It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Saudi gets sentance of 90 lashes for breaking the law

page: 7
0
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
How again, are they allowed even in the UN with behavior like this?


SIMPLE:

OIL

MODS: Sorry @ the one-liner, but if there ever was a time for a one-lined comment, this was it!




posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by D4rk Kn1ght
Shows just how blinded by hatred towards women these 'things' are.

No human would look at a rape victim (A gang rape victim at that!) and feel any thing but the deepest keenest sympathy for them and a hatred of the person / persons that committed this most horrible of crimes..

Guess that is proven wrong in the case of that stinking corrupt cesspool ...

Nope, i think islam and the west are not compatible whilst they still are in the stone age both mentally and emotionally.


Are you honestly trying to say that the Islamic world is in the stone age mentally --nevermind emotionally because it is an argument that neither you nor I can make.

The peoples who were the center for all learning far before the renaissance took place in Europe --hell, a large population of scholars will say that if it was not for the Islamic Libraries that most of the classical teachings and art that sparked the renaissance would have been lost. Many of our most fundamental knowladge in mathmatics were conceived of/mastered there. Hell, the Islamic world was the hub of all learning until sects got into internal power struggles and it collectivly went into "hiding" so to speak.

Because their practices don't mix with our does not make them any less human. It does not make them "things" and you so wonderfully put.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 08:58 AM
link   
Ok so Darknight exaggerated when he said stone age mentality, perhaps pre- Renaissance mentality is more apt.

And what have Islamic controlled countries contributed to the world since these times, i cant think of anything except oil and wars off the top of my head.


Be an interesting survey to take actually, 100 people at random.


Q. "tell me the first two words that come to your head when i say Middle East"

A. Oil errrm erm "Quick another word" erm erm War.

I guess Money would be another common answer seen the ME drips in it for certain individuals and Groups.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 09:29 AM
link   
For all those who take the stand that "it is their country, their laws, their custom therefore we have no right to criticize....ect.
Consider this.
Since when does legalizing something make it Right. Someone brought up the example of Slavery in the US.
Just because it was "legal" did not make it right. All compassionate human beings had a moral obligation to speak out against such barbaric treatment of their fellow human beings regardless of their country of origin.
In Nazi Germany it was "legal" to brutalize the Jews, Roma, ...ect. That did not make it right. Because it was the "law" in Germany did not mean that people from all over the world were somehow forbidden for condemning that unjust regime.
Those who are willing to close their eyes, shrug their shoulders. or fall back on the "its a different culture" line of reasoning are misguided, to put it lightly, in my opinion.
I could go on, but I better stop before I have an aneurism.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 09:54 AM
link   
It enrages me for BUsh & Co on one hand espouse democracy and human rights, criticizing countries thay have a beef with, and on the other hand, kiss the rear ends of heads of state whose human rights record stinks, if said country has a political and economic relationship with us.

Despicable.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by 11Bravo
Had she only obeyed the law she wouldnt have got raped.

Um, had the rapists obeyed the law, she wouldn't've gotten raped.

That is a fact. You wont see me calling you any names for stating this fact.
Its a pretty self-evident fact, kinda like mine

They are the criminals, not this women who's only crime was not being surpervised by a man.

Sorry, not to split hairs with you, but by definition she is a criminal, no matter how abhorant you think the law is. I personally agree it is not a good law, and I feel that to punish her was wrong, but technically she is a criminal.
I know this will cause a great up-roar, but I seriously doubt she ever breaks that law again.


The saudi law, simply, is abhorent and wrong. It doesn't matter that its 'their custom'. This is a custom from ancient tribal pre-civilized days. Its WRONG. It doesn't matter that they're been doing WRONG for a long time.

[edit on 3-11-2006 by Nygdan]

So hold on a second, they had a law about riding around in cars with men other than your husband in ancient tribal pre-civilized days?
Isnt the middle east the craddle of civilization?

I dont think this law has any other intent than to protect women and marriages.
I believe that some may construe it as 'keeping the woman down' or some other PC nonsense, but in my view it is an attempt to legislate morallity, which is a very difficult (if not impossible) thing to do, but I cant blame a civilization for trying to pass laws to protect women and marriages.
I dont agree with the law, but I understand it.

