Topic: U.N. Says ISIS Fatwa Orders ALL Women In Mosul For Female Genital Mutilation (Read 3587 times)

Deeply deeply worrying and disturbing
One shudders at the thought of what lies ahead

Not a hoax or propaganda, just to many retards in this world. It is a common practice in the middle east.

Wait, so this was actually announced?

Wow... Didn't know that so many religions were heading back to the dark ages.

I thought this was a hoax or propaganda or something, and it may very well be, but that's still REALLY messed up.

Has the whole world gone mad?

To me "caring, loving and respecting" a human being is one and the same, male or female. You are free to see a difference, create casts, layers in society. I won't.

Of course I "study" my enemy, I do not "respect" my enemy. I "love" my enemy the same as I love myself, so no arm should happen to me from the hands of my enemy when he makes the first move

In Islamic states sometimes you need a heavy-handed secular dictator. Like Mubarak, Assad, Gaddafi, Hussein, etc. When you don’t have one, tribalism rules and the country falls apart or fringe Islamist groups take over and stuff like this happens, unfortunately.

Just like my cattle is cared and love, not hurt...

How about "women should be respected as equal to men in society"? Too far?

I'm against women mutilation, women private parts should not be touch and change like that. Women should be cared and love not hurt.

Ruined it for the people in power you mean?

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

The Halabja chemical attack

The Halabja chemical attack (Kurdish: Kîmyabarana Helebce کیمیابارانی ھەڵەبجە), also known as the Halabja Massacre or Bloody Friday, was a genocidal massacre against the Kurdish people that took place on March 16, 1988, during the closing days of the Iran–Iraq War in the Kurdish city of Halabja in Southern Kurdistan. The attack was part of the Al-Anfal campaign in northern Iraq, as well as part of the Iraqi attempt to repel the Iranian Operation Zafar 7. It took place 48 hours after the fall of the town to Iranian army and Kurdish guerrillas.

The attack killed between 3,200 and 5,000 people and injured 7,000 to 10,000 more, most of them civilians. Thousands more died of complications, diseases, and birth defects in the years after the attack. The incident, which has been officially defined as an act of genocide against the Kurdish people in Iraq, was and still remains the largest chemical weapons attack directed against a civilian-populated area in history.

The Halabja attack has been recognized as a separate event from the Anfal Genocide that was also conducted against the Kurdish people by the Iraqi regime under Saddam Hussein. The Iraqi High Criminal Court recognized the Halabja massacre as an act of genocide on March 1, 2010, a decision welcomed by the Kurdistan Regional Government. The attack was also condemned as a crime against humanity by the Parliament of Canada.

http://youtu.be/hYGA00Vjc1U

Well if Hussein was still in power no one would be stupid enough to try any of this shit. Mentioning female mutilation under his regime would have probably gotten you killed. He gave a lot of freedom to women especially if you consider he was a Sunni regime.

The cause here is not the US invasion prior, but the amount of retards on this planet with a lot of power - who chose to do this to innocent girls.

I wish I could like comments on this. +1

Iraq had a stable and relax government under Hussein but we had to intervene and ruin it.

Since the people wont fight back, hopefully this will make them. 100's are executed daily and now they are going to maim your women and children. Hopefully the people have had enough it is easy millions versus thousands.

First of all, I don't see Obama interfering with miliatry force as necessarily a bad thing, leastwise, not in this case. He has a track record of using drones in other countries almost as chaotic (northwestern Pakistan, Afghanistan come to mind), this was almost easy pickings. Secondly, we are supposed to be in this for the long haul and every opportunity should be taken advantage of.

