pokerfied.com
Promoting poker discussions.

Main
Date: 12 Feb 2009 18:23:04
From: James L. Hankins
Subject: Is this story accurate?
The story in the link below says that a woman was gang-raped in Saudi Arabia
was prosecuted and sentenced to one year and 100 lashes for the crime of
adulter (even though apparently she was not married).


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1141267/Saudi-judge-sentences-pregnant-gang-rape-victim-100-lashes-committing-adultery.html


Does anyone know if this accurate? I don't know that much about Islam but
can it really be that rape victims can be treated like criminals under the
Koran? Anyone have a cite to the actual text that would allow such a
result?

It seems to me like this must be just some crazy judge. It's just so
difficult to believe if what is reported is accurate.






 
Date: 13 Feb 2009 05:47:06
From:
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Feb 12, 7:23=A0pm, "James L. Hankins" <jhanki...@cox.net > wrote:
> The story in the link below says that a woman was gang-raped in Saudi Ara=
bia
> was prosecuted and sentenced to one year and 100 lashes for the crime of
> adulter (even though apparently she was not married).
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1141267/Saudi-judge...
>
> Does anyone know if this accurate? =A0I don't know that much about Islam =
but
> can it really be that rape victims can be treated like criminals under th=
e
> Koran? =A0Anyone have a cite to the actual text that would allow such a
> result?
>
> It seems to me like this must be just some crazy judge. =A0It's just so
> difficult to believe if what is reported is accurate.


I've read it also, and I think it's accurate.

It's not a crazy judge - that's really the way it is there. You have
to realize that the worst thing for a Muslim in KSA is to be called a
bad Muslim, at least in public. In private, 95% of them are like
everyone else - they want a drink, a cigar, a decent job, opportunity
for their kids, etc., and think that a lot of what the clerics say is
"truth" is BS. But in public, if they do not espouse the party line
(i.e., whatever some moron Mulah says the Qu'ran says) then they are
at risk of losing their job and everything they own, and being called
a traitor, infidel, etc. Picture a cross between the Emperor's New
Clothes, and the Salem witch trials, and you have a pretty good idea
of the mentaility on the street, and what is probably driving this
judge's actions, or at least the acceptance of them by the public at
large in the country.

(Of course, my opinion only comes from having lived in Riyadh, UAE,
Qatar and Bahrain, so some nutjob on here will reply that I don't know
what I'm talking about.)

.


  
Date: 13 Feb 2009 07:04:55
From: risky biz
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Feb 13 2009 6:47 AM, johnnycoconutsftp wrote:

> On Feb 12, 7:23pm, "James L. Hankins" <jhanki...@cox.net> wrote:
> > The story in the link below says that a woman was gang-raped in Saudi
Arabia
> > was prosecuted and sentenced to one year and 100 lashes for the crime of
> > adulter (even though apparently she was not married).
> >
> > http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1141267/Saudi-judge...
> >
> > Does anyone know if this accurate? I don't know that much about Islam but
> > can it really be that rape victims can be treated like criminals under the
> > Koran? Anyone have a cite to the actual text that would allow such a
> > result?
> >
> > It seems to me like this must be just some crazy judge. It's just so
> > difficult to believe if what is reported is accurate.
>
>
> I've read it also, and I think it's accurate.
>
> It's not a crazy judge - that's really the way it is there. You have
> to realize that the worst thing for a Muslim in KSA is to be called a
> bad Muslim, at least in public. In private, 95% of them are like
> everyone else - they want a drink, a cigar, a decent job, opportunity
> for their kids, etc., and think that a lot of what the clerics say is
> "truth" is BS. But in public, if they do not espouse the party line
> (i.e., whatever some moron Mulah says the Qu'ran says) then they are
> at risk of losing their job and everything they own, and being called
> a traitor, infidel, etc. Picture a cross between the Emperor's New
> Clothes, and the Salem witch trials, and you have a pretty good idea
> of the mentaility on the street, and what is probably driving this
> judge's actions, or at least the acceptance of them by the public at
> large in the country.
>
> (Of course, my opinion only comes from having lived in Riyadh, UAE,
> Qatar and Bahrain, so some nutjob on here will reply that I don't know
> what I'm talking about.)

I don't disagree with anything you're saying here. I think you're making
an accurate observation.

Your gunslinging friends would probably like a US modelled after Saudi
Arabia.

________________________________________________________________________
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com




   
Date: 13 Feb 2009 07:23:02
From: John_Brian_K
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
> Your gunslinging friends would probably like a US modelled after Saudi
> Arabia.

I am a 'gunslinger' and want nothing to do with how Saudi Arabia runs
their country.

==========================================
You must not think me necessarily foolish because I am facetious,
nor will I consider you necessarily wise because you are grave.
==============================
47.5% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
JBK

_______________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com



    
Date: 13 Feb 2009 08:04:24
From: risky biz
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Feb 13 2009 8:23 AM, John_Brian_K wrote:

> > Your gunslinging friends would probably like a US modelled after Saudi
> > Arabia.
>
> I am a 'gunslinger' and want nothing to do with how Saudi Arabia runs
> their country.

It shouldn't be a problem then as long as you don't shotgun vehicles that
people are sleeping in because you thought they might have been the ones
who slashed your tire.

________________________________________________________________________
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com




 
Date: 12 Feb 2009 21:22:15
From: risky biz
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Feb 12 2009 5:23 PM, James L. Hankins wrote:

> The story in the link below says that a woman was gang-raped in Saudi Arabia
> was prosecuted and sentenced to one year and 100 lashes for the crime of
> adulter (even though apparently she was not married).
>
>
>
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1141267/Saudi-judge-sentences-pregnant-gang-rape-victim-100-lashes-committing-adultery.html
>
>
> Does anyone know if this accurate? I don't know that much about Islam but
> can it really be that rape victims can be treated like criminals under the
> Koran? Anyone have a cite to the actual text that would allow such a
> result?
>
> It seems to me like this must be just some crazy judge. It's just so
> difficult to believe if what is reported is accurate.


Saudi Arabia is ruled by a royal family who are nominal adherents of the
Wahhabi sect which many Muslims actually consider heretical.

A discussion by an expert on the question of rape in an Islamic society in
general:
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Islam-947/Rape-Islam.htm

And an examination of the Pakistani legal system as it relates to rape:
http://www.karamah.org/docs/Zina_article_Final.pdf

________________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com



  
Date: 13 Feb 2009 13:04:45
From: James L. Hankins
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?

"risky biz" <risky-biz@sbcglobal.net > wrote in message
news:7lcf66x1gd.ln2@recgroups.com...
> On Feb 12 2009 5:23 PM, James L. Hankins wrote:
>
>> The story in the link below says that a woman was gang-raped in Saudi
>> Arabia
>> was prosecuted and sentenced to one year and 100 lashes for the crime of
>> adulter (even though apparently she was not married).
>>
>>
>>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1141267/Saudi-judge-sentences-pregnant-gang-rape-victim-100-lashes-committing-adultery.html
>>
>>
>> Does anyone know if this accurate? I don't know that much about Islam
>> but
>> can it really be that rape victims can be treated like criminals under
>> the
>> Koran? Anyone have a cite to the actual text that would allow such a
>> result?
>>
>> It seems to me like this must be just some crazy judge. It's just so
>> difficult to believe if what is reported is accurate.
>
>
> Saudi Arabia is ruled by a royal family who are nominal adherents of the
> Wahhabi sect which many Muslims actually consider heretical.
>
> A discussion by an expert on the question of rape in an Islamic society in
> general:
> http://en.allexperts.com/q/Islam-947/Rape-Islam.htm
>
> And an examination of the Pakistani legal system as it relates to rape:
> http://www.karamah.org/docs/Zina_article_Final.pdf





Do not those articles indicate a result opposite of what appears to have
been imposed in the article I posted?




