An interview with Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Feisal. "Saudi Arabia is changing at an incredibly quick pace," he says. Looks as if he's right, eh? Wow! Women drivers! Of course, it isn't legal yet. From Spiegel Online, with thanks to Gabrielle Goldwater:
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Saudi Arabia has continually delayed implementing urgently needed reforms. Why is it going so slowly and why are reformers having such a hard time of it?Saud al-Feisal: Saudi Arabia is changing at an incredibly quick pace, but we can't allow ourselves any experiments. The primary goal of the government is to strengthen the inner cohesion of our country. Even the western democracies didn't develop within just a few years. It took centuries, for example, until Great Britain gave women the vote.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: The nation's founder, Abd al-Asis Ibn Saud, and your father, King Feisal, introduced girl's schools, telephones and television against the opposition of the conservatives. But today, the government can't even seem to push the concept of driver's licenses for women through.
Saud al-Feisal: In the 1950s or 60s, it was also much easier to introduce the telephone or telegraph than it is to allow women to drive today. It is a cultural and a societal question that is faced with deep-seated opposition.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Do you, personally, support the idea?
Saud al-Feisal: I am for it. Not just for philosophical and political reasons, but also for practical ones. It is not a religious question. Nowhere in the Koran is it written that women are not allowed to drive cars. In any case, there are many other -- and more important -- rights that have to be granted to women; like the right to vote, for example or the right to follow the career path they wish. There is also nothing in the Koran that would speak against these reforms either.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: In mid-May, religious judges sentenced three Saudi intellectuals to six, seven and nine years in prison because they demanded that Saudi Arabia be transformed into a constitutional monarchy. Human rights groups are outraged.
Saud al-Feisal: I cannot speak about the judges in detail, but I was in fact disturbed by the fact that human rights observers were expelled from the court room during this trial. The federal prosecutor who was representing the government in the case pled for them to be admitted as observers.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Does that not clearly show that the religious authorities in Saudi Arabia have the last word today?
Saud al-Feisal: The power of religion is not a negative power to us; rather, it is, as Crown Prince Abdullah repeatedly points out, a power that we must use in order to keep together our society. Where we do have a problem is with takfir -- in other words, the tendency to denigrate people who think differently as heretics, as apostates ...
SPIEGEL ONLINE: ... and by declaring holy war against them. Between 2,000 and 3,000 Saudi residents are currently in Iraq fighting for the jihad. Does that alarm you?
Saud al-Feisal: We are very alarmed by that and we are doing our best to cut off recruitment in our country and to dry up their funding sources. Our border with Iraq is secure and the Iraqi government has now agreed to provide us with lists of Saudi citizens currently in Iraq. That is very good because as soon as we know we are dealing with one of our own citizens, we can help.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Why is it that so many young Saudis turn their backs on their homeland to fight in foreign wars as Mujahedeen?
Saud al-Feisal: It is related to the images they see every day that come out of Iraq and Palestine. They consider what they see there to be an unjust war against Muslims. And in this part of the world, the principle of justice is of fundamental meaning. If a Saudi Arabian feels that he is being treated fairly, according to the same standards that are also valid for everyone else, he will always accept it. However, if he feels an injustice is being inflicted upon him, he will battle against it until his death. These days, you can't just proceed against terrorism using the military. The problems in Iraq and Palestine have been thrusted upon us. They must be solved politically.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Twenty three years ago, King Fahd proposed a peace plan for the Israel-Palestine conflict. Nothing ever became of it.
Saud al-Feisal: There will be no peace as long as long as the conflicting parties don't make compromises and move towards each other. From where we are at today, we consider it to be Israel's move.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Israel is now going to withdraw from the Gaza Strip.
Saud al-Feisal: That could be a good first step, if it is followed by others. But it will not be enough if other problems are not solved -- especially the Israeli settlements in the West Bank.
In other words, if Israel capitulates further, we will make more progress.
Slick bast*rd.
/But then, aren't spokespeople all?
Saud al-Feisal shows some courage here, but in the face of the bogeyman "culture" he quivers.
On the question of granting women the right to drive, he says, "It is a cultural and a societal question that is faced with deep-seated opposition."
In the next paragraph he says, "It is not a religious question."
And he goes on to confirm that the Koran does not oppose women driving cars. Given that cars didn't exist then, this seems like a reasonable conclusion.
