Despite an international outcry and effort to pay traditional “blood money” in the Saudi legal system, the Kingdom has cut the head off a Sri Lankan maid for allegedly smothering an infant child when the nanny was just 17. The maid was decapitated by a swordsman in Riyadh under the country’s Sharia based legal system.
Rizana Nafeek was sentenced to death in 2007 but Sri Lankan government appealed the death penalty and many international groups decried the ludicrous trial and draconian sentence. While under arrest, the maid signed a confession written in Arabic that she did not understand and later retracted. It did not matter.
Saudi Arabia beheaded as many as 76 people last year.
Source: National Post
Mike S,
We agree that Christianity started out as a sect of Judaism…. Not the Christianity that was originally started I’m sure……
As to Frances beef with gene, I’m not sure where that comes from. I know people can disagree and agree to disagree. But there reaches a point that the point gets missed because if the banter and having to have the last say… Note, I did not say word… Because what’s usually stated is irrevelant to the topic of the post. I think Frances was taking it back to the original posting, not off topic.
I don’t know Frances but she/he can and should be able to post what ever they see fit without risk of reprisal. So what if she put some verbiage that attacked gene. There was nothing cordial about his response to her. That is shaming as a guest writer for this blog. That’s just my thought, there should be a higher standard but that’d be asking too much.
Rereading the thread again…. Why, does one have to call in loose morals of a parent. This seems to me a little excessive in defending oneself, don’t you agree mike? I read France’s response and laughter at the end… I think it was, I still love you Dad…. Apparently she is up to the debate….
Mike S,
I’ve never met Frances. I read Frances posting, were they really attacks? I think that the style of some invite banter if in fact it was an attack, gene can certainly defend himself or ignore the same. There seems to be the feeling that gene is not wrong, you don’t want to say anything that gene will disagree with, the list is endless.
Exactly Mike, how is or does not equate to freedom of speech? It’s more like say it and if I disagree I’ll banter you until you agree with me, shut up or go away. Tell me how this furthers free speech?
“There seems to be the feeling that gene is not wrong, you don’t want to say anything that gene will disagree with, the list is endless.
Exactly Mike, how is or does not equate to freedom of speech? It’s more like say it and if I disagree I’ll banter you until you agree with me, shut up or go away. Tell me how this furthers free speech?”
AY,
As for my disagreeing with Gene simply look up-thread with our interchange regarding whether or not Communism was a religion. Gene can be a little tart at times and thus an acquired taste, I’ll admit, but he and I have similar outlooks on so much that we have become friends through the years. To a lesser degree you and I have also been friends offline and yet we two don’t always agree. So life goes.
As far as freedom of speech goes, it simply means the freedom to express oneself in this type of forum. I’m sure Frances is an estimable person, with intelligence and wit, however, she/he (As a Brit “Frances” is a gender neutral name) clearly aimed some darts Gene’s way and he responded. The initial comment by Frances:
“In reply to your post of January, 11th, Gene, it appears that America inadvertently provided the means by which the attacks were carried out. The rest of the world is aware of this, somehow, the great US with its freedom of speech etc, etc, doesn’t like it’s countrymen to know this. The US amongst others gave financial aid, which Bin Laden benefited from, in the Soviet and Afghani war.”
Would have been merely a statement of opinion. However, not leaving it there, Frances went on:
“I won’t bore you with the rest of the details. It’s convenient to omit such facts. Your knowledge is obviously quite immense, however, somewhat tiresome as it is blatantly bias a reeks of Wikipedia.”
That was an attack on Gene and it was gratuitous to the original statement. Clearly Frances was looking for an argument and got it. My sense from that ad the ensuing exchange is that Frances relishes arguments and got one. Had
Frances statement been one of merely asserting a point of view about facts, then one can say that attacking Frances for the viewpoint would be hostile and tend to drive someone new away. That wasn’t the case. In any event, this is a far less hostile forum then any I can think of that allows uncensored speech.
As far as arguments go, I’ve had a few myself, such as with Nick, off and on with Tony and most certainly with Jill. Nobody got driven off and many disagreed with me. So it goes.
By the way regarding Christian origins they go back to about 120AD when it really stopped being a sect, but to argue it would be splitting hairs. You might notice that for my part when arguments become tangential to the intent of the initial blog post, such as whether Hitler was a Christian I tend to not respond verbosely. I’m not a fan of OT commenting, but I also admit that I am guilty of it at times.
Mike S,
I concede the year. The point is still the same. It was a Jewish sect until then, than you for the conformation….
Pythons at dinner; hopefully it won’t be like the dinner party scene in the movie Brazil. 🙂
Blouise,
I like the idea of the dinner, but I am not sure about the part about “giving up raff”!? 🙂
*sigh*
The world is a much poorer place without Warren.
Time for our favorite tune:
Gene,
No need (I know people … 😉 ) Or, we could give up raff ………
Blouise,
Fantastic! I’ll start saving up bail money now.
raff/OS,
They’ve got it all. Problems counting, diabolical laughter, diabolical acting, the rack and of course, we’d need Cardinal Fang. He’s in charge of the comfy chair . . .
Gene,
We will have that dinner party!
AY,
Frances gratitously attacked Gene in her first two comments on this thread. Went out of her way to do so. He responded and I would have done the same. We guest nloggers are who we are and while we do feel it’s part of our responsibilty to welcome newcomers, it it not part of our responsibilitiesto not respond to personal attacks.
AY,
Take another look. I welcome all posters, including Frances.
OS,
Monty Pyhon for dinner? High praise indeed. 🙂
I reserve the right to defend myself however I see fit, AY. We have many new posters all the time that get treated just as nice as their actions encourage. Most new posters are like our Darren’s and our Malisha’s; very well behaved people who don’t resort to ad hominem. We have far fewer new posters who come in swinging that ad hominem hammer. They too get treated as their actions encourage. Act like a jackass, get treated like a jackass. I’m as nice to people as the let me be. Always have been. Always will be. That’s the nature of the Ethic of Reciprocity. It does not demand that I turn the other cheek. Nor will I.
If you’ve got a problem with that, it’s your problem.
Then quit harassing posters…. Especially new ones….
Ooooo. I’m so hurt, Mr. “Someone Else Is Using My IP To Harass Posters”. 🙄
If you had ethics that’d be something to be dealt with, since you have proved you will stoop to get what you want, you proved your inner self.
The rest dribble….. No need to respond….
I presented facts. You presented opinion. Nice attempt at a reversal there and by “nice” I mean really sad.
Again, I should care what you think of me why exactly, AY? The reason we aren’t friends anymore is entirely your doing. You’d do yourself a favor to remember that you’re the one who burned that bridge and you did it all by yourself. As to the rest of your drivel? The Ethic of Reciprocity is a harsh mistress. Some people learn that lesson. Some people don’t. Don’t throw none, you won’t catch none.
Nah, gene, the be expecting you to take the high road….. Which is incompatible with your basic chi….. No change of chi until chi change within…..