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: 8
0
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by MemoryShock


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.....



No, I am openly acknowledging that I consider anyone that makes the following statement:

"if she hadn't been [fill in the blank], she wouldn't have been raped"

a knuckle-dragging, backwater, neanderthal.

That's what I'm acknowledging. Actually, I'm embracing it.

[edit on 11-3-2006 by Valhall]




posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
The saudi position seems to be that this woman is a whore, she was acting imporperly, by not being supervised by a member of her family, and this attack, it was provoked by her, so these guys are guilty, but she is guilty too, and is then punished.

Incorrect.

She broke the law and was punished for it.
The rapists broke the law and they were punished for it.
Much more harshly, I might add.

Ever been whipped? 1000 lashes is perty arffin serious (I nailed myself with a bullwhip once. Farkin OUCH!)

She wasn't punished for leading those guys on. She wasn't punished for being raped. She wasn't punished for reporting the rape. She was punished for breaking Saudi law.

Whether or not we agree with Saudi law doesn't matter.
It's SAUDI law.
If they want change, it's up to them to make it happen.

We're free to have our opinions (and mine is that they really need to come out of the stone-age), but we do not have the right to impose our morals over their people. Hell, it's not like we've got a perfect system here in the west. Sexcrimes are much more rampent here than there, afterall.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
No, I am openly acknowledging that I consider anyone that makes the following statement:

"if she hadn't been [fill in the blank], she wouldn't have been raped"

a knuckle-dragging, backwater, neanderthal.

That's what I'm acknowledging. Actually, I'm embracing it.

You might find the comment distasteful and/or morally repugnant, but it doesn't mean that it isn't possibly true.

Making that statment isn't the same as blaming the victem, either.

"if she hadn't been [fill in the blank], she wouldn't have been raped", is possibly true.

"if she hadn't been [fill in the blank], she wouldn't have been raped, so it's her fault", is sick.

Anyway, I think you've re-hashed this point enough already. The fact is, she was NOT punished for being raped. No one has stated that it was her fault.

You are doing ATS a disservice by deflecting this issue into something that it's not.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by MemoryShock
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 ValHall
No


I see.....Your personal opinions are not inflecting a discussion that you have no first hand knowledge of.....

....yet....


Originally posted by ValHall
, I am openly acknowledging that I consider anyone that makes the following statement:

"if she hadn't been [fill in the blank], she wouldn't have been raped"

a knuckle-dragging, backwater, neanderthal.

That's what I'm acknowledging. Actually, I'm embracing it.


So stating the charachter of someone whom you do not even know in response to a statement you are predisposed to disagree with is productive to the conversation, how?

I am done with being off topic....I want to take this to u2u, ValHall....please be receptive.....



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by JIMC5499
If we do not have the right to pressure Iran and North Korea to give up their nuclear weapons program, then we do not have the right to pressure Saudi Arabia to change it's laws. People seem to think that they can pick and choose here.


I don't want to see them with nukes anymore than you do. But I think many will say there's a difference between human rights violations, and (claimed) industrial and defense pursuits. Of course those nations will have the confidence to violate alot more civil rights with nukes, as they may not fear international consequences as much...



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 06:11 PM
link   
never mind

[edit on 3-11-2006 by Fett Pinkus]



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Alot of people are missing the reasons behind certain laws.

People in this thread are making insults towards certain laws in saudi arabia without knowning why those laws are in place.

Don;t get me wrong there are alot of laws in Saud which are really bad and in fact even illegle under islamic law itself. For example where Saudi's don't let women drive cars, That law has been condemed by nearly every single muslim group in the world and so on...

But back to this spefic law where women are not allowed to get into cars with men they are not related too or married too. Let me explain this too people.

There are 4 main reasons for this :

1) To Stop road side pick-up prostitution. People will pick up prostitues from the shopping centres or road sides and then have sex with them. ANd if the police catch them they could just say they are firends. With this law they cannot get into the car together which cuts down prostitution greatly.

2) To stop women getting into a position which could endanger there safety. Women who get into vehicles that are not from people they are related too it could put them in a posistion where they could end up being raped or molested.

3) Adultry. The 3rd reason is so they do not meet up with random men or boyfriends and commit adultry behind there husbands back.

