Muslim man sets 11yr old girl on fire

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hows that on a per capita basis?

http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/2886/

Dowry-related violence increased more than three-fold between 1990 and 2000. Dowry deaths rose by 38 percent during that same time period and since then about 6,000 to 7,000 women have been murdered each year.

***************

I dont know of any other country that kills 7000 women a year for there dowry, so per capital is not applicaple is it?

India is a barbaric country, whose women are worth nothing more than a few hundred dollar dowry, what you worth sam 200 dollars, or 300, boy i wished i lived in india.......

A bit hard to blame that on the british is it not sam?


That is home grown barbarity, that has india stamped all over it, its a great pity the british did not stay there then there would be hundreds of thousands of women still alive.
 
Not dowry deaths, domestic violence on a per capita basis. How is it on a per capita basis? Or do you think assaulting/killing women is okay if its not for dowry?
 
Not dowry deaths, domestic violence on a per capita basis. How is it on a per capita basis? Or do you think assaulting/killing women is okay if its not for dowry?

My original reference about india was about dowry deaths from the start, domestic violence is universal, dowry murder is not it is related to indian countries be they bangladesh, india, or sri lanka wherever there is indian spawn you will find women murdered in there thousands for a fast buck.

Domestic violence usually happens because of emotions & adultery & poverty, & alcohol per captilal it is about the same worldwide, dowry deaths happen because of pure fucking greed & having no respect for women or human life, & any country that claims to be civilised is not when hundreds of thousands of women have been murdered in india since the british left for a few dollars more bounty.

Me i would throw india out of the united nations until they cleaned up there act, as the police are behind most of this crap, they refuse to investigate or are bribed not to.
 
And what do you think dowry deaths are representative of? Too much money?

And puhleese, the British murdered millions of Indians while they were here, so don't expect me to ooh and aah at their "sense of justice"
 
And what do you think dowry deaths are representative of? Too much money?

And puhleese, the British murdered millions of Indians while they were here, so don't expect me to ooh and aah at their "sense of justice"

Dowry deaths are representative of a very sick fucking country that respects not human life or anything else.



***********************
# India, uprisings against UK (1919-38)

* Amritsar Massacre (1919): Officially, 379 (Johnson, Gilbert) killed, but unofficially, it gets rounded upwards: 500 (Our Times) or 1,000 (Eckhardt)
* Eckhardt:
o Amritsar (1918-19): 1,000 civ.
o (1921-22): 11,000 civ.
o (1936-38): 11,000 civ.
o TOTAL: 23,000

**********

23,000 is hardly millions is it, did you take maths at school if not you better start getting someone to count your dowry.


The 100,000 killed during partition was between your lot & pakis, its not our fault you were a bunch of savages, you cant tame animals, as for the 3 million killed by the famine, there was half a million killed by the famine in ireland, we are not jesus we cant produce 5000 loafs from one loaf or 5000 fish from one fish, you heap to much praise on us, david copperfield we are not.
 
Dowry deaths are representative of a very sick fucking country that respects not human life or anything else.

I think bombing people and calling them collateral damages is the same thing on a global scale.
 
I think bombing people and calling them collateral damages is the same thing on a global scale.

Yeah i agree when bin lid bombed the american embassy in kenya he killed hundreds of kenyan muslims to kill 8 americans, or when of his toy wind up suicide bomber killed 25 children to kill one american giving them sweets in iraq, yeah muslims no all about collateral damage, difference is they do it on purpose, & you all still praise them, that does not say much for you lot does it, you care little for your lot when you are killing eachother, but when we dare to do it you scream blue murder, fucking hypocrites.....................
 
I think bombing people and calling them collateral damages is the same thing on a global scale.

What puzzles me deeply is this when ever america drops a bomb in afghan or iraq or paki land they always seem to drop it on a wedding, now whats the odds on that?
Are we meant to believe there thousands of weddings taking place each minute in the tribal areas of afgan or paki land or iraq?

Does america have wedding guided missile technology nobody knows about?, or is it just cuntish middle east governments trying to drum up maximun hatred of americans, me i go for the cuntish middle east governments.