OK - so that seems to eliminate the perceived religious opposition to this. That leaves, as he says, "cultural and societal" reasons.
But as well as caving in to what he obviously regards as untouchable cultural mores, he cannot seem to address directly the fact that these cultural and societal reasons, although perhaps not originating with the Koran, have been reinforced by centuries of misogyny inspired by the Koran.
What is it about the word "culture" that causes people to back-off? Even educated, well-informed people cower at the mention of the word, as though it were a holy rite, never to be tampered with. Culture, as any anthropologist will confirm, is an ever-changing collection of elements distinctive to a particular group. Time moves on and the elements change, and will continue to change - they aren't written in stone.
With change comes resistance, but holding on to folk elements (language, dress, food) is one thing; holding on to cruel, oppressive practices is another.
Saud al-Feisal doesn't have the courage to take on these issues, that's obvious, although given the reality of his government, he shows a surprising frankness. He advocates going slowly on any reforms. Why? Would all hell break loose? I think it just might.
He refers more than once to the importance of holding the country together - and that he sees as being the role of religion. Is there a fear here of revolt? Or just the possibility that the country will implode upon itself as the corrupt Roman Empire once did?
So.
Start a list of the things Saudi women are prevented from getting, becoming, doing, being, etc.:
Driving a car.
Riding a motorcycle.
Piloting an airplane.
Becoming an astronaut.
Commanding a submarine or a surface ship.
Traveling without permission.
Dating.
"SPIEGEL ONLINE: Why is it that so many young Saudis turn their backs on their homeland to fight in foreign wars as Mujahedeen?
Saud al-Feisal: It is related to the images they see every day that come out of Iraq and Palestine. They consider what they see there to be an unjust war against Muslims. And in this part of the world, the principle of justice is of fundamental meaning. If a Saudi Arabian feels that he is being treated fairly, according to the same standards that are also valid for everyone else, he will always accept it. However, if he feels an injustice is being inflicted upon him, he will battle against it until his death. . . ."
The principle of justice in that part of the world? How many churches and temples are in the Magic Kingdom?
Pure hypocrisy from a speaker for the Religion of Hypocrisy.
"Nowhere in the Koran is it written that women are not allowed to drive cars."
-- from the article above, quoting Saudi Foreign Minister Saud el-Faisal
How true. And the Qur'an does not contain an explicit message that women are not allowed to fly planes, or travel on rockets into space. Can Saud el-Faisal figure out why?
Allow me to breathe some much needed balance into the blog just so its at least here.
Jen: "in the face of the bogeyman "culture" he quivers."
King: You are indeed correct. S.A., among other nations in that part of the world, has a lot of ancient, deeply rooted cultural issues to work through. Women's issues are clearly in the middle ages and this is not an Islamic issue at all.
I remind you that in some nations that do not share the Arab cultural ideation, women have risen to be presidents. Indonesia, for example, has many, many Muslims.
These issues are on the change but they have to be done slowly and methodically to prevent backlash from certain volitile conservative groups. Patience is a virtue.
Jen: "On the question of granting women the right to drive, he says, "It is a cultural and a societal question that is faced with deep-seated opposition."
In the next paragraph he says, "It is not a religious question."
King: This is correct, as I've stated above.
Jen: "he cannot seem to address directly the fact that these cultural and societal reasons, although perhaps not originating with the Koran, have been reinforced by centuries of misogyny inspired by the Koran."
King: I am not sure where you are jumping to conclude that the Koran "inspires" lack of women's rights/misogyny. I think you are confusing things that are distinctly cultural and customary with religious dogma. Indeed, this can be tricky.
Jen: "What is it about the word "culture" that causes people to back-off?"
King: Good question. Perhaps this is because that culture, in and of itself, is quite a powerful influence that shapes society. One must respect it and be suspicious of it at all times, and one must be fully knowledgable of it before jumping to conclusions. Neither of us is fully knowledgable of the subtlties of Saudi culture so we should simply understand that they sure aren't Western.
For example, lets take the 'culture' Within the Catholic Church, which prevents women from becoming priests. Lets take the 'culture' that prevents gays from having marriage rights in almost every state in the US. Let us take the 'culture' that says you must sing the Star Spangled Banner before every baseball game. Etc.
Jen: "With change comes resistance, but holding on to folk elements (language, dress, food) is one thing; holding on to cruel, oppressive practices is another."
