200 lashes for gang rape victim

[Forward Union]

Amnesty International UK: Saudi Arabia Action


Dear WAN member,

This month we’re asking you to take action on this urgent case from Saudi Arabia.

A woman known as “the girl from al-Qatif” and her male companion were kidnapped at knifepoint by a gang of seven men shortly after they met in 2006. The male companion was attacked by the gang but then released. The woman however was raped by the gang. The gang were convicted of kidnap and rape. However, the woman and her male companion, victims of the crime, were convicted in 2006 of being alone in private with a member of the opposite sex who was not an immediate family member “Khilwa”. They were sentenced originally to 90 lashes and when the woman and her lawyer sought to reject that verdict, it was actually increased to 200 lashes and a 6 month prison term.

Take action now from the Amnesty website

Thank you for all your efforts over the past year and we’d like to take this opportunity to wish you seasonal greetings and all the best for 2008.

Mary Wright
WAN Chair

Still, Muslims fight against imperialism so I fully support this abominable act.

[pusher robot]

Originally posted by William [email protected] 07, 2007 05:15 pm
Amnesty International UK: Saudi Arabia Action


Dear WAN member,

This month we’re asking you to take action on this urgent case from Saudi Arabia.

A woman known as “the girl from al-Qatif” and her male companion were kidnapped at knifepoint by a gang of seven men shortly after they met in 2006. The male companion was attacked by the gang but then released. The woman however was raped by the gang. The gang were convicted of kidnap and rape. However, the woman and her male companion, victims of the crime, were convicted in 2006 of being alone in private with a member of the opposite sex who was not an immediate family member “Khilwa”. They were sentenced originally to 90 lashes and when the woman and her lawyer sought to reject that verdict, it was actually increased to 200 lashes and a 6 month prison term.

Take action now from the Amnesty website

Thank you for all your efforts over the past year and we’d like to take this opportunity to wish you seasonal greetings and all the best for 2008.

Mary Wright
WAN Chair

Still, Muslims fight against imperialism so I fully support this abominable act.
Before I respond, I admit I don't know you well at all, so this is an honest question:

Are you serious?

[Os Cangaceiros]

Originally posted by pusher robot+December 07, 2007 07:05 pm--> (pusher robot @ December 07, 2007 07:05 pm)
William [email protected] 07, 2007 05:15 pm
Amnesty International UK: Saudi Arabia Action


Dear WAN member,

This month we’re asking you to take action on this urgent case from Saudi Arabia.

A woman known as “the girl from al-Qatif” and her male companion were kidnapped at knifepoint by a gang of seven men shortly after they met in 2006. The male companion was attacked by the gang but then released. The woman however was raped by the gang. The gang were convicted of kidnap and rape. However, the woman and her male companion, victims of the crime, were convicted in 2006 of being alone in private with a member of the opposite sex who was not an immediate family member “Khilwa”. They were sentenced originally to 90 lashes and when the woman and her lawyer sought to reject that verdict, it was actually increased to 200 lashes and a 6 month prison term.

Take action now from the Amnesty website

Thank you for all your efforts over the past year and we’d like to take this opportunity to wish you seasonal greetings and all the best for 2008.

Mary Wright
WAN Chair

Still, Muslims fight against imperialism so I fully support this abominable act.
Before I respond, I admit I don't know you well at all, so this is an honest question:

Are you serious? [/b]
I think he's being sarcastic.

[Revolution Until Victory]

I think he's being sarcastic

yes, a childish, boring, and unfunny attempt at being sarcastic. Typical strawman.

[Demogorgon]

Originally posted by pusher [email protected] 07, 2007 07:05 pm

Before I respond, I admit I don't know you well at all, so this is an honest question:

Are you serious?
He is being sarcastic. He is a member of a faction here that can't separate irrational hatred for religion and opposition to imperialism and hence claim imperialism's opponents support this kind of thing (him maintaining this is typical and simply caused by following religion).

