Guest dada_rocks Posted January 29, 2009 Posted January 29, 2009 ^ Show me one post where I said people are moving to Gujarat despite risking their lives. Else accept you too are a certified moron. Also, show me one post where I have said Modi has not brought good economics to Gujarat. Else accept you are a certified idiot. Modi harmed the very fabric of secularism for which he evaded all trials like Rajeev Gandhi did and deserves to be brought to justice like Rajeev Gandhi should have. But neither were ever and nor will they ever face a trial. That doesn't mean they have not done any good for India/Gujarat. I dont; have time mate for searching posts but your idelogical buddy lurker wud suffice it.. I had this debate with him as early as last week..... intellectually dishonest morons you guys are.. in another post you are invoking how you are fine with moves of elected govt all the while bamboozling elected govts whenever it suits your psec propaganda.. again here same story make up your mind which rule it's going to be PS: Find me few posts with same vitriolic which you reserve for Modi.. pathetic double standar you have.. and noooo Modi didn't evade anythign his case was judged by indepedent SC commission while hostile govt was in power in delhi.. so to suggest he avoided thsi like Rajeev gandhi was all powerful Pm is being at best naive or at worst intellectally dishonest whose ample signs u have consistently shown.. got give u,, u are consistent in your intellectual dishonesty for sure
The Outsider Posted January 29, 2009 Author Posted January 29, 2009 I dont; have time mate for searching posts but your idelogical buddy lurker wud suffice it.. I had this debate with him as early as last week..... intellectually dishonest morons you guys are.. in another post you are invoking how you are fine with moves of elected govt all the while bamboozling elected govts whenever it suits your psec propaganda.. again here same story make up your mind which rule it's going to be Okay, glad to know that you have accepted that you are a certified moron and idiot since you were able to produce no post where I said what you were claiming. Acceptance is the first step towards reform. Maybe one day you'll grow out of the idiot and moron league where you just start putting words in people's mouths to drive your hate agenda.
The Outsider Posted January 29, 2009 Author Posted January 29, 2009 cuz people need jobs , money , experience of working overseas etc. Look its not like every non-muslim gets harassed there but I have heard way too many examples where people felt that being of another religion (maybe just foreigner ) didnt give them proper rights Sorry, I don't buy that. If non Muslims were being harassed to the extent you are describing hundreds of thousands of people and thousands of corporations would not be shifting base to Dubai making it a financial hub rivaled only by Singapore and Hong Kong who have had quite a head start. Even Bombay is not in the same league as Dubai as far as the corporate world goes.
punjabi_khota Posted January 29, 2009 Posted January 29, 2009 And yet 75% of Dubai's population is foreigners....please enlighten me how? My first guess would be low taxes and similar measures, but here is what I found: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_the_United_Arab_Emirates#cite_note-3 From Wikipedia: Migrants, particularly migrant workers, make up a majority (approximately 80%) of the resident population of the UAE, and account for 90% of its workforce. And he UAE has not signed most international human rights and labor rights treaties, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, and the Convention against Torture. ................................................................................................................................... Migrant labourers wouldn't be the first one to cry about human rights, since they couldn't care less if they can atleast get food on the table. I don't know what Sharia has to do with these facts, but I guess non existent labor rights, non existent protection for foreigners makes it easy for corporations to exploit cheap easy foreign labor.
The Outsider Posted January 29, 2009 Author Posted January 29, 2009 I have clearly said that these are acts comming out of frustration from these organizations whos stated agenda is vigilantism .... and not beating up women. Did you or did you not support and glorify people beating up and molesting women. A yes or no will suffice. FYI, vigilante is considered a praise in normal parlance. Read that post again. I said there is a definition of Sharia interpretation and application varies but at no point can anyone with a few braincells can say that they will not have any issues with any flavor of sharia be it the Malaysian or the Saudi or the Indonesian one. And once again keep in mind that you were jumping up and down in the original discussion based on the Malaysian and Indonesian flavors which you now accept to be radical countries end of story. Okay then show me how the Shariah being practised in states like Dubai, Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait is any more radical than the average country in the world which does not implement Shariah. Places like China and North Korea would be a good start. And if I start producing the def of real Sharia you will start getting bent out of shape and go hiding behind the no religious discussion excuse as is the wont of gutless wimps such as you and your other harami comrades. The "real" definition of Shariah is inconsequential because we are talking about Shariah practised in certain states. Same thing. But please do continue embarasssing yourself somemore people need to see how the self styled commander of secularism is going to extreems in justifying what is a draconian system even to a highschool kid. You asked for places of worship for other religions....provided. You asked for pubs/clubs.......provided. You asked for survival of people who don't believe in Quran.......provided. You gave a three month sentence for having public sex on a beach as your example of a draconian law Oh, BTW, Pork is also available in Dubai just in case you feel like indulging in a sausage after a nice hangover. Who said he was a politician ? He is a mullah and acted just as Mullahs do .... no surprises though that he hails from your city. Some bloody example of Hindu-muslim unity. So what if he is from Lucknow if he does not have any following in Lucknow? How does one particular nut case typify Lucknow? I still don't consider all people from Hubli to be c.hutiyas even after interacting with you for 4-5 years. And yes, a lot of no bodies get messages from Mata Rome, one such no body got a message to be the President of India.