   
Date: 15 Feb 2009 06:31:08
From: risky biz
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Feb 13 2009 12:04 PM, James L. Hankins wrote:

> "risky biz" <risky-biz@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:7lcf66x1gd.ln2@recgroups.com...
> > On Feb 12 2009 5:23 PM, James L. Hankins wrote:
> >
> >> The story in the link below says that a woman was gang-raped in Saudi
> >> Arabia
> >> was prosecuted and sentenced to one year and 100 lashes for the crime of
> >> adulter (even though apparently she was not married).
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1141267/Saudi-judge-sentences-pregnant-gang-rape-victim-100-lashes-committing-adultery.html
> >>
> >>
> >> Does anyone know if this accurate? I don't know that much about Islam
> >> but
> >> can it really be that rape victims can be treated like criminals under
> >> the
> >> Koran? Anyone have a cite to the actual text that would allow such a
> >> result?
> >>
> >> It seems to me like this must be just some crazy judge. It's just so
> >> difficult to believe if what is reported is accurate.
> >
> >
> > Saudi Arabia is ruled by a royal family who are nominal adherents of the
> > Wahhabi sect which many Muslims actually consider heretical.
> >
> > A discussion by an expert on the question of rape in an Islamic society in
> > general:
> > http://en.allexperts.com/q/Islam-947/Rape-Islam.htm
> >
> > And an examination of the Pakistani legal system as it relates to rape:
> > http://www.karamah.org/docs/Zina_article_Final.pdf
>
>
> Do not those articles indicate a result opposite of what appears to have
> been imposed in the article I posted?

Yeah, and the moon orbits the earth. Did you have a point?

----
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com




    
Date: 15 Feb 2009 10:02:40
From: James L. Hankins
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?

"risky biz" <risky-biz@sbcglobal.net > wrote in message
news:cill66xeog.ln2@recgroups.com...


> Yeah, and the moon orbits the earth. Did you have a point?


Yes. My original question was, is the news story I posted accurate. If it
was then the judge's decision would appear to be against the teachings of
Islam as you posted them.

So, are you intimating that the story isn't accurate? It's not very helpful
if you just post links to stories but then fail to articulate how the
information in the links you posted assists the discussion in the thread.




     
Date: 15 Feb 2009 09:22:19
From: risky biz
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Feb 15 2009 9:02 AM, James L. Hankins wrote:

> "risky biz" <risky-biz@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:cill66xeog.ln2@recgroups.com...
>
>
> > Yeah, and the moon orbits the earth. Did you have a point?
>
>
> Yes. My original question was, is the news story I posted accurate. If it
> was then the judge's decision would appear to be against the teachings of
> Islam as you posted them.
>
> So, are you intimating that the story isn't accurate? It's not very helpful
> if you just post links to stories but then fail to articulate how the
> information in the links you posted assists the discussion in the thread.

If you can't figure out what the difference is, then you have a personal
problem.

Saudi Arabia is a dictatorship which employs the most reactionary elements
in the Islamic religion to buttress it's hold on power. This dictatorship
has, unsurprisingly, been a close partner and protectorate of the United
States for almost 90 years. The royal family and it's religious police
have been hated by the average Saudi muslim for nearly as long. Another
really intelligent foreign policy.

____________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com



 
Date: 12 Feb 2009 20:06:37
From: johnny_t
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
James L. Hankins wrote:
> The story in the link below says that a woman was gang-raped in Saudi Arabia
> was prosecuted and sentenced to one year and 100 lashes for the crime of
> adulter (even though apparently she was not married).

This is the same reason that women wear Burkas.

It is a crime and amoral to tempt men from the path of righteousness.
One of the greatest proofs of this temptation is rape. A man doesn't
rape if he hasn't been tempted by the devil. A mans life is constant
temptation from the devil, and a constant struggle of righteousness. A
man must do whatever he can to defile the devil. To rape it or
dismember it, or if Allah allows, to forever destroy it.

This fundamental difference in "what" is good and "what" is evil is what
will forever culturally separate the middle eastern Muslim from western
cultures.


  
Date: 12 Feb 2009 21:30:20
From: risky biz
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Feb 12 2009 9:06 PM, johnny_t wrote:

> James L. Hankins wrote:
> > The story in the link below says that a woman was gang-raped in Saudi
Arabia
> > was prosecuted and sentenced to one year and 100 lashes for the crime of
> > adulter (even though apparently she was not married).
>
> This is the same reason that women wear Burkas.
>
> It is a crime and amoral to tempt men from the path of righteousness.
> One of the greatest proofs of this temptation is rape. A man doesn't
> rape if he hasn't been tempted by the devil. A mans life is constant
> temptation from the devil, and a constant struggle of righteousness. A
> man must do whatever he can to defile the devil. To rape it or
> dismember it, or if Allah allows, to forever destroy it.
>
> This fundamental difference in "what" is good and "what" is evil is what
> will forever culturally separate the middle eastern Muslim from western
> cultures.

You, unfortunately, do not know the difference between your ass and a hole
in the ground.

____________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com



  
Date: 12 Feb 2009 23:15:11
From: James L. Hankins
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?

"johnny_t" <nobodyis@home.com > wrote in message
news:00111a16$0$26771$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
> James L. Hankins wrote:
>> The story in the link below says that a woman was gang-raped in Saudi
>> Arabia was prosecuted and sentenced to one year and 100 lashes for the
>> crime of adulter (even though apparently she was not married).
>
> This is the same reason that women wear Burkas.
>
> It is a crime and amoral to tempt men from the path of righteousness. One
> of the greatest proofs of this temptation is rape. A man doesn't rape if
> he hasn't been tempted by the devil. A mans life is constant temptation
> from the devil, and a constant struggle of righteousness. A man must do
> whatever he can to defile the devil. To rape it or dismember it, or if
> Allah allows, to forever destroy it.



Is this a quote from some source or just you're characterization?



> This fundamental difference in "what" is good and "what" is evil is what
> will forever culturally separate the middle eastern Muslim from western
> cultures.






 
Date: 12 Feb 2009 22:13:28
From: Irish Mike
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?

"James L. Hankins" <jhankins5@cox.net > wrote in message
news:I33ll.51$i42.15@newsfe17.iad...
> The story in the link below says that a woman was gang-raped in Saudi
> Arabia was prosecuted and sentenced to one year and 100 lashes for the
> crime of adulter (even though apparently she was not married).
>
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1141267/Saudi-judge-sentences-pregnant-gang-rape-victim-100-lashes-committing-adultery.html
>
>
> Does anyone know if this accurate? I don't know that much about Islam but
> can it really be that rape victims can be treated like criminals under the
> Koran? Anyone have a cite to the actual text that would allow such a
> result?
>
> It seems to me like this must be just some crazy judge. It's just so
> difficult to believe if what is reported is accurate.

Well bucko, since you know that the mistreatment, abuse, suppression,
disfigurement and murder of women is fairly common and very well documented
in many muslim countries, I'd give your post about a 3.25 on the
troll-meter.

Irish Mike




 
Date: 12 Feb 2009 21:20:46
From: MZB
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
Damn Israelis.

Oh...wait...

Mel

"James L. Hankins" <jhankins5@cox.net > wrote in message
news:I33ll.51$i42.15@newsfe17.iad...
> The story in the link below says that a woman was gang-raped in Saudi
> Arabia was prosecuted and sentenced to one year and 100 lashes for the
> crime of adulter (even though apparently she was not married).
>
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1141267/Saudi-judge-sentences-pregnant-gang-rape-victim-100-lashes-committing-adultery.html
>
>
> Does anyone know if this accurate? I don't know that much about Islam but
> can it really be that rape victims can be treated like criminals under the
> Koran? Anyone have a cite to the actual text that would allow such a
> result?
>
> It seems to me like this must be just some crazy judge. It's just so
> difficult to believe if what is reported is accurate.
>




  
Date: 12 Feb 2009 21:38:49
From: risky biz
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Feb 12 2009 7:20 PM, MZB wrote:

> Damn Israelis.
>
> Oh...wait...
>
> Mel

Had to get your Israel-first shit in there, didn't you, Mel?

-----
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com



   
Date: 13 Feb 2009 15:50:45
From: MZB
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
And you just have to respond with the defend the Arabs at all costs
regardless of the facts garbage.

Mel
"risky biz" <risky-biz@sbcglobal.net > wrote in message
news:9kdf66xbjd.ln2@recgroups.com...
> On Feb 12 2009 7:20 PM, MZB wrote:
>
>> Damn Israelis.
>>
>> Oh...wait...
>>
>> Mel
>
> Had to get your Israel-first shit in there, didn't you, Mel?
>
> -----
> * kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
>




 
Date: 12 Feb 2009 19:50:33
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:23:04 -0600, "James L. Hankins"
<jhankins5@cox.net > wrote:

>The story in the link below says that a woman was gang-raped in Saudi Arabia
>was prosecuted and sentenced to one year and 100 lashes for the crime of
>adulter (even though apparently she was not married).