[pusher robot]

Originally posted by Demogorgon+December 07, 2007 07:33 pm--> (Demogorgon @ December 07, 2007 07:33 pm)
pusher [email protected] 07, 2007 07:05 pm

Before I respond, I admit I don't know you well at all, so this is an honest question:

Are you serious?
He is being sarcastic. He is a member of a faction here that can't separate irrational hatred for religion and opposition to imperialism and hence claim imperialism's opponents support this kind of thing (him maintaining this is typical and simply caused by following religion). [/b]
Thanks.

He does have something of a point, I think. If "Imperialists" are to be condemned for supporting oppressive authority when because it's in their own interests, leftists ought to hold themselves to the same standards.

[Demogorgon]

Originally posted by pusher robot+December 07, 2007 07:39 pm--> (pusher robot @ December 07, 2007 07:39 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 07, 2007 07:33 pm

pusher [email protected] 07, 2007 07:05 pm

Before I respond, I admit I don't know you well at all, so this is an honest question:

Are you serious?
He is being sarcastic. He is a member of a faction here that can't separate irrational hatred for religion and opposition to imperialism and hence claim imperialism's opponents support this kind of thing (him maintaining this is typical and simply caused by following religion).
Thanks.

He does have something of a point, I think. If "Imperialists" are to be condemned for supporting oppressive authority when because it's in their own interests, leftists ought to hold themselves to the same standards. [/b]
Well I certainly support holding leftists to the highest standards, and the various posts I have made here, both in and out of OI prove that. But it is not Leftists that are committing this crime here. It is what passes for the Saudi justice system that causes this and I certainly don't know of any leftist that could support that.

I just don't want to play the neo-conservative game of demonising Muslims as if all of them are guilty of this, that some people here play due to their comically exaggerated prejudices against religion.

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 07, 2007 07:33 pm
He is a member of a faction here that can't separate irrational hatred for religion and opposition to imperialism and hence claim imperialism's opponents support this kind of thing (him maintaining this is typical and simply caused by following religion).
Oh no I'm more than happy to work with religious people, someones religion is insignificant, class is the only relevent attribute.

I simply refuse to support bourguisie groups like Hezbollocks because they're fighting an even bigger ****. The fact that there's no contemporary force in the region alligned to class politics, highlights a catastrophic failure on our part. One we need to fix. Supporting radical Islam is substitutionalist for class progress.

I also refuse to support the Muslim council of Britain when they condemn homosexuality, other lefties, do support these things. Do you not think I made the right choice?

Anyway I didn't intend for my comment to be taken so seriously, particularly as Saudi Arabia is hardly "anti-imperialist" .

What do people think of the article?

[Revolution Until Victory]

I simply refuse to support bourguisie groups like Hezbollocks because they're fighting an even bigger ****.

just to hilight your nonsense. you can't claim that both the Lebanese National Resistance and the imperilaists are the same "****s". Just coz you disagree with both doesn't mean both have the same problems. The problem with Hizbollah is that its a bourgeoisie liberaiton movment. The problem with the imperilaists is that they are 1. bourgeoisie AND 2. imperilaist. See the difference?? when you say Hizbollah are just "fighitng an even bigger ****" implys that both are equal, as if Hizbollah is a "****" and so are the imperialsts, except that the imperialsts are more powerful "****s" which is bullshit. The issue of "bigger ****s" could be said about, for example, Russia and the US, or between any 2 imperilaist powers that have difference in strengh, but not between the imperialist and the anti-impeirialsit. One is anti-imperialsit (Hizbollah and the Lebanese National Resistance) and the other is imperilaist (the Zionist colony).


