This never hapapened. It's all a lie

[Mister Moobs]

Not a Victim, but a Hero

After being kidnapped at the age of 16 by a group of thugs and enduring a year of rapes and beatings, Assiya Rafiq was delivered to the police and thought her problems were over.

Then, she said, four police officers took turns raping her.

The next step for Assiya was obvious: She should commit suicide. That?s the customary escape in rural Pakistan for a raped woman, as the only way to cleanse the disgrace to her entire family.

Instead, Assiya summoned the unimaginable courage to go public and fight back. She is seeking to prosecute both her kidnappers and the police, despite threats against her and her younger sisters. This is a kid who left me awed and biting my lip; this isn?t a tale of victimization but of valor, empowerment and uncommon heroism.

?I decided to prosecute because I don?t want the same thing to happen to anybody else,? she said firmly.

Assiya?s case offers a window into the quotidian corruption and injustice endured by impoverished Pakistanis ? leading some to turn to militant Islam.

?When I treat a rape victim, I always advise her not to go to the police,? said Dr. Shershah Syed, the president of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Pakistan. ?Because if she does, the police might just rape her again.?

Yet Assiya is also a sign that change is coming. She says she was inspired by Mukhtar Mai, a young woman from this remote village of Meerwala who was gang raped in 2002 on the orders of a village council. Mukhtar prosecuted her attackers and used the compensation money to start a school.

But it's all a lie because ciaran says so.

Pakistan?s human rights record has dramatically improved since 1990. The situation of human rights in Pakistan is a complex one, as a result of the country's tremendous diversity, large population, its status as a developing country and a sovereign, Islamic republic as well as a Islamic democracy with a mixture of both Islamic and colonial secular laws. The Constitution of Pakistan provides for fundamental rights, which include freedom of speech, freedom of religion, right to bear arms and freedom of the press. Clauses also provide for separation of executive and judiciary, an indepedent judiciary and freedom of movement within the country and abroad.

The founder of Pakistan Muhammad Ali Jinnah wanted Pakistan to be an "Islamic country without Sharia." No Pakistani Government has ever come up with a detailed conclusion on what he exactly meant by this. Nevertheless, Pakistan's status as an Islamic Republic should not be confused or compared with other Islamic Republics in the region, such as the Islamic Republic of Iran. Unlike Iran, Pakistan is not a theocracy, but rather an Islamic democracy where elections regularly takes place on time and are mostly free and fair. Most of Pakistan's laws are secular in nature, most of which were inherited from the United Kingdom's colonial rule of modern-day Pakistan before 1947. In recent times, there has been increasing pressure on Pakistan to amend or replace some of its outdated laws made during the time of the British Empire.

Although the government has enacted measures to counter any problems, abuses remain. Furthermore, courts suffer from lack of funds, outside intervention, and deep case backlogs that lead to long trial delays and lengthy pretrial detentions. Many observers inside and outside Pakistan contend that Pakistan?s legal code is largely concerned with crime, national security, and domestic tranquility and less with the protection of individual rights.

The report Freedom in the World 2006 by Freedom House gave Pakistan a political rights rating of 4 (1 representing free and 7 representing not free), and a civil liberties rating of 5, earning it the designation of partly free. However, this designation was received under President Pervez Musharraf. The new government of President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gillani aim to receive the designation of free.

Pakistan is not a country that is under Sharia law (outside of the Swat Valley that is).

ciaran affirms that this kind of thing does not happen in states wherein Sharia is not the law of the land. caran is obviously an expert and knows everything about the Islamic world and it's culture. He must have lived there himself for many years and traveled therein extensively. I'm certain that he speaks Arabic, Urdu, Farsi, Dari, Tajik and may other languages and dialects of the region.

Surely the NYT is lying here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Pakistan

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/legal-system.htm

It must be those damn crusaders... :wink:

[Mister Moobs]

Pakistan is an Islamic republic. Islam is the state religion, and the Constitution requires that laws be consistent with Islam. The country has an area of 310,527 square miles and a population of 170 million. Official figures on religious demography, based on the most recent census taken in 1998, showed that approximately 97 percent of the population was Muslim. The majority of Muslims in the country are Sunni, with a Shi'a minority ranging between 10 to 20 percent.

