Malaysia imposes dress code for non-muslims, THE FRENCH WAY

Quote:And I reserve the right to disapprove, and be disappointed in the choices humans make, both as individuals, and nations.

Well on this I would agree and feel the same.

Quote:Germany was free to choose to elect a madman as a leader, and to round up the Jews and murder them. It was the desire of the majority, who were we to judge?

Nazi germany was not interfered with when they were killing jews. They were attacked as they threatened every other free nation. But how do you compare killing jews with a request that women who do not belong to a community respect the modesty of that community? They aren't killing anyone and they sure as hell aren't policing women all over the country or in their homes.

Quote:Those Indonesian gays and straights who end up in whatever hellhole passes for a prison there for the crime of getting or giving a blowjob will have my sympathies. I hope that we in the west will give them a place to go should they choose to leave

Fine, and I am sure like Castro they would gladly let them leave.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Let us hope that they do. And all of the intellectuals, and feminists. Let their be a brain drain as these people flee oppression, and let Indonesia, and all countries that follow a similar path, sink into backwardness, and a new dark age.

But I will still have sympathy for those who cannot leave, and are forced to endure an Orwellian existence.

Christ, what are you going to defend next, Suttee?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Quote:Well, I suggest you call me James, then. My name is not Chis or Chris. If you persist in calling me that, I might get confused and not answer you. Or I might think you're just being rude and not answer you.

Sorry my mistake.

Quote:I don't care about that, in itself. My concern is when it impacts on human rights.

You mean your conception of human rights. Many people believe it is their right to live and believe differently than someone who lives millions of miles away, doesnt participate in their society nor contribute to it.

Quote:...Given the instability that results from taking that kind of action, it is very rarely a good idea, except in the case of extremely oppressive regimes.

Well lets take two situations, one the law in malaysia concerning dress? What action do you suppose outsiders should take? And then the last, the oppressive regime that doesn't have popular support. If a nation is organizing and fighting an oppressive regime and need/request help then help, but if this oppression isn't confronted on what grounds do we interfere?

Quote:Where do you draw the line, then? How do you determine who is and who isn't a member of "our nation or group"? Personally, I tend to take a very wide view, indeed a global one, and say that all human beings share certain things in common and should be entitled to certain rights. The United Nations agrees with me, and so do organisations like Amnesty International

yes and look how much power they have to change it? The U.S by the way is also among the list of nations for denying human rights, how much headway has been done there? We didnt invade China or the soviet union, or even north korea because they are too strong (main reason we didn't help Tibet when the Dalai Lama had requested the help of the u.s). Ever read Romeo Dalaire's account of the U.N response in Rwanda? The U.N basically had their men sit in the country and WATCH one group kill another and do nothing, people were begging Dalaires men to help BEGGING and they were told to do nothing. Why didn't the U.S and U.N send troops into south africa? Why dont they do the same for the palestinians? Arbitrary I'm sure. Why did the Ivory Coast have to place bodies in front of the u.s embassy to get a reaction? Why did the same ivory coast turn into a mob demanding the french leave? We don't really care about human rights we care about power and resources etc. This global human rights campaign is a hypocrisy. We do not hold the same beliefs what I see happening is the west dictating what the rest of the world should believe. Its in our interest to do so. Basically I am a human being in the world but groups have been broken up into nation-states, and frankly on a tribal/religious/cultural level we are different. Something is not a human rights abuse unless the culture/society itself deems it as such. Look at Cuba, he is considered a great man in South and Central America, he educates many of their doctors and gives them resources both financial, intellectual and military. We say he is horrible but many do not, including the illustrious Gabriel Garcia Marquez who is very close to the man. Castro to americans is a horrible dictator who should be ousted, to most of his people he's a great man, a great leader of the people. But because he does not live up to OUR ideal then we say he must go. Doesn't that strike you as a tad bit arrogant?


Quote

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

nly they can solve their problems. We're really looking at consciousness-raising here. The first step to solving a problem is admitting that you have a problem.