The Outsider Posted January 29, 2009 Author Posted January 29, 2009 Migrant labourers wouldn't be the first one to cry about human rights, since they couldn't care less if they can atleast get food on the table. I don't know what Sharia has to do with these facts, but I guess non existent labor rights, non existent protection for foreigners makes it easy for corporations to exploit cheap easy foreign labor. The discussion is whether Dubai is any more draconian than a lot of other countries in the world who don't practise Shariah.
The Outsider Posted January 29, 2009 Author Posted January 29, 2009 http://dubaiforvisitors.com/2007/09/27/the-sharia-dubai-law-how-it-affects-you/ Yeah, I'll also write a blog and quote it tomorrow.
The Outsider Posted January 29, 2009 Author Posted January 29, 2009 Screw Dubai ... the ****ing Indian Govt alows Muslims to have 4 wives as per sharia .... Iam sure Janab Shwetabh-ali-khan has "No issues with Sharia As practiced in India" *** the c word goes here with that ****ing smiley ** What is the percentage of Muslims in India who have 4 wives in practise?
suraj Posted January 29, 2009 Posted January 29, 2009 What is the percentage of Muslims in India who have 4 wives in practise? Why is that relevant?? The point is about duplicity of law based on religion which at the very least allows this to happen whether or not this is practised. For a country that aims at keeping religion separate from state, this is a shame ful loophole IMHO.
suraj Posted January 29, 2009 Posted January 29, 2009 “Westerners respect each other and they know their countries’ traditions and laws. So why when it comes to Muslims they claim that they do not know anything about the traditions and culture? The West knows well that Muslims, like Hindus, Christians and Jews, have their culture and traditions. They should respect our religion,†Dr Al Qubaisi said. “We see many such cases of foreign men and women in courts. They say they do not know the traditions and religion here. They should know and respect our tradition the same way we respect their tradition and religion,†he said. Dr Khalifa Rashid Al Sha’ali, Dean of the Faculty of Law at Ajman University, said if a man and a woman who are not related are caught alone in a private place, they face a jail sentence or lashes even if they were not involved in any suspicious act. Man what kind of crap is this??? If I start a religion that says 2 human beings found together are punishable for murder according to my religion- is everyone supposed to respect that too??
punjabi_khota Posted January 29, 2009 Posted January 29, 2009 The discussion is whether Dubai is any more draconian than a lot of other countries in the world who don't practise Shariah. I was answering your question about a large percentage of people being foreigners. you said Sorry, I don't buy that. If non Muslims were being harassed to the extent you are describing hundreds of thousands of people and thousands of corporations would not be shifting base to Dubai Now if 80-90% of all residents are migrant laborers, you can't argue that those people would NOT be there if there were all kinds of draconian laws/discrimination being applied. That was basically your counter argument. But they are daily workers, most living like cattle and couldn't be less worried about whether they can have pre marital sex without going to jail, or drink a nice glass of wine or even practise their own religion freely. After all, pehle pet pooja, baad mein kam dooja.
Desi Cartman Posted January 29, 2009 Posted January 29, 2009 Sorry' date=' I don't buy that. If non Muslims were being harassed to the extent you are describing hundreds of thousands of people and thousands of corporations would not be shifting base to Dubai making it a financial hub rivaled only by Singapore and Hong Kong who have had quite a head start. Even Bombay is not in the same league as Dubai as far as the corporate world goes.[/quote'] I think Punjabi_khotay has provided enough info on this ... IMO its not that everybody is getting harassed but the laws (sharia) are stupid and favor Muslims and locals only.
