Only in Saudi Arabia

If you’re looking for justice, Saudi Arabia is the wrong place to look especially if you’re a woman. Ever hear of a rape victim being punished as if she were the criminal rather than the victim? I’ve heard something as ridiculous as a provocatively dressed woman blamed for her own rape when the defense attorney tries to break down her character in a feeble attempt to convince the jury the rapist had no choice but to force himself on her just because she wore a tight blouse and short skirt and had a reputation for sleeping around - that warped mentality of ‘she was asking for it.’ That’s bad enough but how about a rape victim being sentenced for the circumstances surrounding her rape? BBC reported this tragic case of a 19-year old Saudi Arabian woman who was gang-raped by 7 men and has been sentenced to 6 months in prison and 200 lashes for her ‘crime.’
What crime you ask? She was the VICTIM of a gang-rape. What the fak did she do? She failed to adhere to the country’s faked-up segregation law, a rather strict interpretation of Islamic law that forbids unrelated men and women from associating with each other. She was in a car with a strange man at the time of the attack. Initially sentenced to a mere 90 lashes for doing nothing wrong in the civilized world, she pissed off the Saudi court of injustice by appealing her unjust sentence which prompted the court to punish her even further by doubling her punishment. How dare she complain or expect justice in a faked up place like Saudi Arabia? After all, she’s probably lucky she wasn’t sentenced to death for failing to submit to a man’s sexual urges or because one of her 7 assailants didn’t reach orgasm while sexually assaulting her. For fak’s sake, in the oh-so-civilized Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, beheadings and stonings are recreational public spectacles as if they’re sports events, like an American baseball game, rather than displays of the kingdom’s barbaric methods of punishment. Tossing out the first pitch takes on a whole new meaning with these faks. Every human rights organization in the world will tell you ‘due process’ is non existent on Saudi turf and despite all the bad press and lobbying for change by human rights organizations like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, nothing happens to stop the madness.

This is a country where religious police patrol the streets on the lookout for people committing dastardly crimes such as listening to music or watching tv shows from the West. Women are most closely scrutinized and must adhere to an unyieldingly strict dress code which insists they be even more covered from head to toe than my dog is by his fur coat. Should a woman do something as risqué as show a hint of ankle or too much eyeball and be caught by the ‘Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and Prevention of Vice,’ the offending woman is not only chastised as a family disgrace but also faces severe criminal punishment. A girl like Britney Spears would’ve been stoned to death years ago for showing that much skin in Saudi Arabia unless she was hired to entertain the male royals. Then it’s ok.

So I say to myself: Where the fak are the United States and United Kingdom to intervene in this ongoing human right crisis in Saudi Arabia? They’ve gone to war for much less. While Saddam Hussein’s human rights record was cited as partial justification for the war in Iraq, Saddam was a teddy bear in comparison to the Saudi government with its appalling human rights record. However, what’s more appalling is the inaction of the world’s 2 leading democratic watchdogs in response to the Saudis’ blatant disregard for humanity.

They claim they could not stand by and allow Saddam Hussein to remain in power and terrorize his people with his whimsical disbursements of torture at the mere sniff of dissent. As the world’s most powerful democracy, the United States felt obligated to step up and free the Iraqi people from Saddam and his nasty ways. It couldn’t be aware of the Iraqi people’s suffering under this vicious tyrant and not do something. That would be wrong. Democracies are responsible to grant it to others and show the world that everyone is entitled to equal rights and a democratic way of life. If only that were their true motivation because if they were the true motivational factors, there is no fakin way any democratic government could ignore the atrocities committed daily inside Saudi Arabia.

So what’s with all of the Saudi king ass-kissing rather than ass-kicking for his widely publicized misgivings? During a recent visit to the UK in late October, King Abdullah received a lavish red carpet welcome from Queen Elizabeth complete with more butt slurping than a melting ice cream cone gets on a hot summer day.

More annoyingly, he literally gets his hand held by US president George W. Bush during their chummy lovey-dovey visits. But, then again, if you happened to have read the book House of Bush, House of Saud by Craig Unger, you’ll start to understand there’s quite the affectionate history behind all of that handholding – tis not merely a cheap one night stand or a series of occasional lustful interludes. In Craigslist personals-speak, this is definitely a LTR(long-term relationship) not a casual one of NSA(no-strings attached). And like a real long-term relationship, the parties involved are steeped in each others’ affairs and are willing to turn a blind eye to the missteps of the ones they love no matter how it looks to the rest of the world. But what is it about Abdullah that makes W’s heart skip a beat? Why does Abdullah get to play the role of dominatrix in this slick love affair? Is he that good with a whip to be granted absolution from all of his sins against humankind?

Why does freedom-loving cowboy W tolerate the king’s kinky ways when Abdullah’s been a very very bad boy on human rights violations alone and not planning on changing his ways anytime soon? Let’s keep in mind the aforementioned rape case is only one example of how faked up Saudi Arabia is. I’ll be daring and call it the most faked up society in the world and that’s saying a lot given my overall adoration for China. This reputation is no fakin secret. The Saudis aren’t stoning people to death under the cover of darkness and unbeknownst to the rest of the world. Even the average American has an inkling that Saudi Arabia doesn’t make someone just go stand in a corner for a timeout if he or she commits a ‘crime’ on Saudi soil. It’s quite the scary place as some punishable crimes, such as lovers sending each other a simple Valentine’s Day greeting, aren’t exactly crimes in the rest of the world so Westerners especially could inadvertently err and find themselves before a firing squad for something Hallmark rather prides its business on here in the U.S.

