...and these are the people controlling the World's wealth

[Guest Dark Sotonic Mills]

http://business.maktoob.com/20090000454230/Saudi_to_behead_Lebanese_for_witchcraft/Article.htm

 

A Lebanese man sentenced to death in Saudi Arabia on charges of witchcraft is due to be beheaded this week.

 

Are we in 2010 or 1510?

 

Civilisation never went anywhere near this cesspit of a country. It's about time something was done about this totally corrupt regime; terrorist funding, barbarian scum.

[Deppo]

Don't mince your words.

[Wes Tender]

http://business.maktoob.com/20090000454230/Saudi_to_behead_Lebanese_for_witchcraft/Article.htm

 

A Lebanese man sentenced to death in Saudi Arabia on charges of witchcraft is due to be beheaded this week.

 

Are we in 2010 or 1510?

 

Civilisation never went anywhere near this cesspit of a country. It's about time something was done about this totally corrupt regime; terrorist funding, barbarian scum.

 

Don't worry. In the near future, pressure to replace oil with other fuels will build, either for environmental reasons, or because the oil runs out.

 

Then the West can put two fingers up to the Arabs who have too often held our economies to ransom and tell them where to stick their oil. Then, unless they find diamonds, or gold, or some other commodity of value, their economic strength will decline once more to irrelevance and they can go back to living in tents in the desert. A bonus would be that without the money to spend on weaponry, the whole area would cease to be the main potential arena for the next World war.

[Robsk II]

Brings up a bigger question, really. Does anyone have the right to dictate how the world should be run? To hold their values aloft not only in their own nation states, but globally, and impose them on others? Of course that sortof thing is barbaric, but so is half the stuff we do here, albeit with a softer edge. Humans are largely c*nts, lets face it, wherever they are in the world. We're a few disasters away from fear, hatred and spears ourselves, some closer than others. Media-based frenzied attacks on anything from drugs without much evidence to people falsely convicted of crimes etc.. our citizens are capable of shouting loudly about rights whilst taking those of others away in the same breath. Would intervention really have a cumulatively positive effect in Saudi Arabia, or North Korea, or anywhere? Even a bloodless victory might prove entirely negative if a population is not ready to accept, to relish, the values and ideas being instituted. We had many years to be coddled by consumerism, celebrity culture, etc... which keeps us quiet.. but powerful opiate though it is, people used to theocracies etc are not always as well-understood as western governments like to think.

[benjii]

Yes, I agree with that.

[dubai_phil]

http://business.maktoob.com/20090000454230/Saudi_to_behead_Lebanese_for_witchcraft/Article.htm

 

A Lebanese man sentenced to death in Saudi Arabia on charges of witchcraft is due to be beheaded this week.

 

Are we in 2010 or 1510?

 

Civilisation never went anywhere near this cesspit of a country. It's about time something was done about this totally corrupt regime; terrorist funding, barbarian scum.

 

 

Yep, good idea, let's have a regime change.

 

Worked well in Iraq......

 

but seriously, the trap you have fallen into is the "By our standards it isn't right" which I and many down here including Saudis agree with.

 

The PROBLEM is that "The Magic Kingdom" is the spiritual home of Islam. As many may have noted there are as many branches of that religion as there are of Christianity. The PROBLEM the Saudi's have is being "The Custodians of the Holy Places" and having to balance praticality against potential extremism. They walk a very fine path.

 

The point you make is fine but you may as well demand that Britain treats immigrants the way the Middle East treats their migrant workers - ie abide by OUR rules and OUR culture or bugger off home.

 

neither will change because they can't

[S41NTS]

Have you been watching the "Wonders of the Solar System"?

 

The last episode was an interesting documentary on the very real possibility of life on other planets & moons within our solar system. I wonder how the average "religous extremist" would explain life outside the earth and where that was mentioned in the story of all creation if or when it is discovered.

[benjii]

I'm sure they'd be able to explain it somehow. It's not as if cogent thought and consistency is a prerequisite for a religious dogma!

[Amesbury Saint]

I'm sure they'd be able to explain it somehow. It's not as if cogent thought and consistency is a prerequisite for a religious dogma!

 

if god can create life on earth, why not elsewhere?

[Wes Tender]

if god can create life on earth, why not elsewhere?

It's life, Jim, but not as we know it.

[Saint Without a Halo]

Don't worry. In the near future, pressure to replace oil with other fuels will build, either for environmental reasons, or because the oil runs out.

