Author Topic: this pissed me off (Read 1214 times)

sky otter · « **on:** May 07, 2012, 08:42:50 AM »

i must be growing intolerant in my old age..dang

this woman wants all women to dress so that these men don't commit a sin
REALLY..they kill and it's ok but seeing normally dressed free american women is a sin
ohhhhhhhhhhhh ggrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/07/11577799-911-defense-attorney-wears-hijab-at-hearing-wants-others-in-court-to-dress-more-modestly?lite

The civilian defense attorney of one of the men accused of plotting the Sept. 11 attacks wore a black hijab and long black robe at the arraignment of the five Guantanamo prisoners Saturday, and she wants other women to dress more modestly.

Attorney Cheryl Bormann, 52, who is from Chicago and is not Muslim, said she wore the modest garment that revealed only her face to show respect for the religious sensitivities of her client, Yemeni terror suspect Walid bin Attash.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bormann asked the court to order the other women present at the hearing to dress more modestly so as not to distract the defendants, who would be "committing a sin under their faith" by looking at them.

Linda Brown · « **Reply #1 on:** May 07, 2012, 08:57:41 AM »

" said she wore the modest garment that revealed only her face to show respect for the religious sensitivities of her client, Yemeni terror suspect Walid bin Attash.

There is another way to look at her actions. What is she actually doing? I would say that she is simply protecting her own backside. If she presents a sympathetic figure she is less likely to be the victim of one of his associates......after the trial.

Thats the way I read it. She has to know how ridiculous that will look to the Americans in her frame of reference but thats not who she is playing to I think.

I would be a little less malable I think. And if he and others commit sins by "looking" in the courtroom.... then they can pile them on the others that they have committed so far..... and to which they will someday be held responsible by that higher power.

Linda

Shasta56 · « **Reply #2 on:** May 07, 2012, 09:33:11 AM »

If "looking" would be a sin, they can choose not to "look." Let's go back to the days when a woman was the legal property of her husband. Oklahoma finally repealed that law in the 1980's. While we're at it, we could go back to the days when a woman who was raped was "asking for it" by dressing provocatively. Translation: she happened to have two x chromosomes.

Shasta

Somamech · « **Reply #3 on:** May 07, 2012, 09:34:22 AM »

Sky it also Pissed me off on so many levels reading that article, so much so thats it really hard to put into text... Where to begin Especially considering it's a 911 Trial of the Greatest Baloney Tale this side of 2000

ORI Style BS

PLAYSWITHMACHINES · « **Reply #4 on:** May 08, 2012, 02:35:14 AM »

Exactly!
Where does one draw the line between 'politically correct' and 'downright insane'?
So it's a sin to look? Don't look.
It's a sin to kill? Dont kill.

Talking of outdated laws, there used to be one in England that you cannot beat your wife after 10 PM as the noise may upset the neighbours.
Have they repealed that one yet?

My wife shows flagrant disregard for this law....