4) Wild accusations. Also the 4th reason is to stop people from spreading accusations of the women spending time alone in private with another man who she is not engaged too or married too.


This law is there for the womens own protection. The main reasons are Prostitution and Adultry prevention.

And on the other hand what the hell ws she doing with the other man in private in a car. What was so important that they couldn't have talked in public or in her house in front of her husband and family that she and the man had to be in private? If she needed a lift why didn't she ask her brother or father rather then a man who wasn't her husband.

And also read this from another news source on the same story which is from an arab website with more detail on the story :



The court also sentenced the woman and the man she was meeting to 90 lashes for having met in private. The security source from the Eastern Province said, “
The judge sentenced the girl and the man to 90 lashes because they were alone with the intention of doing something bad.Because of that, they will be punished.” Relatives of the woman said that they would appeal against the 90-lash-sentence.
Link


Seems as she was punished becuase she was suspected of commiting adultry.



(Mod Edit: Shortened link)

[edit on 3-11-2006 by iqonx]

[edit on 3-11-2006 by iqonx]

[edit on 4-11-2006 by WyrdeOne]

[edit on 4-11-2006 by WyrdeOne]



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 06:54 PM
link   
I think it is a stupid Saudi law that limits women's rights.

But is their laws. So so be it. Saudia Arabia can make its own laws.

I bet it is strange for people in Saudia Arabia to see American women with the right to drive a car and do things for themselves, and not need protection of a man.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by iqonx



The court also sentenced the woman and the man she was meeting to 90 lashes for having met in private. The security source from the Eastern Province said, “
The judge sentenced the girl and the man to 90 lashes because they were alone with the intention of doing something bad.Because of that, they will be punished.” Relatives of the woman said that they would appeal against the 90-lash-sentence.
Link


Seems as she was punished becuase she was suspected of commiting adultry.


Seems you're more than dead wrong:


Her husband and family said that they would appeal to the court Saturday for harsher penalties for a crime which has shocked public opinion in Saudi Arabia and been the subject of months of debate.


Original Article

Looks to me like this was a family friend and there's no obvious question in the husband's mind about this situation.

Maybe you'd like to come up with your next theory that will place the blame of criminal acts of violent perpetrators on the victim.

(Mod Edit: Tried to fix broken link - Shortened it anyway.)

[edit on 4-11-2006 by WyrdeOne]

[edit on 4-11-2006 by WyrdeOne]

[edit on 4-11-2006 by WyrdeOne]



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Does anyone know why she was in the car with the unrelated man? Was there an emergency? What if she had noone related to accompany her to an appointment? I understand she broke the law, but how does anyone know why she was with him? What if he kidnapped her? Would she still be in trouble for breaking the law if it was not her choice? I understand that some people on this post feel that if she had not broken the law she would not have been raped. Well, using the same logic, is it ok to assume that if a man is drinking alcohol(which I think is against the law in Saudi) and 4 Saudi males kidnap and rape him that he would still be punished for drinking the alcohol? Would we say that if only he hadn't broken the law(drinking alcohol), he would not have been raped? Just because someone breaks a law, no matter what country they live in, does not mean they caused or deserve another crime to be inflicted upon them.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 09:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by iqonx
Seems as she was punished becuase she was suspected of commiting adultry.


Wrong.
She was punished because she broke the law.
She wasnt punished because of suspicion of anything.
She wasnt punished for being raped.


Originally posted by Valhall
Maybe you'd like to come up with your next theory that will place the blame of criminal acts of violent perpetrators on the victim.


Val,
It is apparent to me that you have some sort of vendetta here, and Im sorry for whatever may have happened in your past that has caused you to be so caustic when dealing with this subject.
Did you ever consider that maybe you shouldnt be dealing with this subject?
Perhaps it is just too personal for you, and your emotions are blinding you to the real issue which is the projection of one cultures moral standards onto another, totally different, culture.
I havent seen anyone on this thread 'place the blame of criminal acts of violent peretrators on the victim'.
Nobody, least of all me, said that this woman deserved any of what happened to her. She didnt deserve any of it.

Imagine this....
I have a few beers after work and get in an accident on the way home.
I lose my legs but dont injure anyone else, but I still lose my liscence, get heavily fined and my insurance goes up and so on.
Had I only obey the law I wouldnt be a leg-less, homeless bum.

