Vice interviewed a (the?) Taliban leader in Afghanistan and is shocked that Sharia Law doesn't treat women well.

The Lotus Eaters, a conservative British podcast, makes fun of them and brings up all the examples of how Islam loves beating women.

IT will be different over here I am sure. Just like real communism.

Tag

Idiots everywhere

Vice has always been clueless

Surprise, surprise -- in my best Gomer Pyle voice.

Attached File

I told my wife yesterday that liberalism is so popular with women because it's emotional and lacks logic. Just like, overwhelmingly, women.

When they cry about police brutality and want "social workers" to de-escalate a situation they then cry when that social worker can't stop the abusive spouse. But they won't admit their thinking about the world is what brought on the fucking social worker in the first place. They blame the world for their unnecessary bruises.

Now replace American police issues with Islam, and sharia,  for European women and I think we've got a pretty good comparison

You have to admire the patience  of the Taliban spokesman. I’m sure that about a third of the way in to the interview he just wanted to cut her head off.

Believe it or not, alot of people here in GD share views in common with Sharia law. Especially when it comes to justice.

They just don't realize it. But the eye for an eye without trial mentality that is touted here is very much in line with Sharia.

This, but many here used to be huge fans.

The Taliban, while they have some pretty brutal beliefs, they tend to stick with their values even if they are skewed. They are barbaric. But their barbarism pales in comparison to Isis.

Seems they are trying to make themselves more approachable these days. They want the world to view them as a legitimate government...

They covered the war in Ukraine really well back around 2014-2015.

"Eye for an eye" is from Hammerabi's code, long before Islam.  It's also the first written instance of trials for proving innocence.

The knee-jerk reactions here, often involving a wood chipper, seem to be more in line with a lack of faith in our own justice system, as opposed to embracing Sharia.

One of the greatest troll jobs of all time.

Accurate assessment.
This latter paragraph seems to be difficult for the virtue-signalers to understand.  It takes a certain level of intelligence to understand the subtlety.

The US has a legal system, run largely by liberals who are very concerned with the criminals and not giving one single fuck about the inevitable future victims their pets will target.  Liberals can’t come to grips with the reality that some criminals are just irredeemable and a large net-drain on society, and the highly corrosive effect of letting them roam free, repeatedly dodging consequences until they do something heinous.

The writers at Vice have this affliction, this delusional worldview (as highlighted by the article in the OP).

Vice publishes plenty of Leftist derp.  The ridicule is richly deserved.

I'll say that they got the punishment for theft 100% right.

I’m pretty sure just from his expression you are correct, but I’m sure even the higher up in the ranks Taliban folks know it would be counterproductive to kill a pretty western female reporter after an mildly irritating interview of which she will pack her shit up and leave and hopefully never come back.  Doing anything to her could and most likely disrupt the lucrative (even though small potatoes) western foreign aid packages that they get from the very people that sent her there to interview him.  Also I’m betting that the interview wasn’t done in Afghanistan due to her head dress but most likely was done in Pakistani territory in the north where the interviewer would be able to even ask these questions.  The dudes running the video (the Brits) are mostly correct in their comments about the Islamic world and most succinctly about places like Afghanistan in that the peoples there are entirely incompatible with any western nation and will never be …. End of conversation.  What they were wrong about is that we as in nato or more accurately the USA could not pacify taliban Islamic rule.  We most certainly could have, but the west as in Europe and a large part of the US didn’t and doesn’t have the stomach or fortitude to do what would be necessary to achieve that.  I’m betting that no one likes afghans all that much in the rest of the Arab world much like how everyone out their feels about the Palestinians, hell even Iran hates them and said very publicly that the taliban form of Islamic rule is to harsh and destructive (when the Taliban blew up pre Islam statues which seems to be a no no).  For us to pacify the Taliban would require such violence and outright destruction would almost require cleansing Afghanistan of pretty much all adult males and most boys older than probably 6 to 7 years old as well as a large part of the female population due to they will never assimilate nor take on western values.  The best course of action would be to simply keep them where they are at and preventing them from leaving or emigrating to any western nation.  Letting these people into your country is literally inviting in the wolf to watch over your flock.

I thought it was funny how he kept eye-rolling at her questions.

Well losing a hand is a tad much, I could go as far as a finger or a branding of some sort.  Hell midieval law seemed to do it right with a notch in the convicts ear to at least to have a mark that told others what you have done.

On a more practical note, where on a scale from Dearborn to Taliban is the time to put a stop to Sharia to prevent it from reaching Taliban levels?

I gave it some thought when reading The Red Cliffs of Zerhoun and Caliphate.
And decided that when white robed gangs of "morals police" feel safe to openly patrol the streets, beating/torturing/mutilating women they see walking in public with their heads uncovered, that's when it's time to make the "morals police" squads feel personally unsafe.

Gays for Gaza

New members orientation on the rooftop at noon

Islam, especially radical Islam (like Hamas), espouses everything that the left detests: subjugation, oppression, belittlement, and hatred of modern women, homosexuality, any race and ethnicity other than their own, and an ardent religious ideology.  

It makes no sense for the left to pander to them, advocate for them, and rally to their cause except for the fact that they are an enemy and threat to the United States.  They see Islam as the way to topple the white male patriarchy bogeyman that they think is at the root of all their problems.  The left in our country is also very anti-Semitic  and aligning themselves with Islam makes sense to them on that basis alone.

Most leftists just parrot their leaders.  It’s easier to ignore the blatant contradictions they emotionally adhere to.  

Oh, there are at least two car thieves in Albuquerque upon whom I'd love to inflict Sharia law!

No they were cool. But somewhere along the way they turned into npr

Probably about time the founders left.

Victor Marx has talked about being visited by Islamic extremists who could have just as easily killed him, bringing coordinates and information about Isis training camps they wanted destroyed

They called isis a virus on Islam

In Islam, lying is a virtue.

Authoritarians, like the Taliban, don't like competition.

very true

Only in the USA do they care about women, in many countries around the world, they dfon't give 2 $h!ts about women.

Now do lgbtqwtf.

From a Western POV, Islam is basically "anti-civilization." Judged by Western values, it's barbarism, period.