We raise consciousness by example and the U.S sets a bad example for many people around the world. We are not going to change another's mind just because we think we are right, we don't pay enough attention to our own shit and they know it. (smiles)...and this is not a twelve step program. My problem is not with disagreement but the big boney finger always be pointed towards cultures to which we don't belong. The fact is that rape happens everywhere, black/white/eastern/western/all religious groups included. Rape sucks everywhere and what difference does it make why someone is raped?

 

Repo go back and read my posts addressed to Raithere. When Castro sent boat loads of Cubans to the States americans felt pissed upon. They were the criminals of cuban society he sent. Revolutionaries, intellectuals and feminists are interested in revolutionizing their society they don't up and run. They do the work for the cause they were impassioned to defend.

 

A while ago PAS decided that billboards featuring advertisements with women without headscarfs had to be covered up. –Did they think men were going to vandalise them in a fit of sexual frustration?

Malaysian politics tend to play ‘I’m the best Muslim’, and its well known for its ‘Asian democracy’. So as well as coming down on tight jeans (which don’t facilitate rape) Muslims are now bared from going anywhere alcohol is being served (in that state)

But alls well...Menteri Besar Abdul Hadi Awang came to his senses on the 15th of jan. http://www.straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/asia/story/0,4386,230152-1074203940,00.html

 

Quote:Not only my conception of human rights. There's a thing called the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It's a United Nations treaty, signed by most nations of the world. There are many other common views on human rights by various ethical philosophers.

And? How universal can it be if there are average people all over the world who do not live by those similar standards? And what about the countries that sign it and do not live up to those standards? And what of the countries who do not sign it and couldn't care less about them? We aren't discussing those who do we are discussing those who dont.

Quote:In principle, intervention is morally permissible if it is done to protect the weak and powerless who are the subjects of the oppression

In principle? Why is there basically only one country that displays this principle? And controls how this principle is exercised? There is only one country that sees fit to police the world.

Quote:I suggest in the first instance that they lobby the Malaysian government to change its stance. They should also support groups in Malaysia who oppose this.

Why? What is wrong with a law stating that one should dress in a specific manner while working in their community? Why hasn't Libya, Iran, Saudi Arabia etc been lobbied? Why hasn't Israel been lobbied for Orthodox jews requesting that people/tourists dress in a certain manner when visiting their communities in Jerusalem? And lobby how? What do you suggest sanctions?

Quote:The small amount of power given to the UN is a problem in itself.

Riiight! How would you do that? Bush doesn't care about the UN why should anyone else? They piss away the money with their massive bureaucracy now!

Quote:Again, I have never claimed that the US is faultless. In fact, it has a very poor human rights record.

Then why is the U.S allowed to set the standard? And they do. Why are there only five nations who are allowed to be permenant members of the security council: U.S, UK, France, Russian Federation and China? Why are all the countries Western save one? 10 countries vote on ten other countries to 'join' the five member countries for two year terms. Very egalitarian don't you think?

Quote:If I understand your argument, you wouldn't have wanted them to intervene, would you? After all, why should the US impose its values on Rwandans?

Darling the U.N had their troops there already. They stood by and witnessed the whole thing. They weren't sitting in offices deciding whether it was a good idea to go in. If the U.N is the bastion of human rights then how could they sit back and watch? I am pointing out the hypocisy in the organization.

Quote:Who's this "we"? Do you mean "we, the American government", or something else?

Yes the U.S government who the american people are responsible for. They are not responsible for the malaysian, indonesian or Iranian government, but they are responsible for their own. Why dont they lobby their own? I also mean the west in general (as in the main controlling elements within the U.N)

Quote:You're lumping two different things together. It is one thing to condemn governments who ignore human rights, but quite another to say that the promotion of human rights is itself a worthless enterprise. Which one of these statements do you want to make here?

How have I lumped two different things together? What is worthless is the arbitrary hypocritical ethnocentric position of the west regarding human rights. What is worthwile is Western nations setting the example. Wouldn't it be great if the U.S actually didn't make a fool of their own principles? If they really did live up their position at home as well as abroad? Dont you think they would be respected more if they weren't manipulating other countries for their own interests? Or by threatening nations by denying aid packages if they don't support u.s interests?