 

Then the West can put two fingers up to the Arabs who have too often held our economies to ransom and tell them where to stick their oil. Then, unless they find diamonds, or gold, or some other commodity of value, their economic strength will decline once more to irrelevance and they can go back to living in tents in the desert. A bonus would be that without the money to spend on weaponry, the whole area would cease to be the main potential arena for the next World war.

 

Unfortunately you argument has a hole in it as future clean energy will be mainly solar! and where does the sunshine shine hardest and longest?...........why deserts of course!

[Wes Tender]

Unfortunately you argument has a hole in it as future clean energy will be mainly solar! and where does the sunshine shine hardest and longest?...........why deserts of course!

 

Two things:-

 

Firstly the Middle East doesn't have the sort of monopoly on deserts to the extent that it does with oil. Other desert regions are available.

 

Secondly, I disagree that solar energy will be the main energy source, or at least that it will be the one to replace oil. Hydrogen is where I put my money.

[Saint Without a Halo]

Two things:-

 

Firstly the Middle East doesn't have the sort of monopoly on deserts to the extent that it does with oil. Other desert regions are available.

 

Secondly, I disagree that solar energy will be the main energy source, or at least that it will be the one to replace oil. Hydrogen is where I put my money.

 

Actually the Middle East % of deserts is approx the same as its % of Oil (if you include North Africa and given the main world oil producers are Russia and the US).

 

Secondly my answer was very much in jest!

[Liquidshokk]

Brings up a bigger question, really. Does anyone have the right to dictate how the world should be run? To hold their values aloft not only in their own nation states, but globally, and impose them on others? Of course that sortof thing is barbaric, but so is half the stuff we do here, albeit with a softer edge. Humans are largely c*nts, lets face it, wherever they are in the world. We're a few disasters away from fear, hatred and spears ourselves, some closer than others. Media-based frenzied attacks on anything from drugs without much evidence to people falsely convicted of crimes etc.. our citizens are capable of shouting loudly about rights whilst taking those of others away in the same breath. Would intervention really have a cumulatively positive effect in Saudi Arabia, or North Korea, or anywhere? Even a bloodless victory might prove entirely negative if a population is not ready to accept, to relish, the values and ideas being instituted. We had many years to be coddled by consumerism, celebrity culture, etc... which keeps us quiet.. but powerful opiate though it is, people used to theocracies etc are not always as well-understood as western governments like to think.

 

I liked this post a lot.

 

Ive thought a lot about how other countries behave compared to us recently and must admit I can never understand it when their actions differ so much from ours.

 

One example being the couple that got put away for kissing in public, my initial reaction is " how the hell can a country be so far behind and take such extreme actions over something so insignificant" Surely these countries have evolved enough to see this as a harmless act.

 

I guess, as everything does, it all comes back to religion. Which is also balls imo

[Robsk II]

Broadly in agreement. I guess the core thing is value systems. Religions and attitudes learnt by rota or proxy - in fact, any belief structure based around anything other than rationality and logic, and that doesn't exclude some of the values we hold - is hard to argue against. For example, how can you argue against a man who believes, strongly enough to die, that it is his role (and perhaps eternal prize afterwards) to kill others? Faith is inherently illogical. Belief without proof. If someone is willing to buy into anything of that mould, why do we believe rational discussion will dissuade them? The debate isn't about individuals. People can be called terrorists or insurgents, but no-one fights for things they don't believe in, even if they find other causes than the one their comrades die for. For some wars in the name of god, men have fought for honour, or families. Yet they still fight for something. As individuals, they really are no different. It is the cultures, the systems, the way of doing things, the way thinking is taught that shapes the world. And again, it's very difficult to argue.

 

I believe my views are right, and I was criticised for this yesterday. Yet of course I do - otherwise why would I believe them? So I don't apologise, yet nor do Islamic fundamentalists, and we all like to hold ourselves so far removed from them because it's a convenient and comfortable place to be. And generally, I have my views strongly, because I think they are correct, and I think I have reasons to think these things. But what else is a belief? One man will tell you god exists, another will tell you he doesn't, and both consider themselves to be irrefutably correct. There is no easy way to reconcile these men in their differences, and if these are extreme, perhaps they will fight.

[buctootim]

Two things:-

 

I disagree that solar energy will be the main energy source, or at least that it will be the one to replace oil. Hydrogen is where I put my money.