I have a drug problem (but it is illegal to buy or sell drugs) and I go down to the bad part of town to get my fix.
While down there I get jumped and robbed.
Had I obeyed the law I wouldnt have been robbed.
or I get jumped and shot.
Had I obeyed the law I wouldnt have been shot.
Or, God forbid, I get jumped and raped.
Well, Had I only obeyed the law I wouldnt have been raped.

Like I said, I think perhaps this is a subject that hits too close to home for you.
Consider watching from the sidelines if you must watch, but your initial assault on me, followed by your constant attempt to turn what could be a rational discussion into a DONT BLAME THE VICTIM crusade, leads me to the conclusion that your continued input is not only unneeded, but as a previous poster said, is somewhat of a disservice to the very idea of denying ignorance.


[edit on 3-11-2006 by 11Bravo]



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 10:19 PM
link   


Her husband and family said that they would appeal to the court Saturday for harsher penalties for a crime which has shocked public opinion in Saudi Arabia and been the subject of months of debate.


Read the article.....your response does not necessitate....


Originally posted by ValHall
Looks to me like this was a family friend and there's no obvious question in the husband's mind about this situation


Where and how do you interpret that this was a family friend....based on the words in the article? The husbands appellation to the court is not defined in either direction....are we now to take assumptions from our members as valid rhetoric?


Originally posted by ValHall
Maybe you'd like to come up with your next theory that will place the blame of criminal acts of violent perpetrators on the victim.


Or not.....maybe the point is to understand what is going on prior to making an opinion based on third party expression....I'm not saying your opinion is incorrect...rather...I'm suggesting it may be to quick....especially when you apply referenced opinion to another ATS'er.....

Sorry ValHall.....I'm your size....Pick away....

All Due Respect...



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 10:43 PM
link   
Not that I speak for Valhall, but you should expect a female to be more caustic on issues dealing with a woman being raped. Same way I'm a prick in matters of wartime situations. If a situation hits close to home in some way, it's not irrational.

As to the subject matter, again the woman is being charged with breaking Saudi law, specifically being alone in a car with a man other than her husband. Do I think that's a cool or acceptable law? Not at all. But she isn't being punished for being raped; the rapists are being punished for raping her, however.

I think had the title of this thread not been so misleading in the first place, the replies would not be so combative and emotionally charged.

Peace, Val.



posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall

Originally posted by iqonx



The court also sentenced the woman and the man she was meeting to 90 lashes for having met in private. The security source from the Eastern Province said, “
The judge sentenced the girl and the man to 90 lashes because they were alone with the intention of doing something bad.Because of that, they will be punished.” Relatives of the woman said that they would appeal against the 90-lash-sentence.
Link


Seems as she was punished becuase she was suspected of commiting adultry.


Seems you're more than dead wrong:


Her husband and family said that they would appeal to the court Saturday for harsher penalties for a crime which has shocked public opinion in Saudi Arabia and been the subject of months of debate.


Original Article

Looks to me like this was a family friend and there's no obvious question in the husband's mind about this situation.

Maybe you'd like to come up with your next theory that will place the blame of criminal acts of violent perpetrators on the victim.


If you read the article that was provided by iqonx it says the girl and her male friend were secretly meeting a "secluded spot" and the judge sentenced them because they were alone in a vehicle with the intention of doing something "bad". If this is why the Saudi's have this law on the books them he may have felt the need to punish her for violating this particular law. Depending on the laws there he may have actually been compelled to punish here ... we have those here in the states ... some crimes require a judge to impose at least a minimum specified sentence. I have no clue how the Saudi system works.

Also both articles say the male criminals got 800 lashing and several years in jail (5 for one, 4 for some others) ... this probaby not too far behind the punishment they would get from the judicial system here in the US.

I'm not sure how you can question his articles validity but use the orignial article as a valid reference when they both contain about 90% of the same information.

I am by no mean saying I think it is "right" for her to be caned for being kidnapped and raped. She should have every right to meet someone (friend or more) at her own decision. She and others should definitely be able to freely report a rape or violent crime against them without the fear of this outcome. However she is being judged by Saudi laws and not US laws.

(Mod Edit: Shortened link)

[edit on 4-11-2006 by WyrdeOne]



posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 01:02 AM
link   
My thoughts on this...

