Saudi gang rape victim sentenced to lashes and prison

[fattboy]

I think the neocons in America would disagree with you there!

They hate Saudi Arabia, in fact they are probably enemy number 1 for a lot of them. They are highly critical of the Saudi Regime and the American government are none too keen on the Saudi political and legal systems either, yet whereas countries like Syria and Iran are singled out for being part of the axis of evil and dictatorships, Saudi is praised for the strides they are making towards "democracy". Saudi Arabians were behind 9/11 and the "bad" half of the Saudi Regime are the main sponsors of al-Qaida. We all know how willing America is to invade any country to clean out al-Qaida, yet Saudi Arabia is off limits...does all that really add up if America is the one with power over Saudi Arabia?...

...or does it seem more like Saudi Arabia is untouchable...?

the us is just about held 2gether by saudi cash,without it theyd be all living in trailers

 

[Spion]

I think the neocons in America would disagree with you there!

They hate Saudi Arabia, in fact they are probably enemy number 1 for a lot of them. They are highly critical of the Saudi Regime and the American government are none too keen on the Saudi political and legal systems either, yet whereas countries like Syria and Iran are singled out for being part of the axis of evil and dictatorships, Saudi is praised for the strides they are making towards "democracy". Saudi Arabians were behind 9/11 and the "bad" half of the Saudi Regime are the main sponsors of al-Qaida. We all know how willing America is to invade any country to clean out al-Qaida, yet Saudi Arabia is off limits...does all that really add up if America is the one with power over Saudi Arabia?...

...or does it seem more like Saudi Arabia is untouchable...?

The neocons only hate Saudi because of their lockstep with Israel which drives the habit of dissing anything Arab or Muslim. While there may be some pressure on Saudi from that direction, sheer pragmatism re oil means nothing will be done to pressure the Saudis to do anything meaningful, IMO

 

[butchersapron]

the us is just about held 2gether by saudi cash,without it theyd be all living in trailers

Nonsense, daily Chinese, Japanese and South Korean injections of cash are what's keeping afloat.

 

[sleaterkinney]

does all that really add up if America is the one with power over Saudi Arabia?...

Especially if you look at the oil crisis in the 70's, Didn't SA stop selling oil to the US?

 

[Spion]

Oil production *is* an internal policy.

Err, yeah. Your point?

 

[butchersapron]

Err, yeah. Your point?

That external pressure on oil counts as pressure on internal policy. Thanks. You do remember your post of ooh minutes ago don't you? And what you said in it?

 

[invisibleplanet]

I'll give you a clue - search for honour killings

If you cannot be bothered to give the link and point the reader to the quotes you think are relevant, then I will stop asking you for evidence.

As things stand today, on the prevalence of domestic violence, rape and spousal murder in Britain, reponses by those who uphold the law are far from adequate. In fact, the situation is worse than it was 20 years ago - we're moving backwards, not forwards.

Twenty years ago, in response to women’s complaints about how few rapists were prosecuted, police blamed women for not reporting. Women campaigned for the most common forms of rape, by attackers known to the victim, to be prosecuted — the boyfriend, stepfather, colleague, neighbour, husband. As a result, the numbers of women reporting rape have steadily increased. But the conviction rate keeps falling.

Two women a week are murdered by partners or former partners.

The police are diverting resources from sex offenders to terror suspects. More will now deal with “antisocial behaviour”. Defeating the terrorism of rape, domestic violence and racist assault needs no summary powers and no guns. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,200-1984891,00.html

 

[CyberRose]

The neocons only hate Saudi because of their lockstep with Israel which drives the habit of dissing anything Arab or Muslim. While there may be some pressure on Saudi from that direction, sheer pragmatism re oil means nothing will be done to pressure the Saudis to do anything meaningful, IMO

I agree but my point still stands, that America is powerless to even make strong statements condemning Saudi Arabia like it does other countries (eg Iran). Saudi Arabia is far far worse than Iran for the lack of democracy and the spread of terrorism and extremism, yet for whatever reason (I agree, oil), America is powerless to do anything against the Saudi state.

 

[butchersapron]

Hey fattboy, is it acceptable to lash an adultrous woman with both your right and left hands, or is one to be preferred?

 

[Spion]

I agree but my point still stands, that America is powerless to even make strong statements condemning Saudi Arabia like it does other countries (eg Iran). Saudi Arabia is far far worse than Iran for the lack of democracy and the spread of terrorism and extremism, yet for whatever reason (I agree, oil), America is powerless to do anything against the Saudi state.

You seem to be making the assumption that the US is driven by a desire for democracy and human rights. I'd say its basic foreign policy driver has more to do with access to markets (hence the neocon experiment in Iraq) and ensuring compliance in regional politics

 

[butchersapron]

You seem to be making the assumption that the US is driven by a desire for democracy and human rights. I'd say its basic foreign policy driver has more to do with access to markets (hence the neocon experiment in Iraq) and ensuring compliance in regional politics

What 'market' does the US have in Iraq?

 

[invisibleplanet]

Divorce or separation is the only acceptable answer. Unless the relationship is salvageable.

Lashing out in rage is illegal in this country. But in our recent legal past, if a husband has lashed out and killed his wife for her infidelity, there have been Judges who have lessened the charge from murder to manslaughter/diminished responsiblity, and thus taken into account the rage of the man at his wifes unfaithfulness. Which is tantamount to legal condoning of murder-whilst-in-rage-over-infidelity.

The same has happened here with rape cases - Judges have taken into account the clothing worn by a woman - if it was not deemed 'modest' - and woe-to-her if she had imbibed alcohol. In those instances, her status as 'victim' has been changed to 'asking for it', by those who uphold 'Law' and also in the tabloid media.

