Saudi judge sentences pregnant gang-rape victim to 100 lashes for committing adultery | Mail Online
A Saudi judge has ordered a woman should be jailed for a year and receive 100 lashes after she was gang-raped, it was claimed last night.
The 23-year-old woman, who became pregnant after her ordeal, was reportedly assaulted after accepting a lift from a man.
He took her to a house to the east of the city of Jeddah where she was attacked by him and four of his friends throughout the night.
She later discovered she was pregnant and made a desperate attempt to get an abortion at the King Fahd Hospital for Armed Forces.
According to the Saudi Gazette, she eventually 'confessed' to having 'forced intercourse' with her attackers and was brought before a judge at the District Court in Jeddah.
He ruled she had committed adultery - despite not even being married - and handed down a year's prison sentence, which she will serve in a prison just outside the city.
She is still pregnant and will be flogged once she has had the child.
8 comments:
This is horrible, isn't it? She was the victim of a horrible rape and now she is considered as the culprit. That's what enrages me of these cases. It's so unjust.
Regards.
Yes, what a nightmare inversion of all that is right. But what has me thinking is how Saudis cannot simply be happy with dominating their women but sometimes need to treat them as if they are completely Other, as in this case. Now maybe there is a tribal difference between the rape victim and the rapists and the police and judge. But I somehow don't think that would be necessary for such a story to happen. We've heard similar stories before and you have probably heard of the recent revelations that men and women are raped in order to humiliate them and convince them that only by becoming a suicide bomber can they be purified again before Allah.
To have such a disregard for your fellow Muslims is something very difficult for a mind raised in Judeo-Christian culture to get his head around. It is no doubt a reflection of how the Islamist understands the relationship of all people to Allah, that we all have some duty to submit to a heavenly warlord and can be so used as tools by those who nominate themselves as the ones who will create the horrific events that will give off the signs we must worship as sacred. So, in order to worship according to Allah's hate of "adultery", we will rape unmarried women and accuse her of adultery. In order to fend off our own fear of dieing in a state of shame, we will perform horrific acts thinking this will win us Allah's favor. We will become the Satanic agents of that which we demand others obey.
It makes no sense to us Westerners because we do not see the world through the lens of someone for whom everything is a question of war. In other words, you must be a Satanist to think like some of these Saudis.
Not just Saudi Arabia, where a man's passport claims the holder, not the passport, to be the property of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Look to Robert Spencer, Islam Unveiled for the statistics on women in prison in Pakistan for adultery: it runs to 90 percent, as I recall. It is the crime of "zina." Zina is sex crime in Sharia.
We must also consider that there are no "rights" in Sharia. Rather, there is only submission, first to Allah, then to the caliph, and so on down the line, similar to the Great Chain of Being in the Middle Ages. Worlds are divided: Dar al Men; Dar al Women; Dar al Dhimmis; Dar all Polytheists; and so on. IN this endless hierarchy of kinds of people, Muslims are the best of people, according to the Qur'an. All others must be destroyed or enslaved till they accept Islam. The devil, as it were, is in the details.
The World of Women, Dar al Nun, is a world completely separate from the rest where women are never Human. When a boy reaches the age of majority, roughly six years old, he is cast out of the world of women and is never allowed to return. "Men are superiour to women," it says in the Qur'an, and that's that for the true believer. Men have a right and duty to beat disobedient women. The whole of the Qur'an is hateful toward women.
If your stomach is strong, look up "zina" to see what it is to be a woman in Islam. An that's just a start.
Well Dag, it's one thing to beat disobedient women into their place in the "chain of being"; it's yet another to interpret this hierarchy to mean you can rape whoever is momentarily away from her menfolk and charge her with adultery. Even in Islam, there has to be some distinction between obeying Allah and playing Allah, no?, even if it appears that many Muslim men are completely confused as to the difference. In other words, this appears to be not a rape by her own menfolk and so it must surely be seen by her own family as an attack on them for letting this woman out of their sight. Will her family just accept their shame or will they seek revenge? But how can any society operate if it licenses an endless war within its boundaries?
Chances are good that this girl will be murdered by a family member for shaming them. She is not important as a person, the honor of the family is what matters here to them. We'll encounter arguments such as,"Why was she alone...." We find numerous examples of family members raping their own, brothers and uncles and so on, and the woman is the criminal. If she says it's not her fault, she needs, according to Islam, four male witnesses to defend her. Otherwise, it's not rape. Women are a free-for-all, which is partly why they're shrouded and segregated from public society. The Qur'an claims that women are uncontrollably sexual, and they will mostly burn in Hell. It is a man's duty, i.e. father or brother or son, to protect his family females from themselves or they will surely throw themselves at the first male they see. Hence, when a woman is raped, it's her fault or the fault of the man in charge for letting his guard down. When it happens, the woman must be killed.
Yeah, truepers, I posted at the Spanish site about that case of the "Mum of the Believers" plotting to get young women raped to convince them afterwards to commit suicide attacks.
The problem here is (as I see it) that the women only serve as a tool for having sons and daughters, the first ones to do the jihad, the second ones, to continue the demography obligations. That fact is linked to the "pure" nature of the Muslim man as follower of Allah and the "impure" nature of the woman who is always inferior (less intelligent, more emotional, etc). So if the only thing that they serve for (that is demography) is not given to their husbands, they are to blame, whatever had happened. That is why, as dag has said, world should be divided, so as to prevent women for being even more impure than their nature (well, our nature... :P) makes them.
That is why honor killings are "logical" in a sense, as that woman has destroyed the only thing he was created by Allah: to be a pure tool for bringing sons and daughters to this world, even if she was created as impure from the beginning.
Don't know if I have explained myself correctly, because I normally do not read theory but only the effects of their theories...
I will do that search of "zina". It looks like an interesting thing to research about.
Regards.
Hi Nora,
Just saw you at Jihad Watch commenting on Geert Wilders. Theory hits the pavement there.
My best, Dag.
I normally do not comment there... ;) There are those idiots like Abdullah who aren't there interested in debating, just in insulting. But I really thought this was important, although I saw afterwards that what I have posted had already been linked by others before me... ;)
My best.
Post a Comment