>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1141267/Saudi-judge-sentences-pregnant-gang-rape-victim-100-lashes-committing-adultery.html

>Does anyone know if this accurate? I don't know that much about Islam but
>can it really be that rape victims can be treated like criminals under the
>Koran? Anyone have a cite to the actual text that would allow such a
>result?

>It seems to me like this must be just some crazy judge. It's just so
>difficult to believe if what is reported is accurate.

This is standard policy in Saudi Arabia, which adheres to the vilest
and most despicable brand of Sharia. Amputations, torture, and
beating are considered perfectly acceptable judicial practice, as is
executing rape victims. Women's testimony is considered worth half a
man's. Therefore, a rapist cannot be convicted on the word of a
woman. There have to have been actual witnesses, who also testify to
rape. Clearly, the testimony of a bunch of gang rapists outweighs a
single woman's testimony.

These scum in Saudi Arabia are called "allies." Most of the 9/11
terrorists came from Saudi Arabia. Fuck them.


  
Date: 13 Feb 2009 09:06:41
From: phlash74
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Feb 12, 7:13=A0pm, "garycarson" <garycar...@alumni.northwestern.edu >
wrote:
> On Feb 12 2009 9:51 PM, James L. Hankins wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nob...@fool.foo> wrote in message
> >news:omg9p45sdnq113t76di4caae5kvv3l8vvm@4ax.com...
>
> > > Women's testimony is considered worth half a man's. =A0Therefore, a r=
apist
> > > cannot be convicted on the word of a
> > > woman. =A0There have to have been actual witnesses, who also testify =
to
> > > rape. =A0Clearly, the testimony of a bunch of gang rapists outweighs =
a
> > > single woman's testimony.
>
> > But that's at least understandable. =A0If the judge just didn't believe=
the
> > woman (even for crackpot reasons), then it at least makes a little bit =
of
> > sense that she can be punished for falsely claiming rape.
>
> > But the story doesn't indicated that's what happened. =A0I'm interested=
to
> > know what happens in a case where the woman was without questioned rape=
d.
> > Is she still punished?
>
> It wasn't that long ago that many judges, prosecutors, and cops in this
> country thought that a woman who was raped probably led the guy on by the
> way she dressed or behaved.
>
> _______________________________________________________________________=
=A0
> RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader :www.recgroups.com- Hide qu=
oted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


It's still not uncommon, and it's usually the default tactic for
defense attorneys.

There was a case here in Orange County CA where the punkass son of the
"assistant sheriff" (who only had a badge for bribing sheriff Mike
Carona, who just recently resigned over criminal charges concerning
said bribery) and his two buddies drugged and gang raped an
unconscious girl, videotaping the whole incident as they shoved
several objects including a Snapple bottle and a lit cigarette into
her vagina. The defense attorneys claimed that the unconscious victim
was actually the ringleader and that she wanted to star in some kind
of weird porn movie. Despite the video evidence, the first trial
ended in a hung jury, although all three wastes of human life were
convicted on retrial.

Michael
U.S. American


  
Date: 12 Feb 2009 21:47:56
From:
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
Do you have a penis fixation? It seems like every post you make has
mention of one.

HH




On Feb 12, 6:29=A0pm, A Man Beaten by Jacks <nob...@fool.foo > wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:07:34 -0800, "Paul Popinjay"
>
> <paulpopin...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nob...@fool.foo> wrote in message
> >> This is standard policy in Saudi Arabia, which adheres to the vilest
> >> and most despicable brand of Sharia. =A0Amputations, torture, and
> >> beating are considered perfectly acceptable judicial practice, as is
> >> executing rape victims.
> >Why do you care? =A0You've made it well known on this newsgroup that Sta=
lin
> >was one of your idols. =A0
>
> Stalin was NOT one of my idols, you fuckface, but a contemptible
> traitor who hijacked the Bolshevik Revolution. =A0You prove that when I
> respond to you, I am responding to a troll, when you say absurd things
> like this.
>
> >Why do you care about ANY human beings? I find your
> >supposed concern somewhat suspect.
>
> Yes, but that is because you are intoxicated from all the spunk you
> inhale from Satan's cock. =A0



   
Date: 12 Feb 2009 22:26:04
From: Paul Popinjay
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
<hennieholden@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:88951055-4ab3-47e7-8336-c7cdf94404b9@r41g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...

> Do you have a penis fixation? It seems like every post you make has
> mention of one.


I noticed that too about Man Beaten by Jacks. He cannot seem to express
himself without resorting to embarrassingly graphic sexual innuendo. I am
glad my children do not read the internet. If they did, I would have to
install some safeguards to protect them from reading Man Beaten by Jack's
vulgarity. I find him quite offensive.

-Paul Popinjay















  
Date: 12 Feb 2009 22:22:31
From: Irish Mike
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?

"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo > wrote in message
news:omg9p45sdnq113t76di4caae5kvv3l8vvm@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:23:04 -0600, "James L. Hankins"
> <jhankins5@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>The story in the link below says that a woman was gang-raped in Saudi
>>Arabia
>>was prosecuted and sentenced to one year and 100 lashes for the crime of
>>adulter (even though apparently she was not married).
>
>>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1141267/Saudi-judge-sentences-pregnant-gang-rape-victim-100-lashes-committing-adultery.html
>
>>Does anyone know if this accurate? I don't know that much about Islam but
>>can it really be that rape victims can be treated like criminals under the
>>Koran? Anyone have a cite to the actual text that would allow such a
>>result?
>
>>It seems to me like this must be just some crazy judge. It's just so
>>difficult to believe if what is reported is accurate.
>
> This is standard policy in Saudi Arabia, which adheres to the vilest
> and most despicable brand of Sharia. Amputations, torture, and
> beating are considered perfectly acceptable judicial practice, as is
> executing rape victims. Women's testimony is considered worth half a
> man's. Therefore, a rapist cannot be convicted on the word of a
> woman. There have to have been actual witnesses, who also testify to
> rape. Clearly, the testimony of a bunch of gang rapists outweighs a
> single woman's testimony.
>
> These scum in Saudi Arabia are called "allies." Most of the 9/11
> terrorists came from Saudi Arabia. Fuck them.

If I remember correctly, for the crime of rape to be proven under islamic
law, the rape must be "witnessed by at least four devout muslim men". Of
course, this is the same religion that tolerates throwing acid in young
girl's faces for the crime of going to school. But not to worry, the
liberals will quickly jump in to defend islam and point out that Christians
did bad things too - during the crusades.

Irish Mike




   
Date: 13 Feb 2009 08:27:14
From: MrBookworm
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
> girl's faces for the crime of going to school. But not to worry, the
> liberals will quickly jump in to defend islam and point out that Christians
> did bad things too - during the crusades.

I could go back to the crusades, but the priests raping little boys is a
bit more timely. Your religion isn't any better than Islam.

Dean

"When you respond to me, you are responding to a troll." - Paul Popinjay
1/16/2009

------
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com



    
Date: 13 Feb 2009 13:11:52
From: James L. Hankins
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?

"MrBookworm" <a825b33@webnntp.invalid > wrote in message
news:2kjg66xvai.ln2@recgroups.com...
>> girl's faces for the crime of going to school. But not to worry, the
>> liberals will quickly jump in to defend islam and point out that
>> Christians
>> did bad things too - during the crusades.
>
> I could go back to the crusades, but the priests raping little boys is a
> bit more timely. Your religion isn't any better than Islam.


In the story I posted, the result (the punishment of the woman) was
apparently dictated by the teachings of Islam as understood by the judge in
the case.

There is no rule of Christianity that says it's acceptablet o rape little
boys.




     
Date: 14 Feb 2009 07:13:04
From: MrBookworm
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
> There is no rule of Christianity that says it's acceptablet o rape little
> boys.

When it goes on for DECADES then it is a rule, whether it's written or not.

Dean

"When you respond to me, you are responding to a troll." - Paul Popinjay
1/16/2009

-------
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com




     
Date: 13 Feb 2009 11:40:04
From: garycarson
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Feb 13 2009 2:11 PM, James L. Hankins wrote:

> "MrBookworm" <a825b33@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
> news:2kjg66xvai.ln2@recgroups.com...
> >> girl's faces for the crime of going to school. But not to worry, the
> >> liberals will quickly jump in to defend islam and point out that
> >> Christians
> >> did bad things too - during the crusades.
> >
> > I could go back to the crusades, but the priests raping little boys is a
> > bit more timely. Your religion isn't any better than Islam.
>
>
> In the story I posted, the result (the punishment of the woman) was
> apparently dictated by the teachings of Islam as understood by the judge in
> the case.
>
> There is no rule of Christianity that says it's acceptablet o rape little
> boys.