I'm, apparently, a knuckle-dragging neanderthal, because I believe there are a number of instances where such a statement is warranted. If hypothetical woman X had not ingested heroic quantities of alcohol, incapacitated herself, and left the bar with a strange man, she would not have been raped. Perfectly reasonable statement based on cause and effect. It doesn't exonerate the rapist, it's just simple cause and effect. If I go to a rough bar, get drunk, forget my manners, and wind up on the curb with a busted face, I can honestly say - that wouldn't have happened if I had excercised better judgement. Why is it different for a woman?

Wanna know what I consider backwoods and stone-age thinking? The notion that women can act without regard to the consequences of their decisions. How is getting hammered in the company of scummy men any different than walking down rickety steps in a pitch-black basement, or lying down in the road at night, or going for a walk in the woods without a compass? This Saudi woman didn't get drunk at a bar and lose control of herself, so obviously this example doesn't apply to her. I'm simply making the broader point to counter Val's claim that anyone who believes in cause/effect is subhuman.

On another note, I think the punishment for this Saudi woman is ludicrous. The laws of that land are inhumane and obscene in my view. I wouldn't treat a dog like that, nevermind a citizen. 90 lashes for hanging out with a boy? Pfft...

It's nonsense - and I don't care what their reasons might be. There's no logical basis for prosecuting victimless crimes. The fact that America is allied with SA, and looks the other way while stuff like this goes on makes me disgusted and ashamed. We support fascists in order to keep our military fueled up - a military which is ostensibly a force for good in the world. It's an absolutely ludicrous state of affairs, and people just accept it because they're told to.



posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 06:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
My thoughts on this...

I'm, apparently, a knuckle-dragging neanderthal,


After reading what you wrote, I can't say I feel like arguing.

The victim of a violent crime does not cause the criminal to break the law. The decision to break the law resides entirely within the person who makes that decision. And that you and a number of other people on this thread don't get that gives me a good idea of how sad OUR society is.



posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 06:21 AM
link   
So we've decided that the laws in SA are, to say the least, unjust. yay, go us.

Now, instead of continuously bashing the country, let us put our braincells together and figure out how can we work towards fixing them. What are their reasons for such laws? How can we use those reasons to work towards a different set of rules?

It's a curious thing to do, to draw a line in the sand when the tide's coming in. How to effectively, and more importantly reasonably/logically, change the minds of a society/culture?





P.S.

Originally posted by sardion2000
Wow, that was a light sentence for being raped in Saudi Arabia. I'm not kidding. The usual sentence for a "crime" of this magnitude is death by stoning. She must be in an influential family.


The irony on this thread is so sweet that my tooth hurts.. (The usual sentence for personal insults is a warning, if not worse...)



posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 06:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
The victim of a violent crime does not cause the criminal to break the law. The decision to break the law resides entirely within the person who makes that decision. And that you and a number of other people on this thread don't get that gives me a good idea of how sad OUR society is.



By their laws and standards, wasn't she also a criminal? Wasn't she making the decision to do something that her culture told her not to do?


I haven't seen one post here advocating that she was at fault for being raped. Not one.

I've seen many posts pointing out that she broke the law, just the same as the rapists did.

Is it fair that she got raped as a result of her breaking the law? no.
Is it fair that such a law is in place? no.

But, it still stands.



posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 06:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by SmallMindsBigIdeas


I am by no mean saying I think it is "right" for her to be caned for being kidnapped and raped. She should have every right to meet someone (friend or more) at her own decision. She and others should definitely be able to freely report a rape or violent crime against them without the fear of this outcome. However she is being judged by Saudi laws and not US laws.


Small - I haven't said a word on this thread about the rightness or wrongness of her being lashed for breaking the laws in her country. So I'm not sure why you said ANY of what you said to me. If you would like to argue with some one who is upset by the woman being lashed, there are several members in this thread who appear to be. I'm not one of them.



posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 06:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Diseria

I haven't seen one post here advocating that she was at fault for being raped. Not one.

Is it fair that she got raped as a result of her breaking the law? no.
Is it fair that such a law is in place? no.

But, it still stands.


WTF? What are you talking about? You just said it yourself. What do you mean she got raped as a result of her breaking the law? How'd that happen? And what do you mean "such a law is in place?" What law are you talking about?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join