Imsomking

joined 2 years ago
[–] Imsomking@hexbear.net 1 points 1 month ago

First of all the judgment by their peers is something that is a pretext to the exclusion of women's rights , second thing is we have 16 recognized groups of which only seven will have the right to create their own courts basically, 3rd is that in Iraq there is a lot of intermarriage between different sects which means that this law will effectively lead to not only societal sectarianism but interfamily sectarianism as we have seen in 2006

 

I am a transfem from Iraq and need someone who can sponsor me to Canada, I can provide more details about it and can communicate about it fully as needed so if you can or know someone who can please contact me ASAP

 

So this amendment to the personal issues law is very important to be discussed and understood This post will be containing discussion of child sexual abuse though I will leave it to the 10th point so you could read the other things that this law will affectively do without having to read it if you are triggered by it, I do to a small extent respect this community so I tried as much as possible not to use the most vulgar language which is my mainstream.

  1. This law is basically changing the personal status law of 1959 in a complete way that we will discuss here
  2. First thing that this law does is that it takes the authority of dealing with personal issues from the courts and give it to the clergy killing the secular state,
  3. This law requires the main religious institutions to get a paper done where each one of the religious sects will have their own personal issues law increasing the Divide and sectarianism within the society
  4. This law effectively kills equal inheritance for men and women so in the Sunni sect a woman will take half of what a men takes, and in the Shia sect a woman cannot inherent land
  5. According to the old law custody would be given to the person who is more likely to give better care of the child, this amendment would make it that a child would be with his mother for the first two years and spent the rest with his father no matter the circumstances
  6. In the old law a man should give his wife spousal support even after divorce if the wife does not work or incapable of having a job do to a disability or social issues, this amendment makes it so that the wife cannot get spousal support unless she sleeps with her husband even after divorce 7 this amendment effectively kills any type of civil marriage meaning that if you want to get married outside of religion you need to go to Cyprus
  7. This amendment will legalize temporary marriages, which basically means that it's legal prostitution but the women will come out of it as a divorcee which is socially unacceptable
  8. This amendment was a proposed by the Shia plurality which means that they cannot pass it on their own so they are working with the Sunni minority on getting an amnesty law passed which will lead to at least a thousand confirmed Isis members to be freed from prison
  9. And now let's talk about the child sexual abuse of it all, first of all in Islam there is no age of consent in marriage, that was because the old days you marry your daughter for Political alliances, but if you had an age of consent that would effectively mean that you should hold your alliance, the effects of this passing today means that you can go to the court or to a clergyman and Mary a child and nobody could tell you anything, a child which does not have a specific age that could mean a two-year-old or 2-day or could get married in this law and they will say but you cannot penetrate that child because they are a child you can only penetrate them when they are old enough as in nine year old, which Falls flat because of two reasons the first of which is that nine-year-old is still a child and the second one is that you could still sexually enjoy the two-year-old that you have married without penetration, another really important to issue that it's gives a child the ability to consent which means a seven-year-old girl could consent to a marriage without her parents even known that, another thing is that we have discussed in this post before the issue of temporary marriage so combine it with this issue and I don't need to explain.

This law is going to effectively ensure the total dismantlement of the last threads that this society hangs on.

 

I need and immigration lawyer that is sympathetic to the trans community. As you might know I am in need of getting out of Iraq before I get fully outed and my chances are getting lower and lower by the day, what sadly I cannot find a trusted lawyer from outside of Canada and that's why I need your help.

[–] Imsomking@hexbear.net 1 points 11 months ago

Yeah that is like a very semantic approach to it and my opinion would be that after you charge somebody with crimes against humanity you send them to the people who they have wronged and they would deal with it, people should not get involved with that decision.

[–] Imsomking@hexbear.net 10 points 11 months ago

will do tow

 
66
Yemen POG (hexbear.net)
 
[–] Imsomking@hexbear.net 1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

no, by definition they are unhuman in such way that they do not deserve anything from the society that they have harmed.