It's kind of like the fourth amendment.

It's not acceptable, except for a few exceptions involving priests.

_______________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com



  
Date: 12 Feb 2009 20:51:50
From: James L. Hankins
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?

"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo > wrote in message
news:omg9p45sdnq113t76di4caae5kvv3l8vvm@4ax.com...



> Women's testimony is considered worth half a man's. Therefore, a rapist
> cannot be convicted on the word of a
> woman. There have to have been actual witnesses, who also testify to
> rape. Clearly, the testimony of a bunch of gang rapists outweighs a
> single woman's testimony.



But that's at least understandable. If the judge just didn't believe the
woman (even for crackpot reasons), then it at least makes a little bit of
sense that she can be punished for falsely claiming rape.

But the story doesn't indicated that's what happened. I'm interested to
know what happens in a case where the woman was without questioned raped.
Is she still punished?




   
Date: 13 Feb 2009 00:23:55
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 20:51:50 -0600, "James L. Hankins"
<jhankins5@cox.net > wrote:

>"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo> wrote in message
>news:omg9p45sdnq113t76di4caae5kvv3l8vvm@4ax.com...

>> Women's testimony is considered worth half a man's. Therefore, a rapist
>> cannot be convicted on the word of a
>> woman. There have to have been actual witnesses, who also testify to
>> rape. Clearly, the testimony of a bunch of gang rapists outweighs a
>> single woman's testimony.

>But that's at least understandable. If the judge just didn't believe the
>woman (even for crackpot reasons), then it at least makes a little bit of
>sense that she can be punished for falsely claiming rape.

It has nothing to do with what the judge believed. The judge was not
at liberty to believe anything. A woman's testimony is, as a rule of
evidence, worth half that of a man's. There is no way a woman's
testimony can outweigh a man's. It is absolutely forbidden and
outside the judge's discretion.

>But the story doesn't indicated that's what happened. I'm interested to
>know what happens in a case where the woman was without questioned raped.
>Is she still punished?

For the woman to have been, without question, raped, there would in
most occasions have to be male testimony to this effect. And the
woman would have to have not committed "crimes" like having been out
in public without a male relative present. Otherwise, she would still
have committed a "crime," whether she was raped or not.


    
Date: 13 Feb 2009 13:07:18
From: James L. Hankins
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?

"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo > wrote in message
news:eq0ap49e416qd0jlhj37pskio1ajl761an@4ax.com...


> For the woman to have been, without question, raped, there would in
> most occasions have to be male testimony to this effect. And the
> woman would have to have not committed "crimes" like having been out
> in public without a male relative present. Otherwise, she would still
> have committed a "crime," whether she was raped or not.



You're just reading all that into the original news story. The news story
just says that the woman was gang-raped, got pregnant, and then was found
guilty of adultery and sentenced to the one year and 100 lashes.

That's why I am questioning the accuracy of the story. There appears to be
details left out that would possibly make the story less shocking to Western
readers.




     
Date: 13 Feb 2009 16:27:09
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 13:07:18 -0600, "James L. Hankins"
<jhankins5@cox.net > wrote:

>"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo> wrote in message
>news:eq0ap49e416qd0jlhj37pskio1ajl761an@4ax.com...

>> For the woman to have been, without question, raped, there would in
>> most occasions have to be male testimony to this effect. And the
>> woman would have to have not committed "crimes" like having been out
>> in public without a male relative present. Otherwise, she would still
>> have committed a "crime," whether she was raped or not.

>You're just reading all that into the original news story.

No, I'm not. I'm merely describing the rules of evidence used in the
Sharia courts of Saudi Arabia, in which a man's testimony is worth
twice that of a woman's. It is no exaggeration that this makes a
conviction virtually impossible without outside witnesses.

Saudi Arabia follows the Hanbali school, more or less.

>The news story
>just says that the woman was gang-raped, got pregnant, and then was found
>guilty of adultery and sentenced to the one year and 100 lashes.

>That's why I am questioning the accuracy of the story. There appears to be
>details left out that would possibly make the story less shocking to Western
>readers.

Why? Stories like this are entirely common, and are completely in
line with the judicial traditions and written laws of Saudi Arabia.

I'm frankly surprised you haven't heard of multiple such stories in
the past. They are shockingly common and there have been many
particularly celebrated cases that have outraged the world community.

http://www.aina.org/news/20081117111817.htm


   
Date: 12 Feb 2009 19:13:00
From: garycarson
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Feb 12 2009 9:51 PM, James L. Hankins wrote:

> "A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo> wrote in message
> news:omg9p45sdnq113t76di4caae5kvv3l8vvm@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> > Women's testimony is considered worth half a man's. Therefore, a rapist
> > cannot be convicted on the word of a
> > woman. There have to have been actual witnesses, who also testify to
> > rape. Clearly, the testimony of a bunch of gang rapists outweighs a
> > single woman's testimony.
>
>
>
> But that's at least understandable. If the judge just didn't believe the
> woman (even for crackpot reasons), then it at least makes a little bit of
> sense that she can be punished for falsely claiming rape.
>
> But the story doesn't indicated that's what happened. I'm interested to
> know what happens in a case where the woman was without questioned raped.
> Is she still punished?

It wasn't that long ago that many judges, prosecutors, and cops in this
country thought that a woman who was raped probably led the guy on by the
way she dressed or behaved.

_______________________________________________________________________
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com




  
Date: 12 Feb 2009 18:07:34
From: Paul Popinjay
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo > wrote in message
>
> This is standard policy in Saudi Arabia, which adheres to the vilest
> and most despicable brand of Sharia. Amputations, torture, and
> beating are considered perfectly acceptable judicial practice, as is
> executing rape victims.


Why do you care? You've made it well known on this newsgroup that Stalin
was one of your idols. Why do you care about ANY human beings? I find your
supposed concern somewhat suspect.





   
Date: 12 Feb 2009 21:29:02
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:07:34 -0800, "Paul Popinjay"
<paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net > wrote:

>"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo> wrote in message

>> This is standard policy in Saudi Arabia, which adheres to the vilest
>> and most despicable brand of Sharia. Amputations, torture, and
>> beating are considered perfectly acceptable judicial practice, as is
>> executing rape victims.

>Why do you care? You've made it well known on this newsgroup that Stalin
>was one of your idols.

Stalin was NOT one of my idols, you fuckface, but a contemptible
traitor who hijacked the Bolshevik Revolution. You prove that when I
respond to you, I am responding to a troll, when you say absurd things
like this.

>Why do you care about ANY human beings? I find your
>supposed concern somewhat suspect.

Yes, but that is because you are intoxicated from all the spunk you
inhale from Satan's cock.


    
Date: 12 Feb 2009 20:06:28
From: Paul Popinjay
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo > wrote in message
news:kjm9p4pmuvjgiunm0e9p8u1cr9g4k88ith@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:07:34 -0800, "Paul Popinjay"
> <paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>

>
>>Why do you care? You've made it well known on this newsgroup that Stalin
>>was one of your idols.
>
> Stalin was NOT one of my idols, you fuckface, but a contemptible
> traitor who hijacked the Bolshevik Revolution. You prove that when I
> respond to you, I am responding to a troll, when you say absurd things
> like this.
>

First of all, let me make one thing perfectly clear. I am not a troll. And
now that we are clear on that issue, let me ask you, did you not at one time
post a link to a youtube video that was extremely complimentary of Stalin?
Did you, or did you not? If you want to say now that you were not a fan of
Stalin, then I will accept you at your word. But now, in this very post
that I am replying to, you seem to "instead" be a fan of the Bolshevik
Revolution. May I then assume that implies you are a fan of Lenin? Could I
then exchange the name "Lenin" for my previous use of the name "Stalin"?
Would that also be "absurd", as you called it? Yes? Or no? Do you
honestly believe the Bolshevik Revolution intended to honor human rights,
and then was somehow "hijacked" by Stalin? How about Mao's revolution? Yay
or nay, where do you stand on Mao? Fanboy? Or no fanboy? Please answer
these questions, before I re-examine my opinion on whether you should be
commenting on the rights of this muslim woman in the article.

