Shouldn't I be more emphatic though? Is this as revolting to the rest of you as it is to Omrow and myself?

I said earlier I am working with Omrow's comments - confirmed by Med, and by the Pakistani media when I looked it up; there is a threshold on the necessity of primary information - I do not have to physically jump on a plane and see everything for myself to make a decision, when it is already confirmed by sources I trust.

[i]If[/i] it's a culturally acceptable practice - which all three sources agree on - to sell their children for debts, than it is barbarism.

And I do not care how prevalent the permutations exist throughout the area - no matter where it is, if this is considered acceptable then the people are devoid of law, living in ignorance - barbarians.

A culture of exploitation is as far as I am concerned an exception to the general rule on respecting third generation rights.

The modern world is so touchy about value judgments - understandably so, 100 years ago the standard for barbarity was not being western and 4000 years ago the standard was not speaking greek. However when something is genuinely [u]wrong[/u], [u]cruel[/u], [u]ignorant[/u], and [u]depraved[/u], than it should be judged as such and dealt with - not apologized for and shoved under the carpet.

We didn't get rid of slavery, segregation, apartheid or the British Empire because we were afraid to condemn them.

"*DUST*" wrote:

that^ was bordering on patronizing - ur acting as though ur the only one on this thread (besides omrow) who condemns the practice.
ALL of us have condemned the practice, i am not 'apologising for' it, i am simply questioning its existence/prevalence in Waziristan.

Well I resent the persistent implication I am making some sort of rash, bigoted, prejudicial or patronizing statement about this insanity. Thrice now i've had people express their "surprise" at my outrage and appraisal of this human rights tragedy. I am not wrong - this is wrong, it is barbaric and it should be dealt with, without an ounce of "cultural understanding" which people seem to be so irritatingly implying at me.

Quote:

no offence to either but i dont see Omrow and Med as reliable 'news sources' esp. seeing as how neither have been to the region - their accounts seem more like hearsay.

Well only Omrow or Med could take offense to that - but I have little reason to doubt them, they and sources i've read from Pakistan seem to compliment one another.

Quote:

plz provide links to the 'Pakistani media' sources u looked up. thanx.

http://www.newsline.com.pk/newsApr2004/cover2apr2004.htm

[i]"Though Musharraf's resolve seems to be clear and the operation has benefitted US interests in their war against terror, any real gain for Pakistan is questionable. "Of course the US has gained somewhat, but Pakistan's interest was not served. The forces targeted the extremists, not extremism in South Waziristan. Women there still cannot vote or leave their houses, child marriages continue to take place, and women are bartered to settle their conflicts, against all laws of the country," says Amir Murtaza, a human rights activist. "These remain non-issues for the government, but for us these are as abhorrent as the Al-Qaeda. The tribal Pashtoons are a staunchly religious, anarchic group and have never lived under organised state rules. If Pakistan wants to root out extremism there, then it needs to promote a sense of belonging, develop infrastructure and promote modern education to neutralise the clergy's role and influence."[/i]

Quote:

Thats like a Pakistani saying 'Westerners are all barbarians because to them homosexuality is a culturally acceptable practice'

Minus the whole part about [i]owning[/i] and [i]exploiting[/i] another human being.

Calling the west barbaric for allowing homosexuals to exist is exactly like calling waziris barbaric because they sell their children.

"Med" wrote:

Dave whats coming across in your posts is that you think all these people in the tribal belt are barbarians and need to be civilised. This comes across extremely partronising.

It's not a matter of whether they are all doing it - it's whether this is considered "normal" or "acceptable." If I see a 10 year old being sold to settle a debt and don't say aloud "hey, doesn't anybody find this a little strange?" - I don't care how patronizing I have to be to communicate how extremely, horrendously, horribly wrong this is. It sounds exactly like what you call the Jahilya - which if i'm correct is just as non complimentary and patronizing. I'm reasonably certain that in that time period not [i]all[/i] arabs were burying their daughters - but it was a common and acceptable practice. Ergo - the stamp of barbarity.

Quote:

If you want to play that game, then sure perhaps there are some barbarian practices but I could just as easily turn around and say that is just one problem. In the "West" homosexuality, abortion, pornography, deviated sexual behaviour are norms and this is barbarian behaviour.

Game? How is this a game? Calling something evil, evil, or something ignorant, ignorant isn't a game - especially something as serious as this.

And if i'm not incorrect I already got blasted earlier for making the exact point you are now about abortion - I was equally emphatic - about [i]the West[/i] when I said that abortion doctors have no right to live and that it is a disgusting barbaric practice - and I was equally emphatic just 30 minutes ago when I expressed my distain at Europe for it's flavor of "multiculturalism." Bigoted laws and [i]killing babies[/i] is barbaric by anyone's standards.

Funny I remember a cold reception last time I spoke on that topic.

Quote:

Infact I would say that the whole western "civilisation" is a load of barbarian rubbish and filth. There is no modesty, no regard to shame and bashfulness, no respect for women.

Okay.

Quote:

Your calling them barbarian - well this "civilisation" in which we live is in my opinion much worse than that place. Here to people can buy eastern european sex slaves, here to people commit indecent acts, here to men commit perversion with each other.

The difference with the west is that while the sex slave trade exists - it's [u]illegal[/u], culturally unacceptable and punished when caught. You and Omrow talk about the sale of women in Waziristan as business as usual "it's just their way" - and i'm supposed to be okay with that because they are different and diversity is cool! Yea right.

I'm not saying a society should be judged by it's criminal underworld - but rather by it's cultural norms and aspirations. Nothing you, Omrow, or that news report have said indicates to me that Waziris find anything remotely peculiar about selling women - "it's cool whatever."

Quote:

Just as these things are not for every1, similarly what happens in the tribal belt is not on everyone.

Why is everyone still on this - nobody said that this is every waziri, but so far yall seem to agree that it's common and it's acceptable behavior for them - a cultural value even, sort of like the xenia to the greeks.

Such practices - born of ignorance - and acceptable to a society are barbaric and degrade the society as a whole.

You've made your point very clear - but you obviously missed my answer several times now that I do not call them barbaric out of some sort of idiotic notion that every last one of them is doing this - but rather out of the reality as presented to me so far, that this is considered culturally acceptable.

It happens and is not considered "socially wrong," and (as it is an abuse of another person and therefore bad in and of itself) in this instance silence is understood to consent - it is like bride kidnapping in Kyrgyzstan an aspect of the culture.

As for the report - be real. The report isn't about Islam or even religion for that matter, and the religious devotion of the Waziris is not in question. It's indicative of nothing.

Reporters also refer to bin Laden as a devout muslim all the time - he seems to think he is.