Saudi Arab ki zindagi

[NETPOLICE]

post only in english it is decent OK??

[Guest]

Saudi is a good place to make money but there is no freedom for ladies over there. I have been there wearing burkha but still those eyes pierce thru clothes. Jeddah is the worst place to live in Saudi. Too many crimes takes place there. Any female can not go shopping alone in Jeddah. I have heard lots of stories from residents of Jeddah about crimes and much more.

[Salahuddin]

Female Pathaka, when you criticize a society as being 'repressed' etc, you should also give an example of a society thats not 'repressed'. Meaning what is your version of a society from which everyone can draw an example and try to follow and a society where women are respected. Being that u are a liberated 'Indian' woman, lets take the example of the 'great' Indian society. Are women repressed in India? Of course, they are. There are at least 23,000 dowry related deaths alone, 178,000 rape cases which are reported (and scores go unreported) (Source, The Hindu (2002). There are numerous brothel houses where the plight of women is appalling. These women are sold to their pimp, so that even if they want to, they cannot escape. In the suburban areas, there is report in the Times of India, that infidelity is on the rise. Domestic abuse is also rampant, wives are beaten up daily. There still exists a frown on a fathers face when a girl is born. So much for womens freedom and respect.

Lets take the example of women's liberation and respect in America. There are 38,000 teenage pregnancies in California alone every year. 78,000 reported rape cases. The sex industry a whopping $6 billion (That is 2400 crore indian rupees). This means there is a market for all kinds of deviant sexual behaviour against women. The sex industry includes girl on girl action, sodomy, violence sexual acts, sex with dogs and horses. There are at least 21,000 legal cabarets and strip clubs all over the US, where you can pay money to watch women dance and get naked in front of a lecherous crowd. There are numerous places in teh US where prostitution is legalised. This is a society that respects women and gives women all the freedom.

60% percent of all marriages end up in divorce. 47% of all women are stay at home moms. They stay at home because they want to raise their children in the best manner possible and be there for them when its needed. (If a Saudin women stays at home take care of her children, she is a 'repressed' woman or a caged lab rat or a baby making machine).

There were 238,000 assault cases reported of which 58% were against women... meaning a woman was walking on the street going about her daily business and she was robbed, beaten up, her purse or credit cards stolen etc. Women are constantly being date-raped, drugged, and taken advantage of after drinking alcohol and enjoying their freedom. There about a 300,000 cases of bolimia, anorexia, and other eating disorders reported because the liberated and free women are in a lot of pressure to maintain their figure.

Saudi Arabia has the lowest crime rate, the lowest number of rapes, there is no sex industry, prostitution, or cabarets or strip bars. The divorce rate is 7%.

Women are not treated as caged-lab rats or 'pieces of meat'. Women can work, shop around in the many malls, see the 'light of the day' if they chose to. And if you "come home and see your husband in bed with another woman", you can always divorce him. Also you are allowed to remarry unlike some cultures. The burqa is a part of a system put in place to protect women. Its a religiuos and cultural thing, and majority of the muslim women wear it with pride. It is not a sign of 'suppression'.

Also when you have not experienced living in Saudi Arabia as a woman, how can you generalize that women are suppressed. You are a good example of a victim of the media who believes whatever is dished out on TV.

Its like someone living in America talking about the Russians...'those freaking communists, there is no freedom there to own anything'. Why did he say such a thing? Because he has been programmed by the media who depicts anything other their own culture as bad.

Or a Russian who has never been to American saying, ' there is no freedom in the capitalist society, the rich suppress the poor'.

Anyways, lets not generalize anything about any society based on heresy. Look at the facts. There are good things and bad things about every society.

[BM]

Female Pathaka, when you criticize a society as being 'repressed' etc, you should also give an example of a society thats not 'repressed'.

Very good answer, thanks

[A]

There were some more news items that you did not manage to post about certain countries: Iraq: a young girl of 16 was raped by 2 of her brothers and she became pregnant. The mother got to know about her daughter being raped and she simply scolded her sons, but when she got to know that the daughter got pregnant, she killed her daughter because she said she does not want the 'kalank' of raped daughters' child. the sons were simply scolded again. more later...

Incidentally, sexual crime against women (and men or rather boys) is just about everywhere, even in muslim countries. its just that we are not aware of it. It happens in so called very traditional families too all over the world.

yes, I do agree with you that when a girl dresses to expose herself, it becomes that much more inviting to those of the men who come from different kind of socities, whereas, if the men are from similar backgrounds where they do see nakedness to a certain extent, they do not find it inviting.