King: You are viewing at least the women's rights issues through Western eyes. You see the lack of driving as "cruel and oppressive" and some Saudi women see it as "normal." The Koran does not say "Women cannot drive a car, camel, or donkey."
My purpose here is not to take sides, but just to offer balance (contrary to what the peanut gallery is going to say).
Jen: "He refers more than once to the importance of holding the country together - and that he sees as being the role of religion. Is there a fear here of revolt? Or just the possibility that the country will implode upon itself as the corrupt Roman Empire once did?"
King: You are sort of answering your own questions, correctly, but then rejecting the answers with sarcasm.
The #1 job of any leader worth the suit on their back is to hold a country together. In order to tackle issues such as women's rights, changs must be filtered through slowly and methodically to prevent volitile flare ups that are known to happen in Arab culture. Once again, this is neither right nor wrong, its it just the way it is.
I was in Jordan about 5 years ago and after having a coffee, I was walking back to my hotel. I past what sounded like an escalating argument, almost as if they were going to clear chairs and brawl. I asked someone what was going on and he said "Oh, this is a normal discussion about a football match and a few men are disagreeing." To my western ears, this sounded like a fight brewing and I had to get the hell outta there or end up with a two-piece to the face.
My point is that passionate opinions run deep in Arab culture, even for things as stupid as a football match. Imagine the passions that run in things like politics, justice, religion...
Wasn't Mohammad's first wife a driver?
(Of camels?)
The Saudis just need to have the Koreans build them a special model of automobile for the Meccan market:
The Hyundai "Dromedary" -for the men (two humps).
And the KIA "Bactrian for the women (one hump... since women are only worth half of a man in Islam.)
Hell, they should make me a temporary imam.
I could straighten out this whole religion in 6 months.
They only need that one ingredient which has been drilled out of their skulls (like the oil being drilled out of their lands): imagination.
BigSnore: "I could straighten out this whole religion in 6 months."
King: I am sure you can! All you need to do is go to the Middle East, learn Arabic so you can read about the religion, culture and customs inside and out, learn about the reasons for radicalism and understand why they're there and you'll be on your way to saving Islam, the religion you love to hate!
Oh, yeah - don't give up your day job, either. Your jokes not only suck but also who your complete ignorance and bogotry.
This is a two part problem.
First: Islam.
Muhammad created and manufactured both Allah and the Quran. And Muhammad, a mere mortal, could not foresee the invention of automobiles, or engine driven ships, or airplanes, or rockets, or satellites. And he knew nothing of the seas, the lands, the languages, or the civilizations that existed beyond the known, limited horizons of his time and place. Thus, no specific mention of those things or places in the Quran.
Second: Culture.
Arabian culture, thousands of years old, prevents women from doing that which men have determined they should not. The Islamic ideology invented by Muhammad, has justified their misogyiny to this day.
KingTolerance:
It seems I've touched on a hot spot with the mention of culture. Arguing (whether by you or by me) about semantics will not change the situation in Saudi Arabia.
First of all, you must know that when referring to Saudi culture I was not limiting my remarks to just the ban on women driving.
I referred to the Saudi treatment of women in general: lax birth registration for newborn girls, especially outside of the major cities, thereby facilitating the "disappearance" of female babies, the dropping of concrete blocks on the heads of female adulterers as a form of execution (a cultural practice held on Thursdays in the city centres, and "cruel" and "oppressive" would actually be too mild as adjectives here), the enforced severe restrictions on clothing, working, marriage, activities, etc.
My main point was that Saud al-Faisal had sidestepped the issue by passing the problem (the ban on women driving) off as a cultural issue and thereby throwing up his hands. He implied that religion he could tackle, culture he couldn't.
You also must know that culture does not exist in a vacuum: yes, it is definitely influenced by religion. It is impossible to separate them.
In the case of the Koran and its attitudes to women - they probably derived from the previous cultures' treatment of women dating back to Assyrian times at least. At what point did the cultural cruelty practised by the ancient Assyrians towards females become religious dogma? At around the time when Muhammed had his version of them incorporated into the Koran? Maybe earlier - with the Jews and yes, the Christians too? How influenced was St. Paul by his culture (he was born in Tarsus, now part of modern Turkey)?. Is this why he ordered women to cover their heads in church and submit to their husbands? We can't deny that this (the origin of his thinking) sounds feasible. I don't recollect Christ giving such orders, and he was one who managed to rise above his culture, and of course, he paid the price.