There is no mention of FGM in the Bible or Quran.[102] Although its origins are pre-Islamic according to Gerry Mackie, a reseacher it became associated with Islam because of that religion's focus on female modesty and chastity, and is found only within or near Muslim communities. [103] It is praised in several hadith (sayings attributed to Muhammad) as noble but not required, along with advice that the milder forms are kinder to women.[104] However, Mackie's research is contradicted by both USAID and UNFPA which argues that the prevalence of FGM should actually be delinked from Islam, that the practice predates Islam, is unIslamic and contradicts Islamic law. [105]

However, it is generally accepted that there is no close link between the practice and religious belief.[106] Despite this, there is a widespread view in several countries, particularly in Mali, Eritrea, Mauritania, Guinea and Egypt, that FGM is a religious requirement.[107]In 2006 several leading Islamic scholars called for an end to the practice, and in 2007 the Al-Azhar Supreme Council of Islamic Research in Cairo ruled that it has no basis in Islamic law.[108] According to Mackie, it is not practised in Mecca and Medina in Saudi Arabia, Islam's holiest cities, although there have been reports of it in that country, perhaps among immigrant communities.[109] Surveys have shown that there is a widespread belief in several countries, particularly Eritrea, Egypt, Guinea, Mali and Mauritania, that FGM is a religious requirement.[110] Mackie and LeJeune write that practitioners may not distinguish between religion, tradition and chastity, which makes it difficult to interpret the data.[111]

Outside Islam, FGM has been practised by the Christian Copts in Egypt and Sudan, and by the Beta Israel of Ethiopia, the only Jewish group known to have practised it. Judaism requires male circumcision, but does not allow FGM.[112]

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

As far as I'm concerned, it's a trade off. These Islamic fanatics (like ISIS), are as much our enemies as they are Iraq's. It's not a question of rushing in the help Iraq as it is addressing our own national security interests. And that would include any Islamic fanatical group committed to attacking the American people and I don't particulary care when and where. The only caveat being a regard for civilain casualties. Maybe I'm old fashioned but attacking and killing these Islamic fanatics whenever possible seems a reasonable response.

Now this is the kind of drama queen response that fits into the list of 10 reasons not to be a leftie. I'm one of the few on either side of the aisle that is against drones because they're used in communities instead of in war zones. I would have lauded obama for taking out a contingency of radical muslim terrorists before they could inflict more damage. And since obama has stated time and time again, as bush did, that we are at war with terrorists not islam why in the world would you think that anyone anywhere in the world would be upset because obama used drones to take out a band of terrorists? So in response to your strawman argument that had he acted in response to iraqs request conservatives would have whined, sometimes you do the right thing because its the right thing regardless of what it will do to your political career. BTW he certainly didn't care what conservatives thought when he shoved obamacare down the throats of the majority that didn't want it now did he? And because he put his popularity ahead of lives there are tens of thousands of murdered humans and now you compassionate humanists on the left have to defend obamas do nothing stance that killed innocent men, women and children.

YOUR president?  What-ever do you mean?  Haven't you been one of the jerkwads who keep reminding me that he's OUR president, as in "your" and "my"....LMAO!!
So, for the sake of brevity, I'll assume you are referring to W.
Then, you are saying that Iraqi women were better of in the "rape rooms" of Saddam and Udey and Kusey?  Really?
When W left office, the serge had pretty well succeeded, we were working with the new police and military of Iraq, girls were in school, and except for the periodic sorties of the insurgents (who after Hussein bugged out were able to take over) all was going pretty damn well.  YOUR president handed the country over to the Islamists, just like he did Libya, Egypt, and tried to do in Syria.

The thing is, what point to attacking them? Look, if it's not ISIS, it will be someone else. We take out this year, next year it's OSIRIS or whatever. Are we supposed to go rushing to Iraq's request everytime they can't control their own internal affairs? Now, if you're operating under the principle of "we broke it, we bought it", then, yes, we have an affirmative responsibility to maintain the "peace" we created.

But geopolitically, anyway, it makes more sense for us, as Americans, to let the chaos continue. We are not inclined as a body politic to expend military action--even if you are most would just see it as Obama interfering again--and it doesn't make sense for us strategically. You're right in a sense--this is just a horrible situation for these young girls, but it is part of their lot these days.

I think you may want to ask your fellow conservatives how many of them would support the "we broke it, we bought it" argument. I think you'll find it's very few.

Put down the koolaid, take off your partisan blinders and try thinking for a moment. Like you, I have completely supported Obama's use of drones to attack these Islamic fanatics and have said so numerous times in this forum. Even the American renegades thrown in the pot.

As far as I'm concerned, this was a golden opportunity for Obama to continue those attacks and I would have fully supported that decision. Now go back to sleep.