For your further information, a saree claded woman is much more of an inviting person back in the west to other kinds because of the exposure of the midriff, which is totally taken as a very respectable attire for woman in India.



So, let us NOT generalise, as you said.

[hotshorts]

The burqa is a part of a system put in place to protect women. Its a religiuos and cultural thing, and majority of the muslim women wear it with pride. It is not a sign of 'suppression'.
Also when you have not experienced living in Saudi Arabia as a woman, how can you generalize that women are suppressed.
....
Anyways, lets not generalize anything about any society based on heresy. Look at the facts. There are good things and bad things about every society.

Salahuddin-bhai...



I agree crimes against women might be low in Saudi, but one cannot deny that women are second class citizens there: no politial rights, no driving and they have to watch out for the religious police whose only aim in life is to look for people who violate minor Quranic injunctions.



There was a horrific incident in 2002 when girls perished in a fire in their school since the religious police did not allow them to run outside the building because they were not in Hijab. No one were even allowed to enter the building to rescue them coz in their version of Islam, girls without hijab are not allowed to come in contact with strange men. The religious police simply locked the building from outside and watched the girls being roasted alive.

This caused a big stir among Saudis thenselves and the monarchy made some correct noises, but nothing came out of it.



So much for Respect Of Women in Saudi Arabia. I am sure even Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) would not have imagined such a state.



The life style there would appeal only to Muslims, who anyway wouldnt dare critisize the 'Holy Land' even if they feel otherwise.



If you are non-muslim and non-white, you are tolerated as long as you do your work silently.



The sad fact is that even non-muslim women are forced to wear Hijab in public. Hijab is a tool of suppression when its forced upon unwilling ladies.

My uncle and aunt who are currently in Saudi find the atmosphere really suffocating and only remain there for the money. I am confident this is the case among all non-muslim Indians there. This is also the fact in few other Arab states.



Why cant Saudi be like Dubai (or even the old Iraq under Saddam) where there is no force on non-muslims to confirm to the majority...?



And after all this if France bans hijab in schools, Arabs scream blue murder. Agreed the French law is not correct but let the Arabs look at how they treat people of other religions, before pointing fingers at other countries.



If not for the oil money no one in his right mind would ever think of settling in the gulf countries.

[hotshorts]

This is a follow up to my last post. I want to post some links about the Girls school fire in Saudi. This is to avoid critisism from muslims that its a rumour to defame Islam.

This happend way back in March 2002 in MECCA and I couldnt find many links available on that incident, still i did my best.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle ... 874471.stm



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle ... 399885.stm



http://216.26.163.62/2002/me_saudis_04_22.html



I hope on reading these articles, no more nonsense on respect of women rights in countries like Saudi Arabia is repeated here in these boards.



Let muslims realise that countries like Saudi Arabia bring a bad name to their religion with their medieval mindset

[salahuddin]

Hotshorts behn, you have made some valid points. First of all, about the authenticity of whether the 'women got burnt in the fire because they were not allowed to go out because they were not wearing hijab' is very doubtful. The links you have provided are from bbc.

Bbc as a corporation has long since sold it conscience to the devil. The only reason it exists today is to promote the capitalist ideology. It is a tool that is used by the west (just like cnn, nbc, fox news etc) to brainwash its citizens to demonize muslims.

Islam itself is a very moderate religion. If there are strict rules, there are also exceptions. For example, we are prohibited to eat pork.. a well known fact. But only few people know that we can eat pork if its a life and death situation. We cannot break a fast in Ramadan, but if its a life and death situation, we are instructed to break the fast before dusk.

Likewise, if there is a life and death situation involved, women can run to safety without hijab, make sure they are safe and then worry about hijab.



Regardless of this, if it did happen, which I very much doubt, it was a sad thing because the people in charge misapplied a simple islamic law.



That doesnt make the law itself bad. The misapplication of religion does not make the religion itself bad.



For example, 20 priests all over the US have been formally convicted in a court of law for child molestation. What an abomination, men of god indulging in ungodly acts. Now are you going to blame that on Christianity and say its the worse religion because it promotes child molestation and sodomy. You won't. Because it was not presented to you that way by BBC or CNN. Another example of the western medias hypocrisy.



Lets address the issue of non-muslim women having to conform to hijab. The answer is very simple. When a country is created, the first thing that is put into place is the constitution. Saudi decided that they are an islamic country and hence adopted the laws of islam. And the law of islam professes that women should wear hijab in public. They just come out and say, this is the law of the land, if its likable to u, we welcome you. Simple as that.

Now its true, with every country. At least they are not hiding behind the mask of secularism, or equality or freedom.