-Paul Popinjay





     
Date: 13 Feb 2009 08:21:52
From: MrBookworm
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
> First of all, let me make one thing perfectly clear. I am not a troll. And

Yes you are, look at my signature line!

Dean

"When you respond to me, you are responding to a troll." - Paul Popinjay
1/16/2009

______________________________________________________________________
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com




     
Date: 12 Feb 2009 21:33:35
From: risky biz
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Feb 12 2009 9:06 PM, Paul Popinjay wrote:

> "A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo> wrote in message
> news:kjm9p4pmuvjgiunm0e9p8u1cr9g4k88ith@4ax.com...
> > On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:07:34 -0800, "Paul Popinjay"
> > <paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >
>
> >
> >>Why do you care? You've made it well known on this newsgroup that Stalin
> >>was one of your idols.
> >
> > Stalin was NOT one of my idols, you fuckface, but a contemptible
> > traitor who hijacked the Bolshevik Revolution. You prove that when I
> > respond to you, I am responding to a troll, when you say absurd things
> > like this.
> >
>
> First of all, let me make one thing perfectly clear. I am not a troll. And
> now that we are clear on that issue, let me ask you, did you not at one time
> post a link to a youtube video that was extremely complimentary of Stalin?
> Did you, or did you not? If you want to say now that you were not a fan of
> Stalin, then I will accept you at your word. But now, in this very post
> that I am replying to, you seem to "instead" be a fan of the Bolshevik
> Revolution. May I then assume that implies you are a fan of Lenin? Could I
> then exchange the name "Lenin" for my previous use of the name "Stalin"?
> Would that also be "absurd", as you called it? Yes? Or no? Do you
> honestly believe the Bolshevik Revolution intended to honor human rights,
> and then was somehow "hijacked" by Stalin? How about Mao's revolution? Yay
> or nay, where do you stand on Mao? Fanboy? Or no fanboy? Please answer
> these questions, before I re-examine my opinion on whether you should be
> commenting on the rights of this muslim woman in the article.
>
> -Paul Popinjay

If you think that lot were horrific imagine if Trotsky had acquired the
supreme power. He would've put them in the shade.

------
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com



     
Date: 13 Feb 2009 00:20:47
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 20:06:28 -0800, "Paul Popinjay"
<paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net > wrote:

>"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo> wrote in message

>>>Why do you care? You've made it well known on this newsgroup that Stalin
>>>was one of your idols.

>> Stalin was NOT one of my idols, you fuckface, but a contemptible
>> traitor who hijacked the Bolshevik Revolution. You prove that when I
>> respond to you, I am responding to a troll, when you say absurd things
>> like this.

>First of all, let me make one thing perfectly clear. I am not a troll.

So what IS your name for what you are, then?

>And
>now that we are clear on that issue, let me ask you, did you not at one time
>post a link to a youtube video that was extremely complimentary of Stalin?

I was fucking with you.

>Did you, or did you not? If you want to say now that you were not a fan of
>Stalin, then I will accept you at your word. But now, in this very post
>that I am replying to, you seem to "instead" be a fan of the Bolshevik
>Revolution. May I then assume that implies you are a fan of Lenin? Could I
>then exchange the name "Lenin" for my previous use of the name "Stalin"?

Lenin committed the same error as Robespierre before him, allowing his
revolution to be hijacked. As Napoleon was to Robespierre, so was
Stalin to Lenin.

I'd be more of a fan of Trotsky, who had the sense to get the fuck out
when things went south. Of course, he still ended up with an ice-axe
in his skull.

>Would that also be "absurd", as you called it? Yes? Or no? Do you
>honestly believe the Bolshevik Revolution intended to honor human rights,
>and then was somehow "hijacked" by Stalin? How about Mao's revolution? Yay
>or nay, where do you stand on Mao? Fanboy? Or no fanboy? Please answer
>these questions, before I re-examine my opinion on whether you should be
>commenting on the rights of this muslim woman in the article.

Mao was a mass murdering scumbag. Also a revolutionary genius. Too
bad he couldn't have been one without the other.


      
Date: 12 Feb 2009 21:38:18
From: Paul Popinjay
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo > wrote in message
news:mj0ap45idue2qm3ilggo12agjphijml2f3@4ax.com...

>
> I'd be more of a fan of Trotsky,

>
> Mao was a mass murdering scumbag. Also a revolutionary genius. Too
> bad he couldn't have been one without the other.


So then, essentially, you are ok with communism, but you just want to skip
the mass-murdering part. Is that correct? And regarding this poor woman
who was raped and then punished judicially for it, would it be ok with you
if she were to live the rest of her life under complete economic control
with limited freedom of movement, as long as she was not subject to any
physical abuse? I'm sorry if I have to ask these kinds of questions of you.
I'm just finding it difficult to believe that anyone of the leftwing scumbag
persuasion could really and truly be concerned about anyone.

-Paul Popinjay




       
Date: 13 Feb 2009 16:30:46
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 21:38:18 -0800, "Paul Popinjay"
<paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net > wrote:

>"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo> wrote in message
>news:mj0ap45idue2qm3ilggo12agjphijml2f3@4ax.com...

>> I'd be more of a fan of Trotsky,

>> Mao was a mass murdering scumbag. Also a revolutionary genius. Too
>> bad he couldn't have been one without the other.

>So then, essentially, you are ok with communism, but you just want to skip
>the mass-murdering part. Is that correct?

No, Marxism as imagined by Marx doesn't work. For one thing, it
inevitably devolves into one-leader totalitarianism. Governments
require separation of powers and independence of the judiciary to be
stable, whether their economic system is socialist or capitalist. Pure
forms of socialism and capitalism simply don't work, because there are
many things a market does efficiently that a state can't do at all, or
does so poorly that the entire economy collapses if you try to do them
purely through the state. Similarly, an unregulated economy also
eventually flies out of control and collapses.

>And regarding this poor woman
>who was raped and then punished judicially for it, would it be ok with you
>if she were to live the rest of her life under complete economic control
>with limited freedom of movement, as long as she was not subject to any
>physical abuse?

That's a strange interpretation.

>I'm sorry if I have to ask these kinds of questions of you.
>I'm just finding it difficult to believe that anyone of the leftwing scumbag
>persuasion could really and truly be concerned about anyone.

This is because, being a deranged fascist, you can't conceive of
loving anything but material things. Don't worry, though. Some day
we will have reeducational facilities to restore you to sanity.


        
Date: 13 Feb 2009 14:48:11
From: Paul Popinjay
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo > wrote in message
>
> No, Marxism as imagined by Marx doesn't work. For one thing, it
> inevitably devolves into one-leader totalitarianism.


You say that, like it's a bad thing? How is that "Marxism doesn't work"?
Looks like it works to me. What do you mean it doesn't work? Let me tell
you something, fuck face, it WORKS!


> Governments
> require separation of powers and independence of the judiciary to be
> stable,

To be stable? What the fuck are you talking about? Is Cuba not stable? Is
North Korea not stable? I've had about enough of your shit, and your
college-boy talking points.





         
Date: 13 Feb 2009 18:09:13
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:48:11 -0800, "Paul Popinjay"
<paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net > wrote:

>"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo> wrote in message

>> No, Marxism as imagined by Marx doesn't work. For one thing, it
>> inevitably devolves into one-leader totalitarianism.

>You say that, like it's a bad thing? How is that "Marxism doesn't work"?
>Looks like it works to me. What do you mean it doesn't work? Let me tell
>you something, fuck face, it WORKS!

Wow, now who's the Communist?

>> Governments
>> require separation of powers and independence of the judiciary to be
>> stable,

>To be stable? What the fuck are you talking about? Is Cuba not stable? Is
>North Korea not stable? I've had about enough of your shit, and your
>college-boy talking points.

You spastic, palsied fuck, a government that is only stable during the
lifetime of a dictator or his retard psycho kid is NOT stable. A
government that lasts 200+ years is stable. The United States, for
example, has had continuity since 1776, which is 233 years. Every
President of the United States has succeeded another through a
(mostly) Constitutional process. Name some longer lasting governments
currently in existence, if you can, you babbling reprobate.


