• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Don't get caught breast feeding in public by ISIS

John Connor

John Connor

Lifer
Posted by Jim Hoft on Tuesday, May 12, 2015, 12:12 PM




“The Biter”

“The Biter” is thought to be similar in design o this “Breast Ripper”, displayed in a torture museum in Baden-Württemberg, Germany. (Wikimedia Commons: Flominator)
The Islamic State is reportedly punishing young mothers with “the Biter” torture device for breastfeeding in public. And they are using a devise similar to a “breast ripper” from the Middle Ages.
Raqqa-Sl reported:
A young mother has been savagely mutilated by ISIS – for breastfeeding in public.
Islamic State (ISIS) has a record of treating women appallingly. But a new report has revealed just how barbaric its regime can be.
Members of ISIS’s notorious all-female Al-Khansa brigade patrols the streets of the so-called ‘Caliphate’ in Syria and Iraq, enforcing strict sharia laws concerning women’s dress and appearance.
Disturbingly, they have recently been using a spiked, metal device known as “The Biter” to inflict harsh punishments on local women deemed to have shown too much skin — and women who breastfeed in public are not exempt.
Recently, one 24-year-old woman in the ISIS stronghold of Raqqa, Syria was recently accosted by the Al-Khansa brigade for breastfeeding her baby in public.
Her account of the resulting punishment is hair-raising.
Click to expand...


http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...tilate-women-caught-breast-feeding-in-public/


All the more reason I want to see these bastards wiped off the planet. Send in no more than 5,000 troops and it will be all over in no time.
 
TechBoyJK said:
Uh, probably need closer to 50,000 troops.
Click to expand...

I don't think any number of troops will fix it. You don't have a real enemy that you can identify and destroy. The problem is that much of the population is comprised of crazies or supports them to a degree. You can't fix that.
 
PokerGuy said:
I don't think any number of troops will fix it. You don't have a real enemy that you can identify and destroy. The problem is that much of the population is comprised of crazies or supports them to a degree. You can't fix that.
Click to expand...


You could with education and opportunity but neither them nor us want that.
 
JSt0rm said:
You could with education and opportunity but neither them nor us want that.
Click to expand...

How exactly are you going to provide that education when they don't want it (take a look at Afghanistan where they still kill people and bomb schools because girls are allowed to attend). Not only that, but education doesn't always fix the problem either, many terrorists were / are relatively highly educated people. Sure, a higher level of general education might help, but it's not realistically feasible and is not going to solve the problem anyway.
 
PokerGuy said:
I don't think any number of troops will fix it. You don't have a real enemy that you can identify and destroy. The problem is that much of the population is comprised of crazies or supports them to a degree. You can't fix that.
Click to expand...

Also, when was the last time that going in and shooting everybody led to positive reconciliation between the US and an enemy? World War II? It didn't work in Korea. It didn't work in Vietnam. It didn't work in Iraq. It didn't work in Afghanistan. And, lest we forget, World War II ended with us spending the next 45 years with our finger on the trigger aimed at one of our allies in the war. We have far more examples in the past century of going to war making relations objectively worse than we have of war leading to frolicking in the streets and eventual good will. At this point, if you're advocating sending troops in to kill everything in sight, you're a fucking idiot who has spent the last 70 years jerking off to V-E Day celebration reels and ignoring reality. ISIS is a plague and they need to be wiped from the face of the Earth, but every time we intervene with violence and some innocent person gets killed in the crossfire, we make things worse. It does not work.
 
PokerGuy said:
How exactly are you going to provide that education when they don't want it (take a look at Afghanistan where they still kill people and bomb schools because girls are allowed to attend). Not only that, but education doesn't always fix the problem either, many terrorists were / are relatively highly educated people. Sure, a higher level of general education might help, but it's not realistically feasible and is not going to solve the problem anyway.
Click to expand...

I said education and opportunity. Im pretty sure any of these people would trade that life for a 2000sq ft climate controlled home and 2.2 kids within a generation.
 
PokerGuy said:
How exactly are you going to provide that education when they don't want it (take a look at Afghanistan where they still kill people and bomb schools because girls are allowed to attend). Not only that, but education doesn't always fix the problem either, many terrorists were / are relatively highly educated people. Sure, a higher level of general education might help, but it's not realistically feasible and is not going to solve the problem anyway.
Click to expand...

