this had anything to do with "green energy".

    23. Re:Green Energy by operagost · · Score: 1

      Don't be silly. Nancy Pelosi, Chris Dodd, and Charlie Rangel are only millionaires, not billionaires.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    24. Re:Green Energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So basically you want are saying let's keep buying Saudi oil and funding the nutcases. In the meanwhile, let's let Canada sell oil to China instead of us. Becasue for all the hype, Spain and Denmark are learning what we are also finding out: green energy doesn't produce enough power yet and may not ever. That's without considering that people like the Kennedy family and Sen. Kerry block project that might damage their views of the water, environmental groups block solar to protect endangered species*, and the land may have other uses farming... So actually there are lots of reasons why you last statement is wrong.

      *except eagles. Apparently the large number of eagles killed by wind turbines is okay...

    25. Re:Green Energy by gutnor · · Score: 1

      Spain, as the rest of weak Euro-zone members are bankrupting themselves with work cost similar to Germany. I have friend working in the green sector in Spain, all the work is done in Germany - there no benefit to do anything in spain, except sale. Even for support, considering a lot of the sites are far away from anything, there is almost no time difference shipping an engineer from Germany or the closest spanish city.

      So indeed, green = jobs. There is just not enough competitive advantages to have the bulk of the jobs Spain when there a cheaper, (almost) next door, industrial powerhouse like Germany that also happens to be in charge of your currency.

    26. Re:Green Energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      can you say Fukushima?

    27. Re:Green Energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's bankrupt ourselves like Spain on the green energy=jobs wild goose chase.

      Yeah its not like the western world has already bankrupted itself with the "if we make a few people billionaires for wearing a suit and talking a lot, the rest will trickle down"

      oh wait..

      If anyone knows how to get rich without hiring anyone or buying anything. Please email ihavemyheadupmyass.gmail.com...

    28. Re:Green Energy by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1
      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    29. Re:Green Energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The answer is Natural Gas in both green biofuels and as a fuel itself.

    30. Re:Green Energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hint: Spain did not bankrupt itself with green energy. It basically had a housing bubble similar to the states, but with much less diversification when it comes to industries => so when the finance world imploded on the building industry, Spain got itself a really major headache. (Not the the US have no headache, but it's a little bit smaller).

  32. a precision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, they are going to execute him for touching off a riot, something he had no way of knowing he'd do.

    If there would have been no public reation to his tweets, he wouldn't be in this predicament.

    I'm ready to argue that it's an even more heinous violation of free speech than executing him for the tweets.

    If I thought it'd work, I'd militate for Canada to pull out of Interpol right now.

    1. Re:a precision by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 1

      If I thought it'd work, I'd militate for Canada to pull out of Interpol right now.

      As Jack O'Neill said, "if at first you don't succeed, try, try, try, try, try and try again."

      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
  33. saudi arabia should be taken to UN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they should take saudi arabia (the home of all terrorists) to UN. they are the most hypocrytical system ever existed. they fund terrorists all over the planet.

  34. How about Stalin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

    1. Re:How about Stalin by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 1

      Wrong.

      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
  35. God Will Not Be Pleased by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is just one set of folks in power, exercising that power repressively. Await the swing of the pendulum. It comes.

  36. Fuck Interpol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is all bullshit.

    The US ought to give the Saudis 24 hours to stand down or
    drop neutron bombs on the whole fucking country.

  37. The tweets, for those who don't feel like digging by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On your birthday I find you in front of me wherever I go,I love many things about you and hate others, and there are many thinga about you I don't understand."

    "On your birthday I won't bow in front of you, I won't kiss your hand instead I will shake it as an equal, I will smile at you and you will smile back and I will talk to you as a friend."

    "All the great gods that we worship, all the great fears that we dread, all the desires that we wait for impatiently are but figments of our imagination."

    "No Saudi women will go to hell, because it's impossible to go there twice."

  38. Too simple as to kill the messenger. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And many islamic gentiles wanted to kill the messenger for improving their religious convictions that were trained. Period.

    In Soviet land, prophets judge you! is Malaysia soviet?

    No Soviet prophet exists now in Malaysia for judging you!.

    Malaysians could prosecute Arabians for their commited blood acts against their patriot.

    JCPM: i maybe a Godsent, and i could have the Almighty power for ordering to our gentiles to prove our prosperity.