Anyway I didn't intend for my comment to be taken so seriously, particularly as Saudi Arabia is hardly "anti-imperialist" .

acuatlly, the Saudis are among the oldest and most faithful Imperialsit collaboraters in the region, which means the punishment they will impose on the victims of the rape case should be opposed becasue it is done by the imperialsit agents.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

Originally posted by Revolution Until [email protected] 07, 2007 09:58 pm
you can't claim that both the Lebanese National Resistance and the imperilaists are the same "****s". Just coz you disagree with both doesn't mean both have the same problems. The problem with Hizbollah is that its a bourgeoisie liberaiton movment. The problem with the imperilaists is that they are 1. bourgeoisie AND 2. imperilaist. See the difference?? when you say Hizbollah are just "fighitng an even bigger ****" implys that both are equal, as if Hizbollah is a "****" and so are the imperialsts, except that the imperialsts are more powerful "****s" which is bullshit. The issue of "bigger ****s" could be said about, for example, Russia and the US, or between any 2 imperilaist powers that have difference in strengh, but not between the imperialist and the anti-impeirialsit. One is anti-imperialsit (Hizbollah and the Lebanese National Resistance) and the other is imperilaist (the Zionist colony).
So let me get this straight - we should support weaker bourgeois factions against stronger bourgeois factions? Keep in mind that all bourgeois factions would go for imperialism if they could. Bourgeois anti-imperialists are not anti-imperialist out of principle or because they are part of a class whose interests are opposed to imperialism; they are anti-imperialist only because they are weak. If they were stronger, they would immediately try joining the imperialist club.

At least if the weaker bourgeois factions were slightly progressive I may see your point, but Hizbollah and other such Islamist groups cannot be considered progressive by any stretch of the imagination.

Take Iran for example: The Iranian theocracy is currently adopting an anti-imperialist stance because it opposes American interests in the Middle East. But if the United States were to vanish tomorrow, Iran would immediately adopt an imperialist stance of its own and try to dominate surrounding countries. Thus, at best Iran can be considered a temporary ally of convenience, and at worst it is an enemy like all other reactionary forces.

I, for one, advocate vigorous opposition to imperialism and a stance of neutrality towards bourgeois anti-imperialist groups. We cannot fight such groups, since that would only strengthen imperialism, but we sure as hell don't have to support them either.

[Dean]

Originally posted by William [email protected] 07, 2007 05:15 pm
Still, Muslims fight against imperialism so I fully support this abominable act.
Saudi Arabia is at the forefront of the fight FOR imperialism in the Middle East.

Besides, it doesn't matter how evil this or that action is; it doesn't mean that Islam can be judged as a whole for this.

[Revolution Until Victory]

So let me get this straight - we should support weaker bourgeois factions against stronger bourgeois factions?

well, that's another way to say "we should support a bourgeoisie national-liberatoin movment against a imperilaist agressor".


Keep in mind that all bourgeois factions would go for imperialism if they could.

exacty, agree 100%, would go if they could. That's why I oppose such groups, since they are not truely anti-imperialsits, but the choises are limited. Currenlty, or any time soon, Hezbollah can't possibly turn imperialist. the forgien bourgeoiese are already imperialist, the national bourgeiosie (Hezbollah) are not yet imperialists. Big difference


Bourgeois anti-imperialists are not anti-imperialist out of principle or because they are part of a class whose interests are opposed to imperialism; they are anti-imperialist only because they are weak. If they were stronger, they would immediately try joining the imperialist club.

no question about it whatsoever. Since they are not developed enough to become imperialists, they will actually be just imperialist agenst and collaboraters.


Take Iran for example: The Iranian theocracy is currently adopting an anti-imperialist stance because it opposes American interests in the Middle East. But if the United States were to vanish tomorrow, Iran would immediately adopt an imperialist stance of its own and try to dominate surrounding countries. Thus, at best Iran can be considered a temporary ally of convenience, and at worst it is an enemy like all other reactionary forces.

agree


I, for one, advocate vigorous opposition to imperialism and a stance of neutrality towards bourgeois anti-imperialist groups. We cannot fight such groups, since that would only strengthen imperialism, but we sure as hell don't have to support them either.

