Covering the outrageous treatment of women in Muslim countries wouldn’t fit in with their belief that they’re the heroic front line in an epic battle of rich White women from America’s suburbs fighting the ultimate evil of Emperor Bush and his Christianist abortion doctor murder corps. If Pandagon’s readers knew about the real oppression of women in Muslim countries, Amanda Marcotte accusing other Whites of being racists while shilling for a party that has never tossed out seditious Klan recruiter Robert Byrd would look extra silly.
Like all White liberals, the gals at Pandagon are loath to give up their pseudo-victimhood, which is the core of their identity, so like the Muslim apologists in the MSM they bury stories like this which would draw attention away from the plight of the rich White harpy and make Americans realize how backward and barbaric the rest of the world really is:
JEDDAH, 15 November 2007 — The General Court in Qatif yesterday doubled the number of lashes for a rape victim as well as jail terms for her assaulters. In its verdict, the court also suspended the victim’s lawyer from defending her.
The case was referred back to the General Court by the Appeals Court judges last summer after Abdul Rahman Al-Lahem, the victim’s lawyer, successfully contested against the initial verdict saying it too lenient for the rapists and unjust for the victim.
A year-and-a-half ago in the Eastern Province town of Qatif, a seven men gang-raped a 19-year-old girl 14 times. Three judges from the Qatif General Court sentenced the rape victim to 90 lashes for being in the car of an unrelated male at the time of the rape. The sentences for the seven rapists ranged from 10 months to five years in prison.
The Appeals Court sentenced the victim to 200 lashes and six months in prison. The seven rapists had their sentences increased to between two and nine years. The verdict came in as a shock to everybody.
A source at the Qatif General Court said that the judges had informed the rape victim that the reason behind doubling her punishment was “her attempt to aggravate and influence the judiciary through the media.â€
Judge Soliman Al-Muhanna from the Qatif court told the lawyer (Al-Lahem) that the judicial committee had decided to suspend him from the case. They also confiscated his license which is granted to Saudi lawyers by the Ministry of Justice.
“I explained to them that it was my job to do everything legal in order to serve my client. But they did not listen,†he said.
To Al-Lahem’s surprise he received a call from the Judicial Investigation Department of the Ministry of Justice to inform him of a disciplinary session he should attend on 25th of the Hijra month.
“Actually this is the second time they have contacted me. They claim that I advertise my services and that that is against Saudi law,†he said.
Did you get all that, Amanda? A woman was out on a date, got gang raped and was then sentenced to being beaten with a whip until her blood flows like a river and the flesh hangs from her back in strips. It’s possible that a person may not even be able to survive 200 lashes. Are you outraged?
Does the fact that she was originally sentenced to 90 lashes then got more for speaking out to the media make you rethink the “we live in a police state” nonsense that drives so much of the left? We all believe that a fundamental right all people are endowed with is free speech, right? Now hers, along with all women in Saudi Arabia are being taken from them by this punishment.
Will you remember this the next time you’re cheering on Keith Olberman’s (very) special comment on how we live in a dictatorship?
Of course not. Amanda Marcotte and those of her ilk don’t care about this poor woman, that’s why it’s up to noted feminists like Allahpundit to publicize this case. Marcotte (and I only use her as an example, feel free to insert the name of your favorite White liberal “feminist” with a chip on her shoulder) isn’t interested in some Arab woman’s plight, mainly because it would mean she would be agreeing with people who think differently than her, but also because she doesn’t believe Arab women have the same rights as you and I.
The reason for this is twofold. The first is pure racism, or in the case of the modern left “orientalism” which those of you who like me studied Comparative Religion in college know is racist view of Eastern (in this case Islamic) “otherness” as a sort of noble savagery superior to our decadent western ways.
Through the orientalist lens, the oppression of women is either ignored or excused with a tired, “but it’s their culture!” To the Marcottes of the world, the idea of this woman being whipped half to death by a real misogynist government that oppresses women is no more shocking or important than the fact that English strippers don’t shave their pits.
The second reason is the liberals’ fundamental misunderstanding of the freedoms the Founding Fathers thought were so important that they created a Republic where the rule of law would protect individuals from the tyranny of the masses. Liberals believe that these rights were simply made up by these men and the Constitution grants them to us. I, along with many on the right and the Founding Fathers themselves, believe that the rights are the birth right of every single person on this planet and the Constitution protects Americans from having their natural rights taken away from them.
Marcotte doesn’t think this victim has the same rights as her, and worse, that we Americans wanting to help her retain her rights and dignity are wrong. To them it is imperialism for me to say that we should demand the commutation of this barbaric sentence and work for the liberation of women in Islamic countries. Just like it was “imperialism” for Republicans to crush the slave states in the civil war.
Ironically, it’s their belief that Americans should enjoy rights and freedoms the rest of the world is denied which is imperialism. It is America funding the oppression of women in Saudi Arabia by buying their oil, when there’s plenty off the coast of Florida, that is imperialism.
And it is the supposed feminist movement turning a blind eye to real oppression that is the hight of imperial hubris.
You forgot to mention that the woman’s ex-boyfriend/ stalker was also gang-raped. Whose the silent one here?
A) I didn’t know the boy was raped as well, tell me how it changes my point?
B) If he’s a rape victim, why the “stalker” title, seems harsh.
C) How does concentrating on the woman’s treatment and a supposed feminists lack of reaction to it make me silent? The point of my post is that the Marcottes of the world have a selective feminism that doesn’t apply world wide. Reading your own article, you’ll see that only one or two other “feminist” sites even covered the story before me (and it was a t that point old news) why aren’t you asking them why they were silent until conservative blogs like mine made a big deal out of it?
D) Perhaps you’re unfamiliar with the phrase come strong or don’t come at all. It’s typical of White liberals to decide to try to make this an issue about conservatives vs liberals as opposed to theocracy vs Republicanism (not the party, the system of government that protects individual rights from the easily manipulated public opinion) and distract people from the most important element of the story, the inhumanity of a Mullacracy.