You say, "Culture shapes society." It's the other way around: society, made up of living people, shapes culture. Culture is not alive, it is inanimate. My point was that cultures can, and do, change. But the initial change must happen at the level of the individual. Small, incremental changes in individual thinking can lead to massive cultural change.
The culture I referred to was the overarching culture of a people or a nation - made up of religion, language, art, politics, etc. With this meaning in mind, I couldn't refer to the "culture within the Catholic Church", for example, as you do. As I said before, it's the other way around.
Frankly, if I were a woman in Saudi Arabia right now, I would have run out of the patience you advise. Did Lincoln advise the slaves to have patience? Every day in slavery is unbearable. But sadly for some black slaves, slavery was also seen as normal, just as the ban on driving is see as normal as you suggest by some Saudi women. "Normal" does not mean "ethical" nor does it mean "fair."
Please don't interpret that to mean that I equate a ban on driving with slavery; of course I don't, but the ban is one component in a life of subservience.
Do you have any idea how much courage and mental energy it would take a Saudi woman to speak out against her oppressors? Having been born into a life of subjugation and discrimination, only an unusually strong person could break the bonds.
And yes, some Muslim countries have had women leaders, for example Tansu Ciller, former Prime Minister of Turkey. You see this as proof that the Saudi treatment of women is culturally, not religiously based. I see this more as an indication of varying degrees of oppression. In spite of Tansu Ciller, so-called "honor-killings" continue in Turkey, woman abuse is rampant and seen as "normal," polygamy is still practised, the double-standard is blatantly imposed within the expectations of male and female behaviour, etc. But Turkey is definitely more "enlightened" than Saudi Arabia.
From your comfortable spot it's easy for you to warn against too rapid change in countries such as Saudi Arabia, in fear of backlash, as you say. If fundamentalists can influence your behviour, and the Saudi government's policies, in this way, then they are in control.
Jen: "It seems I've touched on a hot spot with the mention of culture."
King: Not so much a "hot spot" as i is one of the keys to understanding the non western mentality.
Jen: "Arguing (whether by you or by me) about semantics will not change the situation in Saudi Arabia."
King: Agreed! The first step to actually getting something done however, is discussion and dissection. Cracking very, very stupid jokes about kinds of cars shows just what most are capable of, though. Nothing.
Jen: "First of all, you must know that when referring to Saudi culture I was not limiting my remarks to just the ban on women driving."
King: Neither was I. I am fully aware of the wide range of what we Westerners see as female oppression. I do not like it either, but, I see this as part of a very ancient culture that simply has to get with the times. It will.
Jen: "My main point was that Saud al-Faisal had sidestepped the issue by passing the problem (the ban on women driving) off as a cultural issue and thereby throwing up his hands. He implied that religion he could tackle, culture he couldn't."
King: I disagree. I did not read this as a "throwing up of the hands." I read it simply as an interview for the information of the Western media. Why things are the way they are, why things move as they do, and why it will not change overnight.
Jen: "You also must know that culture does not exist in a vacuum: yes, it is definitely influenced by religion. It is impossible to separate them."
King: I am acutely aware of culture and religion intertwining - a phenomenon that is all too prevalent in the Arab world. However, it takes an equally acute sense of the bigger picture to see things like women's rights and other basic human rights issues not as Westerners, but as Arabs.
Jen: "At what point did the cultural cruelty practised by the ancient Assyrians towards females become religious dogma?"
King: I have read many, many passages in the Koran that seem to uphold the woman, make her equal, make her maternal. I remind you of Christianity's difficulties with granting women equal footing within the Church.
I also remind you of women holding positions of high office in predominately Muslim nations like Indonesia.
Jen: "My point was that cultures can, and do, change. But the initial change must happen at the level of the individual. Small, incremental changes in individual thinking can lead to massive cultural change."
King: My point too, we're saying the same thing but you are trying to blame. Blame Islam! Blame culture! Blame, blame, blame! I am trying to understand and fascilitate the change. First step it to quit blaming, hating, making fun, and the other completely inane and counterproductive things people like to do when te cannot/will not get it. You are beginning to see the changes unfold now. Patience!
Jen: "Frankly, if I were a woman in Saudi Arabia right now, I would have run out of the patience you advise."
King: You are making this decsion with the brain of a Westerner. Of course you see it this way!
