Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Saudi gang rape victim sentenced to lashes and prison

butchersapron said:
That's just the law, ain't the culture.
No, that's the prevalent culture here. Men aren't legally allowed to rape women, but then we still have these prevailing cultural attitudes to deal with that affect sentencing and societal responses:
Women still held to blame for rape said:
By Alexandra Frean

Many people believe that flirting or wearing revealing clothes is an invitation to sexual predators

The poll of more than 1,000 men and women suggests that the vast strides towards equal rights for women in the public spheres of work, pay and reproductive health have not been matched by advances in the more private field of sexual behaviour.

Women’s rights groups said that they were astounded and saddened by the findings, which appear to reflect widespread misconceptions that women are sexually available and that some men simply cannot help themselves.

Vera Baird, MP, who heads the Fawcett Society’s Commission on Women and the Criminal Justice System, said: “We tend to blame the low conviction rate on failures in the police and judicial systems. But if juries are thinking like this, then improving the procedures is not going to make much difference. The attitudes in this survey are glib and outdated. They implicitly mean that the guy can’t help himself.”

Jenny Watson, acting chairwoman of the Equal Opportunities Commission, said: “There still seems to be an assumption that women are sexually available, so if a woman has gone out to have a good time, then she must want to have sex.

Sheila Coates, the director of South Essex Rape and Incest Crisis Centre, said that victims — who often blame themselves — are reflecting the blame they can face from society. “Most women and girls who contact us will say, ‘This was my own fault’,” she said. “That’s the mirror of what goes on in a court case. While we have juries who are uninformed, we’re going to have rapists set free to do it again and again.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1880976,00.html

Cultural, not Legal.
 
butchersapron said:
You appear to not know what a market is. It's where you sell your own products.
It's also where you procure product so your definition seems rather limited to me

butchersapron said:
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.
No, I hadn't noticed the breakdown of the nationalised Iraqi oil or any other industry for that matter until after the war. Perhaps you know better and could point to when the Iraqi oil industry was privatised

butchersapron said:
Right they went to war in Iraq over it's massive market. Unbelievable.
They went to war to gain access to its economy and to make sea change in its political system.

You always seem determined to interpret what people say in the narrowest possible way so you can disagree with it.
 
butchersapron said:
Examples of the US pressuring SA to limit oil production? Are you serious?
I wouldn't have asked if I wasn't. It'd be nice if you quit trying to be smart for 5 seconds and actually made good use of any knowledge you can pass on
 
butchersapron said:
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.
I'm trying to figure out your point that "The entire post-war Saudi regime has been dictated by the US." when there is clear evidence that it wasn't in that instance.
 
butchersapron said:
Hey fattboy, is it acceptable to lash an adultrous woman with both your right and left hands, or is one to be preferred?

dont waste my time, ive got nothing 2 say 2 u, bye.
 
invisibleplanet said:
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.
What is so difficult for you to look up THE article on honour killings on Wikipedia (it's actually been spelt honor on there, but it redirects for the British spelling). Are you lazy or just trying to be a smart arse.

Countries allowing pre-meditated killings for adultery:

Jordan

Countries allowing non-pre-meditated killings for adultery:

Syria
Morocco
Haiti
Brazil
Columbia

Countries where such killings are illegal, but where significant numbers of killings occur:

Turkey
Iraqi Kurdistan
Pakistan

A sample of the 'progress' in this aspect:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4311055.stm
 
heres just a few of the miracles of the Qur'an 4 those of u that saying that its made up, or authored or isnt divinely inspired

http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/mathematical_01.html



wether or not u believe the Qur'an is from Almighty God, all scholars, east and west r in agreement its over 1400 years old, so how can u explain these miracles that came 2 an illiterate man, peace be upon him, in one of the most desolate places of the world 1400 years ago, miracles that have only been verified by the very latest scientific findings.
 
david dissadent said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7096814.stm
The story is actualy that the sentence was doubled on appeal. But as much as people keep saying it is a pretty backward society it can be pretty shocking when confronted with the realities of it.

I can see nothing in this to defend but it is worth highlighting round the world so that, perhaps, at some level the conscious of the Saudi public and regime is pricked.

Although this will only feed Islamophobia in the UK and round the world.
Just to remind everybody what the thread was about.
 
MikeMcc said:
What is so difficult for you to look up THE article on honour killings on Wikipedia (it's actually been spelt honor on there, but it redirects for the British spelling). Are you lazy or just trying to be a smart arse.

