ForumGarden

CNN) -- Saudi King Abdullah has pardoned a rape victim who had been sentenced to 200 lashes and six months in prison in a case that sparked international attention, a Saudi newspaper reported.

King Abdullah issued the royal pardon on Monday, Al-Jazirah newspaper quoted a Saudi Justice Ministry official as saying.

A Saudi court ruled the 19-year-old had an "illegitimate relationship" with a man who was not her husband, and that the rape occurred after she and the man were discovered in a "compromising situation, her clothes on the ground."

The attacks took place in Qatif in March 2006 when the woman was engaged to be married.

The case has drawn international attention, provoked outrage in the West and cast light on the treatment of women under strict Islamic law in Saudi Arabia.

The woman was meeting with a man -- described by the woman's attorney as a former friend from whom she was retrieving a photograph -- when they both were abducted last March.

Seven men were convicted in their abduction and her rape and received sentences ranging from 10 months to five years in jail.

The Saudi lawyer who represented the woman faced a disciplinary hearing for "insulting the Supreme Judicial Council and disobeying the rules and regulations" of the judiciary. The hearing has been postponed.

Abdul Rahman al-Lahem said the rape case had elicited a fierce response, including calls for his beheading.



U.S. President George W. Bush said last week that King Abdullah "knows our position loud and clear" on the case.

Under Saudi law, women are subject to numerous restrictions, including a strict dress code, a prohibition against driving and a requirement that they get a man's permission to travel or have surger

That is good to hear, good on the King.

freetobeme;741625 wrote: That is good to hear, good on the King.


You think? It seems an unprincipled way to brush the problem under the carpet and make the nasty noises in the world's press die down. Ask yourself whether he pardoned the man involved as well as the woman. No? Was it the identical sentence for the identical crime? Yes? Did the world's press kick up a fuss about it? No? There you go then.

It was the only sensible thing to do.

spot;741636 wrote: You think? It seems an unprincipled way to brush the problem under the carpet and make the nasty noises in the world's press die down. Ask yourself whether he pardoned the man involved as well as the woman. No? Was it the identical sentence for the identical crime? Yes? Did the world's press kick up a fuss about it? No? There you go then.


I thought the world's press had kicked up a fuss about it, hence the pardon. Gee, sorry you think it was a bad thing.

Thought I read this morning that the man was raped too. Have to try and find that.

yeppers

Saudi king pardons rape victim

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071217/ap_ ... lqW.BvaA8F

spot;741636 wrote: You think? It seems an unprincipled way to brush the problem under the carpet and make the nasty noises in the world's press die down. Ask yourself whether he pardoned the man involved as well as the woman. No? Was it the identical sentence for the identical crime? Yes? Did the world's press kick up a fuss about it? No? There you go then.


Ya really think these same folks have any interest in the Geneva Convention?

grh;741799 wrote: Ya really think these same folks have any interest in the Geneva Convention?


What??

Saudi Arabia signed the Geneva Convention on 18.05.1963. I'm having trouble interpreting your question.

As for the pardon for the girl, my query was whether the man she was with has been similarly pardoned. The article quoted above says "the man who was raped received the same sentence as the woman. Al-Jazirah did not mention whether he had been pardoned as well."

grh;741799 wrote: Ya really think these same folks have any interest in the Geneva Convention?


Your government is quite happy to decide it doesn't apply when it suits them so what do you have to say about them?

gmc;741970 wrote: Your government is quite happy to decide it doesn't apply when it suits them so what do you have to say about them?


Duh?

spot;741897 wrote: What??

Saudi Arabia signed the Geneva Convention on 18.05.1963. I'm having trouble interpreting your question.

As for the pardon for the girl, my query was whether the man she was with has been similarly pardoned. The article quoted above says "the man who was raped received the same sentence as the woman. Al-Jazirah did not mention whether he had been pardoned as well."


I think it's interesting that there are no gays in the community and yet a man was raped by a bunch of other men. So either it was an act of violence as we prefer to call it and not an act of sex, or their rapists are even more messed up then ours are.

And what I was referring to was a carry over from the other thread. Everyone claims such concern for GC and yet here we are waterboarding folks and who knows what else that hasn't come out yet, while these folks are beating the crap out of their own so called victims in the name of god and justice... what exactly do you suppose they would consider torture against an enemy? What qualifies as 'humane treatment'?

The world has gone to hell in a handbasket!:(

Edit: By 'they' in my question above, I mean to include both our idiots and pretty much every other idiot making policy and interpreting GC as it relates to their own countries agenda.

grh;741977 wrote: I think it's interesting that there are no gays in the community and yet a man was raped by a bunch of other men. So either it was an act of violence as we prefer to call it and not an act of sex, or their rapists are even more messed up then ours are.

And what I was referring to was a carry over from the other thread. Everyone claims such concern for GC and yet here we are waterboarding folks and who knows what else that hasn't come out yet, while these folks are beating the crap out of their own so called victims in the name of god and justice... what exactly do you suppose they would consider torture against an enemy? What qualifies as 'humane treatment'?