Gambit Posted January 29, 2009 Posted January 29, 2009 75% of dubai's population is foreigner When I pointed out muslims are flocking to Gujraat so had their been persecution why wud they go there. I was told by psec cabal here l(urker,shewatch etc) that when people need job they can even risk their lives......... ( Mind you I am not equating gujrat with dubai since last time i checked gujrat too is being governed by same consittution as any other indian state) but classic intellectual dishonesty of these folks are at display here....... same folks are tryng to say now that since dubai has many foreingners hence case of discrimination against non-muslim doesn't hold water. Can you psec cabal make up your mind please....... All I ask is little consistency.. pick whatever principle you want to stick to but be consistent mates tsk tsk same That is ownage.
Predator_05 Posted January 29, 2009 Posted January 29, 2009 Shwetabh - if Sharia law is proven to be an acceptable way to govern, why vote for a uniform civil code ?
suraj Posted January 29, 2009 Posted January 29, 2009 :giggle: Dude no tough questions STFU :winky: Problem is that all the nice people who try to defend the "Sharia" crap as religious freedom of Muslims don't understand its implications If Nazism was a religion, should India have supported and protected that too as a secular country??
suraj Posted January 29, 2009 Posted January 29, 2009 beleive it or not a lot of them are closet islamists or sympathisers ... I know it might sound farfetched but you will be surprised at how much brainwashing that is conducted by the pseudo brigade.: I don't really believe that BB
The Outsider Posted January 29, 2009 Author Posted January 29, 2009 Why is that relevant?? The point is about duplicity of law based on religion which at the very least allows this to happen whether or not this is practised. For a country that aims at keeping religion separate from state, this is a shame ful loophole IMHO. It is relevant and in fact is the only relevant thing here. The entire discussion is not about what the laws of a particular place say, but how they pan out in practise. There are laws against anal sex in USA. Are they followed. Should we spend our time agitating against them? A Muslim marrying multiple times in India is not a big enough issue to fret about. Ideally, it should not happen, but that is not the discussion here.
The Outsider Posted January 29, 2009 Author Posted January 29, 2009 I was answering your question about a large percentage of people being foreigners. you said Now if 80-90% of all residents are migrant laborers, you can't argue that those people would NOT be there if there were all kinds of draconian laws/discrimination being applied. That was basically your counter argument. But they are daily workers, most living like cattle and couldn't be less worried about whether they can have pre marital sex without going to jail, or drink a nice glass of wine or even practise their own religion freely. After all, pehle pet pooja, baad mein kam dooja. The who is who of the Banking and IT industry have major offices in Dubai. Many are making it their Asia head office. Yes, tax benefits help but you can't have CEOs, CFOs, upper management, and middle management flocking to a city to reside there if they will be persecuted. When three fourths of a country's population is foreign, it is but expected the majority will be from the lower strata. You can't have hundreds of thousands CEOs moving there can you? As for the things you mentioned, there are pubs, night clubs, temples, churches in Dubai......give me something concrete about persecution on the ground of people there.
The Outsider Posted January 29, 2009 Author Posted January 29, 2009 Shwetabh - if Sharia law is proven to be an acceptable way to govern' date=' why vote for a uniform civil code ?[/quote'] Oh man!!! Uniform Civil Code is the ideal thing, fine. I agree and fully support it. That is not the discussion. The discussion is whether Shariah as practised in certain states like Dubai, Bahrain is any more draconian that a lot of other places in the world where Shariah is not the form of law. It's about the ground realities, not just what the law book says. Do you see any difference between the following 2 sentences : 1. I have no major issues with Shariah as practised in certain states. 2. I support Shariah.
The Outsider Posted January 29, 2009 Author Posted January 29, 2009 Problem is that all the nice people who try to defend the "Sharia" crap as religious freedom of Muslims don't understand its implications If Nazism was a religion, should India have supported and protected that too as a secular country?? Who the heck is trying to defend Shariah? Tell me something, simple. Do you see any difference between the following 2 sentences : 1. I have no major issues with Shariah as practised in certain states. 2. I support Shariah. We are discussing 1, not 2. If you don't there is no point stretching this discussion further, as I'll just accept nuances in language are beyond the understanding of a few, even though the English grammar book might say otherwise.
Recommended Posts