So busy being Charlie Hebdo that they don’t even know who Raif Badawi is
This story was published in the print edition of yesterday’s Times of Malta.
Jailed for 10 years and subjected to 50 lashes outside the mosque every Friday for 20 weeks, to complete the 1,000 lashes of his sentence.
He is 31 and all he did was write a blog which the Saudi authorities didn’t like.
There has been an international outcry and Amnesty International has become involved but the whole thing will continue.
Raif Badawi’s wife said on Thursday before the second round of lashes yesterday that she didn’t think he could withstand them. Face it, who can? The first round of 50 lashes opens up the back which can’t heal in the seven days before the second round. With each subsequent round the wounds inflicted on already existing wounds get progressively and exponentially worse.
Savagery on this scale is horrendous.
Muscat’s hypocrisy is outrageous. First he has Malta decorate a prominent member of the regime then he says this. Talk about mixed messages.
24 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Check your last paragraph ma’am. I think you confused one arsehole for another. I don’t think Busuttil decorated anyone.
[Daphne – Corrected. Getting tired.]
Aye! well that is Muslim Saudi Arabia for you, along with Yemen, Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran and more but it has nothing to do with Islam.
[Daphne – No, in fact it does not. It has to do with men who want to acquire or maintain absolute power.]
Using Islam as the tool?
Claiming divine authority is rather a good tool when acquiring or maintaining absolute power.
Daphne, religion is generally very much about men who want to acquire or maintain absolute power. I can’t think of any religion started by a woman.
If the rulers of a country enacted laws based on human rights it would be up to the individual whether to live according to the rules of any religion. Islam did not impose itself on the Saudis, it is the ruling family that relies on Sharia law, or the parts of it which fits its agenda.
I have not yet heard or read that any of the Princes’ wives were punished because they did not wear the abaya or head scarf while visiting Europe or the US, even thought one can find many photos of the events where Sharia modesty is not taken into account.
But what better way than to ‘blame religion’ for strict rules and regulations, which impinge on the rights of citizens, and strengthen a ruling family’s hold on power. ”God wants this and the prophet wanted that….yet neither God nor the prophet can speak for themselves, therefore those in power can interpret and presume as they wish. A family’s rule using God’s word is far more protected than a family who shuns democracy to protect its power. So is Islam the doer or his tool?
Here is a taste of living according to another religion:
”Women obtain Vatican City citizenship by marriage (as a baptized Catholic) to their husbands; however such citizenship “lasts only for the duration of their stay” in Vatican City.
In the past, women were not allowed to open a bank account in Vatican City but, during the leadership of Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI, the value of women in the city was highlighted.
L’Osservatore Romano – the daily newspaper in Vatican City – is now publishing supplementary pages that address women’s issues.
Women living in Vatican City are expected to wear black skirts or black dresses that do not expose the knee area. The length of the sleeves of the top clothing are required to be “mid to long sleeves” length.
Women are not allowed to wear pants.
Only “simple jewellery” are permitted.
Footwear for women should be “dark closed-toe shoes”.
Among the women who lived in Vatican City was one of the daughters of an electrician, who later got married and “lost her right to live” in the city.
Divorces are not common. There was one divorce a few years ago, after the wife of one guardsmen had an affair with another. All had to leave Vatican City.
Residents must get home before midnight because all the gates are closed. If someone arrives later, one must call the intercom and guardsmen take their names. Likewise, if someone invites guests, they generally have to leave before midnight as well.
Some women would love to have a possibility to sunbathe on their own balcony, but it is not allowed.
To marry a guardsmen, you must be a baptized Catholic — and a regular church-goer. You also need to have confirmation from a bishop of corresponding diocese and a certificate of conduct from a parish priest. Also, a certificate of good behaviour is needed. When all the papers are ready, they need to be handed into a Vatican’s office.
”When a guardsman turns 40, he must retire; and that means he has to move out from Vatican City with his family. Back to “real life,” outside the walls.”
What would countries be like if different Catholics used the Bible to interpret what the God of Catholics intended to say? Would strict, unchallenged and absolute, Roman Catholic law instead of civil law be a piece of cake?
You are not being entirely factual or fair. The Vatican citizenship is only given to those that actually work with the Vatican and is taken away as soon as these terminate their work there. Actually those that do not have a citizenship, are then actually automatically granted an Italian one.
The Vatican city is actually made up of the Pope’s residence and the government offices and this is the reason why the gates are closed. The same goes for the dress code. It is a work related dress code. Try and go to any local bank wearing what you like and not the official uniform, and see what happens.