The world has gone to hell in a handbasket!:(

Edit: By 'they' in my question above, I mean to include both our idiots and pretty much every other idiot making policy and interpreting GC as it relates to their own countries agenda.
The Geneva Conventions dictate the interaction between armed forces and their treatment of civil populations.

Rape is defined by informed consent.

Everyone who authorizes waterboarding should know what it feels like first, from the bottom of the chain of command to the top. Or putting people head first into sleeping bags and sitting on their chest, or any of the other persuasive techniques they dream up and employ with electrodes and cattle prods and Alsatians. On prime-time TV so we can all see what's involved.

Meanwhile we might ask whether King Saud pardoned the man involved as well as the woman. No? Was it the identical sentence for the identical crime? Yes? So why's the woman been pardoned and not the guy, and why's it not a big issue?

spot;741982 wrote: The Geneva Conventions dictate the interaction between armed forces and their treatment of civil populations.

Rape is defined by informed consent.

Everyone who authorizes waterboarding should know what it feels like first, from the bottom of the chain of command to the top. Or putting people head first into sleeping bags and sitting on their chest, or any of the other persuasive techniques they dream up and employ with electrodes and cattle prods and Alsatians. On prime-time TV so we can all see what's involved.

Meanwhile we might ask whether King Saud pardoned the man involved as well as the woman. No? Was it the identical sentence for the identical crime? Yes? So why's the woman been pardoned and not the guy, and why's it not a big issue?


I don't even get to the pardoning part here Spot. These two were the victims of abduction and gang rape apparently. That they were ever being punished in the first place is beyond civilized, IMO. I think you are right however. Can you imagine if the King had been forgiving with the male victim and not the female? Yikes!

grh;742033 wrote: I don't even get to the pardoning part here Spot. These two were the victims of abduction and gang rape apparently. That they were ever being punished in the first place is beyond civilized, IMO. I think you are right however. Can you imagine if the King had been forgiving with the male victim and not the female? Yikes!


There's no forgiveness involved in a pardon, it's clemency for a recognized crime and the conviction still stands. The sentence is remitted. They weren't, as I'm sure you understand, punished in the first place for being abducted and gang raped, they were tried and sentenced for an entirely different unrelated crime. Just as some things are legal in Saudi Arabia that are illegal in the USA, so there are some things which are legal in the USA that are illegal in Saudi Arabia. If that weren't the case they could share an identical set of common laws and save on costs.

gmc;741970 wrote: Your government is quite happy to decide it doesn't apply when it suits them so what do you have to say about them?


btw gmc, the 'duh' wasn't directed at you, it was an answer to the question you asked.:-4

There are gays in the community.

Saudi Arabia is holding three men currently receiving 7000 lashes each for homosexuality. Punishment is already underway, being doled out in installments. We only seem to care about the women, when it comes to insisting on human rights.

koan;742109 wrote: There are gays in the community.

Saudi Arabia is holding three men currently receiving 7000 lashes each for homosexuality. Punishment is already underway, being doled out in installments. We only seem to care about the women, when it comes to insisting on human rights.


http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/1 ... m-case/?hp

Or it may have to do with the less than wholly innocent role the man seems to have played in the events that fateful day in Qatif, according to Arabnews:

According to her husband and her lawyer, the rape victim had met the male friend to receive some photos of her that he had from a relationship with her when she was 16. She contends that the man had initially threatened to distribute the pictures to shame her.

-------

Here's the entire story from arabnews

http://arabnews.com/?page=1&section=0&a ... =12&y=2007

Yep. Not a lot of sympathy for him out there that I can find.

I think if you are going to try an influence the Saudi's on their attitudes to women, gay men, or gay women, adulterers, men who kill women for their "honour", foreigners, black people, Christians, Jews, etc etc the whole gamut by being outraged at a distance at their officially sanctioned and pretty mind-blowing intolerance and ignorance, all I can say is "good luck". There are worse countries but none quite so high profile or wealthy. I find many things about Saudi society and its government despicable (which is just a biased opinion, but there you go), but I guess in a horrible way this woman can consider herself lucky. God, I just hope that oil runs out soon, well its another good reason to develop fuel cell cars, as if we didn't have enough reasons already.

koan;742109 wrote: There are gays in the community.

Saudi Arabia is holding three men currently receiving 7000 lashes each for homosexuality. Punishment is already underway, being doled out in installments. We only seem to care about the women, when it comes to insisting on human rights.


grh;742149 wrote: http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/1 ... m-case/?hp

Or it may have to do with the less than wholly innocent role the man seems to have played in the events that fateful day in Qatif, according to Arabnews:

According to her husband and her lawyer, the rape victim had met the male friend to receive some photos of her that he had from a relationship with her when she was 16. She contends that the man had initially threatened to distribute the pictures to shame her.

-------

Here's the entire story from arabnews

http://arabnews.com/?page=1&section=0&a ... =12&y=2007

Yep. Not a lot of sympathy for him out there that I can find.


Neither one of them was "wholly innocent"... and we still have those three gay men that can't seem to raise any outrage outside of gay activist groups.



It is this selective criticism which makes me see the western world as a bunch of self righteous cads who have no better sense of justice than the people they criticize.