I respect your view since it makes much more since than that of WE. I also appreciate you being logical and understanding that our opposition to anti-imperialist forces would strenghn the imperialists. However, I would go a step further and still say that we should be supporting those anti-imperialist factions, through a temprorary tatcial alliance, IF, and only if, there is no other choice. For example, there is no justification for joining Fatah, Hamas or any other anti-imperialsit faciton in Palestine whe you DO have an alternative, such as the PFLP. However, in places like Iraq, the choices are limited.

[Faux Real]

There is another thread (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=73211&hl=saudi) on this.

Besides, it doesn't matter how evil this or that action is; it doesn't mean that Islam can be judged as a whole for this.
But of course you know that literallist Wahhabists represent, interpret and act on behalf all of Islam, right?
---
My condolences for the victim, justice is elusive in such a corrupt and inhumane country backed by the US oil industry.

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 07, 2007 08:28 pm
Besides, it doesn't matter how evil this or that action is; it doesn't mean that Islam can be judged as a whole for this.
It's their misanthropic selection of fairytales that leads to these stonings and to all the head-chopping they go in for.

[pusher robot]

Originally posted by [email protected] 07, 2007 08:44 pm
My condolences for the victim, justice is elusive in such a corrupt and inhumane country backed by the US oil industry.
Why do you single out the U.S. oil industry?

Much more Saud oil goes to East Asia than the U.S. Hell, more refined Saud products go to Europe than the U.S.

[Faux Real]

Originally posted by pusher [email protected] 07, 2007 01:05 pm
Why do you single out the U.S. oil industry?

Much more Saud oil goes to East Asia than the U.S. Hell, more refined Saud products go to Europe than the U.S.
Brainfart!

I would fix that by inserting the technological and military backing by the US government as a whole. (for Saudi Arabia's oil exports in return)

[Dean]

Originally posted by Jazzratt+December 07, 2007 08:48 pm--> (Jazzratt @ December 07, 2007 08:48 pm)
[email protected] 07, 2007 08:28 pm
Besides, it doesn't matter how evil this or that action is; it doesn't mean that Islam can be judged as a whole for this.
It's their misanthropic selection of fairytales that leads to these stonings and to all the head-chopping they go in for. [/b]
So if it wasn't for Islam, harsh punishment, stoning and beheadings would not exist in the region? That's quite a leap, on top of being blatantly illogical.

[synthesis]

Yeah, no one seems to recognize that these might have been cultural practices in the region long before Muhammad was born.

It's like this: you can say "an eye for an eye" is a barbaric part of Hammurabi's code, but before Hammurabi, people would take a life for an eye.

The fact that we perceive Islamic tradition to be "bad" (I agree in this case) does not mean it wasn't "worse" before Islam came along.

Something people have to understand is that Saudi Arabia is full of contradictions. The leadership is tied in very close with the U.S., but because this leads to a great deal of dissent among fervent Muslims, the leadership tries to appease the Muslims by enacting very strong Islamic domestic policies.

I am surprised by the level of philosophical idealism on a board full of Marxists. We're supposed to be materialists here, and recognize that ideology is a product of conditions.

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by Revolution Until [email protected] 07, 2007 07:58 pm
just to hilight your nonsense. you can't claim that both the Lebanese National Resistance and the imperilaists are the same "****s".
I know. That's why I pointed out that one was much worse.


"fighitng an even bigger ****" implys that both are equal,

I've highlighted two words. Maybe you can work the rest out yourself. Then again maybe not.


acuatlly, the Saudis are among the oldest and most faithful Imperialsit collaboraters in the region, which means the punishment they will impose on the victims of the rape case should be opposed becasue it is done by the imperialsit agents.

Of course.

[TC]

Originally posted by William [email protected] 07, 2007 05:15 pm
Amnesty International UK: Saudi Arabia Action


Dear WAN member,

This month we’re asking you to take action on this urgent case from Saudi Arabia.

A woman known as “the girl from al-Qatif” and her male companion were kidnapped at knifepoint by a gang of seven men shortly after they met in 2006. The male companion was attacked by the gang but then released. The woman however was raped by the gang. The gang were convicted of kidnap and rape. However, the woman and her male companion, victims of the crime, were convicted in 2006 of being alone in private with a member of the opposite sex who was not an immediate family member “Khilwa”. They were sentenced originally to 90 lashes and when the woman and her lawyer sought to reject that verdict, it was actually increased to 200 lashes and a 6 month prison term.