The issue here isnt about the rape of that poor woman, the issue is with the law that was intended to thwart incidents such as this, and more directly the issue is with westerners thinking they have the 'moral authority' to denounce Saudi laws.

In a land where divorce is at an all time high, more people are behind bars per capita then any other nation, a large portion of which are victimless crimes, where corruption, politics and buisiness go hand in hand in hand, and 90% of everything that you own is made by communist chineese labor with obscene profits being raked in by the orchestrators while the blue collar worker finds it more and more difficult to find a job or afford the little bit of health insurance he does have,
where personall and government debt is at an all time high, where three forths of the shows on TV are some varient of 'sex in the city' and debauchery is as close as the afternoon talkshows, in this 'land of the free and home of the brave' we should be a little more concerned with our own house, our own yard, and less concerned with the cultures of foreigners.

It was very unfortunate what happend to that woman, no doubt about it, but what I find equally unfortunate is how some Americans attemp to use this as a platform to speak down to other cultures. Who left the decision of right and wrong up to Americans? What moral high ground to we Americans have to impose our version of right and wrong on others?



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Once again, I see hardcore reactions to a story that NOONE here has been directly involved with. Which typically means that you are responding to the presentation of a story/experience, and all of it's intricate nuances of bias.....the telephone game and all that rot.....


She was 'raped,'......yeah, right...


Has it occurred to anyone here that the girl wanted what happened and then freaked out because someone was giving her the third degree?.....so she cried rape? Given the harsh social structure of islam, especially in the more affluent families, this is indeed a POSSIBILITY.......

She may have in fact been raped.....in which case.....many of the reactions I have encountered could be valid....maybe even Valhall's exaggerated response.....*cough*

My point is this.....something happened over there....it got communicated....

The two statements in bold are mutually exclusive. That formula will not always corrolate to a factual representation of history......stop reacting in a dismissive fashion and maybe use this as a way to understand the thought process of a society/culture that you have no idea about. Everything contains the potential for learning....spitting out dismissive comments that discourage the flow of thought is counterproductive...especially when you consider that there are people here who don't give a rats pootah canal about how you, "feel," about anything.....rather what you, "think."

Class dismissed...



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 12:15 PM
link   
What is wrong is still wrong even if somebody else is doing things that are even worse on a greater scale.


This issue, without introducing any moral outrage, outlines the vast differences between the cultures, which is more than just a minor issue due to the presence of Islamic minorities in the west who have shown to exhibit similar tendencies.

Let me give you one of the more blatant examples politics.abovetopsecret.com... titled (quote) Muslim leader: It's the woman's fault who is raped. She's "uncovered meat"

.. which took place in Australia, btw, so if all is fair in Saudi Arabia, similar standards apply to us, if i'm not mistaken.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 12:34 PM
link   
Women were considered chattel in most countries and religions throughout most recorded history.

My 1929 Webster's defines "woman" as follows:



woman:

a wife, and in the lesser sense of human being, a person.





Please note: "Chattel" is a legal definition. Until recently, women did not have the right to be educated, vote, own property, hold a professional job, or make financial decisions or commitments - because the were property, in the full legal sense.

I'm glad things have changed - but frankly, they haven't really changed that much, in very many places. Speaking with authority as an ex-resident of New Mexico, for example.


...Anyway, in some Islamic traditions, women have value only as chattel, and only for their virginity or "virtue" as a woman.

Such Islamic laws are designed to protect women as property - to preserve their virginity before marriage, and their 'virtue' after marriage.

So how can we change this? Where do we start?

...Presumably, we can find guidance in our own history. How did we change our own laws, and give women the rights of citizenship and human rights?





posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by MemoryShock

....maybe even Valhall's exaggerated response.....*cough*

yeah I am still waiting for an appology for the abuse I suffered from her.

......stop reacting in a dismissive fashion and maybe use this as a way to understand the thought process of a society/culture that you have no idea about.
Thats exactly what I was attempting to do!

Everything contains the potential for learning....spitting out dismissive comments that discourage the flow of thought is counterproductive...

