Gosling: Cagey B: Why is this a left-right issue? He's being held under a system based on theocratic religious edicts, not a system resembling anything like the rule of law. As a member of "the left", I don't think we should be supporting regimes like Saudi Arabia with economic and military aid. I would hope that people on "the right" would agree.

This. That system isn't even law. That is literally not a legal system. That's the system that was in place before Hammurabi INVENTED laws.

just after the germans bombed pearl harbor.

You know, under the circumstances, I really don't have a problem with this.

The guy beats up his (step) mother. The father gets a condition on the sentence that allows him to be the final arbiter of his sons released based on him meeting the fathers conditions. The son is not / has not met those conditions so he sits in jail.

Yeah, I don't really see a problem with it. At worst I would call it some seriously extreme parenting. However, I am glad there is at least one saudi man willing to stand up for his woman.

So....shiathead spoiled brat adult son beats up his dad's wife. Dad presses charges and the judge only sentences violent shiathead spoiled brat adult son to three years. As the end of the three years comes up, Dad decides son is still a violent shiathead and dangerous to his family, so he asks the judge to keep shiathead son in jail until Dad says shiathead son can get out of jail.

This being Saudi Arabia, apparently Dad can do that.

Since what this prick did to go to jail was beat the crap out of a woman---and not just any woman, but his stepmom---I got no problem with this.

Their culture's legal system has decided a violent offender is still dangerous and needs to stay incarcerated. They're not cutting off his body parts, they're not putting him in solitary, they're not killing him, they're keeping his ass locked up so he can't beat up women.

And it's because someone with actual knowledge of the crime and of the offender, and with actual authority under their legal system, made the determination that he still presents a danger.

This is actually one of the least barbaric and most progressive and sane criminal justice things I've heard of the Saudis doing.

And if they want to decide that it's not just for the guy to be in prison this long, then it would make sense to move him to a different part of the country, where he's away from his father and stepmother. That way his victim doesn't have to worry about running into him again. Just tell him he can't go back to the town where his father lives until his father says it's okay. Protects the crime victims, preserves justice. But before you let him go, it's maybe a good idea to ask the dad why he thinks the son is still dangerous.

wildcardjack: xanadian: INeedAName: xanadian: cman: If there is anyone who does deserve to be in prison for 16 years it is a woman beater.

/And it was his step-mother of all people

Yup. Or a pedant. I mean, a pedestrian. No, wait! What's that other "p" word... ;-/

Pedophobic?

Pediatric! ...no... hmm.

Priest?

Podiatrist?

There is always the possibility (probability) that a "man" willing to beat the crap out of his father's wife is a worthless piece of shiat bad seed who, for the sake of society as a whole, needs to sit in jail and rot until he dies of old age.

I think having to face that about your son would be the worst thing in the world---worse than having your kid just die.

/"The Bad Seed" is an interesting movie, well worth watching
//the bad seed in the movie is a girl, not a boy, which actually makes it better

Julie Cochrane: So....shiathead spoiled brat adult son beats up his dad's wife. Dad presses charges and the judge only sentences violent shiathead spoiled brat adult son to three years. As the end of the three years comes up, Dad decides son is still a violent shiathead and dangerous to his family, so he asks the judge to keep shiathead son in jail until Dad says shiathead son can get out of jail.

This being Saudi Arabia, apparently Dad can do that.

Since what this prick did to go to jail was beat the crap out of a woman---and not just any woman, but his stepmom---I got no problem with this.

Their culture's legal system has decided a violent offender is still dangerous and needs to stay incarcerated. They're not cutting off his body parts, they're not putting him in solitary, they're not killing him, they're keeping his ass locked up so he can't beat up women.

And it's because someone with actual knowledge of the crime and of the offender, and with actual authority under their legal system, made the determination that he still presents a danger.

This is actually one of the least barbaric and most progressive and sane criminal justice things I've heard of the Saudis doing.

And if they want to decide that it's not just for the guy to be in prison this long, then it would make sense to move him to a different part of the country, where he's away from his father and stepmother. That way his victim doesn't have to worry about running into him again. Just tell him he can't go back to the town where his father lives until his father says it's okay. Protects the crime victims, preserves justice. But before you let him go, it's maybe a good idea to ask the dad why he thinks the son is still dangerous.

The problem isn't so much that they asked his father for his opinion, but that his father seems to have final say because of the judge the guy drew for his trial. Okay, that's two problems. First is that because his father hasn't forgiven him for beating up his dad's wife, he gets more jail time. The other is the basic idea of rule of law.