  39. Not that much different from the US, actually by Arrogant-Bastard · · Score: 2

    There's a tendency to think that the US is above all this -- that Bertrand Russell's famous saying ("Religion is something left over from the infancy of our intelligence, it will fade away as we adopt reason and science as our guidelines.") refers not to the future, but to the past, and that we have all somehow become enlightened, that we've matured out of these primitive superstitions along with the violence, hatred, prejudice, bigotry, slavery, and ignorance that they support.

    But we haven't. Let me suggest the following thought experiment to you: write on a large piece of posterboard "I skullfucked Mary and shit on Jesus' face." Now go stand with that poster on a streetcorner in Topeka, Kansas at 9 AM on Monday morning. Do you think you'll survive the day?

    Of course these are purely mythical creatures, no more real than Arthur Dent or Allah or Harry Potter or Zeus or Loki or any other fiction. But, amazing, there are people on this planet -- including in Topeka, Kansas, in the heart of the United States -- who will attack and kill you for that sign.

    Some will point out that at least this isn't codified into law: that is, that such attacks are extralegal. My response to that is (a) not yet, they aren't, although if you're paying any attention to contemporary American politics you know full well that there are numerous attempts underway to make Christianity the state religion and (b) it's not clear to me why, when you're lying in the street bleeding and dying, the lack of statutory authority will matter to you.

    When we in the United States have progressed beyond this -- when we no longer live in a society where atheists are considered as trustworthy as rapists -- then perhaps we can claim some measure of the moral high ground here.

    1. Re:Not that much different from the US, actually by Pecisk · · Score: 1

      I really enjoy rights of free speech, and I will get modded down for this, but I will say:
      ENOUGH WITH THIS - "BUT..BUT...BUT US IS NO BETTER!" - BULLSHIT. It is childish to insist to push your message like this and you know it - but still doing it. And no, you won't get death row because you will say something awfully bad about Jesus or Maria or God in US.

      So get a grip, really. One think is constructive criticism of capitalism (or social, or whatever) system of US, but something totally different from outright comparing US with Saudi Arabia where they perform death penalty by sword. And for reasons like this.

      --
      user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
  40. This is what the Mayans predicted by billcopc · · Score: 1

    Okay, I'm being an irresponsible arse here, but maybe - just maybe - those other muslims around the world, you know, the "moderates", should think about distancing themselves from the barbaric ones. If your frail mind cannot live on without religion, then at least splinter off into something that does not carry the weight of homicidally intolerant pre-civilized cultures.

    Yeah, I'm an atheist, but I can respect freedom of faith. I just don't respect the use of that faith as an excuse to murder your fellow man in cold blood. I've known my share of muslims over here, and while they seemed a bit stuck-up against my amoral libertarian lifestyle, they did not express any desire to harm me for sharing my tales of rock-star antics. I would dare say they had a more progressive outlook on humanity than most of the purebred white folk I grew up with. Sure, there was this one guy who pulled a gun on me because I said he looked hot... but he went right the fuck back to Lebanon a week later.

    What I'm saying is: faith is just faith, a belief system that breaks your fall when life knocks you down. The problem with the middle east is not Islam, the problem is their intolerant backwoods inbred leaders twisting that faith into a weapon of self genocide. Get rid of those charismatic leaders and the problem will resolve itself.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
    1. Re:This is what the Mayans predicted by Necroloth · · Score: 1

      Okay, I'm being an irresponsible arse here, but maybe - just maybe - those other muslims around the world, you know, the "moderates", should think about distancing themselves from the barbaric ones.

      We do... problem is the vocal minority that most assume to be the majority

    2. Re:This is what the Mayans predicted by billcopc · · Score: 1

      To paraphrase Russell Peters: Those homicidal nutbars we see on TV are the Rednecks of the arab world. "YEE-HAW WE'RE GONNA KILL THE WHOLE FUCKIN' WORLD!"

      Too bad we only see the rednecks on TV, but at least with catholics, they have different sub-genres that help us tell the apart. Unified protestant ? Not so bad. Southern Baptist ? KOS.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
  41. Link to tweet ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone got a direct link to the tweet !! Whatever he had to say, it certainly deserves to be read be shouted from the roof tops across the world, to stick it in the face of whoever things they can suppress the right to freedom of speech because of some irrational belief system they happen to hold!

  42. Blood for the blood god! by ElusiveJoe · · Score: 1

    Well, a strange name they got for Khorne though. What is it again, "Allah"? Anyway, god needs more killings.

  43. Islam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Islam is the religion of love!

  44. So. If I want you DEAD... by BoRegardless · · Score: 1

    I just get your cellphone when you are not looking in Saudi Arabia and insult the prophet!