If France's constitution states that its a secular country, then why the hypocrisy of banning the hijab. If by claiming that France is a secular country, and that I am allowed to practise my religion, why are you stopping me from practising my religion. Plus the protest that the women are organising, is yet another law of the land that promotes freedom of expression.

If France is a so-called democratic country, then the people have a voice, and if France allows freedom of expression, then muslim French citizens are raising their voice against what they deem is an injustice.

[hotshorts]

Hotshorts behn,.....

Excuse me, I am a "bhai" not a "behn"

about the authenticity of whether the 'women got burnt in the fire because they were not allowed to go out because they were not wearing hijab' is very doubtful. The links you have provided are from bbc. Bbc as a corporation has long since sold it conscience to the devil.

I had originally read the news item in Khaleej Times and few other Arab news sites, after seeing an account of it in Indian news channels. None of those sites maintain links to that news anymore. After a lot of search I found 2 BBC links and a link from another newspaper.
For your information, unlike the CNN, BBC is anti america and pro-arab, even in the palestine situation. It did not even support the American-British war in Iraq.
In a sense of fair play if BBC critisizes arabs for anything, it does not mean that it "sold its conscience to the devil". I am sorry, but you sound like a typical paranoid muslim, thinking anybody who points out any fault in him is evil.

Islam itself is a very moderate religion. If there are strict rules, there are also exceptions........That doesnt make the law itself bad. The misapplication of religion does not make the religion itself bad.

I know that the image of Islam is a victim of its followers' actions. In my post I stressed on it in many places. I said "in their version of islam..." and phrases like that. As you yourself put it, its the misapplication of religion (by Saudi, few other arab countries and some muslims in many other countries) that is giving out a bad image of Islam. I know what is Islam in reality coz I have many clear minded Muslim friends.

Saudi decided that they are an islamic country and hence adopted the laws of islam. And the law of islam professes that women should wear hijab in public.

Even countries like Dubai, Tunisia, Syria, Libya, Egypt, Oman, Morocco and many Central Asian countries (the '**stans') are self-professed Islamic countries, but they do not force non-muslim ladies to move about in hijab.

.....If France's constitution states that its a secular country, then why the hypocrisy of banning the hijab....muslim French citizens are raising their voice against what they deem is an injustice.

France wants to delink religion from schools. Thats why they are banning outward signs of religions like, Hijab for muslims, skull caps for Jews, large crosses for Catholics and even turbans for Sikhs, in government run schools. They have not issued a blanket ban on those things in the country, only in educational institutions run by the government. Their claim is that in a multi-cultural society like France, children should be brought up with secular values.



In a sense they are right, but again, this order violates the guarantee of Liberty in the French constitution.



French muslims are being very vocal in their protest. Please note that this is possible only in a democracy. Lets see anybody, arab or non-arab, publicly protest ANY law in Saudi Arabia.....! I am sure this stifling of voices is not sanctioned by Quran!

[Mayavi Morpheus]

The answer is very simple. When a country is created, the first thing that is put into place is the constitution. Saudi decided that they are an islamic country and hence adopted the laws of islam. And the law of islam professes that women should wear hijab in public. They just come out and say, this is the law of the land, if its likable to u, we welcome you. Simple as that.

Yesterday evening I was watching a program on TV. It was a sponored program, sponsored by CBN (some christian missionary) airing program on muslims.

This channel aired a program on christianity and muslims, a very biased news report about muslims in general and saudi arabia in particular. He was saying some bad things about saudi arabia and their wahabbism. Seems, saudi arabia doesnt allow other nationals or people of other faith to practice their religion in saudi, even in private.

Amidst all the propaganda he popped a good question that made me think. When the western countries got their constituition they were predominatntly christian, infact they were 99.9% christian, yet they allowed others to practice their religion without subduing them or forcing them to convert (Lets not talk about missionary work here for a moment).

He says, that when we (as in west) allow them (muslims) to follow and spread their religion freely, we expect them to allow us to atleast practice (if not allowed to spread) our religion in their land.

I think he has got a good point. Why should I open my doors to you knowing fully well that your doors are closed for me? I am not talking about Islam, but a country's policy which you are defending.



So if tomorrow, the Americans decide that, "ah well, saudis are not allowing our soldiers in riyadh to practice christianity, so we will ban all saudis coming to America from practicing islam as long as they are in America!". Would that be acceptable? The saudis can dictate terms only in Saudi and not in US.



On the same lines, Since constituition can be changed, Imagine if a new french government comes to power in paris today and they decide that their forefathers were wrong in declaring france as a secular country where it should have been christian since majority is christian and they ammend the constituition to make it christian and outlaw practice of other religions and it gets passed as democracy = majority, would it be right?