While I'm all for letting different cultures be different and handle their shiat in their own way, I do want there to be some overarching restrictions. Relevant to this article, the basic laws shouldn't be customizable. You should get similar results no matter which judge you appear before.

Also, and I know I'm going to get called out on this, I'm not sure why it's so important that it's his stepmother. Certainly, I think it's terrible to assault your parents (or their spouses) but I don't see how that turns it into a life sentence (of which he's served 15, it sounds like) from a 3 year sentence.

And as for your allegations of him being a danger to women, I didn't really get that out of the article. Certainly, the article is trying to paint a sympathetic picture of him, but it read to me like the reason he's still there is that his dad is still pissed.

Sin_City_Superhero: Julie Cochrane: But before you let him go, it's maybe a good idea to ask the dad why he thinks the son is still dangerous.

Maybe dad is ALSO a shiat-head, and he's keeping his kid in jail because he can, not because the kid actually poses a threat. We really don't know, do we?

The "kid" is 43. He was 28 when convincted. Is there a point where he no longer has to be under his father's rule?

Sin_City_Superhero: Julie Cochrane: But before you let him go, it's maybe a good idea to ask the dad why he thinks the son is still dangerous.

Maybe dad is ALSO a shiat-head, and he's keeping his kid in jail because he can, not because the kid actually poses a threat. We really don't know, do we?

Maybe. Which would be a reason to release the kid in another part of the country and not allow him to go back to the part of the country with his father and stepmother.

Banishment and exile (or "you can't go there's") are punishments we don't make enough use of. If we used them wisely here as a replacement for a lot of the cases where we use "restraining orders," we'd have something that worked.

Julie Cochrane: So....shiathead spoiled brat adult son beats up his dad's wife. Dad presses charges and the judge only sentences violent shiathead spoiled brat adult son to three years. As the end of the three years comes up, Dad decides son is still a violent shiathead and dangerous to his family, so he asks the judge to keep shiathead son in jail until Dad says shiathead son can get out of jail.

This being Saudi Arabia, apparently Dad can do that.

Since what this prick did to go to jail was beat the crap out of a woman---and not just any woman, but his stepmom---I got no problem with this.

Their culture's legal system has decided a violent offender is still dangerous and needs to stay incarcerated. They're not cutting off his body parts, they're not putting him in solitary, they're not killing him, they're keeping his ass locked up so he can't beat up women.

And it's because someone with actual knowledge of the crime and of the offender, and with actual authority under their legal system, made the determination that he still presents a danger.

This is actually one of the least barbaric and most progressive and sane criminal justice things I've heard of the Saudis doing.

And if they want to decide that it's not just for the guy to be in prison this long, then it would make sense to move him to a different part of the country, where he's away from his father and stepmother. That way his victim doesn't have to worry about running into him again. Just tell him he can't go back to the town where his father lives until his father says it's okay. Protects the crime victims, preserves justice. But before you let him go, it's maybe a good idea to ask the dad why he thinks the son is still dangerous.

I don't think the problem people are having is with the sentence itself being cruel or excessive, but with it being essentially arbitrary. A legal system which is not based on LAW is barbarism, and that's what we have here.

I May Be Crazy But...: wildcardjack: xanadian: INeedAName: xanadian: cman: If there is anyone who does deserve to be in prison for 16 years it is a woman beater.

/And it was his step-mother of all people

Yup. Or a pedant. I mean, a pedestrian. No, wait! What's that other "p" word... ;-/

Pedophobic?

Pediatric! ...no... hmm.

Priest?

Podiatrist?

Proctologist!

Crosshair: No more stupid that US drug laws. Lets first look at getting rid of the log, more like a forrest, in our own eye first. Then we might have just a speck of moral standing in the world that we can use to criticize others.

As messed up an the US prison population is right now, no. Just no. This is just not the same thing. But thanks for playing!

INeedAName: xanadian: cman: If there is anyone who does deserve to be in prison for 16 years it is a woman beater.

/And it was his step-mother of all people

Yup. Or a pedant. I mean, a pedestrian. No, wait! What's that other "p" word... ;-/

Pedophobic?


you mean a thing that babies suck on?

I May Be Crazy But...: The problem isn't so much that they asked his father for his opinion, but that his father seems to have final say because of the judge the guy drew for his trial. Okay, that's two problems. First is that because his father hasn't forgiven him for beating up his dad's wife, he gets more jail time. The other is the basic idea of rule of law.