After hearing about the 200th wedding america dropped a bomb on, i stopped believing anything these middle east governments have to say, its all bullshit, i mean if they changed the story occationally like a gay coming out party, or terroist retirement party, i might start to believe them again sam......
 
oh come now, suicide bombing for religious reasons is very different from 100,000 dollar a pop precision munitions dropped from a 10 to 100 million dollar aircraft. I mean, at least they can claim a casualty for their religion, as well as send all those youngsters on to paradise early. Really, it's a kindness on their part. If they wanted to be really kind, they'd blow themselves up among their fellow suicide bombers. That's worth at LEAST 73 virginians.
 
I for one, do not respect or appreciate having my words twisted to support such an agenda.
:rolleyes:

SAM:
This is an incident that did not happen, however, I roundly condemn it since the validity of the story does not matter.
Michael
It must refer to the noun preceding it. Which in this case is incident. The incident in question is the command to murder the singing girl. Ergo, you are condemning the actions of Mohammad in the story. Which is to say you think that in this story his actions are immoral.


Please feel free to restate yourself if you would like to change your opinion, if not then we will take you at your own word, as directly quoted, and accept that you condemn the actions of Mohammad in this story. BUT, if you would like to change you're mind go for it mate.
 
Last edited:
Misrepresenting other peoples views seems to be a favorite pastime in this forum for many members.
see above

Child molestation is forbidden in Islam,
This thread is NOT about child molestation, it's about a man who burned a girl alive and thought claiming his was a conservative Muslim would save his ass.

So, your bitch is with him not anyone here.

And, on the topic of burning girls alive:
Saudi Arabia's religious police stopped schoolgirls from leaving a blazing building because they were not wearing correct Islamic dress, according to Saudi newspapers.
 
And, on the topic of burning girls alive:
Saudi Arabia's religious police stopped schoolgirls from leaving a blazing building because they were not wearing correct Islamic dress, according to Saudi newspapers.

One witness said he saw three policemen "beating young girls to prevent them from leaving the school because they were not wearing the abaya".

The Saudi Gazette quoted witnesses as saying that the police - known as the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice - had stopped men who tried to help the girls and warned "it is a sinful to approach them".

The father of one of the dead girls said that the school watchman even refused to open the gates to let the girls out.

Whew! At least the police made sure no one saw those girls without their 'abaya' - well, at least not alive, anyways.

Praise Allah!
 
Everyone who was related to that girl 3 connections out should get in a line and slap the man 1 good one each. (i imagine he would be dead after they were all done)
 
Everyone who was related to that girl 3 connections out should get in a line and slap the man 1 good one each. (i imagine he would be dead after they were all done)

I think the relatives should line up line this
gas, match, extinguisher, gas, match extinguisher, gas...
Set him on fire over and over
 
Michael, are you an idiot?

You are saying that this criminal reflects on my and my religion? Seriously, what is wrong with you?

My problem is with your labeling this criminal as a 'Muslim' man instead of just a man. Why does it have to be representative of my religion when this idiot does something not only inhumane, but anti-Islamic?

It is clear from all Islamic sources, Quran and Hadith, that this man would be a sinner for this crime, and this crime is one which is unforgivable according to Islamic law, hence this man deserves to be executed.

My problem is with you and people like you who try to relate the actions of criminals to Muslims everywhere and to Islamic religion. People like you make me sick.
 
blah blah backtrack blah blah backtrack

SAM
This is an incident that did not happen, however, I roundly condemn it since the validity of the story does not matter.

Michael
It must refer to the noun preceding it. Which in this case is incident. The incident in question is the command to murder the singing girl. Ergo, you are condemning the actions of Mohammad in the story. Which is to say you think that in this story his actions are immoral.

In the 1500 year old story, of Mohammad ordered that a singing slave girl have her head chopped off. I'm pretty sure SAMual condemns this act, but, meh, maybe not - such is the power of childhood brainwashing. Most people here who were raised theist understand.

It's a pitty isn't it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top