Quote:Wrong. Certain rights are universally agreed to be desirable across the globe, at least by those who are not so oppressed that they feel unable to express an opinion for fear of persecution.

Oh really, then why are activists having such difficulty trying to convince mothers not to circumcise their daughters? Why are you trying so hard to convince PM of your position? Shouldn't he just 'see' that you are right and he wrong? What about countries where homosexuality is considered a sickness, abhorrent and deviant? What about cultures where arranged marriage is the norm? What about countries that think it is okay to decimate people with daisy cutters, land mines and atom bombs and wage illegal wars without retribution? What about countries that think a death sentence is the right thing to do?

Quote:Look at the economic situation and standard of living in Cuba, and decide for yourself whether Castro has been good for the country or not. Mind you, I am not in any way saying he should be ousted now. This is not an issue I have looked at in anything like the depth needed to be able to express an informed opinion on that matter.

Go check your facts, Cuba suffered under SANCTIONS. A few years back countries, many European, complained that they couldn't see any reason why they should not do business with Cuba. Cuba became enemy number one when they nationalized industries in their country. Industries that were formerly being run by U.S companies. Unless you see how the West cripples other countries you cannot speak about human rights and have others take you seriously. It was the same with Iraq. Iraqi's were doing quite well BEFORE the sanctions. Shit even U.N reports indicated that people were suffering from poor medical care and lowered standards in every aspect of life because of the sanctions. Some to their credit even resigned over the issue.

Quote:I think we can pay attention to our own problems and also take an interest in the issues other people face. It's not one or the other.

Okay I get it, there are news reports about failing public schools and religious radicals against gay rights that are in question, but you can give those to others. There are people who under the patriot act are imprisoned without charge, representation for a specified indefinite period of time but you want to free people elsewhere. The U.S can't provide medical insurance to low wage workers but you want to help elsewhere. Yea I get it.

Quote:It makes no difference. Rape is bad. Everybody agrees with that - except rapists. But again, that's not what is under discussion here. We were discussing whether rape can be mitigated or excused by the dress of the victim. My answer is an unequivocal "No!", and some other people agree with me. I have tried to explain why I give that answer, and now I'm explaining why a shout of "Cultural relativism!" doesn't cut the mustard as a response.

Unequivocally no? I do think that a woman can set herself up for a rape but I dont think that that excuses the act. And guess what? I belong to the west so it has nothing to do with cultural relativism, the dress code yes, the rape issue no.

 

Quote from article:KUALA TERENGGANU - Menteri Besar Abdul Hadi Awang has reversed his stand on the ban which stops non-Muslim women in Terengganu from wearing short skirts or tight jeans to work. He said on Tuesday that the Terengganu state government run by Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS) could not dictate how non-Muslims should be dressed.Advertisement
'They are free to choose their dressing and we cannot force them to dress like Muslims,' he said before presenting Chinese New Year gifts to non-Muslims in Kampong Tiong.The statement by the PAS chief contradicted one he made earlier in which he said that the dress code set on Jan 4 by the Kuala Terengganu Municipal Council was acceptable to non-Muslim state religious leaders.
Several of these leaders and other groups in Malaysia criticised the code as infringing on the rights of women who are not followers of Islam.
They included Muslims."

Ahh, look at that? Those silly malaysians sorted it all out by themselves without the inteference of pesky foreigners. So what now are you going to lobby France for the same law being worked in the opposite direction? Quelle Horreur! Who would ever dare.

 

Malaysia already has a policy that all schools should have a dress code. I very much doubt that you would be allowed to wear a cross in a Malaysia state school.

 

I wouldn't want to.

 

Indeed Lucy, look at james attitude for example, he is having this western disease: The self rightous attitude.

First he tried to rubbish the statistics I provided ( although they are NOT mine but rather from the UN ) and then he asked me to provide stats PER CAPITA and when I did, it became very embarrasing for him to keep nagging on these stats, so now, he turned personal accusing me of IGNORANCE regarding stats although those are NOT mine but they have produced by UN EXPERTS, I am sure those experts know far much better than James...dont you think ?

