Woman to be stoned to death for "adultery" in Iran

42 posts / 0 new

Mon, 2010-07-12 03:30

Stockholm

This story has been all over the news - but seems conspicuous by its absence on babble:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/western-propaganda-wont-stop-w...

"Government officials, celebrities and ordinary citizens from around the world have joined international human-rights organizations in a growing campaign against the stoning sentence given to Ms. Mohammadi Ashtiani. She was first convicted on May 15, 2006, of having an “illicit relationship” with two men, for which she received 99 lashes. At a subsequent trial of a man accused of murdering her husband, Ms. Mohammadi Ashtiani was charged with “adultery while being married.” It is for that crime that she has been sentenced to death by stoning."

I for one am opposed to this woman being stoned to death and consider it barbaric. In fact I consider it barbaric that she was given even the equivalent of a parking ticket for what she did.

Mon, 2010-07-12 03:35

Cueball

Probably because the recent crack down in civil liberties in Canada has been occupying most peoples attention.

I signed that petition already, and it seems that the Iranian authorities have relented. She is to be hung instead.

Mon, 2010-07-12 03:46

Stockholm

This is the international forum...there are plenty of other active threads. I assume that a lot of people simply don't want to discuss anything happening in the world that doesn't easily lend itself to attacks on American imperialism and zionism.

Mon, 2010-07-12 04:05

Cueball

As I said, I signed the petition, a while back. I don't know what else to do really. Let me know when Iran elects to occupy foreign territories encompasing millions of people, impose martial law on a them for 40 years, steal their land and make them destitute. Then, maybe we can talk.

Anyway just to keep things up-to-date, since your only interest seems to be back end loading this poor woman's predicament into some meta-discussion comparing human rights abuse in Iran, Apartheid Israel and US imperialism:

Iran halts stoning of woman 'for time being'

Your statements about Zionism and US imperialism makes your genuine concern for this woman seem dubious. Are you sure you are not simply using her plight as a means of glosing over serious crimes in the name of Zionism and US imperialism?

Mon, 2010-07-12 05:24

Fidel

Stockholm wrote:

This is the international forum...there are plenty of other active threads. I assume that a lot of people simply don't want to discuss anything happening in the world that doesn't easily lend itself to attacks on American imperialism and zionism.

Why would you think Iran is a country where the USA has not interfered politically and "otherwise" since Mossadegh? US Hawks believe the affairs of every country in the world is their business and have a right to interfere politically as well as "otherwise." The otherwise end of things is always kept at arm's length from the presidency and Congress for the sake of "plausible deniability" and fooling enough millions of people to make the elected cosmetic gov appear legit and in control of things.

As Noam Chomsky says, the real world is run like the mafia. Not a lot happens without Uncle Sam's say so. The last vicious empire was hatched in 1947 with the signing of the National Security Act.

Mon, 2010-07-12 07:37

Sven

Stockholm wrote:

I assume that a lot of people simply don't want to discuss anything happening in the world that doesn't easily lend itself to attacks on American imperialism and zionism.

American imperialism and zionism can still be criticized along with this barbaric practice without much cognitive dissonance.

But, to admit that there are far uglier civil inequities in the world than those that exist in Canada makes complaints about Canadian civil inequities ring a bit hollow.

Mon, 2010-07-12 07:50

skdadl

Sven wrote:

But, to admit that there are far uglier civil inequities in the world than those that exist in Canada makes complaints about Canadian civil inequities ring a bit hollow.

That position always strikes me as one step short of a threat. Translation: "You should be grateful we don't stone you for adultery," which is just one step short of "Be grateful for what we allow you, or we will start stoning you for adultery."

It's the "two wrongs make a right" argument, and your mother was supposed to have taught you what is wrong with that.

Mon, 2010-07-12 10:07

DaveW

Baloney. What contorted logic.

Sven is just saying that it would be extraordinarily unlikely that this punishment would ever be proposed in Canada. That is true.

Mon, 2010-07-12 10:28

Sven

skdadl wrote:

Sven wrote:

But, to admit that there are far uglier civil inequities in the world than those that exist in Canada makes complaints about Canadian civil inequities ring a bit hollow.