Jen: "Normal" does not mean "ethical" nor does it mean "fair."
King: Of course not and I already said that I hate the lack of women's rights in many Arab nations. I also applaud the strides women have made in many Arab nations. Many women ran for office in Afghanistan's elections last Fall. My understanding of the woman's plight, however, is bolstered when I also realize what has lead up to this and how it can be changed.
Jen: "Do you have any idea how much courage and mental energy it would take a Saudi woman to speak out against her oppressors?"
King: I have an idea, yes. Do you? Perhaps this could explain why the process is so slow.
Jen: And yes, some Muslim countries have had women leaders...you see this as proof that the Saudi treatment of women is culturally, not religiously based. I see this more as an indication of varying degrees of oppression."
King: I'm afraid I do not follow your logic here. Varying degrees of oppression? Can you please elaborate on this one?
Jen: "From your comfortable spot it's easy for you to warn against too rapid change in countries such as Saudi Arabia, in fear of backlash, as you say"
King: Equally, from your "comfortable spot", it is easy for you to blame, blame, blame. I substantiate my position with understanding the bigger picture and "peeling the onion." You work backwards, and blame Islam, and see how this religion has managed to make this the way they are.
Jen: "If fundamentalists can influence your behviour, and the Saudi government's policies, in this way, then they are in control."
King: A simplistic position based on lack of understanding on how the Arab world works. Corruption in government AND religion work hand in hand to allow radical ideations to take hold and be as tenacious as they are. This has been ongoing for centuris and is only now catching up.
Like it or not, fundamentalist extremists are there and need to be dealt with. They are volitile, radical and can resort to militant behavior. They must be handled carefully. There needs to be strong leadership within these nations and THEY NEED THE HELP FROM THE WEST IF THEY ARE GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE. When the radical influences are removed, moderation can thrive.
Blame not the religion.
King: blame not the religion.
The religion itself was started by a psychopath. Why would there NOT be radical extremists in Islam?
The fact that there are moderates at all is nothing short of amazing.
Speaking of the Saudis,here's a short piece out of a OP/ED in the Toronto Sun paper that deals with the limp-wristed responses to Canadians being tortured in Middle East Islamic Nations and note the denial or fear to be critical of Islam.
**************************************************
Remember Bill Sampson, the Canadian framed for murder in Saudi Arabia and held in solitary confinement for two years, tortured and sentenced to death?
Foreign Affairs Minister Bill Graham (now transferred to the defence portfolio, God help our army!) didn't believe Sampson was being tortured, but did believe the Saudi ambassador who said with a straight face that torture is forbidden in Saudi Arabia (although chopping off hands and heads isn't).
Sampson was freed after a couple of years and is still angry and appalled at Canada's blase attitude.
**************************************************
Torture is forbidden?
Torture is the foundation of Muhammeds fabricated quasi religion,the humiliation and debasing in public to Females in Saudi Arabia is psychological torture according to the UN and any Country that values Human Rights and personal Liberty.
Also , the Saudis have hacked off the heads of close to 50 people last year that they deemed sinners in the eyes of Allah and had to be punished. Their argument for it was that they use a sharp sword that beheads the person in a Humane way with one quick smite to the neck.
These are the people we are dealing with and the wealthy elitist Judges and Politicians just don't get it,CAIR's sensitivity training would not have stopped the 9/11 slaughter by Wahhabi
Muslims from Saudi Arabia and will not stop future attempts to kill more civilians.
CAIR only wants to wash their hands clean of the connection they have to aiding and abetting terrorism,CAIR blames the victim for inciting
Muslim to resort to terrorism.
So I guess the perception of Muslim by infidels is accurate,Muslims are pre-disposed to paranoia and denial while not having the intelligence to
resolve issue without the usual murdering of civilians to defend their version of reality.
"Blame not the religion. "
Posted by: KingTolerance
Would you extend the same courtesy to Christianity?
"I have read many, many passages in the Koran that seem to uphold the woman, make her equal, make her maternal."
Please list these many, many passages
and tell us what translation of the koran
you read. Thank you.
King: I have read many, many passages in the Koran that seem to uphold the woman, make her equal, make her maternal. I remind you of Christianity's difficulties with granting women equal footing within the Church.
You mean equal minus clitoris and the right to inherit or testify in a court of law?
King: Equally, from your "comfortable spot", it is easy for you to blame, blame, blame. I substantiate my position with understanding the bigger picture and "peeling the onion." You work backwards, and blame Islam, and see how this religion has managed to make this the way they are.
