Strange justice . . . . .

[Cowperson]

Strange justice . . . .

The Iranian Supreme Court has overturned the murder convictions of six members of a prestigious state militia who killed five people they considered “morally corrupt.”

The reversal, in an infamous five-year-old case from Kerman, in central Iran, has produced anger and controversy, with lawyers calling it corrupt and newspapers giving it prominence.

“The psychological consequences of this case in the city have been great, and a lot of people have lost their confidence in the judicial system,” Nemat Ahmadi, a lawyer associated with the case, said in a telephone interview.

According to the Supreme Court’s earlier decision, the killers, who are members of the Basiji Force, volunteer vigilantes favored by the country’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, considered their victims morally corrupt and, according to Islamic teachings and Iran’s Islamic penal code, their blood could therefore be shed.

The last victims, for example, were a young couple engaged to be married who the killers claimed were walking together in public.

Full story with other examples is here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/19/wo...hp&oref=slogin

Interestingly, the ramblings of the Virginia Tech murderer also contained general references to moral corruption.

Cowperson

[Burninator]

At times like this it seems that the Middle East is just plunging back to the stone age.

Iran’s Islamic penal code, which is a parallel system to its civic code, says murder charges can be dropped if the accused can prove the killing was carried out because the victim was morally corrupt.

[Flameschick]

Is there any reason at all that we don't nuke Iran? If they want to revert to the stone age, we can help them facilitate that process very quickly and easily. If it results in higher oil prices, who cares? All that would mean is that more people would ditch their cars. Basically nuking Iran would be good for the environment. Sign me up.

[Frank the Tank]

I'll never understand how things like "walking together in public" or a woman showing her ankles are grounds for murder. Just a bizarre culture.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Flameschick

Is there any reason at all that we don't nuke Iran? If they want to revert to the stone age, we can help them facilitate that process very quickly and easily. If it results in higher oil prices, who cares? All that would mean is that more people would ditch their cars. Basically nuking Iran would be good for the environment. Sign me up.

I hope you are not serious. Are you really advocating the murder of 70 million people?

[FireFly]

This reminds me of the time that I was waiting at a C-Train stop in a little tank top and pair of capris and I was told by a middle eastern gentleman of about 55 or 60 that "If I was his, I wouldn't be allowed out of the house." To which I responded that "Thank God you're in Canada where you could be arrested for unlawful confinement if you tried that. Perhaps you should go home then if that's how you'd like to treat your women. Here, we don't appreciate that kind of behaviour."

I was in shock and awe. I really don't understand their moral code. They seem to place all the blame on women for tempting the men and no blame on the men for not being able to control themselves.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by Flameschick

Is there any reason at all that we don't nuke Iran? If they want to revert to the stone age, we can help them facilitate that process very quickly and easily. If it results in higher oil prices, who cares? All that would mean is that more people would ditch their cars. Basically nuking Iran would be good for the environment. Sign me up.

Before you condemn and atomize, I remembered this article (linked below) from 1999 in National Geographic on Iran . . . . . and deals with the attitudes of young people in that country versus the more fanatical elements who happen to be in charge.

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/ng...ngm/index.html

Khatami, referred to in the article in 1999, is, of course, no longer as powerful.

Iran was clearly on a track towards a modern society before recent elections where only candidates approved by clerics were allowed to stand . . . . . resulting in the current somewhat fanatical leadership in office.

Underlying that though . . . .

Cowperson

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by FireFly

This reminds me of the time that I was waiting at a C-Train stop in a little tank top and pair of capris and I was told by a middle eastern gentleman of about 55 or 60 that "If I was his, I wouldn't be allowed out of the house." To which I responded that "Thank God you're in Canada where you could be arrested for unlawful confinement if you tried that. Perhaps you should go home then if that's how you'd like to treat your women. Here, we don't appreciate that kind of behaviour."

I was in shock and awe. I really don't understand their moral code. They seem to place all the blame on women for tempting the men and no blame on the men for not being able to control themselves.

This thread is useless without pictures

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by FireFly

This reminds me of the time that I was waiting at a C-Train stop in a little tank top and pair of capris and I was told by a middle eastern gentleman of about 55 or 60 that "If I was his, I wouldn't be allowed out of the house." To which I responded that "Thank God you're in Canada where you could be arrested for unlawful confinement if you tried that. Perhaps you should go home then if that's how you'd like to treat your women. Here, we don't appreciate that kind of behaviour."

I was in shock and awe. I really don't understand their moral code. They seem to place all the blame on women for tempting the men and no blame on the men for not being able to control themselves.

You know its funny because with Islam there was a lot to be admired in thier treatment of both woman and academics.