I assumed when I joined ATS that this was a place to deny ignorance, a place where we can all help educate one another about issues and concerns. I never thought that I would get attacked for pointing out to a 'christian nation' that they should 'judge not, lest ye be judged', that they should 'not throw stones if they live in a glass house', or that they should not worry about the speck in their neighbors eye and be more concerned with the log in their own eye.
A portion of the posters here understand, but others have no reguard for other cultures, other peoples, or other religions, and they visciously attack any messenger that disturbs their little vision of American might, American RIGHT!



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by MajesticJax
It enrages me for BUsh & Co on one hand espouse democracy and human rights, criticizing countries thay have a beef with, and on the other hand, kiss the rear ends of heads of state whose human rights record stinks, if said country has a political and economic relationship with us.

Despicable.


Two words: Clinton, China.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 12:45 PM
link   

You have voted 11Bravo for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.


Wow. two in two minutes.
Must be nothing intellectually stimulating on T.V tonight.

I can,t say anymore after your post Bravo..

nail+hammer = swing and direct hit



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
...Anyway, in some Islamic traditions, women have value only as chattel, and only for their virginity or "virtue" as a woman.

Such Islamic laws are designed to protect women as property - to preserve their virginity before marriage, and their 'virtue' after marriage.



Thanks for that post, in other worlds because the value of women in the middle east as nothing than property.

Actually their most presious possession is their Virginity they lose that not matter how they lose it, if is not because of marriage she will be guilty under their laws.

So the real criminals that were the men that raped her will never be found guilty, because that is their law.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Oh how sad...still no score for Bravo. I have not once said anything negative about about the laws of another culture in this thread. In fact, I repeated several times the issue of her lashings are not what I'm holding against YOU.

What I'm holding against YOU came straight from YOU...not Saudi Arabia.

You won't get an apology from me, just contempt.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
How again, are they allowed even in the UN with behavior like this?


oil

sorry for the one word response, but that is the truth.

edit - sorry MajesticJax just saw your post saying exactly the same


[edit on 3/11/06 by Strodyn]



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 02:45 PM
link   
Some one pointed out earlier on that just because something is the LAW, that doesn't make it right...if ever there were a case of this. This particular incident is a prime example.

I feel no particular need to respect a culture that insists on living in the Middle Ages, and attempts with some degree of success, to export this same sort of justice (?) abroad. Any culture that subsumes women as this one does get's no respect from me, nor will it. Yes, the cultures of the Middle East brought the West many marvelous things...but that was rather a long time ago. Does the word stagnant come to mind to anyone?

She was the victim of a brutal crime, yes the perps were punished. Those lashes are a death sentence by the way, and good riddance say I. Unfortunately, those 90 lashes may also be a death sentence for the unfortunate young lady. Were I the father, she'd be on a plane to somewhere else...damn the consequences.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 02:46 PM
link   
First of all I would like to state I'm a feminist and hold those men in complete and utter contempt. Actually they aren't men at all merely males of the species. However, after reading the article and all the posts it appears to me that she was forced into the car with her companion and kidnapped, therefore, I fail to see how she broke the law. I dislike greatly the Saudis after having many dealings with them. The ones I have met are arrogant, ignorant individuals with no respect for another culture or indeed the laws of any other people. That being said if she was indeed in the car with a man not related to her before the attack then she was breaking the law which is still no excuse for the rape. I find the law repugnant and frankly stupid however, it their law. That being said it was commented that this was for the woman a light sentence comparitivly (sp) speaking since the sentence is usually death; has anyone stopped to realize that those 90 lashes could indeed cause her death depending on what kind of whip is used and how it is used. At the very least she will be permanatly scarred possibly crippled for life.

11Bravo your phrasing was at the very least guaranteed to cause reactions such as you received. You did indeed make it sound as though you at least partly believed she caused the rape. Indeed another member whose name I forget and quite frankly wish to continue to forget accused her of wanting it or at least the possiblity. Such comments are astonishing to me, it is hard to believe that someone could make such a comment and then act as if he is educating us. Please I've never met a rape victim who "wanted it". Perhaps he should be raped; then we could say he wanted it or possibly he would have a little more compassion for the victim.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by gallopinghordes
..Perhaps he should be raped; then we could say he wanted it or possibly he would have a little more compassion for the victim.