    Now that is a modern, well educated, socially forward thinking type of government...yeah!

    1. Re:So. If I want you DEAD... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can profess something for you towelhead. Fuck Mohamed and your camel jockey Allah. Backward fucking scum

  45. And also... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The wise man flees before he tweets.

  46. I'M THE PROPHET, MY NAME, THE PUPPET! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    404, NOT FOUND PROPHET <-- it's the kind of islamic judgement that appointed the fuzzyied meaning of the "prophet", unexistant proof in the actuality.

    Put another prophet more, and better than these primitive ones, because he can be living among us of this age, simply it.

    Then many fundamentalist religion-addicted peoples hate and refuse this new change.

    Then, they should go to the psychiatric centers for trying to cure their mental illnesses provoked by their religions's ires.

    It's the thing that could happen, overall, the radical islamists could fear themselves the coming of a new prophet, the next generation to their always known prophet ~15 centuries ago.

    A clusterfuck of trained candidates for becoming the supreme prophet could be on the way, if it's believed to be artificially created inside of the laboratories, not?. Or is it only a sci-fi?.

    Among every prophets, they must prove along the Earth history, the best according to the accomplishment of their prophecies.

    Without real prophecies, the real prophets don't exist.
    Without real prophets, the real prophecies don't exist.

    And there's an important rule, the violence between prophets is not permited for reclaiming the best of the prophetic acts.

    Each prophet should prove itself their prophetic proofs, their facts. And a prophet can't accuse/judge to another prophet for the comparison of their competences, only our Almighty Lord can judge them the valorations.

    If you're radical islamist then you could be ignoring how is evil your COMMANDMENT HUMAN EXECUTOR that is more devil-related than God-related.

    It's an ERROR that the humans are claiming the deity rules when these same rules are simply invented by humans, and sometimes for evil intentions among us. A don't like these wargames using the deity as a business or advantage in aftermath.

    JCPM: now, i'm in the apocalypse's age of the fightings of the prophets for the Almighty love. The final solution: to abandon the property of relating the prophecies and the lives of the beings on the Earth, and the property of relating the prophets and the lives of the beings on the Earth, Amen.

  47. Petition to State department by cosmicaug · · Score: 1

    Another petition for Hamza Kashgari. This one for getting the US State Department to put pressure on Saudi Arabia. I suspect any such pressure would be useless:

    http://www.change.org/petitions/us-state-department-save-hamza-kashgari

  48. Australian here, by mjwx · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We buy our oil from Singapore which is about $0.20 dearer then WTI or Brent crude.

    /Smug mode.

    Now not buying oil from them wont make them stop acting like idiots, they'll just be poor idiots. Even that is unlikely as they aren't going to run out of customers for their oil any time soon. But yes, the US should pull support from the Saudi's for many more reasons then this, that means pulling US forces out of Saudi bases (even the logistic bases) and stop selling them weapons.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    1. Re:Australian here, by Slider451 · · Score: 1

      There are no U.S. bases in Saudi Arabia. Not since 2003.

      --
      Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
    2. Re:Australian here, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too many in American politics and enterprise are comfortably sleeping with the Saudis. Think the whole Bush family for example. The saudis have even financially bailed out former presi-gag-dent GW Bush of most, if not all, of his failed enterprises as favor to his father. Not that the bush family doesn't have enough money to do that themselves hundreds of time over. In addition, the Saudis have been felated by every member of the American political right wing for years. NO chance that America will ever pull any such support from the Saudis before hell freezes over.

    3. Re:Australian here, by mjwx · · Score: 1

      There are no U.S. bases in Saudi Arabia. Not since 2003.

      I didn't say US bases, I said US forces out of Saudi bases. A nice little loophole that keeps US forces operating with impunity out of Saudi Arabia by simply admitting that the bases belong to the Saudi's. The 64th Air Expeditionary Group for example, is still operating out of Eskan Village.

      But far more alarming is the ongoing sale of US weapons and technology to Saudi Arabia.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    4. Re:Australian here, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right. You did say that. I stand corrected.

  49. This same story has been censored on reddit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This same story has been submitted recently to reddit's /r/worldnews queue, and it doesn't show up now because apparently it was recently censored by the moderators. The story has lots of upvotes and comments.

    You can still see the actual story by using its direct link.

    It's a shame reddit's /r/worldnews moderators have to resort to censorship.