The problem is that resolving issues in that area of the world isn't going to come from outside. They resent us and our mettling that we've been doing for 70 years.
 
Okay, thanks OP I'll make sure not to breastfeed in public. In the ME. I'll have to make other plans for summer vacation.
 
TechBoyJK said:
Uh, probably need closer to 50,000 troops.
Click to expand...
John Connor said:
If you say so. 😀
Click to expand...
According to wikipedia, ISIS has Estimated total: 52,600–257,900 members. No matter how much more advanced our military is, 5000 would be a grossly low estimate of needed troop strength. Even Techboy is estimating low, we'd need probably a few hundred thousand. And if we don't want them to use our force as propaganda of an invasion to get even more people, then we'd need it to be a force made up of soldier from that region.

MustISO said:
1 or 2 nukes should do it.
Click to expand...
Something tells me that might have some other consequences we wouldn't me thrilled with. Also, how useful is irradiated oil?
 
John Connor said:
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...tilate-women-caught-breast-feeding-in-public/


All the more reason I want to see these bastards wiped off the planet. Send in no more than 5,000 troops and it will be all over in no time.
Click to expand...

Anyone remember babies being thrown from incubators after Kuwait was invaded?

http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0906/p25s02-cogn.html

And then there was this during WW I:

germbayonet.jpg
 
drifter106 said:
Be that as it may, most people who read the article can for themselves see that it has nothing to do with our current POTUS. As you grow and mature, hopefully, you can read an article and comprehend its meaning and its inferences (if any).
Click to expand...

What is your point exactly? :colbert: That conservative blogs are a fine source of unbiased news? 😵
 
During the First World War most countries publicized stories of enemy soldiers committing atrocities. It was believed that it would help persuade young men to join the armed forces. As one British general pointed out after the war: "to make armies go on killing one another it is necessary to invent lies about the enemy". These atrocity stories were then fed to newspapers who were quite willing to publish them. British newspapers accused German soldiers of a series of crimes including: gouging out the eyes of civilians, cutting off the hands of teenage boys, raping and sexually mutilating women, giving children hand grenades to play with, bayoneting babies and the crucifixion of captured soldiers. Wythe Williams, who worked for the New York Times, investigated some of these stories and reported "that none of the rumours of wanton killings and torture could be verified."

http://spartacus-educational.com/FWWatrocities.htm
 
JSt0rm said:
During the First World War most countries publicized stories of enemy soldiers committing atrocities. It was believed that it would help persuade young men to join the armed forces. As one British general pointed out after the war: "to make armies go on killing one another it is necessary to invent lies about the enemy". These atrocity stories were then fed to newspapers who were quite willing to publish them. British newspapers accused German soldiers of a series of crimes including: gouging out the eyes of civilians, cutting off the hands of teenage boys, raping and sexually mutilating women, giving children hand grenades to play with, bayoneting babies and the crucifixion of captured soldiers. Wythe Williams, who worked for the New York Times, investigated some of these stories and reported "that none of the rumours of wanton killings and torture could be verified."

http://spartacus-educational.com/FWWatrocities.htm
Click to expand...

Demonizing/dehumanizing the enemy is literally as old as warfare. It's tribalism, hidden behind euphemisms.

There are North Korean posters from the Korean War showing US soldiers throwing Korean babies down wells.

Jessica Lynch. Pat Tillman. Kuwaiti babies. Outright lies or misleading to create a bunch of angry jingoism.

Propaganda is as old as time. Getting caught up in it is a waste of time. If there isn't a good reason to go and kill the enemy without it, then there's probably no good reason to go and kill the enemy at all.

ISIS is bad enough without the typical "baby killer" propaganda. This is an attempt to get your emotions rattled.
 
The more and more they do, the more it becomes clear, day after day, that they're just a bunch of the worst criminals of our nation, headed and financed by some very dirty hands, to lead a systematic chaos and terror over this region.
 
nickqt said:
ISIS is bad enough without the typical "baby killer" propaganda. This is an attempt to get your emotions rattled.
Click to expand...

You don't think ISIS is a genocidal organization hell bent on spreading terror, torture, and barbarism? How is the OP propaganda?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top