Apart from you, everyone here has this disease, they think everything that is good for them must be good foreveryone else, they think their WESTERN LIFE STYLE is superior over mine, they like to preach( without practicing what they preach ), they like to sit here and parrot what they hear from biased western media.

I think they should learn from you dear lucy, let us URGE them to travel, to move outside their holes and see the outside world.

I am grateful for your comments, it shows that we muslims can learn a alot not from those self rightous nuts but FROM YOU.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

If the argument is that women’s clothing is a major risk factor for rape, surly this is an empirical question?

We should set up a research group into the causes of rape, and so we could ask rapists what it was which made them rape. A few expected answers; lust, domination, sexual frustration, but how about the biological genetic answer? (http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s93527.htm) I don’t buy that one thought.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

weebee

 

Quote:Why should anyone care about the UN if Bush doesn't? Simple: the UN may protect other people against Bush and others

But James that's just my point, the U.N cannot protect others from the greatest military and economic might in the west and other member nations are aware of this, they are also aware that they cannot override the United States when it counts the most, not without suffering the consequences.

Quote:Actually, they don't. There are many many cases of the US refusing to recognise or abide by international treaties and conventions. That doesn't mean those things don't exist.

And what happens when they refuse? What happens when Iraq refuses? If the U.N sets one standard and then the U.S does what it wants then the U.N has no power over the U.S or ability to make these standards stick. Think about it? What difference do those standards make in reality? The U.N has member dues and guess what the United States is the only country to not pay U.N dues, they simply refuse. There isnt anything the U.N can do about it because it is helpless against the mighty. The mighty of course being the U.S and what the U.S wants as opposed to all the other countries of which we refer to as the third world. This is why I say the U.N is a pyramid where western nations at the top dictate to the majority of members below, if the majority of members below disagree with those on top and set a standard, that standard is ignored. The standards are adhered to arbitrarily by those who have the power to resist without retribution. Iraq was never mighty and what might they did have was given to them through arms and finance by the U.S government. The U.N polices for the West, we cannot deny this, its a thin veil hiding global imperialism.

Quote:Education is the key. Mothers circumcise their daughters because they know no better. PM is clearly uneducated about women's rights, and also has an entrenched worldview. People don't change their minds in an instant; it is often a very slow process to win hearts and minds, even where the cause is right. Homophobes are uneducated about homosexuals, and hence fear them. Advocates of the death sentence tend to be more interested in retribution than in preventing unfair executions, which they often do not acknowledge as occurring.

Well this is where I disagree with you. These mother's themselves have been circumcised. How are you going to 'educate' them when the entire culture supports this ritual. The ritual may peter out over time and the culture revolutionize itself over time, but from the inside out, not at the insistence of the west. It is obnoxious and in the spirit of the missionary for us to say we are going to 'educate' those poor unknowing africans. Can you not see why so many have a viceral resistance towards this attitude? A viceral resistance stemming from colonialism and all those who came to 'teach' them? PM is educated in the West. There are many conservative muslims who have been born and educated in the west and adhere to a conservative image of woman. There are many Islamic women in the west who are educated and perceive their way of life as the best way for them, it is there choice. If an african woman decides to not perform female mutilation come what may then she is in the process of revolutionizing her society, but that will be her choice. 'Uneducated'? Do you say the same about Mormons in Utah who practise polygamy? Why don't we assume that these men and women are not educated? why don't we send 'teams' to show them the light? What about orthodox jews? Many of their marriages are arranged. Women cut their hair and cover it as a sign of modesty, it is law for them (try renting the israeli movie Kadosh), they sometimes mistreat their wives. Do assume they are unknowing and uneducated about womens rights or do we just accept them as living a religious life and leave them be? What about western domestic violence? We do not say its because they are uneducated no, then we say its because of jimmy's childhood or the woman suffers from low self esteem, but we do not chalk it all up to lack of education and say we have to now 'teach' them. I also don't believe that all homophobes are 'fearful' they just don't like them and it is their right to dislike whomever they please just like its the right of a racist to not want to associate with blacks or whites or whomever. If they break the law then they should suffer the penalty under the law but the term 'hate' crimes is a crock of shit, crime is crime whatever the motive.