Take action now from the Amnesty website

Thank you for all your efforts over the past year and we’d like to take this opportunity to wish you seasonal greetings and all the best for 2008.

Mary Wright
WAN Chair

Still, Muslims fight against imperialism so I fully support this abominable act.
Uh, those Muslims don't fight imperialism dumbass, those Muslims are directly responsible for funding imperialism by giving low interest loans to the City of London and investing money in America. In fact it would be reasonable to say that imperialism in its current form would not exist if not for the Saudi Arabian economic support of the US and UK through petrodollar recycling practices.

The Muslims who fight imperialism, like Hizbollah or the FLN, would never do something like that.


But please don't miss an excuse to overlook differences among scary brown people for the sake of racist sarcasm. I mean, you hate the secular anti-imperialists like Fatah, the PLFP, and the contemporary (rather than 1980s) Ba'athists, as well...cause they're all dark and don't support anarcho-punk-kid sensibilities.

[Revolution Until Victory]

I know. That's why I pointed out that one was much worse.

well, of course one is much much worse, however, both are not on the same level of being worse. What I mean is, both the US and Russia are imperialists. One imperialist is bigger than the other (US bigger imperialist than Russia) which equals that the US imperialists are bigger ****s than the Russian imperialists. You can call both Russia and the US ****s and imperialists, since the only difference between them is that one is a strong imperialist, the other is weaker. However, in no way is this the case with the Zionist imperialists and the Lebanese National Liberation. While both are bourgeoisie, one of them is developed enough and are imperialists, the other, are anti-imperialist (or at least, are not yet imperialists). you keep ignoring the fact that one side (which you falsley label as "samll ****s") is anti-imperialist, and the other side is imperialist. So the issue isn't a difference of whos the most powerful imperialist, its the issue that one side isn't imperialist in the first place, and in fact, anti-imperialist.


I've highlighted two words. Maybe you can work the rest out yourself. Then again maybe not.

if you read what I posted, you would realize that I clearly said labeling both sides as ****s, with the only difference bieng one is smaller, would make them equal, or suffer from the same problem (in this case, imperialism) which is false.

[Orange Juche]

I see alot of softness towards Islam on the left, while there is still a hardass attitude against Christianity (rightfully so), and it fucking pisses me off. Fuck Islamo-Sympathy.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17, 2007 07:05 am
I see alot of softness towards Islam on the left, while there is still a hardass attitude against Christianity (rightfully so), and it fucking pisses me off. Fuck Islamo-Sympathy.
Seconded.

[Faux Real]

Originally posted by Agora77+December 17, 2007 12:20 am--> (Agora77 @ December 17, 2007 12:20 am)
[email protected] 17, 2007 07:05 am
I see alot of softness towards Islam on the left, while there is still a hardass attitude against Christianity (rightfully so), and it fucking pisses me off. Fuck Islamo-Sympathy.
Seconded.[/b]
Yeah, fuck religious minorities in Islamophobic Western countries. Another thing we can ally with the reactionary right on.

[Dean]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17, 2007 07:05 am
I see alot of softness towards Islam on the left, while there is still a hardass attitude against Christianity (rightfully so), and it fucking pisses me off. Fuck Islamo-Sympathy.
It was the same people who tried to dissuade our government from getting into WWII that said such things, except that they damned "Judao - sympathy." I, for one, am very fittin' to have solidarity with any oppressed people, be it because of their gender or their chosen beliefs.

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by TragicClown+December 07, 2007 10:41 pm--> (TragicClown @ December 07, 2007 10:41 pm) Uh, those Muslims don't fight imperialism dumbass, [/b]

Read things properly you dumbass


wat tyler
Anyway I didn't intend for my comment to be taken so seriously, particularly as Saudi Arabia is hardly "anti-imperialist" .

