Last week King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia was being treated to lavish receptions with the Queen and assorted British dignitaries. This week, one of his courts has punished a women with 200 lashes and six months in jail for BEING gang-raped. They apparently increased the sentence from 60 lashes to punish her for attempting to draw attention to the case internationally, and have withdrawn her lawyer's right to practice law after he appealed on her behalf. I love a good dinner party, but I have to say I'm a little more picky than the government and royal family are about who I invite.Of course the Queen dressed for the occasion in a rather raunchy outfit by Saudi standards, with her lust-inducing face fully exposed, a crime which in Saudi Arabia would be punished severely. During the visit the Queen said the UK and Saudi Arabia should work together against those "who threaten the way of life of our citizens". What Saudi Arabian "way of life"? Virtual perpetual house arrest for women, who are treated like goats and have no human rights whatsoever?
Oh sorry, just heard, apparently they sell oil to power our SUV habit and buy expensive arms from our corrupt giant defense companies to use against their own people and regional rivals. OK, everybody put your heads back in the sand please...
4 comments:
Is it necessary to descend into daliy mail and evening standard journalism to make your point? While agreeing with everything you've written above, she is being punished for breaking a "law" ... not a "law" that either of us think is right in principle, or that should be applied to a victim in such an inflexible manner(which backs your main point), but she is not being punished "for BEING gang raped"
Well you know in a way I accept your point - she's being punished for something else - for being in the car with an unrelated male. Clearly she should have known better than to get into a car with six armed men. Hmmm. I mean maybe she willingly got in the car with them, but if so why were they armed? Maybe it's just the way I read the article - I assumed she had been forced into the car by the rapists and that therefore the crime was "committed" under duress as part of her assault. I can accept that's not made entirely clear, maybe these guys are the kind of guys who would carry guns and gang-rape someone but not the kind of guys who would force a woman to get into a car...
Also in most countries reporting major crimes means the police will overlook minor ones. When I was about 15 I was witness to a big fight in a pub, the police made it very clear to me that I wouldn't be pursued for underage drinking if I gave evidence because clearly dealing with one crime was more important than the other.
Legal systems need to prioritise laws, otherwise you're in a situation where as soon as you have 1mg of marijuana in your system, you're fair game to be robbed and raped because you can't report or you'll be punished yourself.
In a sense though it's flattering that you insist on comparing me to national widely-distributed newspapers, when I am blatantly one rather opinionated woman with an online blog. Says something about our media if I have to "descend" to their level.
Saudis are sick -- and very primitive-minded.
Post a Comment