And let me say this for you to be living in the West is for you to not understand the reasons behind such statements, in the end of the day you have not been genocided nor ethnically cleansed nor puts in present for five years and been tortured in such manner that makes you feel as if you are unhuman to them, after an experience like that you will get out and you are necessarily gain a be looking at yourself as a lesser as unhuman , the reason for these actions is two fold, first is to show you that your oppressors the actual humans the ables of doing harm and good to you her as much of human as you are, and the second is to make you understand that there will be no more oppression, that you will not exist in a world that does not avenge you, and that's the point, dehumanizing them would bring about in the eyes of their victims justice fairness and satisfaction of mind that they would not be harmed again and their enemies go unharmed

[–] Imsomking@hexbear.net 1 points 11 months ago (4 children)

if it will lead to the ppl fealing satisfide and that they have taken reveng then be it

[–] Imsomking@hexbear.net 5 points 11 months ago (2 children)

What you don't need to have a torturer you just need to put Hillary Clinton in Baghdad for three days and she will die from torture because we will kill her, and you say that because for you all you have experienced from capitalism is exploitation from the capitalist class, for others they saw their friends and family members getting exploded in to bits, you don't really need to avenge for anything really but for me I will never be satisfied until we can actually harm those who have harmed us, same goes for the logic of October the 7th to an extent

[–] Imsomking@hexbear.net 1 points 11 months ago (6 children)

Will again you are stepping at the point the point is that he justice in torturing and killing them is that it would bring satisfaction to those that they harmed

[–] Imsomking@hexbear.net 1 points 11 months ago (8 children)

I can easily explain to you why torture, and it's basically because it with alleviate the feelings for those who have been wronged, when Saddam got murdered by the American state people were not satisfied they needed him to suffer as much as they have suffered which is in the eyes of those who have suffered Justice enough. Ignoring the victims just because you can moralize from a far away place how they should act is not material thinking, you again sadly moralize the wrongness that have been inflicted upon people and them wanting to wrong them back, you would say I want Elon Musk and Jeff bezos to work in a factory or a genitarial job, that is you taking a revenge upon them from the same kind of wrongness they have wronged you

[–] Imsomking@hexbear.net 6 points 11 months ago

no its gonnabe titeled dont police my food im poor and need protin

 
 

I have been having this debate with multiple western leftist whom I vigorously despise, and it was about people who commit crimes against humanity, and it is very simple really in my point of view people who did unhuman acts (light upholding apartheid, genocide, cleansing, starting an international War) are by definition unhuman. Really simple actually they have took the humanity away from people and used that as an excuse and they sacrifice their own humanity in The Pursuit of that goal therefore morally at least these people should be counted as dangerous animals or the malaria or whatever unhuman living creature who is causing us mass suffering and death. On the other hand you have the Western liberal who think that they are leftist simply because they don't care if gay people fack, and these people directly benefit from the unhuman acts that their leaders commit, so they turn and blind eye to it or at most say that they are bad people who should be jailed, jail for Bush or Clinton or Kissinger or Putin or whoever does not solve the problem, you talk a lot about prison reform and how it is cruel what you have not seen the other angle which is that these people physically cannot pay back for their crimes within a million lifetimes, I don't really care about your personal moralities and bullshit that you say to be the most moral in the room restorative justice cannot occur because these people have committed such crimes that they have left the boundary of restoring what they have done, to the point of being unhuman. When people understand that there is no way that would have been taken from them would be restored they want Justice in any way shape or facking form, including leaving all morality aside and just severely punishing those who have committed these unhuman acts.

You can moralize but for me as a person who lives in Iraq when I hear what people would want to do to George Bush or jog Biden or Barack Obama or whom ever I hear the most descriptive forms of torture, and the reason for that is that these people have actually came to to moral clarity, because the forms of brutal killings and torture that they would want to commit are the same as those who have been committed by these unhumans, when restorative justice fails, when there is no way shape or form your oppressors can be punished that would actually restore what they have been breaking you break their stuff in the same way, but in such subject, where these people have violated your right not to be tortured and not to be killed and not to be humiliated the retaliation must not be lesser than the pain that they have put upon every single person that they have violated their rights of. Do not f****** come to me with your Lefty morals or your Western human standard saying that war criminals and unhuman actors should be not tortured or should it be not brutally murdered, These people are not human.

[–] Imsomking@hexbear.net 4 points 11 months ago

I think the difference between those two is the fact that israel does that all the time and people just do not care

 

while the isnt-realy military is commiting eathnic cleansing in gaza , they have been bomming dimoscos and other citys in syriya non-stop

[–] Imsomking@hexbear.net 5 points 11 months ago

i cudent read that so joke you

24
shoot it (hexbear.net)
 

lets take turns comrades

 

your favurit dislexix irqi comrade is back

 

Facking mind blowing, please tell me WTF I really hate every American a personal hate for these Facking headlines

 
view more: next ›