Countries allowing pre-meditated killings for adultery:

Jordan

Countries allowing non-pre-meditated killings for adultery:

Syria
Morocco
Haiti
Brazil
Columbia

Countries where such killings are illegal, but where significant numbers of killings occur:

Turkey
Iraqi Kurdistan
Pakistan

A sample of the 'progress' in this aspect:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4311055.stm

im a muslim, i dont take my example from what prince Abdullah says or any of the western stooges that r in control of the lands of the muslims, we go by what Islam says, the point ur trying 2 make is completely irelevant.
 
fattboy said:
please check the crime statistics 4 saudi and tell me the sharia isnt a deterrent, us laws arent sharia, even in part so i dont see the comparison ur trying 2 make.


You------------------------------------------------------------the point. :rolleyes:
 
fattboy said:
im a muslim, i dont take my example from what prince Abdullah says or any of the western stooges that r in control of the lands of the muslims, we go by what Islam says, the point ur trying 2 make is completely irelevant.
So what is your reaction to the Pakistani parliament's rejection of moves to stiffen the law against honour killing, referring to it as un-Islamic. Do you know better than them?

As the Wikipedia article states and has been mentioned in a couple of posts honour killing is related to the level of illiteracy in an area. It is the abuse of the laws that allow such outrages, but this is not helped when the laws are imprecise and, in some cases, even allow such barbarity.
 
MikeMcc said:
So what is your reaction to the Pakistani parliament's rejection of moves to stiffen the law against honour killing, referring to it as un-Islamic. Do you know better than them?

As the Wikipedia article states and has been mentioned in a couple of posts honour killing is related to the level of illiteracy in an area. It is the abuse of the laws that allow such outrages, but this is not helped when the laws are imprecise and, in some cases, even allow such barbarity.

is this the same pakistani parliment that sent troops in 2 kill muslims in a masjid?

why cant u find a sharia reference 4 honour killings instead of spouting drivel about what pakistanis and jordanians r doing.

the pakistani parliment has no basis or authority in the sharia.
 
Spion said:
It's also where you procure product so your definition seems rather limited to me

No, I hadn't noticed the breakdown of the nationalised Iraqi oil or any other industry for that matter until after the war. Perhaps you know better and could point to when the Iraqi oil industry was privatised

They went to war to gain access to its economy and to make sea change in its political system.

You always seem determined to interpret what people say in the narrowest possible way so you can disagree with it.

So when you say market, you don't actually mean market. FFS. And if you hadn't noticed the breakdown of the Natioanlised Iraqi oil system then you missed ten year of sanctions and needed investment.

Have you just heard of Iraq or something?
 
invisibleplanet said:
No, that's the prevalent culture here. Men aren't legally allowed to rape women, but then we still have these prevailing cultural attitudes to deal with that affect sentencing and societal responses:


Cultural, not Legal.

What's that got to with your hypocrisy re: Islam?
 
Spion said:
"The entire post-war Saudi regime has been dictated by the US. It's a state built around responding to external pressures."

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=6912490&postcount=290


Yes, it has been. Do you disagree? Where and why? And why does this mean that the massive petro-dollars post-73 haven't been circulated or invested through the US. I said this to you already. Why the same post? It doesn't say that it's one way.
 
sleaterkinney said:
I'm trying to figure out your point that "The entire post-war Saudi regime has been dictated by the US." when there is clear evidence that it wasn't in that instance.

What by claiming that i've argued that it both is and that it isn't?

Pick one.
 
fattboy said:
is this the same pakistani parliment that sent troops in 2 kill muslims in a masjid?

why cant u find a sharia reference 4 honour killings instead of spouting drivel about what pakistanis and jordanians r doing.

the pakistani parliment has no basis or authority in the sharia.
What, like stoning to death for married persons who commit adultery, or 100 lashes for unmarried persons? As I said before, if you can find 7 people willing to rape somebody, you can find 4 people to SAY that they saw them in the adulterous act. It's not drivel, it's actually happening. It doesn't matter if it's not properly in the name of Islam, its seen to be that way, it's promoted as being that way.
 
invisibleplanet said:
What hypocrisy is this?

Bad things = culture
Good things = Islam


Especially in religious cultures. Becasue the two things are clinically seperate.

It's the area where liberal idiots like you end up holding bloody hands with our fundy mate above. So naive.
 
butchersapron said:
Yet they fit your arguments so closely.
Apart from the fact that 'they' (your black-white categorisations) don't fit the presentment of British cultural interpretation of British Law as made by me, rendering your 'Culture=bad/Islam=good' simplification and your subsequent appellation of hypocrisy inapplicable.
 
invisibleplanet said:
Apart from the fact that 'they' (your black-white categorisation) don't fit the presentment of British cultural interpretation of British Law as made by me, rendering your 'Culture=bad/Islam=good' simplification and your subsequent appellation of hypocrisy inapplicable.

They fit your reading of islam and islamic cultures. I never said we was all the same.
 
Back
Top Bottom