Quote:What I don't agree with, and what I've been arguing against all along, is that the rapist should for some reason get off more lightly if a woman is dressed "provocatively" when he rapes her. There is no cultural standard by which this result could be justified, in my opinion. It seems to me that you think differently, but you haven't managed to clearly express why so far.

I dont disagree with you here but PM has a point of view, just like those who think that just because you kill someone doesn't mean its murder one, it can be aggravated manslaughter or second degree murder.

Quote:No, I want problems fixed in the US and elsewhere. It's not one or the other. It's not too much to hope and strive for both

Yes it is because the only way to pull it off is to globally police and set up a global judicial branch, override national sovereignty and set up a global education system overriding local cultural and religious institutions. And in case you are wondering I am against that. I think its time for the West to mind its own business, they tend to create more problems than they solve. We are so quick to underestimate how, when, and in what way other people solve their own problems. You don't see african blacks having panels on how to solve the problems and re-educate americans on the issue of racism, you don't see the danish sending dignitaries to the States to show them how they can offer health care to all their citizens or take better care of the environment. If you don't see what I am getting at then I don't know what else to say.

Quote: I'm not aware of all the factors which were in play in that particular situation. On the other hand, I agree entirely that it is morally bankrupt to sit back and watch a genocide.The UN, as you have pointed out, is not a powerful organisation. It must work through its member states. Many times, it may like to act, but without state support it is powerless. As I said, I do not believe that is a good situation.

About Rwanda:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Heroes/Gen_Romeo_Dallaire.html

About Srebenica:
http://pub18.ezboard.com/fbalkansfrm34.showMessage?topicID=12.topic

Well there again it is not the member states that are the problem but the one nation that controls where, when and how the ball is rolled. Here is an excerpt from the above link:

"The US and NATO: Heroes of Our Time?
The US has played a very dirty game." - said one officer at UNPROFOR Headquarters in Zagreb. The US always made loud noises about the atrocities being committed in Bosnia. Until Dayton paved the way for IFOR , they never let a single troop set foot in Bosnia. Still, Presidents Bush and Clinton, have always taken the moral high ground - accusing Europe of complacency as genocide was committed on its doorstep.
Once more the US could lord over Europe - pointing to its own intervention in bringing about a "cessation of hostilities," at the end of 1995."

I think the U.N should be dissolved. I think that the United States needs to bring its troops home and intervene only upon request and willingness of the american people (no drafting and no sending boys to war without full consent of the u.s citizens). I think that Asia and Africa should create separate leagues with their own neighbors to perform the task of solving human rights problems within their own areas. I think that people need to take responsibilty for their own nations and not demoted to begging hands. I think that these separate leagues should be free to assist each other if they feel it necessary. A league in Asia would have no right to decide the agenda of the league in africa etc. We cannot expect the one or two economically viable and militarily strong countries to solve the worlds problem, nor an incompetent organization. If we look at hunger we know that war is a factor in hunger, especially in Africa, but food aid creates dependency. Read Collins and Lappe World Hunger: 12 Myths this was their assessment:

1. A poor farming family considers children a source of labor in the fields
and social security for their parents' old age.
2. In spite of technological advances such as irrigation projects, new
improved seeds, and machinery the poor farmer is not much better off.
3 There is enough grain to provide everyone in the world an adequate diet
(3000 calories/day).
4. Food aid is only a temporary solution.
The issue of hunger is not a competition between developed and
developing countries.
5. Consumers and farmers in both rich and poor countries suffer from high
food prices and the expanding role of large corporations in food
production.
6. Poor farmers in developing countries need to be given an active role in
decisions about the land and the type of crops to be grown.
7. Land which could be used to grow food for the population of a developing
country has been converted to cash crops by large landowners.
8. When families are able to have food, security and good health care, many
will choose to have fewer children.
9. Overpopulation is not the cause of hunger; hunger is one of the causes of
overpopulation.
10. In 1991, the UN Food and Agricultural Organization reported a record
world production of staple foods.
11. The problem is not the supply of food; it is unequal distribution of food.
Sending food aid creates dependency and fosters paternalistic attitudes.
12. Large multinational food corporations control much of the world's food
trade.
13. The modem methods require more investment, something only rich
landowners can afford

