To the tyrants of the Arab world...

  • Thread starter Thread starter جوري
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 48
  • Views Views 9K
Would the people of the Arab world want democracy? Or would democracy in the Arab world simply mean theocracy, and shortly thereafter another dictatorship? I suppose it depends on where in the Arab world we speak of. Probably different in the different areas.
 
Pygoscelis said:
Would the people of the Arab world want democracy? Or would democracy in the Arab world simply mean theocracy, and shortly thereafter another dictatorship? I suppose it depends on where in the Arab world we speak of. Probably different in the different areas.
Click to expand...


As sheikh ibrahim el-khouly stated today in his lecture.. Islam is radically more progressive than 'democracy'. If you have 50+1 usurping the the opinion of 50-1 then, that isn't a fair and just system rather another totalitarian dictatorship. In Islam Amrohoum shura bynhoum from the the head of state to the youngest child. No one is excluded and no one is unrepresented!
Now a 'democracy' by its very definition means people electing their own representative not a troika of militant despots, Zionist pigs and fundamental christian poodles.
It was only under the Muslim empire after all that any exiled individuals and especially Jews who were kicked and tortured in the 'civilized' west and even Christian west that found a fair degree of tolerance in the Muslim world..

Why do you insist on dispensing with your foolish under-educated opinion where ever you go?

all the best
 
O Allah Grant the Oppressed Victory, the Weak Victory, the Poor Victory. Verily To You, Alone, Belongs All that is in the Heavens and the Earth. Ameen!
 
Pygoscelis said:
Would the people of the Arab world want democracy? Or would democracy in the Arab world simply mean theocracy, and shortly thereafter another dictatorship? I suppose it depends on where in the Arab world we speak of. Probably different in the different areas.
Click to expand...

Why must a theocracy lead to a dictatorship?
 
Boaz said:
I know Iran isn't an Arab country, but they too are protesting the tyrants over there.
Click to expand...

You mean the sore losers who lost in the elections last time out are protesting against the Iranian government, aided by the US and its masters Israhell.
 
Boaz said:
I know Iran isn't an Arab country, but they too are protesting the tyrants over there.
Click to expand...

The Iranian government is not that bad than compared to the royal monarchies. I think some Iranians were upset about the economy...
 
Lost Identity said:
You mean the sore losers who lost in the elections last time out are protesting against the Iranian government, aided by the US and its masters Israhell.
Click to expand...

Look, just because they don't want to be governed by religion, doesn't mean they're Zionists or pro-America.
 
Boaz said:
Look, just because they don't want to be governed by religion, doesn't mean they're Zionists or pro-America.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't they have been protesting against the Ayatollah? He is the one that is in charge. I think the majority of protesters wanted Mousavi rather than Ahmadinejad...and Mousavi does not promote secularism.
 
That was in 2009. Right now they want a change of government completely. I'm against all non-secular governments. Religion and politics don't mix because one will always influence the other and both will be corrupt.
 
Last edited:
Boaz said:
That was in 2009. Right now they want a change of government completely.
Click to expand...

Evidence?

I'm against all non-secular governments. Religion and politics don't mix because one will always influence the other and both will be corrupt.
Click to expand...

It depends on what you mean by corruption. Can you give me an example?
 
Boaz said:
Look, just because they don't want to be governed by religion, doesn't mean they're Zionists or pro-America.
Click to expand...

Are you having a laugh? Who don't want to be governed by Religion, A handful of Zionist backed [so called] protesters?

Boaz said:
I'm against all non-secular governments. Religion and politics don't mix because one will always influence the other and both will be corrupt.
Click to expand...

You may be against Non secular governments but that's not to say the vast majority of Iranian's are!
What is corrupt about the Iranian government?

Classic case of Anti Iran propaganda
 
Last edited:
What is corrupt about the Iranian government?
Click to expand...

Well lately it seems they are executing people who protest the government and saying they are being executed for drug charges.

Or you can toe the Iranian government line that every single thing that is anti-Iranian government, whether it be protesters or claims of election fraud or the reports of multiple human rights groups, are all perpetrated and made up by foreign countries.

I also find it enlightening what the Iranian government keeps out of the Iranian press. If a country is not corrupt and wants to listen to its people then why the need to censor the press? Why make it illegal to criticize the government?
 
titus said:
it illegal to criticize the government?
Click to expand...


Is it legal to criticize the govt. in the U.S and I am not talking in theory.. I am speaking of the actuality.. All corporate media seems to echo one sentiment and any opposing voice even if given a chance is in fact marginalized and ridiculed.. is that better in your opinion than censorship?
 
Is it legal to criticize the govt. in the U.S and I am not talking in theory..
Click to expand...

Yes, it is legal. It happens every single day. How many Americans are you aware of that have been jailed for criticizing the government?

In Iran it is actually a law on the books that makes it illegal and journalists are often jailed for printing anti-government "propaganda".
 
titus said:
Yes, it is legal. It happens every single day. How many Americans are you aware of that have been jailed for criticizing the government? In Iran it is actually a law on the books that makes it illegal and journalists are often jailed for printing anti-government "propaganda".
Click to expand...



It actually doesn't happen everyday..

those who dare speak out, for instance against their stance on the Colonial settler state end up losing their job all together.. I can just imagine them offering people who defend the taliban/hamas/hizbullah a nice chance to criticize your govt. using a different view.. that will be the day!

here is one example out of many:

http://chomsky-must-read.blogspot.com/2010/10/american-radical-trials-of-norman.html

and you merely need to google to see a censored list of books in the U.S

pls. stop the pretenses.. hypocrisy isn't attractive!
 
Last edited:
It actually doesn't happen everyday
Click to expand...

People criticizing the US government in print? It most certainly happens every day.

those who dare speak out, for instance against their stance on the Colonial settler state end up losing their job all together.
Click to expand...

We are talking government oppression here. I believe you are referring to Helen Thomas? If so then she was forced to retire by a private corporation and had absolutely zero chance of spending any time in Jail. Compare that with what would happen to anyone in Iran who spoke out publicly in favor of Israel, which would be possible jail time and death.

Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press do not mean freedom from repercussion for your actions by other individuals, nor does it mean that nobody is allowed to criticize you back for your opinion. It means that the government cannot persecute you for voicing your opinion.
 
titus said:
We are talking government oppression here. I believe you are referring to Helen Thomas? If so then she was forced to retire by a private corporation and had absolutely zero chance of spending any time in Jail. Compare that with what would happen to anyone in Iran who spoke out publicly in favor of Israel, which would be possible jail time and death. Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press do not mean freedom from repercussion for your actions by other individuals, nor does it mean that nobody is allowed to criticize you back for your opinion. It means that the government cannot persecute you for voicing your opinion.
Click to expand...


I was speaking of finklestein but thank you for bringing into the picture Ms. Thomas as well countless others..
Also what do you call those held in Gitmo without trial and for years?
yeah repercussions can indeed take many different forms.. which is worse or better? who is to say? why not ask the individuals voicing a different opinion or those simply lynched off the road for being Muslim and imprisoned somewhere without any just cause which form of bull **** they prefer more?

all the best
 
Finkelstein, also, was not prosecuted in any way by the government and had absolutely zero chance of jail time.

Also what do you call those held in Gitmo without trial and for years?
Click to expand...

I have always been against Gitmo. I have always thought that the people being held there should either be brought up on charges or let go.

Those are not cases, though, of people not being allowed to voice their opinion. These are people accused of acts of violence.
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top