April 24, 2005

• I don't know what point you are trying to make.
• Both events happened in the same area. That area is called Badakhshan, according to the map. I notice it's a homophone for bad action. I have no idea what point I am trying to make
• Actually, now that I read more closely, It's the Urge-you district of Bad-action. huh.
• or maybe it's the Your-jew district. I can't tell.
• /hard look
• Anyway, look, if anyone thought operation enduring freedom ever lived up to it's name, then they were fuckin stupid. So calling attention to the disparity of image vs reality really aint goin' anywhere. Anyone with a functioning brain won't be particularly surprised.
• Besides, some people like to be stoned.
• Alternate headline: The Urge-you's stoned a Bad-action woman
• /snake eyes OK, out with it, what are you on?
• Regardless of what you think of the war in Afghanistan, simply the fact that a single woman's stoning is not so rife as to be considered newsworthy is, though a horrible tragedy in her life, an indication that perhaps some of the worst misogynistic treatment diminished with the Taliban.
• The post title seems to be implying that the American invasion of Afghanistan somehow hasn't lived up to it's promise, but a thoutough reading of the linked article would contradict this. Correspondents say this is the second time a woman has been stoned to death since the ousting of the Taleban in 2001. Both events happened in the same area. During the Taleban's rule, women were regularly stoned to death for adultery. That passage would indicate that the results of the invasion have vastly improved conditions for many women.
• The war aside, stoning is a messy and painful way to murder someone. This is the second time such a murder has occurred in this district. The murdeer was not done subsequent to action on the part of a local court, but evidently by locals following the edict of "a religious scholar". It would seem no one cares enough to prevent this happening again to some other woman. So both the US and the Afghanistan authorities are liable to come in for much criticism. And I think rightly so.
• If you're going to act like a lot of innocent lives were saved, you need to take into account the number of innocents killed in the effort to save them. If it's known that women were "regularly" stoned to death, then the number of them killed HAS to be known. Use this number to get a # of deaths per Taliban Year (a Taliban year being a year under Taliban rule). Set this number aside. Now take the number of innocents killed by the US to remove Taliban rule, then factor into account the time since to give us a # of deaths per Freedom Year. Now compare the # of deaths per Taliban Year VS # of deaths per Freedom Year. This ratio will say msomething about Taliban rule VS Enduring Freedom rule (although it only accounts for "likelyhood to be killed by your rulers", and not any other factors determining quality of life).
• "simply the fact that a single woman's stoning is not so rife as to be considered newsworthy is, though a horrible tragedy in her life, an indication that perhaps some of the worst misogynistic treatment diminished with the Taliban. If I understand this statement correctly, it appears to me to be naive to the point of self deception. The amount of female or any other human abuse in Afghanistan is only relevant to Western press in so far as it illustrates the glorious success of the invasion. Given that the coalition forces still only really control the areas around Kabul, and few western media concern themselves with anything in the wilder areas, suppositions based upon such reports are worthless. The only reason other such abuse is not reported is because it is either not known of, or not serving the reporting agencies' entertainment agenda. 20 years ago such abuse was rampant and we heard nothing, because then it was the Soviet's fault. You're just hearing spin. I ask myself why is this being reported now? Abuse of women has never stopped in Afghanistan, anyone think the bombs helped? Who knew that bombing the shit out of people stopped misogynism.
• I don't want to diminish the severity of the crime, but this hardly seems newsworthy except to make a political point about the war. How many American women have been murdered by their partners for suspected adultery? What government is to blame for those?
• How many American women have been stoned to death by members of a community on the sayso of a religious scholar? Guessing, nind ye, but it seems likely if such an event occurred in the US or indeed in most countries there would be a public outcry and an investigation into the murder, at the very least. Or perhaps I am wrong here -- maybe the rise of religious fundamentalism means that we may see this sort of thing becoming commonplace everywhere. Believe there's Biblical precedent for this kind of murder, anyway, though I'm certainly no Biblical scholar.
• How many American women have been murdered by their partners for suspected adultery? What government is to blame for those? or more relevantly: How many American communities have cooperatively murdered a woman because suspected adultery? Because every single instance of that happening WOULD be newsworthy. Somehow this is lesser though, because it's done by those savages that you wouldn't expect any better than from. It's ho hum when they do it, but headlines if it happened here.