This barbaric reputation isn’t something some sharp, overachieving investigative journalist stumbled upon and recently exposed to the world for the first time in one of those shocker, breaking news exposes. This is standard fakin operating procedure for King Abdullah and his band of thugs. Why the fak doesn’t a freedom loving, smirking cowboy like W send his big bad Blackwater brutes to right these wrongs against humanity? With the general consensus of Saudi Arabia’s human rights record to be the world’s worst – so bad it makes Saddam Hussein appear a philanthropist by comparison, why isn’t W bothered in the least? Why instead does he host his Saudi pal King Abdullah to those down home Texas BBQs and rides in his favorite pick-up truck on the Crawford ranch?

Why doesn’t the US/UK quest for world democratization apply to Saudi Arabia? They’re already in the neighborhood so why not stop by and say: enough is enough. Forgive me if I’m incorrect but the concern for the democratic way everywhere for everyone only seems pressing when it occurs within the boundaries of a place where there’s something in it for them and easily quieted if there’s good reason to keep our noses out of it regardless of the degree of abuses being suffered by the general public we’d step up to ‘protect’ if the prize was right.

How democratic is this selective approach to protecting people from brutal regimes? Are we the equivalent of Blackwater thugs for hire? If you can’t reward us handsomely, no chivalry for you? Is that democratic? But then again, I would never accuse the Bush administration of being the poster child for democracy.

Sorry but if you cite global democratization and a pressing desire to protect people from harmful impositions of non-democratic governments as reason to get involved, then your need to spread democracy must apply to everyone – whether you stand to win or lose by standing up for people under control of oppressive governments. You also can’t crap all over the democratic process in your own supposed democracy. It’s tough to get away with selectively playing the hero without someone legitimately questioning your motives or calling your bluff. Selective democracy is like a vegetarian sneaking in a Big Mac when no one’s looking. It just doesn’t fly.

If you’re going to go to bat because as the most powerful democracy in the world you cannot stand by while cruel, power-hungry regimes impose hellish conditions on their people, then damn it, it MUST apply to all regimes whether they have oil or Redskins tickets or a strategic geographic location optimal for storing your G.I. Joe action figures or anything else you may want or need.

Yes, I know. People say this is politics. I call it hypocrisy. The U.S. especially turns a blind eye because it knows the consequences of ticking off oil-rich Saudi Arabia. With oil already flirting with the $100/barrel mark, we don’t want to rock the boat. Already you regularly hear discussion about the negative impact a potential war with Iran could have on oil prices. Imagine if we piss off the Saudis who sit on the world’s largest oil reserves and lead in exports?

Saudi Arabia produces the most oil, and the US consumes the most oil. Let’s do the math – and it won’t require a calculator or any mathematical ability. What do you reckon will happen if the biggest consumer ticks off the biggest producer? As the world’s leading producer, you’d better believe the Saudis have most control over price and production and know they can make everyone, especially the U.S., their bitches because they say how much flows, where it flows, and how much it costs to direct that flow your way. OPEC is nothing more than a horse and pony show of fictional fairness when the simple truth is: the Saudis run the show.

Officially, Saudi Arabia is a member along with 13 other nations but realistically, it’s about as fair as a rigged election in a corrupt nation or Florida. The other OPEC nations are merely there to carry the Saudis’ robes and make OPEC appear as something more than the Saudi boys’ club it is. With a nation full of cars chugging gas like frat boys beer, America knows damn well it’d screw itself royally if it pressured the Saudi royals to clean up their act and start treating people like human beings rather than whipping posts with its insanely harsh treatment of those who violate its faked up brand of Islam. But America doesn’t dare speak out against the Saudi oil tyrants. When it comes to crude oil, the Saudi faks can be as crude as they please and not worry that anyone will ever as much as suggest they curb their ways – at least as long as the oil is there to feed those hungry, hungry Hummers.

Oil supply fears aside, W knows he can’t exactly be the pot calling the kettle black either. Under fire for his less than humane treatment of suspected terrorists such as his long-standing guests at the Guantanamo Bay Ritz Carlton or those kidnapped and shipped off to countries where torture would NEVER be expected as part of the welcome wagon hospitality package for W’s esteemed guests, Bush can’t exactly accuse his good buddy King Abdullah of human rights violations without having a finger pointed right back at him. No one would take him seriously. Poor W – he kidnaps and tortures a few innocent people and everyone’s branding him the bad guy with no regard for humanity.

No good could come out of reprimanding the Saudi king so why upset the guy with control over the oil faucet when you have oil running through your own veins and know this presidential gig eventually ends and then what’s a W to do? What does a guy with W’s smarts to do after the party is over? We don’t exactly expect him to reel in the big bucks on the public speaking circuit as other former presidents have done.

So in the case of human rights violations, W does what I wish he’d do when someone hasn’t told him exactly what to say: he shuts the fak up. Now if he could only learn that trick when the teleprompter goes blank, the rest of his presidency would be a hell of a lot easier to tolerate.

Your vote:

Average: 10 (1 vote)