unruly didn't like & deleted my comment about how muslim leaders cannot trusted and that everything the Taliban said about women's rights, etc. was a lie. I was right.

>could've stated the same opinion without violating the TOS. It's a theocracy. If talking smack about a theocratic leader is breaking TOS regarding religion, there's a serious problem with not only the TOS but also people's sensibilities. JFC, Divine Right was destroyed centuries ago with good reason. And if you talked smack about the king operating under Divine Right, it was heresy. Is that what we have now? It's a theocracy so you have to be able to talk smack about the politician or the entirety of the subject is religious persecution. There's no other way about that. All you have to do is pay attention to what every islamic leader in history has done with treaties and when they take over. The pattern *never* changes - treaties never last 7 years (specifically), they say one thing when they take over a country but do something else. Christ, have you never read *A Thousand Splendid Suns*? That's literally one of the major points of the book. *Talking about it is quoting history.* Are you going to suddenly outlaw people talking about leaders who express Holocaust denial now? Are you going to outlaw someone asking for undeniable evidence of the Holocaust or asks someone for contrary evidence to something that believe might be undeniable? Or maybe you're going to stop people talking about the Pope and how he covers up child molestation in the church since he's a leader who's refusing to do something about it?