These flagrant and cultural misrepresentations of Law have occurred in our legal 'institutes' and so can be considered as both part of CULTURE and of our system of LAW which allows our culture to define the extent of our Laws.

 

[butchersapron]

Oh no! Really!!

 

[Spion]

That external pressure on oil counts as pressure on internal policy. Thanks. You do remember your post of ooh minutes ago don't you? And what you said in it?

To produce oil and sell it and gain vast revenues is not something that particularly needs to be pressured out of the Saudis. And the matter of production volumes and quotas and relationships with oil buying nations are both internal and external matters.

But, all that's outside my intended point that (besides oil) I'm not aware of any pressure the US or anyone else has successfully had to impose on SA. Unless you know better, O Sarky One

 

[invisibleplanet]

What 'market' does the US have in Iraq?

Haven't you seen the Malls?

 

[butchersapron]

To produce oil and sell it and gain vast revenues is not something that particularly needs to be pressured out of the Saudis. And the matter of production volumes and quotas and relationships with oil buying nations are both internal and external matters.

But, all that's outside my intended point that (besides oil) I'm not aware of any pressure the US or anyone else has successfully had to impose on SA. Unless you know better, O Sarky One

No, stopping or limit it's production and sale is callled pressure though. You do realise that the US has historially done this don't you?

Why would i care about another point? It's not mine. I was merely showing that the state is one built around external pressure that operates internally - in fact oil is the overarching factor, not merely one amongst many.

 

[Spion]

What 'market' does the US have in Iraq?

The intention of the neocons was to break the nationalised industies of Iraq and give free access to foreign (ie, mostly US) companies.

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/09/0080197

 

[butchersapron]

Haven't you seen the Malls?

Ohh yeah a few million from a severely reduce consumer base - grow up. That's what it was about.

 

[Spion]

No, stopping or limit it's production and sale is callled pressure though. You do realise that the US has historially done this don't you?

Some egs might illustrate what you're trying to say

 

[sleaterkinney]

No, stopping or limit it's production and sale is callled pressure though. You do realise that the US has historially done this don't you?

And Saudi has done the same, against the US has it not?

 

[invisibleplanet]

Oh no! Really!!

Really.

And those examples on 'Legal' responses to British Domestic Violence and Rape that I gave above show the difference between British Cultural expectations regarding the application of the Law, and the actual Law as it is writ.

 

[butchersapron]

The intention of the neocons was to break the nationalised industies of Iraq and give free access to foreign (ie, mostly US) companies.

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/09/0080197

You appear to not know what a market is. It's where you sell your own products. The intention was to secure future enrgery sources. They've been breaking down nationalised industries for the last 30 years through one method or another - you may have noticed. The 10 BEM - big emerging markets that the US decied on targeting were Poland, Brazil and 7 asian countries. They're not there for markets for fucks sake. They just destroyed any effective consumer demand.

Right they went to war in Iraq over it's massive market. Unbelievable.

 

[Spion]

Why would i care about another point? It's not mine. I was merely showing that the state is one built around external pressure that operates internally - in fact oil is the overarching factor, not merely one amongst many.

Ah well, I'd dispute that the relationship is just one of one-sided, or external pressure. Saudi IMO is a useful and important business partner to the US and as long as it fulfils its side of the bargain the US will not pressure it to change internally

 

[butchersapron]

Really.

And those examples on 'Legal' responses to British Domestic Violence and Rape that I gave above show the difference between British Cultural expectations regarding the application Law, and the actual Law as it is writ.

That's just the law, ain't the culture.

 

[CyberRose]

You seem to be making the assumption that the US is driven by a desire for democracy and human rights. I'd say its basic foreign policy driver has more to do with access to markets (hence the neocon experiment in Iraq) and ensuring compliance in regional politics

I'd say American foreign policy is driven, to an extent, by a desire for human rights and democracy, but usually as a guise for furthering their security policies. This is neoconservatism. Of course, traditional economic factors are high up on the agenda, but I don't think you can say they are the only concerns. Security is a major factor (and is also needed for your economic argument) in American foreign policy and there is no greater security risk than Saudi Arabia (if we go along with the view that Islamist terrorism is the greatest threat to security - of our own countries and markets) - much greater than Iraq or Iran

Neoconservatism really is very different to traditional Republicanism. When Bush came into power in 2000, he was ushered in with many neocons. They're all about foreign policy and are very idealistic. They are primarily concerned with democracy promotion (which goes hand in hand with security). Hence why they hate Saudi Arabia and American policy towards it. Because Saudi policy IS primarily concerned with economics and the neocons can't stand that...so there are many aspects of US foreign policy and I don't think you can characterise it as having one single aim (especially when you say neocon foreign policy is about economics, when I completely disagree with that)

 

[butchersapron]

Ah well, I'd dispute that the relationship is just one of one-sided, or external pressure. Saudi IMO is a useful and important business partner to the US and as long as it fulfils its side of the bargain the US will not pressure it to change internally

Who said it was one-sided? I didn't.

 

[butchersapron]

Some egs might illustrate what you're trying to say

Examples of the US pressuring SA to limit oil production? Are you serious?

 

[butchersapron]

And Saudi has done the same, against the US has it not?

...and? I said as much myself.

 

[sleaterkinney]

...and? I said as much myself.

Right, so the oil crisis in the 70's was actually dictated by the US?

Is this a joke? The entire post-war Saudi regime has been dictated by the US. It's a state built around responding to external pressures.

 

[butchersapron]

In large part yes.

And what a weird way you do things. You ask me i think SA didn't have some comeback on the US and i say of course it did and you translate that into me saying that SA had no comeback.

Do us both a favour, read what i say, not what you're ready to juimp to down my throat with eh? That way you won't read things back to front and undermine your own argument, your own posts even.