          
Date: 13 Feb 2009 17:19:28
From: da pickle
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
"A Man Beaten by Jacks"

> Name some longer lasting governments
> currently in existence, if you can, you babbling reprobate.

You cannot think of at least one?




           
Date: 13 Feb 2009 21:31:45
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 17:19:28 -0600, "da pickle"
<jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com > wrote:

>"A Man Beaten by Jacks"

>> Name some longer lasting governments
>> currently in existence, if you can, you babbling reprobate.

>You cannot think of at least one?

Other than the Papacy? I don't count it. Name one if you can,
instead of diddling around like a goddamn asshole.


            
Date: 14 Feb 2009 07:01:41
From: da pickle
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
"A Man Beaten by Jacks"

>>> Name some longer lasting governments
>>> currently in existence, if you can, you babbling reprobate.
>
>>You cannot think of at least one?
>
> Other than the Papacy? I don't count it. Name one if you can,
> instead of diddling around like a goddamn asshole.

I would start with the very small ... Liechtenstein.




             
Date: 14 Feb 2009 14:19:18
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 07:01:41 -0600, "da pickle"
<jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com > wrote:

>"A Man Beaten by Jacks"
>
>>>> Name some longer lasting governments
>>>> currently in existence, if you can, you babbling reprobate.
>>
>>>You cannot think of at least one?
>>
>> Other than the Papacy? I don't count it. Name one if you can,
>> instead of diddling around like a goddamn asshole.
>
>I would start with the very small ... Liechtenstein.

"During World War II, Liechtenstein remained neutral, while family
treasures within the war zone were taken to Liechtenstein (and London)
for safekeeping. At the close of the conflict, Czechoslovakia and
Poland, acting to seize what they considered to be German possessions,
expropriated the entirety of the Liechtenstein dynasty's hereditary
lands and possessions in Bohemia, Moravia, and Silesia the princes
of Liechtenstein lived in Vienna until the Anschluss of 1938."

That doesn't sound very "continuous" to me.

*BZZT* try again.


              
Date: 14 Feb 2009 14:20:32
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 14:19:18 -0500, A Man Beaten by Jacks
<nobody@fool.foo > wrote:

>On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 07:01:41 -0600, "da pickle"
><jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>"A Man Beaten by Jacks"
>>
>>>>> Name some longer lasting governments
>>>>> currently in existence, if you can, you babbling reprobate.
>>>
>>>>You cannot think of at least one?
>>>
>>> Other than the Papacy? I don't count it. Name one if you can,
>>> instead of diddling around like a goddamn asshole.
>>
>>I would start with the very small ... Liechtenstein.
>
>"During World War II, Liechtenstein remained neutral, while family
>treasures within the war zone were taken to Liechtenstein (and London)
>for safekeeping. At the close of the conflict, Czechoslovakia and
>Poland, acting to seize what they considered to be German possessions,
>expropriated the entirety of the Liechtenstein dynasty's hereditary
>lands and possessions in Bohemia, Moravia, and Silesia the princes
>of Liechtenstein lived in Vienna until the Anschluss of 1938."
>
>That doesn't sound very "continuous" to me.
>
>*BZZT* try again.

Also:

"Liechtenstein's current constitution was adopted in October 1921. It
established in Liechtenstein a constitutional monarchy headed by the
reigning prince of the Princely House of Liechtenstein. It also
established a parliamentary system, although the reigning prince
retained substantial political authority."

Also Wikipedia.

As far as I know, pickletard, 233 years is longer than 87.


               
Date: 14 Feb 2009 13:49:53
From: da pickle
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
"A Man Beaten by Jacks"

> "Liechtenstein's current constitution was adopted in October 1921. It
> established in Liechtenstein a constitutional monarchy headed by the
> reigning prince of the Princely House of Liechtenstein. It also
> established a parliamentary system, although the reigning prince
> retained substantial political authority."
>
> Also Wikipedia.
>
> As far as I know, pickletard, 233 years is longer than 87.

Wow, change your constitution and you are no longer in existence. Amazing.

Louisiana wrote their last constitution in the 1994; thought we became a
state in 1812.

I suppose you cannot even say that the "government" is the same "government"
that the United States had even last year.

Are you in law school MBbJs?




                
Date: 14 Feb 2009 14:57:49
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 13:49:53 -0600, "da pickle"
<jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com > wrote:

>"A Man Beaten by Jacks"
>
>> "Liechtenstein's current constitution was adopted in October 1921. It
>> established in Liechtenstein a constitutional monarchy headed by the
>> reigning prince of the Princely House of Liechtenstein. It also
>> established a parliamentary system, although the reigning prince
>> retained substantial political authority."
>>
>> Also Wikipedia.
>>
>> As far as I know, pickletard, 233 years is longer than 87.
>
>Wow, change your constitution and you are no longer in existence. Amazing.

You are fucking retarded. We are talking about longest continuous
governments. Try to keep up. Actually just go in my killfile with
the rest of the fucking retards.


                 
Date: 14 Feb 2009 14:03:04
From: da pickle
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
"A Man Beaten by Jacks"

So, you flunked out? It happens.




             
Date: 14 Feb 2009 08:29:25
From: James L. Hankins
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?

"da pickle" <jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:LYOdnTTepL0qXQvURVn_vwA@giganews.com...
> "A Man Beaten by Jacks"
>
>>>> Name some longer lasting governments
>>>> currently in existence, if you can, you babbling reprobate.
>>
>>>You cannot think of at least one?
>>
>> Other than the Papacy? I don't count it. Name one if you can,
>> instead of diddling around like a goddamn asshole.
>
> I would start with the very small ... Liechtenstein.


LOL...how about you start with the significant? I doubt there are any. The
Vatican is the only one I could think of off the top of my head.




              
Date: 14 Feb 2009 09:49:11
From: da pickle
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
"James L. Hankins"

> LOL...how about you start with the significant? I doubt there are any.
> The Vatican is the only one I could think of off the top of my head.

While we wait, have you thought about this?


The Vatican City is a city-state that came into existence in 1929 and is
thus clearly distinct from the central authority of the Roman Catholic
Church, known as the Holy See, which existed long before 1929. Ordinances of
Vatican City are published in Italian. Official documents of the Holy See
are issued mainly in Latin. The two entities even have distinct passports:
the Holy See, not being a country, only issues diplomatic and service
passports; the state of Vatican City issues normal passports. In both cases
the passports issued are very few.

The Lateran Treaty in 1929, which brought the city-state into existence,
spoke of it as a new creation (Preamble and Article III), not as a vestige
of the much larger Papal States (756-1870) that had previously encompassed
central Italy. Most of this territory was absorbed into the Kingdom of Italy
in 1860, and the final portion, namely the city of Rome with a small area
close to it, ten years later, in 1870.




               
Date: 14 Feb 2009 20:19:35
From: James L. Hankins
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?

"da pickle" <jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:0uadnakRn4RnegvURVn_vwA@giganews.com...
> "James L. Hankins"
>
>> LOL...how about you start with the significant? I doubt there are any.
>> The Vatican is the only one I could think of off the top of my head.
>
> While we wait, have you thought about this?
>
>
> The Vatican City is a city-state that came into existence in 1929 and is
> thus clearly distinct from the central authority of the Roman Catholic
> Church, known as the Holy See, which existed long before 1929. Ordinances
> of Vatican City are published in Italian. Official documents of the Holy
> See are issued mainly in Latin. The two entities even have distinct
> passports: the Holy See, not being a country, only issues diplomatic and
> service passports; the state of Vatican City issues normal passports. In
> both cases the passports issued are very few.
>
> The Lateran Treaty in 1929, which brought the city-state into existence,
> spoke of it as a new creation (Preamble and Article III), not as a vestige
> of the much larger Papal States (756-1870) that had previously encompassed
> central Italy. Most of this territory was absorbed into the Kingdom of
> Italy in 1860, and the final portion, namely the city of Rome with a small
> area close to it, ten years later, in 1870.



Yes. I noticed that Jacks said the Papacy rather than the Vatican, so I was
inaccurate there.




                
Date: 14 Feb 2009 21:26:50
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 20:19:35 -0600, "James L. Hankins"
<jhankins5@cox.net > wrote:

>Yes. I noticed that Jacks said the Papacy rather than the Vatican, so I was
>inaccurate there.

Yes, I generally choose my words carefully. I said Papacy for exactly
that reason. That particular stupidity of the pickletard was merely
the antepenultimate reason I decided he was too stupid to bother
communicating with any more.