The Penal Code incorporates a number of Islamic law (Shari'a) provisions. The judicial system encompasses several different court systems with overlapping and sometimes competing jurisdictions that reflect differences in civil, criminal, and Islamic jurisprudence. The Federal Shari'a Court and the Shari'a bench of the Supreme Court serve as appellate courts for certain convictions in criminal court under the Hudood Ordinances; judges and attorneys in these courts must be Muslim. The federal Shari'a court may overturn any legislation judged to be inconsistent with the tenets of Islam. In March 2005, however, the Supreme Court Chief Justice ruled that the Federal Shari'a Court had no jurisdiction to review a decision by a provincial high court even if the Federal Shari'a Court should have had initial appellate jurisdiction.

The legal system is derived from English common law and is based on the much-amended 1973 constitution and Islamic law (sharia). The Supreme Court, provincial high courts, and other courts have jurisdiction over criminal and civil issues. The president appoints the Supreme Court?s chief justice and formally approves other Supreme Court justices as well as provincial high court judges on the advice of the chief justice. The Supreme Court has original, appellate, and advisory jurisdiction, and high courts have original and appellate jurisdiction. The Federal Shariat Court determines whether laws are consistent with Islamic injunctions. Special courts and tribunals hear particular types of cases, such as drugs, commerce, and terrorism. Pakistan?s penal code has limited jurisdiction in tribal areas, where law is largely derived from tribal customs.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/legal-system.htm

[Mister Moobs]

LIES LIES ALL LIES!!!!!

DAMN THOSE LIARS TO HELL!!!

[beej]

I guess nothing bad happens in the USA.

[Mister Moobs]

Who said that, Oh Great Defender of the Islamic Faith?

I never said that.

As a matter of fact, I have stated the very opposite on here many times. Aside from that, the US has enough detractors on TF. It has you who posts every time a human, dog or baboon discharges a fire arm. It has Neo. Several others.

All is made clear.

As a matter of fact, if you read the US newspapers you will find all the dirt on the US that your heart could desire. You can find many more reasons to hate the US in our own newspapers.

Read and research to your hearts desires.

Hate away.

Blame the US for every ill conceivable. Hell, many of us will agree with you about the ills that pervades the planet.

Do as you will. You already do.

Go on. Defender of the Faith.

Explain this away or just say that you "can't be arsed..."

It doesn't affect you. It's just some damn ***** in Pakistan. What is she ompared to the importance of defending Islam and Palestinian Statehood.

[condotown]

None of this would have to happen if these women would just admit that they are the property of men.

[Mister Moobs]

:wink:

[bobbyboy112003]

Oh this is going to be a bad one :?

[Stramash]

I just wish people would wake up and realise that not every evil is America's fault...or the Muslims...or the Israelis.

It's those bloody Solomon Islanders!!

:twisted:

[StevieJR]

Oh this is going to be a bad one :?

Is that not the point of the post :roll:

[eagle]

So when are we going into Africa to help the women getting circumcised. Your argument just shows the US can't solve all the worlds problems although I bet they are planning a takeover of Africa in the future also. I think its a good strategy to have troops around energy reserves and in an historically strategic region. Just stop telling me the US is there to help the women and children pleeeease. Look how much they helped them in Iraq :shock:

[eagle]

Maybe if they put the women in charge of the banks when the Afghanis go full capitalist we will have accomplished our mission right.Go Saint Uncle Sam go :roll:

[Mister Moobs]

So when are we going into Africa to help the women getting circumcised. Your argument just shows the US can't solve all the worlds problems although I bet they are planning a takeover of Africa in the future also. I think its a good strategy to have troops around energy reserves and in an historically strategic region. Just stop telling me the US is there to help the women and children pleeeease. Look how much they helped them in Iraq :shock:

Because everyone was so well off under Saddam Hussein.

Aside from that, your argument is with someone else. I've not said those things.

I do, however, think that Islamic enslavement of women is as heinous a presence on the planet as was Hitler and his Nazi armies, Southern slavery and Stalin/Mao. Same same different geography.

[bobbyboy112003]

Oh this is going to be a bad one :?

Is that not the point of the post :roll:

Maybe, but I was talking about from a mod perspective Steve. :wink:

[eagle]

So when are we going into Africa to help the women getting circumcised. Your argument just shows the US can't solve all the worlds problems although I bet they are planning a takeover of Africa in the future also. I think its a good strategy to have troops around energy reserves and in an historically strategic region. Just stop telling me the US is there to help the women and children pleeeease. Look how much they helped them in Iraq :shock:

Because everyone was so well off under Saddam Hussein.