 

I agree that hydrogen will become the main 'portable' fuel for transport, especially cars - but you need a lot of electricity to split water into oxygen and hydrogen (the most eco friendly way of doing it - otherwise you end up with lots of methane). So maybe we will need the solar power to make the electricity to make the hydrogen.

[Liquidshokk]

Broadly in agreement. I guess the core thing is value systems. Religions and attitudes learnt by rota or proxy - in fact, any belief structure based around anything other than rationality and logic, and that doesn't exclude some of the values we hold - is hard to argue against. For example, how can you argue against a man who believes, strongly enough to die, that it is his role (and perhaps eternal prize afterwards) to kill others? Faith is inherently illogical. Belief without proof. If someone is willing to buy into anything of that mould, why do we believe rational discussion will dissuade them? The debate isn't about individuals. People can be called terrorists or insurgents, but no-one fights for things they don't believe in, even if they find other causes than the one their comrades die for. For some wars in the name of god, men have fought for honour, or families. Yet they still fight for something. As individuals, they really are no different. It is the cultures, the systems, the way of doing things, the way thinking is taught that shapes the world. And again, it's very difficult to argue.

 

I believe my views are right, and I was criticised for this yesterday. Yet of course I do - otherwise why would I believe them? So I don't apologise, yet nor do Islamic fundamentalists, and we all like to hold ourselves so far removed from them because it's a convenient and comfortable place to be. And generally, I have my views strongly, because I think they are correct, and I think I have reasons to think these things. But what else is a belief? One man will tell you god exists, another will tell you he doesn't, and both consider themselves to be irrefutably correct. There is no easy way to reconcile these men in their differences, and if these are extreme, perhaps they will fight.

 

Another great post...

 

But surely common sense, rationality and logic MUST have some impact on their beliefs?!? They are human snd have brains afterall?!? On a simple level such as the question of whether there is a god, jesus, heaven etc or not I find it extremely easy to dismiss these things because in most cases science proves that these things don't exsist (especially in proving the bible is fiction) yet it is beyond me that people can't apply this common sense themselves and they still believe in religion today.

 

The only thing I have in common with these religious people is the fact that I feel as strongly about my belief on this matter as they do... Which is worrying...

[Robsk II]

See? Strange to turn the tables on that thought. Nothing is ever proved, of course. Only disproved... So I believe my views have more validity than others, but so do they, as much or more.

[Liquidshokk]

See? Strange to turn the tables on that thought. Nothing is ever proved, of course. Only disproved... So I believe my views have more validity than others, but so do they, as much or more.

But I think there's more chance of me being right in that no man single handedly created this earth and about a man walking on water, dieing and coming back to life than there is of it actually being true?! So they can believe it all they like but common sense can prove them wrong surely?!??? Religion had it's time and helped a lot of people deal with the unknowns but now we have science to disprove everything it stands for and therefore it's about time it was dismissed completely. Maybe if common sense and science was relied on rather than religion throughout the world then the crime if kissing in public would be shown for how insignificant it really is. I don't think you'd find many religious people admit the bible was wrong though.

[Liquidshokk]

I digress anyway. My point is that I think our way of life and beliefs in this country are as a result of an advanced stage of civilisation where we use common sense and science. It just amazes me that there are so many countries that are in my mind seriously behind in evolving.

[dubai_phil]

I digress anyway. My point is that I think our way of life and beliefs in this country are as a result of an advanced stage of civilisation where we use common sense and science. It just amazes me that there are so many countries that are in my mind seriously behind in evolving.

 

PMSL....

 

Not at you but at the thought you provoke...

 

So any "un-civilised" foreigner who mistakenly happens to find themselves in the main street of any UK town or City at around 1am on a Friday or Saturday night is supposed to believe that the binge drinkers vomiting their alocpops and kebabs in the middle of the street and giving it large are the ultimate destiny of the Human race in it's quest for civilisation

[Liquidshokk]

PMSL....

 

Not at you but at the thought you provoke...

 

So any "un-civilised" foreigner who mistakenly happens to find themselves in the main street of any UK town or City at around 1am on a Friday or Saturday night is supposed to believe that the binge drinkers vomiting their alocpops and kebabs in the middle of the street and giving it large are the ultimate destiny of the Human race in it's quest for civilisation

 

Haha, I wasn't referring to all of our actions! :-D I was more referring to the basic fundamental laws and the freedom we have in this country that is sometimes quite astonishingly missing in other countries.