[Os Cangaceiros]

Originally posted by Dean+December 18, 2007 09:32 pm--> (Dean @ December 18, 2007 09:32 pm)
[email protected] 17, 2007 07:05 am
I see alot of softness towards Islam on the left, while there is still a hardass attitude against Christianity (rightfully so), and it fucking pisses me off. Fuck Islamo-Sympathy.
It was the same people who tried to dissuade our government from getting into WWII that said such things, except that they damned "Judao - sympathy." I, for one, am very fittin' to have solidarity with any oppressed people, be it because of their gender or their chosen beliefs. [/b]
Just because they're oppressed doesn't mean that I have to tolerate their silly authoritarian beliefs even one little fucking bit.

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2007 11:13 pm
Just because they're oppressed doesn't mean that I have to tolerate their silly authoritarian beliefs even one little fucking bit.
well, I wouldn't go that far.

I mean, my only objection is to Islamic power structures that want to replace Jewish/Christian/Whatever ones, not Islam in general (well I do object to Islam as a valid philosophy, but that's different). And too often I think leninists (SWP) blindly support Islamic groups who are quite openly capitalist, they seek to destroy and divide workers, and crush womens rights. We shouldn't tollerate that in the way many on the left do. But we shouldn't attack people for being muslims.

[Dean]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2007 11:13 pm
Just because they're oppressed doesn't mean that I have to tolerate their silly authoritarian beliefs even one little fucking bit.
What are you going to do about it, then?

[Os Cangaceiros]

Originally posted by Dean+December 20, 2007 03:02 am--> (Dean @ December 20, 2007 03:02 am)
[email protected] 18, 2007 11:13 pm
Just because they're oppressed doesn't mean that I have to tolerate their silly authoritarian beliefs even one little fucking bit.
What are you going to do about it, then? [/b]
That's the million dollar question, isn't it? I suppose I can try to show them the error in their ways, and help lead them towards a better way. I doubt it would do any good, though. It would probably be the same if I tried to lead a flag humping Evangelical who believes in the Rapture towards anti-capitalism and anti-religion.

Like I said, though, just because they've screwed by Imperialists and oppresive governments, that doesn't mean I have to take a softer approach towards their dictatorial theology than I would towards the Roman Catholic Church. Primitive, outdated views are primitive, outdated views.

The enemy of my enemy is not my friend by default.

[Hiero]

Like I said, though, just because they've screwed by Imperialists and oppresive governments, that doesn't mean I have to take a softer approach towards their dictatorial theology than I would towards the Roman Catholic Church. Primitive, outdated views are primitive, outdated views.

Victims, perputrators what does it matter right? In the battle for theoritical purity anyone can be an enemy.

[Dean]

Originally posted by Agora77+December 20, 2007 07:53 am--> (Agora77 @ December 20, 2007 07:53 am)
Originally posted by [email protected] 20, 2007 03:02 am

[email protected] 18, 2007 11:13 pm
Just because they're oppressed doesn't mean that I have to tolerate their silly authoritarian beliefs even one little fucking bit.
What are you going to do about it, then?
That's the million dollar question, isn't it? I suppose I can try to show them the error in their ways, and help lead them towards a better way. I doubt it would do any good, though. It would probably be the same if I tried to lead a flag humping Evangelical who believes in the Rapture towards anti-capitalism and anti-religion. [/b]
That doesn't sound very intolerant.


Like I said, though, just because they've screwed by Imperialists and oppresive governments, that doesn't mean I have to take a softer approach towards their dictatorial theology than I would towards the Roman Catholic Church. Primitive, outdated views are primitive, outdated views.
The roman catholic chruch is an established, material power structure. belief in Muhammed does not necessarily entail any of that; only certain irrational fears. Are you saying that you would treat those who are passing capitalists with the same animosity towards those who actively centralize economic power in their own hands?


The enemy of my enemy is not my friend by default.
Muslims are neither freinds nor enemies by default, either.