What I would like to know is, of all those women polled, how many felt it was their duty, to let their husbands, as leader of the family, help to choose what to write?

We know Islam is a patriarchal society, so unless there were systems in place, to ensure that women were speaking with absolute freedom, then I would hold serious reservations on the reliability of what is passed on, as their views.

mozzaok wrote on Jan 30^th, 2009 at 6:16pm:


How many? How many do you think..and do you have any evidence whatsoever to back up your claim.

Do you actually know if their husbands DID choose what to write, or is this just an assumption?

Or are you once again, doing what you do best..


Disguising ignorance as fact.

Quote:


Duh. They voted for Muslims because most people are Muslims. But to say they are an Islamic party is absurd. Abu goes to great length to constantly point out that middle eastern governments are not true Islamic governments. It's like you will claim them as Islamic governments when it suits your argument, or blame the entire political situation on the west when it suits you. You can't have it both ways.

Quote:


Crap lestat. The 'evil west' is setting up two democracies in the area as we speak. It is not possible to establish a democracy and successfully oppose the will of the people. The 'evil west' is doing more for democracy in the middle east than Muslims have ever done. Islam on the other hand is opposed to democracy, despite Abu's attempts to blur the definition of democracy so that anything involving voting is democratic, even if only Islamist candidates can run.

You contradict yourself constantly. On the one hand the west is setting up pretend democracies where Islamists cannot run, but on the other hand Islamists are winning elections in democracies set up by the west. You ignore the reality and reinterpret the situation to suit whatever point you are making, even if it means giving contradictory interpretations in the same post.

Quote:


Of course I know the difference. According to Abu, the former is Islamic, the latter is not Islamic. Islam is fundamentally opposed to democracy.

Quote:


Yes they do. To claim otherwise is just absurd.

The west has more faith in the choices of Muslims than Islam does.

Quote:


ABu, Muslims are more than capable of doing that themselves. You can't blame everything on the west.

Quote:


As we saw with Hamas, they don't like the choices Muslims generally make.

Also their long history of supporting dictators in the Middle East, tends to indicate they're not serious about it. Yes it's nice to talk about, but in reality their policy has always been to prop up dictators, it's more profitable and keeps the region stable for their interests, and for Israel's.

You can claim absurdities all you like, but it all flies in the face of the reality we've seen for the past 80 years.

Quote:


Again, history tends to prove you incorrect. The sectarian violence we see today is undoubtably a direct result of the U.S invasion. I would also contend that it's most likely the U.S engaged in some 'covert' operations that sparked a lot of it off. Prior to the sectarian violence erupting, Sunni and Shi'a groups were often resisting the U.S jointly, even if not physically, they provided logistics and intelligence information to one another in their common struggle against the invasion forces. We also know the motto of the West has long been "Divide and rule". The sectarian violence has also been a very convenient excuse for the U.S to justify their continued presence.

It's obviously hard to prove, but the motives are quite strong and the fact that the violence has pretty much no history, tends to indicate there's a force that's inciting and feeding it.

Quote:


Actually it's you who has no idea. Supporting democracy is a load of bollocks, and the U.S would never support a democracy, unless they can guarantee 'friendlies'' will take the helm. Deep down you know it to be true, you're just hiding behind this ridiculous argument that "democracy is not a license".

Egypt for instance is the largest  Arab country, and it's well known the Muslim Brotherhood (the parent group of Hamas) has the strongest support there, even when running as independants (because they're banned as a party, as are any Islamic parties), they always blitz any half fair election. Now, do you honestly mean to tell me, the U.S would like to see fair and free elections held in Egypt? Can you tell me why they pour billions of dollars a year into propping up the current regime, if what they really sincerely want is the 'will of the people'???

You're not connected with reality fd.

Quote:


We will see how things pan out when/if the U.S pulls out of Iraq. The Shi'a majority have quite clearly declared they merely 'used' the U.S to get rid of Saddam, let's see how they begin acting once the U.S pulls out. As for Afghanistan, more than half the country is controlled by the Talibaan, give me a break.

Quote:


All it would've taken would be one bomb strategically detonated at a Shi'a shrine, and that alone could account for all the subsequent violence we've seen. Shi'as then begin attacking Sunni neighbourhoods and so the cycle of violence began...

You didn't address the fact that historically, no such sectarian violence existed.