The kind of people you describe simply knows. everything is lost on them, at least from my experience, they get a rise from interpreting positively charged values as mandatory, ususally in conjunction with dubious precedents.

someone is even more evil and they're from the west so we have to shut up and whistle dixie, yo.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally quoted by Valhall
You won't get an apology from me, just contempt.


Are you openly acknowledging the allowance of your personal opinions to inflect how you interact with ATS'ers?...Given your history, of such that has inspired respect on my part, I would think that maybe the adverse would be preferable.....


Originally posted by MemoryShock
...
spitting out dismissive comments that discourage the flow of thought is counterproductive


Is ATS not a place where we can question....TACTFULLY....the reasonings and opinions of those who we wouldn't naturally encounter in 'our' normal social circles...respectfully?

I feel the need to communicate the fact that I respect your online personality....you are one of the few who I would defer to in a pinch.....however....in this case, I wouldn't......

Please take a step back and review the rules of logic.....considering opposing viewpoints does not necessitate that you compromise your own moral standings.....

Personally.....I apologize for my segue off topic.....I feel no need to defend a minor point..........



Originally posted by gallopinghordes
11Bravo your phrasing was at the very least guaranteed to cause reactions such as you received. You did indeed make it sound as though you at least partly believed she caused the rape.


No, 11Bravo did not. Read what she stated. She was making concession for an ideaology that differs from the prominent perspective here.....To read between the lines in such a haphazard fashion is irresponsible.....have you ever tried to read legalese?....there is your communication without emotion....


Originally posted by gallopinghordes
Indeed another member whose name I forget and quite frankly wish to continue to forget accused her of wanting it or at least the possiblity.


Sorry...won't let you forget.....Look at my avatar.....there's my name. And if you read my post and went away thinking that I was making any accusations upon people I do not know, in context of a situation I was not a part of, then I must interpret that you didn't even try to comprehend my post.....


Originally posted by MemoryShock
My point is this.....something happened over there....it got communicated....


Worst case scenario.......for everyone. That is how people tend to interpret stories. Or Best Case. Point being, if we wanted to take every piece of infrmation we ingest as a black and white topic, then we may be justified in responding on an emotional level.

Damn....everything ain't black and white.....

Who here, much less you, GH, can tell me exactly what happened that night....with the girl..and the guy...and the car..? Who here can tell me how they knew each other? Who here can tell me how they ended up in the vehicle together? Who here can support the story, positive or negative, with history and more than one avenue of subjective reasonings that are based on experience?

Can you?

Maybe you should try a bit harder....I am not interested in how you feel about what I have to say.....which NEVER had anything to do with making the highlighted victim a perpetratour....I am interested in how you think....and I see that you are operating within a tunnel....


Originally posted by GallopingHordes
Such comments are astonishing to me, it is hard to believe that someone could make such a comment and then act as if he is educating us.


I am not acting.....nor are you....educate me.
Please. The second you are offended, however, is where I tend to rather listen to background noise..I can make such a comment because it doesn't mean anything.....I read a news story about a situation I had no experience with. The story was quick to identify the good and bad for me. The subsequent reactions reaffirmed the stories' bias......

Do I want to just accept that conclusion.....when there may be extraneous, socially subconcious factors that would contradict such an initial reaction?

If I could be sure of the truth, than yes.........I find that with our present day media, one can never be assurred of the truth.....


Originally posted by gallopinghordes
Please I've never met a rape victim who "wanted it". Perhaps he should be raped; then we could say he wanted it or possibly he would have a little more compassion for the victim.


Rape me.

It won't dissuade me from atttempting to objectively analyze every piece of information I ingest...or at least to the best of my ability.....

Which was my point....all along....

[edit on 3-11-2006 by MemoryShock]



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 04:22 PM
link   
There are no uniform standards of law in Saudi.
The only common rule each city and village has is the the kingis the absolute monarch.
After that each village and city make make its own laws and its own sentences.

What may be legal in one town is illegal in another.
What is a minor crime in one town carries a death sentence in another.

Law is tribal and chaotic in Saudi.

Not all cultures are equal, functional, or deserving of respect.
That was settled at Nuremberg at one time, and the atrocity is that such things have become open to question as acceptable once more in the west.

If we have to accept the unacceptable to be accepted ourselves, then it is best that we are rejected.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join