That position always strikes me as one step short of a threat. Translation: "You should be grateful we don't stone you for adultery," which is just one step short of "Be grateful for what we allow you, or we will start stoning you for adultery."

I do think North Americas have a lot to be grateful for (not for what "we" [men] allow "you" [women] but what we [society] have created for ourselves [society]). That does not mean conditions of civil inequity can't be improved here. But in the context of (1) extraordinarily oppressive state-sanctioned punishment (like execution for adultry) meted out in many, many parts of the world and (2) the very recent (last 100 years) and rapid development of civil rights in North America, we should at least acknowledge that the sky is not falling.

Look at the issue of SSM. Prior to 2000, not a single country in the world allowed legal unions of same sex couples. Today, Canada is one of only eight countries in the world which allows SSM. Yet, to hear many leftists talk about Canada, Canada is the pit of fascist hell.

Mon, 2010-07-12 10:43

#10

George Victor

You are a braver fella than I, Stock (to paraphrase Kipling). Proposing discussion of historical middle-eastern social customs is a real knuckle-rapper.

Mon, 2010-07-12 13:00

#11

genstrike

Sven wrote:

But, to admit that there are far uglier civil inequities in the world than those that exist in Canada makes complaints about Canadian civil inequities ring a bit hollow.

I don't appreciate this line of reasoning either.

It sounds like it is basically saying that since Canada isn't the worst place in the world, we should stop fighting for a better world, or even against our situation getting worse. If we agree that peace, civil rights, equality, motherhood and apple pie, etc. are all good, shouldn't we be fighting for that everywhere, instead of being content to be second worst or better?

Mon, 2010-07-12 14:01

#12

Unionist

Israel doesn't stone women. So I think they should be allowed to attack Iran.

How'm I doin' so far?

Mon, 2010-07-12 14:02

#13

Sven

genstrike wrote:

Sven wrote:

But, to admit that there are far uglier civil inequities in the world than those that exist in Canada makes complaints about Canadian civil inequities ring a bit hollow.

It sounds like it is basically saying that since Canada isn't the worst place in the world, we should stop fighting for a better world, or even against our situation getting worse. If we agree that peace, civil rights, equality, motherhood and apple pie, etc. are all good, shouldn't we be fighting for that everywhere, instead of being content to be second worst or better?

As I said above:

Sven wrote:

That does not mean conditions of civil inequity can't be improved here.

If Country X has a infant mortality rate of 5 per 1,000 live births and Country Y has an infant mortality rate of 155 per 1,000 live births, that doesn't mean that Country X "should stop fighting for a better world" (i.e., stop working to lower its existing infant mortality rate). But, when looked at in the context of global rates (and very likely Country X's own historical rates), the 5:1,000 ratio can't fairly and legitimately be labeled terrible.

Yet, in the context of civil equality, where there is an analogous disparity between Canada and most other countries, Canada is often disparaged with caustic vitriol as though the country is one of the most wretched abusers of human rights.

Mon, 2010-07-12 14:03

#14

Sven

Unionist wrote:

Israel doesn't stone women. So I think they should be allowed to attack Iran.

How'm I doin' so far?

Terribly, as that's a non sequitur.

Mon, 2010-07-12 14:05

#15

Unionist

Sven wrote:

Unionist wrote:

Israel doesn't stone women. So I think they should be allowed to attack Iran.

How'm I doin' so far?

Terribly, as that's a non sequitur.

Really!!!??? It worked for Afghanistan!! And we've almost won there! Iran should be a cakewalk, given Israel's apparent eagerness to act as a proxy!!

Mon, 2010-07-12 14:29

#16

Sven

Another observation: Being stoned for adultry is probably not even that common in places like Iran. So, I don't think it's particularly useful to put undue focus on that kind of conduct (don't ignore it but don't blow it out of proportion, either).

A far more common scourge is female genital mutilation (FGM). According to the [url=http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/][color=blue][u]World Health Organization[/u][/color][/url], "An estimated 100 to 140 million girls and women worldwide are currently living with the consequences of FGM."