I am probably more unforgiving of the pickletard's stupidities than
other stupid people on this newsgroup. After all, presumably he has
passed the bar exam and has no excuse for stupidity, so I assume it is
willful stupidity when he is stupid. He has looked at a list of
choices he has, examined them carefully, and chosen being a stupid
fuck over more intelligent options, when he is stupid. I am willing
to cut other stupid people considerably more slack. Considering their
mental limitations, they probably looked at a list of choices they had
that consisted of "be stupid, be really stupid, be gigantically
retarded," and if they choose merely to "be stupid," they are doing
the best they can.

Being a fan of Jesus, I assume he smiles upon my indulgence for the
merely stupid.


                 
Date: 16 Feb 2009 12:25:52
From: John_Brian_K
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
> I am probably more unforgiving of the pickletard's stupidities than
> other stupid people on this newsgroup. After all, presumably he has
> passed the bar exam and has no excuse for stupidity,

I know ALOT of attorneys and your statement about them NOT being stupid
because they passed the bar is laughable. For the record I do not think
Pickle is anywhere near stupid.

==========================================
You must not think me necessarily foolish because I am facetious,
nor will I consider you necessarily wise because you are grave.
==============================
47.5% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
JBK

-------
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com




                 
Date: 15 Feb 2009 05:04:21
From: Beldin the Sorcerer
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?

"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo > wrote in message
news:64vep4tb4b1dd9g6sl8ep9n1jg9r4ctg30@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 20:19:35 -0600, "James L. Hankins"
> <jhankins5@cox.net> wrote:
>. Considering their
> mental limitations, they probably looked at a list of choices they had
> that consisted of "be stupid, be really stupid, be gigantically
> retarded," and if they choose merely to "be stupid," they are doing
> the best they can.

Excuse me, the levels are "Stupid, really stupid, and wicked retahded"
I referenced this in an earlier post, with a video link.




                 
Date: 14 Feb 2009 18:55:18
From: Paul Popinjay
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo > wrote in message

I am willing
> to cut other stupid people considerably more slack. Considering their
> mental limitations, they probably looked at a list of choices they had
> that consisted of "be stupid, be really stupid, be gigantically
> retarded," and if they choose merely to "be stupid," they are doing
> the best they can.
>


I remember when I started bonus-whoring online casinos, and came upon the
very respectable and player-friendly Cryptologic Group. I remember saying
to myself, "Gee, one really has to be a stupid fucking idiot to mess THIS
up".

Don't know where I'm going with that thought, but I'm just sayin.....





               
Date: 14 Feb 2009 08:45:59
From: Paul Popinjay
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
"da pickle" <jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:0uadnakRn4RnegvURVn_vwA@giganews.com...
> "James L. Hankins"
>
>> LOL...how about you start with the significant? I doubt there are any.
>> The Vatican is the only one I could think of off the top of my head.
>
> While we wait, have you thought about this?
>
>
> The Vatican City is a city-state that came into existence in 1929 and is
> thus clearly distinct from the central authority of the Roman Catholic
> Church, known as the Holy See, which existed long before 1929. Ordinances
> of Vatican City are published in Italian. Official documents of the Holy
> See are issued mainly in Latin. The two entities even have distinct
> passports: the Holy See, not being a country, only issues diplomatic and
> service passports; the state of Vatican City issues normal passports. In
> both cases the passports issued are very few.
>
> The Lateran Treaty in 1929, which brought the city-state into existence,
> spoke of it as a new creation (Preamble and Article III), not as a vestige
> of the much larger Papal States (756-1870) that had previously encompassed
> central Italy. Most of this territory was absorbed into the Kingdom of
> Italy in 1860, and the final portion, namely the city of Rome with a small
> area close to it, ten years later, in 1870.
>

Gee Pickle, you be bitch-slapping the fuck out them today.

And by the way, I was talking to some of the homies from Liechtenstein
earlier, and they want to know if they put a foot in Jame's ass if he would
think that was "significant" or not.




                
Date: 14 Feb 2009 20:20:34
From: James L. Hankins
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?

"Paul Popinjay" <paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net > wrote in message
news:eACll.4462$PE4.4426@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...


> And by the way, I was talking to some of the homies from Liechtenstein
> earlier, and they want to know if they put a foot in Jame's ass if he
> would think that was "significant" or not.



I wouldn't mind kicking a little Liechtensteinian ass.




                
Date: 14 Feb 2009 14:05:03
From: da pickle
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
"Paul Popinjay"

> Gee Pickle, you be bitch-slapping the fuck out them today.
>
> And by the way, I was talking to some of the homies from Liechtenstein
> earlier, and they want to know if they put a foot in Jame's ass if he
> would think that was "significant" or not.

I think James is pretty smart. He gets excited sometimes.

I just got MBbJs to put me in his kill file! Wow.




              
Date: 14 Feb 2009 08:47:02
From: da pickle
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
"James L. Hankins"

>>>>> Name some longer lasting governments
>>>>> currently in existence, if you can, you babbling reprobate.
>>>
>>>>You cannot think of at least one?
>>>
>>> Other than the Papacy? I don't count it. Name one if you can,
>>> instead of diddling around like a goddamn asshole.
>>
>> I would start with the very small ... Liechtenstein.
>
> LOL...how about you start with the significant? I doubt there are any.
> The Vatican is the only one I could think of off the top of my head.

Come on, James ... put the top back on.


When Britain first, at heaven's command,
Arose from out the azure main,
Arose, arose, arose from out the a-azure main,
This was the charter, the charter of the land,
And guardian angels sang this strain:

Rule Britania!
Britannia rule the waves.
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

Rule Britannia!
Britannia rule the waves.
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

The nations, not so blest as thee,
Must in their turn, to tyrants fall,
Must in ,must in, must in their turn, to tyrants fall,
While thou shalt flourish, shalt flourish great and free,
The dread and envy of them all.
(Chorus)
Rule Britannia!
Britannia rule the waves.
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

Rule Britannia!
Britannia rule the waves.
Brittons never, never, never shall be slaves.


You can enjoy the singing here:
http://www.jilldaniels.com/rule%20britannia.htm




           
Date: 13 Feb 2009 17:06:09
From: mo_charles
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
> "A Moron Beaten by Life"
>
> > Name some longer lasting governments
> > currently in existence, if you can, you babbling reprobate.
>
> You cannot think of at least one?

what we have here, my dear pickle, is a child trying to sound smart.

mo_charles

-----
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com



        
Date: 13 Feb 2009 16:48:09
From: da pickle
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
"A Man Beaten by Jacks"

> No, Marxism as imagined by Marx doesn't work. For one thing, it
> inevitably devolves into one-leader totalitarianism. Governments
> require separation of powers and independence of the judiciary to be
> stable, whether their economic system is socialist or capitalist. Pure
> forms of socialism and capitalism simply don't work, because there are
> many things a market does efficiently that a state can't do at all, or
> does so poorly that the entire economy collapses if you try to do them
> purely through the state. Similarly, an unregulated economy also
> eventually flies out of control and collapses.

What you say you believe here is not supported by your other postings.




      
Date: 12 Feb 2009 21:36:40
From: risky biz
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Feb 12 2009 10:20 PM, A Man Beaten by Jacks wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 20:06:28 -0800, "Paul Popinjay"
> <paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> >"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo> wrote in message
>
> >>>Why do you care? You've made it well known on this newsgroup that Stalin
> >>>was one of your idols.
>
> >> Stalin was NOT one of my idols, you fuckface, but a contemptible
> >> traitor who hijacked the Bolshevik Revolution. You prove that when I
> >> respond to you, I am responding to a troll, when you say absurd things
> >> like this.
>
> >First of all, let me make one thing perfectly clear. I am not a troll.
>
> So what IS your name for what you are, then?
>
> >And
> >now that we are clear on that issue, let me ask you, did you not at one
time
> >post a link to a youtube video that was extremely complimentary of Stalin?
>
> I was fucking with you.
>
> >Did you, or did you not? If you want to say now that you were not a fan of
> >Stalin, then I will accept you at your word. But now, in this very post
> >that I am replying to, you seem to "instead" be a fan of the Bolshevik
> >Revolution. May I then assume that implies you are a fan of Lenin? Could
I
> >then exchange the name "Lenin" for my previous use of the name "Stalin"?
>
> Lenin committed the same error as Robespierre before him, allowing his
> revolution to be hijacked. As Napoleon was to Robespierre, so was
> Stalin to Lenin.
>
> I'd be more of a fan of Trotsky, who had the sense to get the fuck out
> when things went south. Of course, he still ended up with an ice-axe
> in his skull.
>
> >Would that also be "absurd", as you called it? Yes? Or no? Do you
> >honestly believe the Bolshevik Revolution intended to honor human rights,
> >and then was somehow "hijacked" by Stalin? How about Mao's revolution?
Yay
> >or nay, where do you stand on Mao? Fanboy? Or no fanboy? Please answer
> >these questions, before I re-examine my opinion on whether you should be
> >commenting on the rights of this muslim woman in the article.
>
> Mao was a mass murdering scumbag. Also a revolutionary genius. Too
> bad he couldn't have been one without the other.