  50. Thought Crime in the USA by Frankie70 · · Score: 1

    Someone in jail for making threats.

  51. We tried but Democrats insist by SuperKendall · · Score: 0

    Stop buying oil from these dips hits

    In the U.S., we wanted to put in a big pipeline from Canada. That way we could get ethically "clean" oil for less money, and also monitor environmental impact more closely.

    We also could have had a lot of jobs...

    Instead, the Democrats decided it would be far superior to keep shipping oil from people who execute journalists for tweets. Now we can't examine the environment around the oil rigs, risk loss of oil at sea, and continue to pay more to to fund the killing of people who simply speak out against a given religion.

    Remember in November. Do you want ethically and environmentally cleaner oil, or do you want Democrats.

    I'm not even saying what other party to vote for mind you; any will suffice (I'd recommend Libertarian when possible and/or practical).

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:We tried but Democrats insist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Before you talk too much shit: I manage projects in the oil refining industry. Do some homework and find out to whom the Canadian firm was planning on selling the refined products made from the oil.... Also, take another moment to find out what kind of oil it is they are moving through the line, and what has to be done to it to actually make it flow properly, and the additional risks involved. Not a whole lot of that nasty, over-sulphered shit is staying here in the 'states, it's just being sent down to existing gulf coast refineries before being cracked and sent overseas. They'll create a few jobs building / maintaining the line, but that's it.

  52. If Twitter had any ethics at all... by dskoll · · Score: 2

    ... then they would forge postings defaming Mohammed from all the nutcases who have called for this guy's punishment. Let's see how quickly things would change.

  53. The original tweets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here are the original tweets:
    http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/malaysia-returns-insulting-saudi-journalist
    I think I found my new t-shirt text today.

    (What do you think? Do I get arrested indefinitely at the airport if I wear that?)

  54. Condemned for thinking different by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hes going to die for thinking different. Why? because he lives in an Islam country.

    Now lets see what happens in USA: What if i start predicating communism or dictatorism, and sharing those ideas? i could get a free pass all inclusive in Guantanamo resort for a life time (not much different from death from what i see).
    What if i started sharing some "files" a.k.a. songs? Again, can be put in jail, and all for the good of some already rich organizations that want to be even more rich.

    Before you start criticizing another culture or ideas, check yourself, may be you are not doing it that good neither.

  55. Stop putting religion above the state by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stop giving religion a free pass in the name of "tolerance". Whether it's Catholics demanding the right to deny women basic healthcare (how long until Jehovah's Witnesses refuse to cover any procedure requiring a blood tranfusion--scratch pretty much all life-saving surgery), Jews demanding a genetic right to colonize neighboring territories, or Muslims demanding the right to murder anyone who wakes up and smells the bullshit of their religion, or who draws cartoons they don't like, or otherwise criticizes their moronic beliefs, JUST SAY NO.

    Religion should only receive as much tolerance as it gives, no less, no more. And right now, the 3 Abrahamic religions haven't earned a whole lot of tolerance.

  56. Damn that Finch-machine! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mr. Reese, I have a job for you. His name is Hamza Kashgari...

  57. I almost wondered the same... by schlachter · · Score: 1

    Because prosecution of thought crimes requires thoughtless order following.

    --
    My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
  58. Dumb idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stop them from using Interpol, they'll stop reciprocating, creating two (more) places where you can go kick back if you're wanted by Interpol, and know you'll be safe from the fear of prosecution.

    1. Re:Dumb idea. by Krigl · · Score: 1

      Guess you're right but I'm still getting somewhat warm feeling imagining spoiled American (you know the kind I mean) crook coming to kick back to Saudi Arabia. After few years there, that plea bargain deal might look pretty appealing, especially if it includes a part about not going into some max security hell.

      --
      Troll 2.0 Fear my asocial networking!
  59. Counter argument by aepervius · · Score: 1

    Salem witch process. Other witch execution. It can hardly be seen as non-religious "you shall suffer no witch".

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  60. Intolerance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think we should tolerate Islam, which is, most of the time, a peaceful and loveable religion.

    If them Muslims decide that it's illegal to say that Mehmet or whatever they call that bastard was a normal guy (which he wasn't), I mean, it's their mistake, not ours, no?

  61. 18 of 19 by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    18 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia.