King's at it again...It must be great to have "right" continually on your side. What an ego massager it must be to denounce those who dont think as you do. To call them bigots, racists and haters, must make a shiver go up your spine.(not so far on this thread, but on others).
You obviously have a superiority complex, " I substantiate my position with understanding the big picture...". Like no one else see's the big picture quite as well as you do. You're auto-stimulating yourself under the guise of civilized debate, which is not really all that civilized. Have you decended into hell? Are you preaching to demons? Are you an Avatar? Did Allah send you? Are you Al-Mahdi?
If the answer to those questions is yes or no, you have big problems my boy.
You need help. Post your real name and adress and I will send you a free book, "Duh swami's guide to ending confusion and getting a grip on yourself." With well researched chapters on "how to stop bed wetting". How to live with bed wetting if you fail to stop it". "How to deal with a spouses reaction." and finally, "What about Bob?"
I am not attacking you King...I'm just trying to help you. If you try and stay up on that pedestal, someone is going to knock you off it.
Remember Humpty Dumpty...he thought he could sit on that wall too, now look at at him...all cracked up...send for the book...
Google searches...
Interesting! Google stoning women Christianity and the first thing that comes up?
Archbishop Proposes to Die in Place of Woman Sentenced to Stoning ...
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2002/107/13.0.html
Not quite the same for ANY country with high islamic populations (or governments):
Results 1 - 10 of about 88,200 for stoning women islam.
http://www.rawa.org/htimes.htm
http://au.news.yahoo.com/050620/21/urz2.html
http://www.religioustolerance.org/isl_adul1.htm
http://www.csmonitor.com/atcsmonitor/specials/women/world/world082202.html
http://www.middleastwomen.org/html/lethal.htm
http://www.pioneerthinking.com/cgi-bin/mb/YaBB.pl?board=religion;action=display;num=1114368780
http://www.mask.org.za/Archive%20Web%20Files/Updated%20060601/Sections/AfricaPerCountry/somalia/somalia.html
http://pgoh.free.fr/stoning.html
I could go on all night with these links. However I already know kt's response, so I'd rather spend time with my wife, who is my Equal under God's teachings in the Bible, just as she deserves to be.
Night all!
Voltaire: "The religion itself was started by a psychopath."
King: There are 1.2 billion people who would disagree. Your opinion stifles you.
Voltaire: "The fact that there are moderates at all is nothing short of amazing."
King: See my answer above.
Carolyn2 asked: "Would you extend the same courtesy [blame not the religion] to Christianity?"
King: Yes. A radical interpretation is a radical interpretation. There are equally disturbing things in Christian scripture that have been radicalized.
Poetess: "Please list these many, many passages
and tell us what translation of the koran
you read. Thank you."
King: Here are a few as translated from an Arabic Koran by one of my dear friends, Arshad, a gentle and educated fellow from Qatar:
Koran 33:35
"God has prepared a forgiveness and great reward for the submitting men and women, the believing men and women, the pious men and women, the truthful men and women, the humble men and women, the charitable men and women, the fastring men and women, the men and women who gurad their chastity, the men and women who remember God frequently."
Koran 4:7
"Men shall have a share in what parents and kinsfolk leave behind, whether it be little or much and women shall have a share in what parents and kinsfolk leave behind, whether it be little or much - a share ordained by God."
Koran 58:1
"God has indeed heard the words of her who pleads with theee concerning her husband."
The Koran makes clear distinction that men and women are equal and due basic rights. It is custom and culture that has eroded at women's rights and corrupt government that has allowed it to be so.
and finally......
"Duh" warbled: "Have you decended into hell? Are you preaching to demons? Are you an Avatar? Did Allah send you? Are you Al-Mahdi?
If the answer to those questions is yes or no, you have big problems my boy."
King replies (while laughing): When reading posts like yours, it is absolutely no wonder why I can stick out my chest and feel "superior."
You may continue chasing your tail, M'Lud.
"Duh" threatened: "If you try and stay up on that pedestal, someone is going to knock you off it."