Muslim woman were allowed to vote under the Koran, they reconized Woman's sufferage before anything else. It was a scholarly religion.

The Radical/extreme element has really wound that backwards in thier attempts to show it as a almost warrier religion, that dosen't repect intellect, and actually has a pretty strong hatred of woman.

[Ayrahb]

Originally Posted by troutman

I hope you are not serious. Are you really advocating the murder of 70 million people?

Yes, Flameschick, please elaborate.

[GlobeTrotter]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

Before you condemn and atomize, I remembered this article (linked below) from 1999 in National Geographic on Iran . . . . . and deals with the attitudes of young people in that country versus the more fanatical elements who happen to be in charge.

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/ng...ngm/index.html

Khatami, referred to in the article in 1999, is, of course, no longer as powerful.

Iran was clearly on a track towards a modern society before recent elections where only candidates approved by clerics were allowed to stand . . . . . resulting in the current somewhat fanatical leadership in office.

Underlying that though . . . .

Cowperson

I remember this NG article as well. I also have a friend that spent most of the summer of 2006 in Iran, he had an amazing experience with the people. From what he told me, Iran can be a great place to visit.

Articles like those in the original post definitely stir up a lot of emotion, as well they should. However, we have to be very careful not associate all 70 million Iranians with the small portion that are in control of the country.

I would suspect that if you spoke to everyday Iranians you would discover that the vast majority do not support the type of "justice" as discussed in the initial article (although some probably do).

I think that much of the religious fanatacism that we see in places like the Middle East has as much to do with a small group of people trying to protect their priviledged position in society as it does with devotion to a certain faith.

[sec304]

Originally Posted by troutman

I hope you are not serious. Are you really advocating the murder of 70 million people?

Only if they're morally corrupt!!

[Crazy Flamer]

Originally Posted by Flameschick

Is there any reason at all that we don't nuke Iran? If they want to revert to the stone age, we can help them facilitate that process very quickly and easily. If it results in higher oil prices, who cares? All that would mean is that more people would ditch their cars. Basically nuking Iran would be good for the environment. Sign me up.

Welcome to the forum, George Bush.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Crazy Flamer

Welcome to the forum, George Bush.

Frankly thats a little harsh... George may be pretty right wing and a definite hawk, but his opinions and policies are almost positively liberal when compared to the policies and objectives of the Iranian leadership.

If Iran ever obtains the ability to mass produce nuclear weapons, that would scare the bejesus out of me! Look out armegedon!

[Ayrahb]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Frankly thats a little harsh... George may be pretty right wing and a definite hawk, but his opinions and policies are almost positively liberal when compared to the policies and objectives of the Iranian leadership.

How is that an accomplishment? If we begin to hold ourselves or our governments to such low standards then we are indeed boned. I am not attacking your opinion, but you are stating the obvious there.

If Iran ever obtains the ability to mass produce nuclear weapons, that would scare the bejesus out of me! Look out armegedon!

Save your fear for Pakistan (which has had nukes since 1998, IIRC), India and a few other countries that already have them.

Any country that uses nuclear weapons will end up enjoying a Pyrrhic victory. Iran knows that it's current enemies have decades and decades worth of nuclear weapons and delivery technology stockpiled and ready to use. Besides, that is one country in the Middle East that is a small rebellion away from being a really good friend to the West.

With all the rhetoric and propaganda, there is still only one country in history that used nukes on human beings.

[Cowperson]

This is pretty funny and I thought a useful addition to this particular thread . . . . . President Ahmedinejad is ripped a new butthole by an Iranian Hezbollah newspaper for kissing a former schoolteacher in public.

At a ceremony on Tuesday ahead of Iranian teachers' day, Mr Ahmadinejad was photographed and filmed by state media stooping to kiss the woman's hand and then clasping her arms in an embrace.

The ultra-conservative Hezbollah newspaper, which is not related to the group in Lebanon of the same name, criticised him on the front page.

"The Muslim Iranian people have no recollection of such acts contrary to sharia law during Islamic rule [since the 1979 revolution]," it said.

"This type of indecency progressively has grave consequences, like violating religious and sacred values."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...5/s1912815.htm

Can't live with 'em, can't live without 'em.

Originally Posted by Ayrahb

Iran knows that it's current enemies have decades and decades worth of nuclear weapons and delivery technology stockpiled and ready to use.

It's funny that nuclear armed Israel and America didn't provoke most countries in the Middle East to seriously seek nuclear weapons yet, with Iran now apparently arming itself, suddenly they all want nuclear programs.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/15/wo...6e1bba&ei=5070

Cowperson