While I'm all for letting different cultures be different and handle their shiat in their own way, I do want there to be some overarching restrictions. Relevant to this article, the basic laws shouldn't be customizable. You should get similar results no matter which judge you appear before.

Also, and I know I'm going to get called out on this, I'm not sure why it's so important that it's his stepmother. Certainly, I think it's terrible to assault your parents (or their spouses) but I don't see how that turns it into a life sentence (of which he's served 15, it sounds like) from a 3 year sentence.

And as for your allegations of him being a danger to women, I didn't really get that out of the article. Certainly, the article is trying to paint a sympathetic picture of him, but it read to me like the reason he's still there is that his dad is still pissed.

I've been trying to think about this in terms of the very little I know of sharia.

They don't have "Rule of Law."

Whether they "should" have it or not is a moot point, because they not only don't want "Rule of Law," them getting "Rule of Law" is against their religion.

Look, up until well after the Protestant Reformation and all the slaughter that came with that in France as well as a whole bunch of other places, religion and politics/government---church and state---weren't two things, they were one thing and that whole thing constituted "religion."

To postulate the idea of separating the state from the religion was nonsensical, because the state and judging and law were inherently religious in nature and inherently part of religion.

To skip the whole Neo-platonism thing and the journey of church and state in Western Europe, in the US how we developed is that what for forever and a day down through human history had been One card slot on our human brain motherboard, labeled "RELIGION" (Which contained blueprints for Church and State) we split it into Two card slots. We labeled one "State" and the other "Religion."

And in the "State" card slot, pretty much all of us Americans have something I call "Americanism"----We treat the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence as sacred texts and have certain beliefs about what the core properties of good, just, free government is----beliefs almost all of us share. We're extremely evangelical about these beliefs, very devout, and pretty much blind to our passionate, religious devotion---we take it all as obvious truths of the universe. The importance of "Rule of Law" being one of those Articles of Faith within Americanism.

And we feel very enlightened about freedom of religion that we'll "let" other people have whatever religion they want to have that "Religion" card slot----just as long as they've got Americanism (or something close enough to Americanism for us) in the "State" card slot.

In the case of the Saudis, we're happy and fine with them being Muslims as long as they move "forward" towards having "Rule of Law."

I believe that many of the principles we put forward within that "Americanism" (like Rule of Law) are worthwhile. But they're not going to do it, and the reason they're not going to do it is because their religion really does say to do things the way they're doing them now. Sharia gives judges that much independence.

If the government wanted to increase rule of law, they'd put an adviser at each judge's elbow, with an internet connection and a lot of google-fu and the full scope of information the government wanted the advisers to have access to. You get more uniformity and predictability by natural drift when the left hand knows what the right hand is doing.

Julie Cochrane: There is always the possibility (probability) that a "man" willing to beat the crap out of his father's wife is a worthless piece of shiat bad seed who, for the sake of society as a whole, needs to sit in jail and rot until he dies of old age.

I think having to face that about your son would be the worst thing in the world---worse than having your kid just die.

/"The Bad Seed" is an interesting movie, well worth watching
//the bad seed in the movie is a girl, not a boy, which actually makes it better

Sadly, in Saudi Arabia disrespecting your father is probably a hundred times worse than beating up your mother. I honestly believe that the father's reasoning behind this was something along the lines of, "It is MY job to beat my property."

basemetal: I'm safe from Sharia law here in Okla.

/suck it biatches!

I don't think there ever was a time you weren't safe from Sharia Law in Oklahoma.

"Some judges view children's "disobedience" towards their parents as an offence worthy of lashing and even jail sentences."

"Eid al-Sinani, 43, was originally sentenced to three years in prison and 200 lashes for beating up his step mother,"

Find a cause you believe in and shoehorn the first example you can find into it. Ignore any other facts as inconsequential. The human rights group seems to be saying it's wrong to keep a man who beats women in prison. They'd have more credibility if they went into some details. Beat up is a very poor description of the severity of the crime. If he is 43 now we are talking about a 28 year old man assaulting his step mother. The problem with the law is it puts too much power in the father's hands and not enough in the court. Think about it this way. Lets assume this guy is violent. Our evidence is he beat up his step mother. Lets assume for the sake of argument that his dad is actually a good guy and so is his step mom. Now lets assume you give suddenly have the right to keep someone in jail who hurt someone you love.

This article is terribly short on details.