  62. Islam deserves all the blame - and more! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The islam-bashing is completely justified. Every muslim country in the world, to varying degrees, ill-treats its non-muslim minorities, has penalities for women who get raped, major sentencing for apostasy from islam, and so on. Saudi Arabia is among the most visible, but in other countries, in Egypt, they persecute Copts, in Iraq, all Christians have fled once it became 'democratic', in Pakistan, persecution of Christians and Hindus is at an all time high, as in Malaysia, where dead Hindus or Christians are posthumously declared converted. The few Jews left in Tunisia are now considering fleeing, and Maldives just has a new Islamic regime.

    If you want to judge this population wise, take Indonesia, Pakistan and Bangladesh. In Indonesia, persecution of Christians and Ahmadiyas is on in full swing, and the government in Jakarta has gone so far as to accept Sharia in Aceh. In Pakistan, as I noted above, persecution of Christians and Hindus are at their maximum, national support for Osama remains high (make that 200 million out of your 1.5 billion right there) and even in Bangladesh, Hindus have by & large fled that country.

    The only muslim countries that can be considered benign - for now - are the ex-Soviet stans, but even there, there is a campaign to islamize them, as well as China's Xinxiang province, and recreate a Timuride era Turkestan that would be another oil rich (from Turkmenistan & Kazakhstan) empire that would vie with the GCC for the Emir ul Momineen title.

  63. Never leave home by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    Another reason I'll probably never leave the borders of the USA. At least (for now) we still have freedom of speech. Now, with our muslim president, I guess if someone over here insulted their "god" he would probably round them up & ship them off to Iran to be hung. You can insult just about any religion in the USA you want, but, if you insult islam, OFF WITH YOUR HEAD LOL.

    1. Re:Never leave home by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      what muslim president? the USA has never had one

  64. In Saudi Arabia, there's passage to HELL of deads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "No Saudi women will go to hell, because it's impossible to go there twice."

    It's the women slavery in the hell, as he had been adventured there, no woman had been seen entering or exiting from the hell, only men can since that he adventured there.

    On the way of the truth, basing in the quantity and quality of each one of the points of the prophecies of this primitive prophet, was he a real prophet or not?

    JCPM: i'm a supertroll, and i think that a clusterfuck of prophets is required for a better, BETTER, BBEETTTTEERR demonstration.

  65. Hamza Kashgari maybe another Godsent. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In a meeting from face to face, Hamza Kashgari is http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02136/_The-Saudi-writer-_2136051b.jpg, a good young person.

    Matthew 18:4 Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

    (in spanish: Mateo 18:4 Así que, cualquiera que se humille como este niño, ése es el mayor en el reino de los cielos.)

    Undear radical islamists, why do you want to kill him as if he is your brother, or your son, or your daddy? Allah forbides you to commit a blooody act! What disgrace! He has the same blood as from yours and from the grand father Abraham!.

    - - - - -

    And each person can question itself: can i be a PROPHET?.

    Is there any "How to be a prophet manual for dummies"?.

    Then, there are comprensions of the distinction between the real world and the world of imaginations.

    JCPM: i'm not afraid of to be a follower of him, i'm not commiting any sin if i do it.

  66. Global Peace Index by NewYork · · Score: 1

    Malaysia = 19 is better ranked than USA = 82 in
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Peace_Index

  67. Hamza Kashgari, i'll try to save you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear Hamza Kashgari condemned to the death execution for their 3 electronic lollipops,

    I'll try to save you. "I'm more blasphemer than you and the Saudi Arabia's Justice WON'T work!.

    And i'll want to be the 1st to be executed before than you! A margin is for your life, yes!. It's the thing that i'll try for avoiding the your coming unuseless death execution.

    JCPM: my greatest blasphemy against Mohammed is that their assholed manuscripts are NOT "deity's papers", and i'm praising to my God that's not from Mohammed, and DON'T ACCUSE me of the INFIDELITY because i'm fidel to the innocent Hamza Kashgari.

  68. What a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like ancient times mixed with technology. These Saudi fucks must take pride in being cavemen.

  69. Can't feel much sympathy for this guy.. by Rexdude · · Score: 1

    Let's face it. Living in one of the most oppressive Islamic countries, he decides to post his heretical opinion on a public website. Having done that, he chose to flee to ANOTHER Sharia loving state. WTF was he thinking? What did he expect would happen?
    And if his death sentence is carried out, what will it have achieved for him, or for the cause of free speech in Saudi Arabia?
    Either keep your head down and don't post inflammatory content in a country where the price you pay is your life, or cover your tracks online, or run like hell to a friendlier country BEFORE you express your opinion!

    --
    "..One hosts to look them up, one DNS to find them, and in the darkness BIND them."