There are a large number of establishment that require strict dress code and I agree with this as it does project a sense of discipline and order.
His second set of 50 lashes have been postponed because the first lot haven’t healed yet. So you see, there actually are some moderate Muslims after all.
Well, they were busy beheading a woman instead.
You consider afflicting such a sentence is moderate Nighthawk, or rather savagery.
It pains me to have to point out that I was being sarcastic. And also unoriginal, as I should have credited Bill Maher who came up with it in the first place.
You might want to look up the controversy caused that arose in a discussion about Islam between him and Ben Affleck, a celebrity liberal suffering an overdose of political correctness.
Say “thank you” for prolonging your life to ensure that you receive the whole thousand lashes before you die!
Some more Non-Muslims that are behaving in a way that is atypical to Muslims.
http://www.france24.com/en/20150117-charlie-hebdo-protests-
niger-pakistan-algiers-zinder-france/
There is no such thing as a moderate Muslim.
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2015-01-17/world-news/Charlie-Hebdo-cover-causes-unrest-in-Muslim-world-6736128899
Joseph Muscat ought to change his Facebook status to ‘Je suis charlatan”.
He has already changed it . . . to . . . Je suis Charlie Chaplin
Public outcry against the actions of such appaling regimes would be more befitting than the public anger demonstrated last week to demonstrate against the killing of a group of fanatics bent on mocking Islam in the name of a radical interpretation of freedom of speech.
This is just terrible. Horrible and horrifying. I’ve always been taught that God is All Love so how come these supposed Religions are inflicting such pain in His name?
For your information, here’s a Charlie Hebdo update:
http://www.infowars.com/charlie-hebdo-report-from-europe/
It is clear from the video that Amedy Coulibaly, one of the alleged gunmen, had his hands tied up at the time of his execution. This favours the theory that the alleged gunmen, with clear connections to CIA asset Al-Awlaki (often described as a triple agent), were patsies and the actual gunmen will remain unknown (although anyone who knows how it works can list the usual suspect categories).
Don’t be bewildered that the world we live in could be so evil; that most politicians are oblivious while others are charming psychopaths. You’ll get over it once you understand how it all works out.
I do agree with this article, but if we weren’t busy being Charlie Hebdo now, this might happen to anyone in Europe who dares blog something ‘insulting’ a few years from now.
Something happened in Europe, we reacted, the Saudis should react the same way if they want to defend freedom of speech. If they did, I am sure we would all support them as we did France, but they have allowed these kinds of things for so long, for them it has become the norm, and that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t all be Charlie, or anyone else for that matter. My 2 cents.
[Daphne – People are not free to protest in Saudi Arabia. That’s the point. That’s why this man is being punished.]
firstly, let me say that I my opinion is only about the public supporting Charlie hebdo, not politicians, I totally agree that most of them are hypocrites, Putin at the rally in favor of freedom of speech??? really??! so if I am off point, I apologise.
As for the rest of us, I know protesting is forbidden in Saudi, but what about all those Saudis and Muslims living in countries like Europe, are they out en masse protesting for this cause? No, hardly any of the protesters I have seen in the media are muslim. I chose to support Charlie H because I disagree with what they published, but I value the fact that they are free to publish what they want and not risk their lives over it. In our society, to me, the attack was an extension of that law in SA, a ‘take the law into their own hands’ attitude, So In France this kind of publishing is allowed? well let’s show them. That is why I supported the protest because I am grateful for being here having a banter :) on a lighter note, I did see a ‘je suis raif’ poster somewhere :)
This sort of punishment, irrespective for whatever reason, is not accepted, at all, in our civilisation. If it is permitted in another civilization, that constitutes “a clash of civilizations” that politically-correct people claim does not exist.
Having a clash does not mean that we should join in and add to it, but rather that we should restrain it, but if we are to succeed, first we have to admit that it exists.
The solution is not an ill-defined multicultural nation. Tolerance cannot accommodate the intolerant.
Contrary to what was implied, the second punishment-session was not administered precisely for the medical reason mentioned. That is a very tiny step forward. A second seems to be likely, but I shall not rush to say that it will happen.
Yes, Muscat is a terrible hypocrite – but we knew that. The problem is that so many people don’t see this, probably due to ignorance more than maliciousness.
Perhaps it might help if someone kept a running list of all his contradictory behaviour, and why they are contradictions.