Say what you will, but at least these guys finished the job.

degenerate-afro: Funny that this story causes outrage, but the US has a larger percentage of the population in jail for minor offenses.

Meh, it is only Saudi Arabia. Fark 'em.

Mildot: The thing I don't understand is, we boycotted the shiat out of South Africa over Apartide, but we turn a blind eye to all the crap in Saudi because of their oil. Drill for our own, and tell these farkers to pouns sand, which they have in abundance!

That isn't how oil works. As long as our country runs on petroleum we will- and must- continue to prop up this shiatty regime. Drill for our own? Is the mere act of drilling supposed to make oil magically appear where there was none before? Should I try adapting an Indian rain dance to the problem? Are you retarded?

silverjets: Wait? What?

A completely different country has completely different ways of doing things?

It is strange how the ways of different people on in different planets countries differ.

Good one less Beardsley McTurbanhead.

Your oil dollars at work

As much as their legal system sucks I gotta agree with the final outcome.Woman beaters can rot in hell.

If my son (that I don't have) beat up my wife (that I don't have) I could see myself holding a grudge

cman: Crosshair: No more stupid that US drug laws. Lets first look at getting rid of the log, more like a forrest, in our own eye first. Then we might have just a speck of moral standing in the world that we can use to criticize others.

I am actually quite confused at the lefts stance on this.

Do we the United States have the right to tell other nations how to run their own nation?

We need to get off the oil, so we can let that country implode in their own stupidity.

dandude28: Woman beaters can rot in hell.

What's your opinion on man beaters?

cman: I am actually quite confused at the lefts stance on this.

Do we the United States have the right to tell other nations how to run their own nation?



*ahem*

Cheney: Now, I think things have gotten so bad inside Iraq, from the standpoint of the Iraqi people, my belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators. . . .

Russert: If your analysis is not correct, and we're not treated as liberators, but as conquerors, and the Iraqis begin to resist, particularly in Baghdad, do you think the American people are prepared for a long, costly, and bloody battle with significant American casualties?

Cheney: Well, I don't think it's likely to unfold that way, Tim, because I really do believe that we will be greeted as liberators. . . . The read we get on the people of Iraq is there is no question but what they want to the get rid of Saddam Hussein and they will welcome as liberators the United States when we come to do that.

That arbitrariness of law is pretty screwed up, and demonstrates what a truly frightening place Saudi Arabia is. So glad I do not live there.

I am glad that this miscarriage of justice found such a worthy victim though! Beat up a woman, and your stepmother to boot, and go to prison for a decade and a half. It's like Boondock Saints, or that Meg Ryan movie where she started vigilante killing the thugs terrorising NYC. I juuuuuust can't get that riled up about it.

/Saudi Arabia is still a freaky crazy place.

xanadian: cman: If there is anyone who does deserve to be in prison for 16 years it is a woman beater.

/And it was his step-mother of all people

Yup. Or a pedant. I mean, a pedestrian. No, wait! What's that other "p" word... ;-/

Pudknocker?

Only thing I'd do after being released is cut off the stepmother's head and shove it up the old man's ass.

What a coont of a Muslim father.

although, he DID beat the man's wife. You beat MY wife, and I have the key to your cell door, I dont CARE if you are my son... you aint gettin out.

and if you beat a woman bad enough to actually be PUNISHED for it over there....

cman: Crosshair: No more stupid that US drug laws. Lets first look at getting rid of the log, more like a forrest, in our own eye first. Then we might have just a speck of moral standing in the world that we can use to criticize others.

I am actually quite confused at the lefts stance on this.

Do we the United States have the right to tell other nations how to run their own nation?

Well, you know what they say, "Might makes right." So, some would argue that we do have the right to tell other nations how to run their own nation.

Mock26: cman: Crosshair: No more stupid that US drug laws. Lets first look at getting rid of the log, more like a forrest, in our own eye first. Then we might have just a speck of moral standing in the world that we can use to criticize others.

I am actually quite confused at the lefts stance on this.

Do we the United States have the right to tell other nations how to run their own nation?

Well, you know what they say, "Might makes right." So, some would argue that we do have the right to tell other nations how to run their own nation.

Frankly, no one is telling anyone how to run anyone's nation here, are they? or did we miss some witty dig at the left here?

Idiotic and open ended sort of law, but he did beat up his own step mom, so 15 years seems justified kinda......although in a country where men beat up women all the time and spend zero time in jail is a bit peculiar.

SageC: Say what you will, but at least these guys finished the job.
[i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

Yea, and then blamed the Asians.