Truth is poverty makes the west wealthier:
(95')
"While Congress considers slashing U.S. aid to developing countries, a study released today by a leading international research center shows that foreign aid creates U.S. jobs by expanding overseas markets. Agriculture aid, which helps strengthen the farm-dominated economies in many developing countries, actually increases the amounts of food and other products that those countries buy from export markets, said the report by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)."

A world in chaos helps boost Western business: Excerpt from House Armed Services Committee article

"...the United States, by far the world's largest weapons exporter with $15 billion in annual business. Britain, Israel, Russia, France, Germany, China and Sweden are among other major players."

http://www.clw.org/atop/global_companies-large.html
http://www.clw.org/atop/global.html

The truth is that hunger, war, poverty and injustice are big business . The west cannot cause trouble with one hand and then pretend to want to solve it with the other and expect outside nations not to notice the hypocrisy.

 

I got this the other day from another news group. It might be of interest to this post. -weebee


To: All progressive organizations and individuals


On October 21st 2003, Muslim leaders in Canada elected 30 member council to establish a judicial tribunal for Muslims known as " the Islamic Institute of Civic Justice". The move is designed to persuade Canadian court to uphold decisions made under the Muslim Law.

The International Campaign for the Defense of Women's Rights in Iran is
running an International Campaign against this new move in Canada.

We strongly believe that this move is anti women's move and will push back women in the society in general. In the past 20 years, women's rights have been increasingly under attack by the Islamic governments and groups. Women are subject to abuse for disobeying social Islamic standards. Daily degradation of women, prohibition from many forms of employment, field of study and sports, sexual segregation in buses, schools and public places, Stoning to death of women or murdering them for sexual relations outside marriage, acid-throwing in the faces of women, and flogging for transgressing Islamic laws for improper behavior have been imposed on women under Islamic influence not only in countries such as Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan but also in Western countries.

The women's rights movement has fought this reactionary movement and many paid a price in doing so. . As part of this radical movement, we believe that all people who live in Canada are citizens with equal rights, and should live according to same social laws and norms. We do not divide society into cultural, religious, national and racial majorities and minorities. We stand for equal and universal laws and freedoms for all humanity, which should embrace all, irrespective of sex, race, ethnicity, etc.
We now are calling on all individuals and progressive organizations to
oppose the proposed tribunal for legal recognition of settlements according to Shari'a. This proposal is anti-freedom, anti-women, misogynist and anti-modernism and is strongly racist.

We therefore have the following demands:

1. Religion to be declared private affair of the individual. And complete separation of religion from education for children under the age 16.

2. Prohibition of violent and inhuman religious ceremonies, practice and any form of religious activities that is incompatible with people's
civil rights and liberties and the principle of the equality of all.

3. Prohibition of teaching religions subjects and dogmas or religions
interpretation in schools and educational establishments or in general any law and regulation that breaches the principle of secular non- religious By signing this petition, you defend the universal rights of human beings.
Your support will strengthen the radical movement for secularism.

Homa Arjomand
The coordinator




The Join the International Campaign against setting up Shari'a court in
Canada Petition to Media in Canada and USA was created by the International Campaign for the Defense of women's Rights in Iran and written by Homa Arjomand. This petition is hosted here at
http://www.petitiononline.com/petition.html as a public service. There is no endorsement of this petition, express or implied, by Artifice, Inc. or our sponsors. For technical support please use our simple Petition Help form.

 

Proud_Muslim,

I guess your asking why the International Campaign for the Defence of Women's Rights in Iran is protesting the move in Canada. I would assume that that particular non-government organisation had the time and infrastructure to set up the petition. It may also have something to do with having a few members based in Canada (pure speculation).

I don’t see how it is a ‘hate campaign’, unless it’s a hate campaign against Shari'a law.