Aside from that, your argument is with someone else. I've not said those things.

I do, however, think that Islamic enslavement of women is as heinous a presence on the planet as was Hitler and his Nazi armies, Southern slavery and Stalin/Mao. Same same different geography.

I agree with you about the treatment of women but Iraq had it better then most in that area. Its the best thing about the US being there in Afghanistan but as for being the reason for the US being there it is great propaganda IMO. I just can't imagine the heads of US government sitting with clergy praying for the women and children before the invasion.

[Stramash]

Oh this is going to be a bad one :?

Is that not the point of the post :roll:

Maybe, but I was talking about from a mod perspective Steve. :wink:

it's all the bloody mods' faults!! Gulags, Iraq, The Balkans, Afghanistan, female circumcision, burqas; especially that bugger on the white horse!!

:twisted:

[grezzzy_greer]

Maybe someone can enlighten me...

Is this about the empowerment (hate that word) of women in Islamic states (or even semi-Islamic states)...or is it an attack on Ciaran...or on Beej...or is it standing up for something...or is it maybe an attack on Islam...or defending the USA on something...or defending Islam...or moderate Islam...or...?

...sorry - not sure I have got the point of this post at all...?

Just curious...

Greer

[bobbyboy112003]

Oh this is going to be a bad one :?

Is that not the point of the post :roll:

Maybe, but I was talking about from a mod perspective Steve. :wink:

it's all the bloody mods' faults!! Gulags, Iraq, The Balkans, Afghanistan, female circumcision, burqas; especially that bugger on the white horse!!

:twisted:

Now that's fair!

[Stramash]

Oh this is going to be a bad one :?

Is that not the point of the post :roll:

Maybe, but I was talking about from a mod perspective Steve. :wink:

it's all the bloody mods' faults!! Gulags, Iraq, The Balkans, Afghanistan, female circumcision, burqas; especially that bugger on the white horse!!

:twisted:

Now that's fair!

and did I mention the plight of the Kazakhstani cheese refugees?

THAT'S your fault too!!

:twisted:

[Mister Moobs]

Maybe someone can enlighten me...

Is this about the empowerment (hate that word) of women in Islamic states (or even semi-Islamic states)...or is it an attack on Ciaran...or on Beej...or is it standing up for something...or is it maybe an attack on Islam...or defending the USA on something...or defending Islam...or moderate Islam...or...?

...sorry - not sure I have got the point of this post at all...?

Just curious...

Greer

All of that and none of that all at the same time...

[digitalcat]

Maybe someone can enlighten me...

Is this about the empowerment (hate that word) of women in Islamic states (or even semi-Islamic states)...or is it an attack on Ciaran...or on Beej...or is it standing up for something...or is it maybe an attack on Islam...or defending the USA on something...or defending Islam...or moderate Islam...or...?

...sorry - not sure I have got the point of this post at all...?

Just curious...

Greer

All of that and none of that all at the same time...

well at least he's not attacking Issan O_o

[Hobbes]

Can't be all that bad in Pakistan since Uncle Sam is pumping in almost US$ 700 Million in 'aid' (2006) making it the largest recipient of US aid after Iraq, Israel and Egypt (which all have an equally exemplary human rights record of course thanks to the US pushing that agenda so relentless).

I mean, they surely wouldn't give them all that dosh if they weren't friends, would they?

And since human rights are obviously always top of the agenda for our American allies they surely wouldn't support countries or regimes were there was this kind of 'stone age' treatment of women...or 'black' prisons...or torture...or incarcerating people indefinetly without any charges (or at least attmepting to)...no, surely not.

:roll:

[Mister Moobs]

I agree with you about the treatment of women but Iraq had it better then most in that area. Its the best thing about the US being there in Afghanistan but as for being the reason for the US being there it is great propaganda IMO. I just can't imagine the heads of US government sitting with clergy praying for the women and children before the invasion.

Actually, I could imagine Dubya doing that. Whether it would have been sincere or if he actually knew where Konduz was on a map or how to read a map in 2003 would be up for debate.

Oddly enough, our first teams into Afghanistan were provided "tourist maps" by the locals. The only maps that were on hand at the time. They bombed taliban positions using B52 Bombers and spotted using 30 year old tourist maps. Amazing.