Such a fact vividly underscores the relative goodness of a place like Canada.

Mon, 2010-07-12 14:31

#17

skdadl

I agree. Bomb them! Bomb them! I mean, liberate them!

That'll work.

Mon, 2010-07-12 15:16

#18

Sven

skdadl wrote:

I agree. Bomb them! Bomb them! I mean, liberate them!

That'll work.

Right. And because there is no stoning (or FGM) on Mars, that planet must contain water.

Mon, 2010-07-12 15:57

#19

VanGoghs Ear

Does that kind of thinking work in reverse as well? Canada doesn't have national daycare program therefore we should not be critical of any country for executing their citizens for their sexual choices. Being critical naturally means supporting an invasion, of course.

Mon, 2010-07-12 16:07

#20

Sven

VGE: To whom is your comment directed?

Mon, 2010-07-12 16:13

#21

VanGoghs Ear

it's aimed at those who engage in whataboutery all the time.

Tue, 2010-07-13 21:52

#22

George Victor

One must not mention certain middle eastern customs not because it would give ammunition to devotees of war hereabouts (I'm fairly sure it's safe to say none of those inhabit this realm, except perhaps as "moles" or other furtive, timid critters) but because "out there", people might take up that idea. We must remain absolutely silent to avoid giving succour to the enemy within our borders and "the West" at large...people who would urge further military adventures in the name of some kind of social justice. To avoid becoming "used" by propagandists, we must not even discuss the writings of people who oppose the existence of a religiosity that drove almost continuous warfare across Europe for more than four centuries.

The level of discipline demanded by that degree of concern would be extremely difficult to maintain if one did not see the way in which the propagandists of Tel Aviv and Washington - and all of their network at work here and abroad - actually function. But perhaps if we can entertain discussion of the varieties of belief out there in the real world, we can also safely discuss some of their practices? The Globe and Mail's Graeme Smith, who blew the whistle on Canadian forces handing over detainees to Afghan interrogators, has been writing from Pakistan, with a Saturday series that looks at internal divisions within that country. There is what might be called an "uneasy multiculturalism" that begs to be explored in the many works available.

Tue, 2010-07-13 22:01

#23

cruisin_turtle

Unionist wrote:

Israel doesn't stone women. So I think they should be allowed to attack Iran.

How'm I doin' so far?

As far as the people on this thread are concerned, you are DOING GREAT, 'ist

Tue, 2010-07-13 22:01

#24

al-Qa'bong

Quote:

This story has been all over the news - but seems conspicuous by its absence on babble

Gosh, thanks Stockholm, for raising this on babble.

Women should not be stoned to death!

Death to Israel!

Tue, 2010-07-13 22:16

#25

George Victor

And so it goes. (Vonnegut, first employed in Slaughterhouse-Five)

Tue, 2010-07-13 23:13

#26

al-Qa'bong

Come on, George, get into the spirit of the thread.

Is it possible to find the "Bless Me Now With your Fierce Tears" thread from the day Vonnegut died? Maybe I was on EnMasse when he died, but I wrote "So it goes" in whichever site's thread at the time. The Great Unread ain't as illiiterate as you think.

Tue, 2010-07-13 23:22

#27

Unionist

al-Qa'bong wrote:

Is it possible to find the "Bless Me Now With your Fierce Tears" thread from the day Vonnegut died? Maybe I was on EnMasse when he died, but I wrote "So it goes" in whichever site's thread at the time.

Al-Qa'bong on EnMasse:

[url=http://enmasse.ca/forums/viewtopic.php?p=109434&sid=cc95cb52e9eaf7e4b7d7... it goes.[/url]

... and BleedingHeart on babble:

[url=http://archive.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=11&t=0017... it goes.[/url]

Tue, 2010-07-13 23:48

#28

George Victor

al-Qa'bong wrote:

Come on, George, get into the spirit of the thread.

Is it possible to find the "Bless Me Now With your Fierce Tears" thread from the day Vonnegut died? Maybe I was on EnMasse when he died, but I wrote "So it goes" in whichever site's thread at the time. The Great Unread ain't as illiiterate as you think.