• Or, what bees said.
• Somehow this is lesser though, because it's done by those savages that you wouldn't expect any better than from Is that your opinion, or are you implying that it's mine? (I hope there's a third option I'm missing, because either answer will make you a trollish asshole)
• Is that your opinion, or are you implying that it's mine? It's exactly what you are saying. What, You're going to back out of it now that it's pointed out how shitty it is? YOU're the one trying to gloss over the story. YOU made the first comparison to it happening in America, except YOU tried to downplay it as a less event. Are you now changing your mind about the newsworthiness of the story? Because otherwise you'll remain the same asshole that you came in here as.
• Nice, the blame game! It's true that Afghanistan is much better without the Taliban than with it. It's also true that the US administration has almost left to rot what's left of the country thanks to the moronic decision of going to hunt a white elephant (current debatable improving conditions in Irak notwithstanding). But sending troops all along the country hunting down lapidators won't help a bit. Instead of having a woman stoned to death in the news once a month or so you will probably have soldiers and civilians alike being blown apart by IEDs on the news every week. The only way to improve women conditions in Afghanistan is by improving the whole infraestructure of the country. Fighting poverty and ignorance needs better schools, better roads, better social services in general. And even then, you will not stop hearing about lapidations until several years later when the true benefits of the country's restoration comes to be seen. This changes are not the sole responsibility of the US to bring up. it's the responsibility of all developed nations, the UN and NGOs in general. So, why not instead of pointing the finger to someone else for not doing enough why not do something about it yourself?
• It's exactly what you are saying. What, You're going to back out of it now that it's pointed out how shitty it is? Mr. K: That's not even close to what I said. You made a lot of assumptions about the sentiments behind my comments and all of them were wrong. I'm questioning why a stoning in Afghanistan, horrible as it is, is worthy of a front-page post. On it's own, I suspect it isn't...it was posted as a lead in to a thinly veiled (but logically flawed) criticism of the overthrow of the Taliban regime. If the stoning death, and not the US involvement, is the real point of this post, then where is the mention of the countless other stonings in Iran, Sudan, Nigeria, etc? If the topic is violence against women in general, then where are the posts about such killings in every other country in the world? This was just another "Blame America" post, and it's disgusting that the brutal death of a woman was used to pull it off.
• I'll stick in my two cents against my better judgement. There may be many reasons to criticize the US invasion/occupation-- for instance, the number of innocent deaths inadvertently caused. But to criticize it for a tragedy that a) was not caused by it, b) would have occured in greater numbers had the occupation not happened is just plain dumb. And I say this as someone who'd probably agree with you on most things, Skrik. (Jag är faktiskt svensk.) Arguing is not a freaking point-scoring exercise. If you want to make a difference, you have to convince people. You will not do this by bringing up points that make no sense except to the already-converted. Sorry for the gratuitous use of italics, but I feel it's an important point.
• I'm not Swedish, nor am I Norwegian ;). The point was, a long time ago, now that insults are being hurled, that the US has yet again done what it used to do in the cold war - "liberated" a country simply by removing the regime it happened not to like, then withdrawing. Of course the US military can't deliver a civil society -- bombs and rockets can't change human nature, only humans can do that -- but perhaps it's time to stop the inflated claims of what military invasion will achieve. Afghanistan is a country that has had its previous form of government removed and not satisfactorily replaced. It finds itself in a state of enduring confusion, of enduring chaos, of enduring anarchy. That, simply, was the point.
• Everything exppii just said, except that I never apologize for using italics.
• Stoning women to death is part of their culture. Who are we to step in and tell these people who is right?
• Afghanistan is a country that has had its previous form of government removed and not satisfactorily replaced. You may have a valid point there, but you'll need more evidence than an isolated incidence of stoning to back it up. I, for one, am not convinced that the new government isn't satisfactory. It's certainly much better than the old one.
• Tell us again what you think the US equivalent story would be. You originally described it like was just a spouse abuse story. You claim that's "not even close to what [you] said", so here's the link to your words that you've forgotten. There's approximately 45 people you left out of your comparison. I've assumed you left them out because you want to downplay the stoning. I've made this assumption because you used that comparison to downplay the stoning. You've said I'm wrong with this assumption— fine. You tell me why you left 45 people out of your comparison. Or you could decide to include them and give us your revised comparison. But until you do, it stands that you think 45 Afghanis stoning a woman to death is on par with US spousal abuse. I got the number 45 from here, a 2003 population report. If you can provide a more accurate number, then please do so. If the stoning death, and not the US involvement, is the real point of this post, then where is the mention of the countless other stonings in Iran, Sudan, Nigeria, etc? The US has killed thousands of Afghanis under the pretense of protecting Afghani women from stoning death. The US has not killed thousands of Iranians under the pretense of protecting Iranian women from stoning death. The US has not killed thousands of Sudanis under the pretense of protecting Sudan women from stoning death. The US has not killed thousands of Nigerians under the pretense of protecting Nigerian women from stoning death. Get the picture? Acting like you don't understand the connection is, at best, disengenious. The US actively and intentionally made decision to be responsible, and they sealed the obligation with the blood of thousands. I'm questioning why a stoning in Afghanistan, horrible as it is, is worthy of a front-page post. You were saying it wasn't newsworthy, not that it wasn't fppworthy. Those are two very different things. If you were using the two terms interchangeably, then fine, we're done, and I apologize for the miscommunication. I haven't been defending the fppworthiness, only the newsworthiness.
• I, for one, am not convinced that the new government isn't satisfactory. Honestly? You are seriously satisfied with their new government? WOW. I am so positive you'd change your tune if it was over here, but I still have to ask: Are you satisfied with that government only for Afghanis, or would you be satisified with that government here in the US?
• Based upon my flipping of an official US 25 cent piece, I have determined that rocket88 wins the argument, and that apologies should commence at thirty minuts past the hour.
• I didn't say the US cases were equivalent. Not all comparisons are 100% equivalent. Both were cases of women killed for suspected adultery. That's all. You seem convinced that I hold a position that downplays the stoning, and that it's somehow racist or misogynist or both. I can assure you that that's not the case, and I don't feel the need to prove my innocence to you or anyone else. The US has killed thousands of Afghanis under the pretense of protecting Afghani women from stoning death. I wasn't aware that was their pretense. I thought it was because of the Taliban's support for and complicity with Al Qaeda.
• You want to protect women? Give them shotguns. Changing a regime or issuing a restraining order hardly stops a man bent on proving he's right and the bitch is wrong.
• The only thing worse than a bitch is a bitch with a shotgun.
• ahhh. bitches with shotguns.
• Wow you people got so worked up you totally missed my troll mine.
• I think it was probably too subtle.
• I don't see why anyone should be surprised that a country "liberated" by the USA would still employ the death penalty.
• And as Joe Pesci says, "It's the bitches that'll getcha".
• "If the stoning death, and not the US involvement, is the real point of this post, then where is the mention of the countless other stonings in Iran, Sudan, Nigeria, etc? If the topic is violence against women in general, then where are the posts about such killings in every other country in the world?" That's a fallacious argument, my friend. Care to guess why on your own? " I wasn't aware that was their pretense. I thought it was because of the Taliban's support for and complicity with Al Qaeda." You must have missed the memo. One of the reasons used to justify the war was the poor human rights record of the Taliban. A justification I happened to agree with, for the record.
• Monkeyfilter: ahhh. bitches with shotguns.
• If you really want to stop the stoning of women, then you have to get past all the petty political arguments and bullshit, and get to the heart of the problem- the rocks. Take away their fucking rocks!
• If you take the rocks away from honest stoners only criminal stoners will have rocks.
• If you take the rocks away from honest stoners only criminal stoners will have rocks. I'm sorry, but the correct response was "Rocks don't kill people- people kill people." Thanks for playing.
• I'm sorry, but the correct response was "Rocks don't kill people- people kill people." Poor fool. Everyone knows the best response would have been "You can take my rock when you pry it from my cold dead fingers." Sheesh
• First they came for the rock. And I did not speak because the rock can break me. Then they came for the paper. I did not speak because paper's my bitch. Then they came for me and there was no pen missile to cover my ass.