No government acts for any other reason than self-interest. Even World War II, a war that was probably the most justifiable in the past century, the US waited until we were pulled into the war by the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Additionally, we had been acting to forestall the Japanese in the Pacific by cutting them off from resources since at least '39. We should have been in that war the moment Germany attacked Pearl Harbor or upon the Japanese attack of mainland China.

But we waited until the moment was forced upon us or until FDR allowed the moment to be forced upon us.

Why, because it wasn't our war and GW1 told us to avoid entangling alliances with Europe and we were still subconsciously following that advice a hundred plus years later.

I would be all for pushing secularism on Islamic states. The problem is that initially, it would be hugely violent. A hundred fold of the violence of the past decade.

But eventually, we'd win and Islam would flow along the path of Christianity.

Push the decrepit old religions to the side. Push human rights. Push capitalism to reform and become more mindful of the planet and humanity.

There is much that I would do had I the power.

Where you and I part ways is that you think that violence is the worst resort. I think there are far worse acts made by the West than resorting to war. Not resorting to war is often more inhumane and more deadly. Simply my opinion.

Humans are violent. It is our nature. Sometimes violence is the quickest path to resolution and saves lives. Think of how many lives would have been saved if America had joined the allies in 1939 or if we had backed Chiang Kai Shek more directly and declared war on Mao. It probably would have caused a war against Russia as well. If we had won, the Iron Curtain would never had fallen. Mao would never have taken over China.

No Vietnam, no Khmer Rouge, no communist conflicts across the globe. Now something else probably would have replaced it.

If we would have faced down Churchill and DeGaulle at the end of World War II and demanded an end to colonialism instead of allowing ourselves to be co-opted into Europes last gasp. No Indo-chine War. No deposing of Mossadegh.

Mossadegh fall was the beginning of the Iranian Revolution.

America backs Ho Chi Minh and Mossadegh as would have been proper and we have the standing now to support Israel which in my opinion is not a colonial issue. It's a "right of return" and homeland issue. Instead, the Palestinians are assimilated by Jordan and Egypt and no Palestine issue.

What a neat world it would be.

We'd still have the Kurds and the Shi'a/Sunni divide with which to contend, though. lol Among other things.

But that's all hindsight. Even though some leaders were pushing for those very confrontations at that time. So it's not completely hindsight being 20/20. Some people were thinking clearly at the time instead of simply pushing for "swords into plowshares" and bringing the boys home with a job half finished.

[Mister Moobs]

Can't be all that bad in Pakistan since Uncle Sam is pumping in almost US$ 700 Million in 'aid' (2006) making it the largest recipient of US aid after Iraq, Israel and Egypt (which all have an equally exemplary human rights record of course thanks to the US pushing that agenda so relentless).

I mean, they surely wouldn't give them all that dosh if they weren't friends, would they?

And since human rights are obviously always top of the agenda for our American allies they surely wouldn't support countries or regimes were there was this kind of 'stone age' treatment of women...or 'black' prisons...or torture...or incarcerating people indefinetly without any charges (or at least attmepting to)...no, surely not.

:roll:

Welcome to the thread, Hobbes.

We've spent the past 5o some odd years keeping the Germans from attacking France again and Russia from attacking everyone haven't we. Spent a lot of money doing that.

We gave aid to the Soviet Union in the 70s and 80s.

We've pretty much assisted every enemy we've ever had. Including the backstabbing Euros.

We've been subsidixing the European economy since the Marshall Plan by making it possible for Europe to skip on their responsibilities to defend themselves.

Round up the cost of that and tell me who has been the larggest recipient of US Aid.

Oh, but the fellows who started the past two World Wars always seem to conveniently forget to consider those numbers.

I wonder why...

[Hobbes]

Just to show you for the obsessed with a messianic complex you are:

The Marshall Plan aid was mostly used for the purchase of goods from the United States.

....

Germany paid the U.S. back in installments (the last check was handed over in June 1971).

Looks like Germany owes SFA to Uncle Sam. I wonder how much has Israel paid back of those billions in aid it has received (and still is)? :roll:

On a side note, those that started WWII are dead and those foolish enough to follow them are for most parts too. And we didn't receive anything form that Marshall plan anyway. And before you ask, we too paid war reparations. Did the US do that to Vietnam or Iraq or Afghanistan? I didn't think so.

:salute: