good to see human rights alive and well in the islamic republic. yet those of us that are wary of madrassas popping up all over our neighbourhoods and islamic councils commenting in the public sphere of australia makes us "islamaphobic".
quote:
A PAKISTANI man has been sentenced to death for blasphemy after he defiled the Muslim holy book and used derogatory language to refer to the Prophet Mohammad, a police official said.
Convictions for blasphemy are fairly common in predominantly Muslim Pakistan, with most cases involving members of religious minorities, but death sentences have never been carried out usually because convictions are thrown out on a lack of evidence.
The convicted man, Mohammad Shafeeq, a Muslim in his early 20s, was arrested in 2006 in a village near the eastern city of Sialkot where the trial was held in the court of Justice Shoaib Ahmad Roomi.
"Judge Roomi sentenced him to death for defiling the Holy Koran and using derogatory language against the Prophet," said Shezada Hassan Ali, a senior official at the jail where Shafeeq has been kept.
"He can appeal the court decision."
The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan says blasphemy law is misused against religious minorities such as Christians.
The US-based Human Rights Watch group this week urged the abolition of the death penalty in Pakistan, where nearly a quarter of 31,400 convicts in the country have been sentenced to death.
In 2007, 309 prisoners were sentenced to death and 134 were hanged, the group said, adding that most of those sentenced to death were poor and illiterate.
a religion is defined by its followers and the effects it has on people generally, not some idealistic notion what the koran really means.
you are what you eat, and political islam has eaten a large batch of theocratic dogmatism that oppresses human rights wherever it raises its ugly head.
Fir3start3r
...this interlude brought to you by the, 'Religion of Peace™' :rolleyes:
It's moments like this they wonder why we want to 'discuss' and then they shake it off immediately and label us as "Islamaphobic"
Take the example of our Canadian Maclean's magazine and Mark Steyn.
Now granted Mark has a sharp tongue however opinions will be heard when something needs to be questioned and is of concern.
However, to have the CIC (Canadian Islamic Councel) DEMAND via the B.C. Human Rights Commission (aka a governmental Kangaroo Court) that Macleans (a private business) allowing them to print a rebut because someone's feeling got hurt is sending strong chills through ALL private press and free speech world-wide.
If you're not up to date on this, just look up "Mark Steyn" via Google News.
It's absurd and sickening that a government entity is being used to force censorship and gag free speech in a country where millions died in hopes of preserving it for us. :mad:
Fir3start3r
Here's a primer regarding the above case...
Krypton
Very unfortunate. But what can you do? Hope that Pakistan makes a change from within. Occupations in the region really don't help that either. Instead, outrage leads to more recruitment for the fundamentalist militants.
hardcore trancer
Awesome!! I say it is time to invade them and show them what true democracy is all about you know like how we did it in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Unfair trial you say? how about we look at our own backyard first?hmm does guantanamo Bay ring any bells? or how about those secret prisons around the world made by CIA? Iam not saying what happend is Pakistan is a good thing but things like this happens everywhere,but the west always likes to pick on the evil Islam.
pkcRAISTLIN
quote:
Originally posted by hardcore trancer
but things like this happens everywhere,but the west always likes to pick on the evil Islam.
really? could you provide an example of a christian society that delivered the death penalty for blasphemy? maybe in the dark ages...
Krypton
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
really? could you provide an example of a christian society that delivered the death penalty for blasphemy? maybe in the dark ages...
How about a so-called Christian government which tortures over 100 people to death.
quote:
Ex-State Dept. official: Hundreds of detainees died in U.S. custody, at least 25 murdered.
At today’s House Judiciary Subcommittee on Civil Rights hearing on torture, Lawrence Wilkerson, former chief of staff to Colin Powell, told Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) that over 100 detainees have died in U.S. custody, with up to 27 of these declared homicides:
Transcript:
NADLER: Colonel Wilkerson, in your prepared testimony, you write that “as I compiled my dossier for Secretary Powell, and as I did further research, and as my views grew firmer and firmer I had to reread that memo (of February 7, 2002), “I needed to balance in my own mind the overwhelming evidence that my own government had sanctioned abuse and torture, which at its worse had led to the murder of 25 detainees and at least 100 detainee deaths. We have murder at least 25 people in detention. That was the clear low point [lower end of the range] of the evidence.” Your testimony said 100 detainees have died in detention; do you believe the 25 of those were in effect murdered?
WILKERSON: Mr. Chairman, I think the number’s actually higher than that now. Last time I checked it was 108, and the total number that were declared homicides by the military services, or by the CIA, or others doing investigations, CID, and so forth — was 25, 26, 27.
NADLER: Were declared homicides?
WILKERSON: Right, starting as early as December 2001 in Afghanistan.
NADLER: And these were homicides committed by people engaged in interrogations?
WILKERSON: Or in guarding prisoners, or something like that. People who were in detention.
NADLER: They were in detention, not trying to escape or anything, declared homicides by our own authorities.
false analogy. where is the talk of blasphemy and the punishment of death handed down for it?
Krypton
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
false analogy. where is the talk of blasphemy and the punishment of death handed down for it?
I guess you missed the point. You have no moral high ground in condemning another country's legal practices.
EDIT: Well, maybe from Australia you do. I never heard of any Australian military violating human rights. If you are somehow trying to defend the Western Alliance as holding the moral high ground, then "You have no moral high ground in condemning another country's legal practices."
pkcRAISTLIN
quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
I guess you missed the point. You have no moral high ground in condemning another country's legal practices.
really? what does the US' worst administration in history (and its crimes) have to do with me in australia?
you're the one that missed the point; which is wherever islam holds sway at a public level, people suffer because of it.
i know this must be hard for you, mr i hate america, to deal with.
edit: im not talking about the western alliance. merely about religious meddling in law, politics and society.
The17sss
Wow this is crazy... I am in total agreeance with you PKC! :wtf:
NeoPhono
quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
I guess you missed the point. You have no moral high ground in condemning another country's legal practices.
I don't get it. So basically, since no country is "perfect" we have no right to criticize another nation or belief system? On top of that, we're automatically associated with whatever our country does or does not do, regardless of whether or not we approve of it? So...since I live in the US, I have no right to get upset when I see another country violating human rights because my country might have done something similar. Even though I had no part in whatever my country's government might and done and despise any crimes they may have committed?