Oh I would never accuse you of such a failing, alQ...although I've absolutely NO IDEA of why you raised it. Do you mean Vonnegut did not use the expression first in Slaughter-house Five? And now you've caused U (never far in the background on this particular) to roll up the heavy artillery to the seige works.

This aspirant joined the ranks of babble six months after the death of Vonnegut, apparently (thanks U). I was introduced to him be an English prof who came up out of the states seeking relief from the threat of the draft. Breakfast of Champions and Slaughter-house Five were his initial recommendations.

Wed, 2010-07-14 01:28

#29

trippie

So the imposition of ultra right conservative Islamist practices are absent form the pressure the West puts on Iran I guess?

Nope, The constant movement to ultra right conservativism in Iran is directly related to the economic conditions of society. Their economic conditions are directly related to the world abroad..

Wed, 2010-07-14 03:10

#30

al-Qa'bong

Say, Unionist, do you have some sort of special interwebs potion that allows you to perform such feats?

I have to admit, it was sad to read Hephastion's comments on Jerry Falwell's death, knowing Heph's fate but three years later.

Quote:

Oh I would never accuse you of such a failing, alQ...although I've absolutely NO IDEA of why you raised it

Hmm, I guess that makes us...even.

Wed, 2010-07-14 10:26

#31

George Victor

I have reviewed my remarks preceding your "offended" post, alQ, but I've no idea where you are coming from still, with this idea that we are now "even."?. Perhaps you could point out the offending phrase/word? Or we could ask U to help out here as well. He has in the past been able to provide a literalist's focus at the level of syntax, and sustain it for entire threads.

Wed, 2010-07-14 11:27

#32

Jingles

Quote:
Israel doesn't stone women. So I think they should be allowed to attack Iran.

Spoke too [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EUUrE8Lm14]soon...[/url]

To be fair, it isn't the [i]state[/i] of Israel, per se, but those "settlers" are sanctioned, protected and encouraged by the state. And, the [i]state[/i] of Israel would never engage in such a barbaric, uncivilized practice as stoning. Not when you have civilized F-16s and Apache gunships, hell ya! That'll teach those women to be Palestinian!

Wed, 2010-07-14 15:36

#33

remind

It is very disconcerting to watch some men have a pissing match in a thread about a woman possibly being stoned to death, it was enough that it was started by a man who wanted to play politics with this woman' life.

Mon, 2010-08-16 20:09

#34

Sven

The woman in Iran may have received a (temporary) reprieve from being stoned to death but [url=http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/08/16/afghanistan.stoning.death/in... Taliban[/u][/color][/url] stoned a 27-year old man and a 20-year old woman to death today for having had an "illicit" sexual relationship.

For a good primer on the "Do's and Don't's of Stoning" in Iran, [url=http://www.slate.com/id/2262540/][color=blue][u]Slate[/u][/color][/url] ran an informative piece earlier this month. [u]NOTE[/u]: Be aware that the 1994 film clip of a stoning linked to in the Slate story is very disturbing. I wish I hadn't seen it...

Mon, 2010-08-16 20:46

#35

NDPP

Abolish the Death Penalty Worldwide!

Save Sakineh Mohammadi

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/save-sakineh-mohammadi.html

Save Linda Carty

http://www.reprieve.org.uk/savelindacarty

Save Teresa Lewis - sentenced to be executed in Virginia USA 9/23/2010

http://www.saveteresalewis.org/petition.html

Mon, 2010-08-16 21:03

#36

E.Tamaran

If the law in Iran allows stoning, well, that's their business. We should not interfere in any way. Otherwise, people might get the idea that it's OK to intervene in other places, like Afghanistan.

Mon, 2010-08-16 21:22

#37

Catchfire

Sven, why did you post an incident which took place in Afghanistan in a thread about Iran?

Mon, 2010-08-16 21:31

#38

Unionist

al-Qa'bong wrote:

Say, Unionist, do you have some sort of special interwebs potion that allows you to perform such feats?

[referring to Unionist's uncanny ability to find stuff... - U.]

Yes.