 

But yes, we're not perfect in this country :-)

[Robsk II]

What is civilised, eh? It seems almost that a large proportion of the population need to be given a codified moral framework to be 'decent people'. I feel I'm basically a good person, but, while I know nurture and society play a part in shaping my ideas, I certainly feel I've developed my own values overall - and certainly would question some existing concepts within the society I live. This is where my views and some religious people differ, I think. The problem is that a whole load of secular of faux-secular people seem to be morally redundant, and maybe they need religion - or something like it - to be kept vaguely 'in check'. It's further complicated by moral codes that OK violence to others and so on, and the fact that many supposedly godly people are nasty idiots or bigots anyway. Dubai Phil raised a good point. Is our society really any better than any other? Is what we consider to be freedom (questionably, perhaps) actually better if many just vomit that away, or stop caring about how others are, stop investing in their cultures and communities? We supposedly value democracy, yet how many people really attempt to be truly informed or objective? Hardly any. How many people simply can't be bothered to involve themselves in the process, even if that's to combat the reasons for disillusionment in it? Too many. How many are happy to remain in ignorant bliss in their outmoded views of other people, or the suffering of others, or inconvenient facts that might shake up their own position? Too many. Maybe extremist clerics whip up naive young men to commit barbaric acts believing them to be right, but can our own preachers - the tabloids, television, etc - not also stir up great fervour in people without always being reasoned or even true? Look at the crazy reaction to some criminals over others. The ideas people have about immigration or race or class. How quickly people get to feeling righteous indignance at the crimes of others whilst colluding or failing to prevent crimes of our own. Our population is often just as suggestible, stupid or mad. The only thing that really differentiates us is the ready availability of information, so that more viewpoints are on offer. For such a great, liberal and free-thinking society, once again it's easy to conclude that we're not really so far away from the 'uncivilised'. We con ourselves and tell ourselves we are better, and sometimes we are, but so do others.

[Liquidshokk]

What is civilised, eh? It seems almost that a large proportion of the population need to be given a codified moral framework to be 'decent people'. I feel I'm basically a good person, but, while I know nurture and society play a part in shaping my ideas, I certainly feel I've developed my own values overall - and certainly would question some existing concepts within the society I live. This is where my views and some religious people differ, I think. The problem is that a whole load of secular of faux-secular people seem to be morally redundant, and maybe they need religion - or something like it - to be kept vaguely 'in check'. It's further complicated by moral codes that OK violence to others and so on, and the fact that many supposedly godly people are nasty idiots or bigots anyway. Dubai Phil raised a good point. Is our society really any better than any other? Is what we consider to be freedom (questionably, perhaps) actually better if many just vomit that away, or stop caring about how others are, stop investing in their cultures and communities? We supposedly value democracy, yet how many people really attempt to be truly informed or objective? Hardly any. How many people simply can't be bothered to involve themselves in the process, even if that's to combat the reasons for disillusionment in it? Too many. How many are happy to remain in ignorant bliss in their outmoded views of other people, or the suffering of others, or inconvenient facts that might shake up their own position? Too many. Maybe extremist clerics whip up naive young men to commit barbaric acts believing them to be right, but can our own preachers - the tabloids, television, etc - not also stir up great fervour in people without always being reasoned or even true? Look at the crazy reaction to some criminals over others. The ideas people have about immigration or race or class. How quickly people get to feeling righteous indignance at the crimes of others whilst colluding or failing to prevent crimes of our own. Our population is often just as suggestible, stupid or mad. The only thing that really differentiates us is the ready availability of information, so that more viewpoints are on offer. For such a great, liberal and free-thinking society, once again it's easy to conclude that we're not really so far away from the 'uncivilised'. We con ourselves and tell ourselves we are better, and sometimes we are, but so do others.

 

Cant argue with that. Only thing I will say is that the freedom we are given in this country doesnt have to be used by us to correct our societies downfalls. We have a substantial, structured policing/justice system (?) in this country that takes care of those things for us. I just think that in comparison to many of the countries in question the fact that we can pretty much do whatever is considered "normal" and "ok" shows we are some steps forward in our way of life over theirs. The fact that some of the laws/beliefs that the middle east/africa still have are the kind that we had in place many moons ago yet are now no more only backs up this point.

Edited 8 April, 2010 by Liquidshokk

[Barry the Badger]

Whilst to a large extent I agree with the sentiment... we are not as advanced as we like to think.

