Stoning execution caught on camera

I'm Sorry

I'm sorry because I missed the part where it said "The crowd can be heard shouting allahu akbar as she is killed, the Daily Mail reported."
au.news.yahoo.com...

I guess when it comes to Muslims and Islam any source is acceptable without any question.

I repeat, I'm sorry.

Quran and the Bible aren't much different when it comes to stoning. Just saying. There won't be peace before all the religions are gone.

Originally posted by reatarded

Originally posted by Maslo

Originally posted by reatarded
reply to post by Maslo

 

"Wrongly convicted" is the word, yes, you are right, just like the word "collateral damage", or the word "accidental killing".

Wasn't the supposed stoning case also a wrong conviction?

No, it was not. There is a profound difference between being wrongly convicted of a real crime, and a brutal murder. This was a brutal murder, much more serious crime than a wrong conviction.

1. How do you differentiate between a brutal murder and wrong conviction?

2. How do you differentiate between kidnapping, physical/mental torture and wrongful conviction?

I hope you answer the above two questions.

1 - A wrongful conviction can be rectified, and also allows the damaged party to seek damages because he is still alive. A brutal murder is just that and is permanent.

2 - kidnapping is where a person is forcefully abducted against their will, depriving that individual of their legal and constitutional rights absent a court of law.
Physical torture is when a person is physically harmed / injured in order to produce a response or certain behavior.
A wrongful conviction is a breakdown in the legal system where an innocent person is incarcerated for a crime they did not commit.

and again, under western law all of the above are able to be challeneged in court, and the wronged parties have a legal avenue for redress of greivances.

The 2 people who were killed in the OP - Were lied to by the authorites. We forcefully removed from their houses at 2 am. Were brought before 2 mullahs who held an illegal judicial proceeding, who then passed a death sentence and then carried it out.

My question for you is if you acknowledge in my last post that Sharia law was not followed in this case, so why are you trying to compare it to Western law? The response you gave me seemed to indicate that what occured with the mullahs actions was in violation of Sharia law, but you seem to approve of the actions and results of what occured.

Did I miss read your argument, or do you support what occured to these 2 people?

If Sharia law is violated, then how come they think they would go to heaven?

As a foillow up, what do you mean perspective is everything?

reply to post by reatarded

1. How do you differentiate between a brutal murder and wrong conviction?

What kind of question is that? Murder is a killing of an innocent person. Wrong conviction is legal punishment of a person that is considered not innocent at that time, and usualy does not involve killing. Of course, both of these are wrong according to the law.

2. How do you differentiate between kidnapping, physical/mental torture and wrongful conviction?

Physical torture should not happen under wrongful conviction, and mental torture is also limited by law. Under wrongful conviction, person is thought to be guilty, even tough he is not. Of course, both of these are wrong, and somehow similar in the end effect.

reply to post by PETROLCOIN


Yeah, they say they are going to do something... but lets face it. The Afghanistan gov't is scared of the Taliban... that is why the US and other countries are over there.

And yes, Sharia Law DOES supersede local laws in the Middle East. I'm not saying on a legal scale, I am saying on a personal scale. Imagine if that happened here. We would have a man-hunt trying to find these people. Bounties would be on every identifiable person in the film. Over in Afghanistan it is just another day for the country.

And yes, it is just like "Gangsta" Law here in the states... or Mob Law. Just because it is not legal do not mean people won't follow the unofficial laws that regulate the streets. Would you run your mouth to the authorities if you know who these people were AND lived in the area they are all located? I know I wouldn't... I would be trying to find a way to leave, and then drop the names though.

Originally posted by PETROLCOIN

Originally posted by afoolbyanyothername
NUKE the lot of them

So killing millions of innocent people in a nuclear attack because this group of individuals - most likely all Taliban or at least Taliban supporters - stoned two people makes logical sense to you? That would correct the situation to satisfactory standards in your mind?

And the Taliban is NOT a product of their society and by extension, their religion ?

Would YOU or YOUR society (assuming you're non-moslem), condone such animalistic behaviour ? If not, then why excuse theirs ?

Originally posted by THIRDEYETRIPPIN
that is a brutal way to die. But she did know the laws of her people.

Something about the way you said that just hit me wrong.

Originally posted by chocise
I don't know what it takes to haul a people/mindset like that into the 21st Century.

It would take reeducating them and cutting them off from their cult. It would take doing that .. but there are too many people in the world who are blind to just how bad Islam is for the world and for people, so It won't happen. Too many people who are 'politicall correct' and refuse to acknowledge how bad that cult is .. both for the people stuck in it and for everyone else. It'll just get worse and it'll spread .. at the point of a blood soaked sword.

Originally posted by afoolbyanyothername
Would YOU or YOUR society (assuming you're non-moslem), condone such animalistic behaviour ? If not, then why excuse theirs ?

I'm not excusing their behavior. I'm simply questioning the logic (and sanity) of resorting to nuking an entire country because two people got stoned.