The Chinese peasants were the revolutionary geniuses. Mao Tse Tsung was
just a murdering scumbag.

--------
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com



       
Date: 13 Feb 2009 23:18:03
From: Robert Ladd
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?

"risky biz" <risky-biz@sbcglobal.net > wrote in message
news:8gdf66xuid.ln2@recgroups.com...
>
> The Chinese peasants were the revolutionary geniuses. Mao Tse Tsung was
> just a murdering scumbag.
>

Anyone that believes genius can be attributed to groups is ridiculously
naive.

Robert Ladd




        
Date: 13 Feb 2009 22:30:03
From: Clave
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
"Robert Ladd" <rladd5@cox.net > wrote in message
news:gn5nmq$6v8$1@news.motzarella.org...
>
> "risky biz" <risky-biz@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:8gdf66xuid.ln2@recgroups.com...
>>
>> The Chinese peasants were the revolutionary geniuses. Mao Tse Tsung was
>> just a murdering scumbag.
>>
>
> Anyone that believes genius can be attributed to groups is ridiculously
> naive.

One overbroad generalization isn't refuted by another.

Name a Manhattan project physicist who wasn't, in your opinion, a genius.
Then tell us why not.

Or instead, back up and tell us that by "groups" you meant something a whole
lot more specific, and how it should have been obvious in context.

Jim




     
Date: 12 Feb 2009 23:13:10
From: James L. Hankins
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?

"Paul Popinjay" <paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net > wrote in message
news:Nj6ll.1869$Lr6.1102@flpi143.ffdc.sbc.com...
> "A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo> wrote in message
> news:kjm9p4pmuvjgiunm0e9p8u1cr9g4k88ith@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:07:34 -0800, "Paul Popinjay"
>> <paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>
>>
>>>Why do you care? You've made it well known on this newsgroup that Stalin
>>>was one of your idols.
>>
>> Stalin was NOT one of my idols, you fuckface, but a contemptible
>> traitor who hijacked the Bolshevik Revolution. You prove that when I
>> respond to you, I am responding to a troll, when you say absurd things
>> like this.
>>
>
> First of all, let me make one thing perfectly clear. I am not a troll.
> And now that we are clear on that issue, let me ask you, did you not at
> one time post a link to a youtube video that was extremely complimentary
> of Stalin? Did you, or did you not? If you want to say now that you were
> not a fan of Stalin, then I will accept you at your word. But now, in
> this very post that I am replying to, you seem to "instead" be a fan of
> the Bolshevik Revolution. May I then assume that implies you are a fan of
> Lenin? Could I then exchange the name "Lenin" for my previous use of the
> name "Stalin"? Would that also be "absurd", as you called it? Yes? Or
> no? Do you honestly believe the Bolshevik Revolution intended to honor
> human rights, and then was somehow "hijacked" by Stalin? How about Mao's
> revolution? Yay or nay, where do you stand on Mao? Fanboy? Or no
> fanboy? Please answer these questions, before I re-examine my opinion on
> whether you should be commenting on the rights of this muslim woman in the
> article.
>
> -Paul Popinjay



I posted a serious question about Islam and you shitheels have hijacked it
with all this commie talk. I posted a serious question and I expect an
answer.

If this thread continues with discussions about this Bolshevik bullshit I
will be forced to take steps.




      
Date: 12 Feb 2009 21:24:01
From: Paul Popinjay
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
"James L. Hankins" <jhankins5@cox.net > wrote in message
news:Gj7ll.79$xK6.15@newsfe12.iad...
>

>
> I posted a serious question about Islam and you shitheels have hijacked it
> with all this commie talk. I posted a serious question and I expect an
> answer.
>
> If this thread continues with discussions about this Bolshevik bullshit I
> will be forced to take steps.

I think I could have just as easily taken issue with YOUR apparent concern
over abuse of a fellow human being. You have made no secret out of your
liberal persuasion, and I find it quite suspect that anyone on your "side of
the aisle" could seriously be concerned about people. For whatever reason,
I instead chose to take issue with Man Beaten by Jacks, perhaps due to his
seeming to be the more militant in his subversive beliefs out of the two of
you, not to mention that he is also the most obnoxious. And besides, he's
an ass hat.

-PP




       
Date: 13 Feb 2009 13:08:45
From: James L. Hankins
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?

"Paul Popinjay" <paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net > wrote in message
news:Ds7ll.1871$Lr6.574@flpi143.ffdc.sbc.com...
> "James L. Hankins" <jhankins5@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:Gj7ll.79$xK6.15@newsfe12.iad...
>>
>
>>
>> I posted a serious question about Islam and you shitheels have hijacked
>> it with all this commie talk. I posted a serious question and I expect
>> an answer.
>>
>> If this thread continues with discussions about this Bolshevik bullshit I
>> will be forced to take steps.
>
> I think I could have just as easily taken issue with YOUR apparent concern
> over abuse of a fellow human being. You have made no secret out of your
> liberal persuasion, and I find it quite suspect that anyone on your "side
> of the aisle" could seriously be concerned about people. For whatever
> reason, I instead chose to take issue with Man Beaten by Jacks, perhaps
> due to his seeming to be the more militant in his subversive beliefs out
> of the two of you, not to mention that he is also the most obnoxious. And
> besides, he's an ass hat.
>
> -PP



See? You have persisted even after being warned. Don't think I won't go to
the Complaint Department.




        
Date: 13 Feb 2009 13:26:43
From: Paul Popinjay
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
"James L. Hankins" <jhankins5@cox.net > wrote in message

>
> See? You have persisted even after being warned. Don't think I won't go
> to the Complaint Department.


Yes, but I AM the Complaint Department.





         
Date: 13 Feb 2009 16:38:01
From: James L. Hankins
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?

"Paul Popinjay" <paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net > wrote in message
news:3Blll.20325$Ws1.10729@nlpi064.nbdc.sbc.com...
> "James L. Hankins" <jhankins5@cox.net> wrote in message
>
>>
>> See? You have persisted even after being warned. Don't think I won't go
>> to the Complaint Department.
>
>
> Yes, but I AM the Complaint Department.


Oh crap.




    
Date: 12 Feb 2009 21:25:14
From: FL Turbo
Subject: Re: Is this story accurate?
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 21:29:02 -0500, A Man Beaten by Jacks
<nobody@fool.foo > wrote:

>On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:07:34 -0800, "Paul Popinjay"
><paulpopinjay@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>>"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo> wrote in message
>
>>> This is standard policy in Saudi Arabia, which adheres to the vilest
>>> and most despicable brand of Sharia. Amputations, torture, and
>>> beating are considered perfectly acceptable judicial practice, as is
>>> executing rape victims.
>
>>Why do you care? You've made it well known on this newsgroup that Stalin
>>was one of your idols.
>
>Stalin was NOT one of my idols, you fuckface, but a contemptible
>traitor who hijacked the Bolshevik Revolution. You prove that when I
>respond to you, I am responding to a troll, when you say absurd things
>like this.
>

Yes, I see.
You are one of those incurable Commies who think that the next time
will be different.

When the next Communist Regime takes over a country, they will get it
right next time, and everything will be wonderful.

Now, I don't have anything against Idealists.
They are some wonderfully caring people.
It's just when they try to run things, it just never does seem to come
up to expectations.

Oh well.
Maybe next time.

>>Why do you care about ANY human beings? I find your
>>supposed concern somewhat suspect.
>
>Yes, but that is because you are intoxicated from all the spunk you
>inhale from Satan's cock.

That's quite ironic, coming from a Bolshevist.