 

We were still hanging people in this country just 50 years ago. It was only a few hundred years ago we were hanging people for witchcraft. Although that seems like a long time to us, it really isn't in the grand scheme of things.

[Liquidshokk]

Whilst to a large extent I agree with the sentiment... we are not as advanced as we like to think.

 

We were still hanging people in this country just 50 years ago. It was only a few hundred years ago we were hanging people for witchcraft. Although that seems like a long time to us, it really isn't in the grand scheme of things.

 

The difference is we have moved on and seen the errors of those ways... I therefore find it astonishing that there are countries that havent.

 

The question is whether these countries are "behind" or not.... if not then I fear for the future of these countries and trying to "correct" them by invading them is a pointless mission.

 

edit: I didnt really acknowledge your valid point, sorry. That is a very short timescale indeed so maybe im just blinkered by having only been alive for 27 years Maybe these places will go the same way one day. Although, as most of the countries in question arent even developed yet and we have been so for a long long time I feel its going to take many many years yet before we see changes in these countries to match our developments of the last couple of centuries.

Edited 8 April, 2010 by Liquidshokk

[Barry the Badger]

The difference is we have moved on and seen the errors of those ways... I therefore find it astonishing that there are countries that havent.

 

The question is whether these countries are "behind" or not.... if not then I fear for the future of these countries and trying to "correct" them by invading them is a pointless mission.

 

 

What I was trying to point out is.... though it's easy to sit up here basking in how civilised we all are and being shocked at such savage cultures, in reality "we" were practising such things just a few generations ago, which is no time at all really.

Edited 8 April, 2010 by Barry the Badger

[Liquidshokk]

I keep comning back to the couple that kissed in public but I still firmly believe that the fact that the country saw it as a crime is wrong regardless of respect for their beliefs. Sometimes common human sense has to come into play and this sort of thing seen as nonesense.

 

Think Ive gone in a circle now

[benjii]

Robsk, there is moral virtue in the use of paragraphs, mate.

[Liquidshokk]

What I was trying to point out is.... though it's easy to sit up here basking in how civilised we all are and being shocked at such savage cultures, in reality "we" were practising such things just a few generations ago, which is no time at all really.

 

Yeah sorry, I did edit my post to acknowledge that as its a very good point

 

Maybe I should be more accepting of their beliefs and just be grateful I was born when I was :supz:

[Barry the Badger]

I keep comning back to the couple that kissed in public but I still firmly believe that the fact that the country saw it as a crime is wrong regardless of respect for their beliefs. Sometimes common human sense has to come into play and this sort of thing seen as nonesense.

 

Think Ive gone in a circle now

 

But again, this is down to where your moral guidelines sit. Now I am with you in that mine sit in the same place, going to prison for kissing in public, ridiculous by my standards.

 

Our beliefs are largely defined by the enviroment/culture in which we grew up. So you think kissing in public is fine but if you move along through to more "intimate" acts there would be a point at which would would draw the line for what is acceptable in public.

 

The only difference in your example is that their line is in a different place, doesn't make them wrong though, just different.

 

edit: just seen your aknowledgement above after posting this, so was probably no need for me to labour the point like this, ah well :-) and yes, obviously I would hope that at some point these cultures will adhere to what I think is acceptable, but I'm not holding my breath.

Edited 8 April, 2010 by Barry the Badger

[Liquidshokk]

But again, this is down to where your moral guidelines sit. Now I am with you in that mine sit in the same place, going to prison for kissing in public, ridiculous by my standards.

 

Your beliefs are largely defined by the enviroment/culture in which you grew up. So you think kissing in public is fine but if you move along through to more "intimate" acts there would be a point at which would would draw the line for what is acceptable in public.

 

The only difference in your example is that their line is in a different place, doesn't make them wrong though, just different.

 

edit: just seen your aknowledgement above after posting this, so was probably no need for me to labour the point like this, ah well :-) and yes, obviously I would hope that at some point these cultures will adhere to what I think is acceptable, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

No I think it was a point worth elaborating on Maybe its the extremety I have a problem with. i mean, If I saw someone sh@gging in the street I would have a problem with that but again I wouldnt expect them to go to prison for that, let alone kissing. I think there are better more civilised ways of dealing with the beliefs in any country.

 

I guess it is, as you say, all about individuals beliefs based on their experiences/cultures and its not neccesarily a case of being behind, just seeing things differently. Man, you've changed my opinion! Not many people manage to do that! :-D

Edited 8 April, 2010 by Liquidshokk