Originally posted by PETROLCOIN

Originally posted by afoolbyanyothername
Would YOU or YOUR society (assuming you're non-moslem), condone such animalistic behaviour ? If not, then why excuse theirs ?

I'm not excusing their behavior. I'm simply questioning the logic (and sanity) of resorting to nuking an entire country because two people got stoned.

You're questioning MY sanity ??

How about questioning instead the sanity of a society that perpetuates and condones such barbarity ... and the sanity of a religion that encourages it ?

Judging by your location and avatar, you're living in Australia.

Would your society, ethics and morality permit even one such act of atrocity to beall 2 of it's citizens ? I think not.
And if it did, what would your opinion be of the society that you're a member of ?

Originally posted by FlyersFan
It would take reeducating them and cutting them off from their cult.

Basically, taking away from them their freedom of choice.

reply to post by ArMaP


They don't have the freedom of choice in the religion of Islam, so I guess really you would be giving them the choice to choose to go back to Islam after it was taken and they actually we allowed to make that choice for themselves, instead of being subjugated by the local and religious policies.

(Okay, they have the ability to choose certain things. BUT for the most part, it is strictly limited choice)

Originally posted by afoolbyanyothername
How about questioning instead the sanity of a society that perpetuates and condones such barbarity ... and the sanity of a religion that encourages it ?

Tell me how stoning two people is more barbaric than nuking millions?

Originally posted by afoolbyanyothername
Judging by your location and avatar, you're living in Australia.

No.

Originally posted by afoolbyanyothername
Would your society, ethics and morality permit even one such act of atrocity to beall 2 of it's citizens ?

No, my society, ethics, and morality would not permit such actions. But they would also not permit nuking an entire country and killing millions of people because executions like this are still carried out there. Other than a fringe few who feel they are superior and feel they are justified in nuking others whenever they please - such as yourself - I do not think anyone would support your radical solution to this issue.

Don't allow the fact that nuclear weapons are more advanced than stones lure you into the delusional belief that using nuclear weapons is any less barbaric than using stones.

Originally posted by strato
Quran and the Bible aren't much different when it comes to stoning. Just saying.

Just to clarify:
Old Testament – Jewish
And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death. Leviticus 20:10.

New Testament – Christian
And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. John 8:3-8

Very different approach.


I don't know if the Jews or Israelis still advocate stoning, I don't think they do.

Originally posted by strato
There won't be peace before all the religions are gone.

Guns don't kill people, people do.

I've seen the vid and it's pretty gruesome. Very unpleasant.

They say they stoned them to death in accordance with the rules/laws set out by the Qu'ran. But where in the Qu'ran does it say you can shoot them in the head with an AK-47 when stoning doesn't work?

Morons...

reply to post by noonebutme


I guess metal comes from smelting it out of ore. Which is a form of rock/stone. Stick some gunpowder behind it to propel the "rock" faster, it is logically the same in the sense that you are throwing a stone very fast from a metal hole?

Just trying to see a way they could legitimately argue their case. I hate that I am able to find a way to make this even remotely feasible in only 2 minutes. I bet they already have a huge speech made for just this question.

reply to post by Seitler


You know what? It's sad, but you're probably right.

With people like that, there is no way to use logic or reason on them. They live in absolutes and deludes ideals. I do wonder how people of this planet will ever work together if there are cultures who believe this is "appropriate" civilised behaviour.

reply to post by reatarded



That is great and all, however Islam, true Islam, none of this psuedo modern Islam that they try to force down our throats as peaceful, is based in thirteenth century technology and for that matter the thriteenth century period. It is a garbage religion and now god or higher being would ever want blood shed at all. Even the Christian god, does not want anyone to shed blood in their name. An all knowing, loving, seeing being would not want that, or would he?

reply to post by CommandantLassard


You just made me think of something.

The way in which the original writings of Islam were constructed we to make man work as one. They were meant to bring groups, even of different religions, together in harmony. Through the years, somehow they got misconstrued terribly, and now it makes me wonder about the real problem.

MAYBE Satan has truly taken hold of the Muslim religion. I say this in pure honesty... I don't believe in Satan in the essence of what religion seems him as, but I do believe in universal opposites. If a purely good but neutral God exists (which I do believe) then a purely evil and interfering God must exist as well. This would account for a lot of man's greatest accomplishments being twisted and used for ill intent.

... Just some food for thought. Speaking of food....

Nothing to see here folks! This is obviously a Hollywood forgery, for Islam would never condone this. Islam is a religion of peace! Here, lets have a Muslim clear this up for you... here are his words.

Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid defended the stoning.
He told the BBC: "Anyone who knows about Islam knows that stoning is in the Koran, and that it is Islamic law. There are people who call it inhuman - but in doing so they insult the Prophet. They want to bring foreign thinking to this country."

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by FlyersFan
It would take reeducating them and cutting them off from their cult.

Basically, taking away from them their freedom of choice.

If their cult is incinting violence, it is justified. Religious freedom does not include freedom to promote these ideas.