King shrugs off: Sadly it is not you and it bugs the hell out of you, doesn't it? Here's a hint to you: I think you are an absoulte ass. Along with several others, your posts border on psychotic and your ability to comprehend an opposing point of view is severely limited, let alone being able to understand a foreign culture and religion. Your moniker is even a hint as to what I'm dealing with - a complete buffoon!Unless you have any thoughts on engaging me in a civil, meaningful debate or exchange of ideas I will take your posts and play word hockey with them since that's what I think they're worth. Fair enough?
"Duh" offers: "Post your real name and adress and I will send you a free book, "Duh swami's guide to ending confusion and getting a grip on yourself." "
King replies:
Send that book to: George W. Bush
1300 Pennsylvania Ave
Washington, DC
I am sure he needs to read whatever it is you have to say more than I....
The Koran makes clear distinction that men and women are equal and due basic rights. It is custom and culture that has eroded at women's rights and corrupt government that has allowed it to be so.~ kt
And it is the Immams of Every Single muslim nation who back those customs and culture, by quoting the koran.
Every single muslim nation.
Show me one that does not.
Oh, great poohbah king, thank you for those many, many koran verses that "seem to uphold women and make her equal. . ."
Surely those are the ones that are used in the the mohammedan court to prove that a woman's testimony is as much as a man's and that she can't be beaten for not submitting to her husband wish when he wants to take a second or third or fourth wife. How merciful is your tribal god.
King Tut Tut-
Make that 3 months.
You've got "El Mohkh Tasumom".
(And by "bogotry" are you referring to the medieval Manichean mystical heresey from Eastern Europe known as the Bogomils?)
Humor is like an electrical circuit.
You need positive and negative to make it charge.
You're heavy on the negative.
Check your tolerances.
(Khal-lee el Ba-ee Ah-lah Sha-nuk.)
( Or is it 'Sha-nik'?)
BigSleep :
Since Imams are A-sexual and are too ugly to get a woman here on Earth,Kia makes the "Flat Bed"
camel special known as "Humphrey" (Hump-Free) and it comes with vinyle seats and no A/C just to remind them there ain't a chance in hell of getting laid.
kt~ we understand you also have a life, however we are still waiting for actual answers to our questions.
kt~ we understand you also have a life, however we are still waiting for actual, real answers to our questions.
Don't you guys wonder why "King Tolerance" NEVER posts at JW? Maybe because he can't argue against the facts of what is happening?
It's easier to pick on the dhimmis/potential future dhimmis.
Poetess: "Oh, great poohbah king, thank you for those many, many koran verses that "seem to uphold women and make her equal. . .""
King: You're welcome! Not surprised that you take issue with the selections, though. How 'bout a poem to sum up your disgust? I am sure you'll feel much better. Nevertheless, I am the one who sat with my friend to examine the Koran for the above verses and interpret their meaning, not you.
Gary queried: "we understand you also have a life, however we are still waiting for actual answers to our questions."
King: In case you haven't noticed, I actually take time and effort to answer questions one by one, point by point, to those who take the time to post them to me. You do not, ergo, I ignore you.
CGW: "Don't you guys wonder why "King Tolerance" NEVER posts at JW?"
King: JW/DW? What's the difference? Who cares?
CGW: "It's easier to pick on the dhimmis/potential future dhimmis."
King: Its like shooting fish in a barrel. ALl I have to do is see the article and then watch the conga line of stupidity walk by.
You will make an excellent "Dhimmi Watcher" someday.
Gary demanded: "Show me one that does not."
King retorts: OK, Gary. I'll play along with you here but I'll need some clarification of the question you grunted.
Are you asking me to name muslim countries that do not have Imams that back/support archaic cultures?
King Kong:
Still using screws for the coffee-filter?
Must be a 'cultural' thing. I can tolerate that, even though it hurts you. I understand it King, I really do.
But UHU is the answer:
KT: Millions of grateful Mohammedans have (and still do) had the screws taken out and attached the coffee-filter with UHU!
Result:
UHU doesn't hurt like screws (do) and makes the Mohammedan male less aggressive. There are some promising signs: Coffee-filter attached with UHU doesn't inhibit the brain from developing (at least not as badly as when attached with screws)
Like FGM in the female (which causes the female not to experience any sexual pleasure and gives her nothing but pain instead) the coffee-filter attached to the Mohammedan skull stifles development and reduces reasoning abilities & critical thought.
A look in the mirror will show you King, clearly all the other aspects of Islamic lunacy, if you care to open your eyes to see.
I don't grunt, kt. However I do apparently speak above your level. Forget the question, you wouldn't give an answer anyway.