[CtrlAltDel]

Both Hotshorts "BHAI" and Morphy are right.



Saudi and similar Islamic countries are the biggest hypocrites when it comes to rights of religions. Except for a handful (or less) of Islamic countries, non-muslims have absolutely no rights or just some token rights to satisfy the world.



the strange thing is that many muslims in non-muslim countries support this hypocrisy, saying its ordained in the Quran.



At the same time they expect to be treated on par, where ever they live.



As Hotshorts had said, if not for oil money any non-muslim should be retarded to go work in those countries.



About this law in France, I feel the french are taking secularism too far. Secularism mean respect to all religions and not suppression of all religions.



I am sorry to say that even in India secularism is applied selectively by politicians. All this due to some skewed policies of Nehru and his ilk. Say, that looks like a subject for a new topic: How Nehru-ism sc***ed India...or some thing like that!

[JustaLittleUnwell]

Ctrl-bhai,



I think you raised the issue in France in another thread as well, and at the time I didnt have much info. But looking at hotshort's info, I am puzzled as to why you consider it to be extreme. An educational institution funded by a secular government would like its wards to grow up without divisive influences and hence has apparently forbidden display of visible signs of religion - so that young minds develop a sense of equality. I dont think there is suppression, as they are not forbidden from practising their religion, just from displaying it. It is just like we wear shorts / dhoti / lungi / pyjama while at home depending on what culture / background we come from, but when we report to duty, we all are expected to turn up in western formals. I dont think anyone complains of suppression of culture.

I am sorry to say that even in India secularism is applied selectively by politicians. All this due to some skewed policies of Nehru and his ilk.

Can you throw more light? If you are refering to vote-bank politics practised previously by Congress (e.g. Shah Bano episode) and now by Sangh Parivar (Ayodhya / Gujarat etc), it is definitely not secularism.

[CtrlAltDel]

I am puzzled as to why you consider it to be extreme. An educational institution funded by a secular government would like its wards to grow up without divisive influences and hence has apparently forbidden display of visible signs of religion - so that young minds develop a sense of equality. I dont think there is suppression, as they are not forbidden from practising their religion, just from displaying it.

What they are doing is theoritically perfect. But does wearing religious symbols like veil encourage divisive feelings? i think that if children of different cultures grow up together with visible differences, they might grow up to appreciate the diversity.
If not, i feel they might grow up and feel uncomfortable with religious symbols and might even feel antagonistic to any harmless religious display.

Can you throw more light? If you are refering to vote-bank politics practised previously by Congress (e.g. Shah Bano episode) and now by Sangh Parivar (Ayodhya / Gujarat etc), it is definitely not secularism.

These incidents u pointed out are some of the things that have come to define secularism in India. I am a Hindu and consider myself secular in true sense of the word: I am proud of being a hindu, but i carry no hatred for non-hindus. I feel a person's religion is his/her own business and no government or religious leader has any say in it.

what is happening in india is that since independence, government is coddling all religions and systematically denigrating Hinduism and its customs or symbols. [/quote]

[JustaLittleUnwell]

Ctrl-bhai,



I'm sure French education dept must have been advised by competent and professional child psychologists, before taking the decision. Me thinks a child growing in a religion-neutral environment is more likely to appreciate the worth of other individuals / religionists. It's similar to the concept of school uniforms - all kids (rich / poor / middle class) wear the same dress and there is no scope for class consciousness, thereby enabling kids from different backgrounds to mingle with each other.

But does wearing religious symbols like veil encourage divisive feelings?

You may be aware of post-9/11 violence against Sikhs in the US. Their fault - they wore turbans which resembled what Osama Bin Laden wore. This is the reaction a religious symbol can invoke among grown ups, who are expected to be mature enough to know the right from wrong. What can you expect from kids who are still learning their values?

what is happening in india is that since independence, government is coddling all religions and systematically denigrating Hinduism and its customs or symbols.

I am somehow not with you because I have not come across any hindu custom or symbol being systematically denigrated by any government. Some primitive customs like animal sacrifice had to go, and I have no issues if the law enforcement was harsh on such practises.

[CtrlAltDel]

a child growing in a religion-neutral environment is more likely to appreciate the worth of other individuals / religionists......This is the reaction a religious symbol can invoke among grown ups, who are expected to be mature enough to know the right from wrong. What can you expect from kids who are still learning their values?

I agree with you partly on this. We must remember that France has banned religious symbols only in schools. Outside the schools the children are confronted with all the cultural differences. Dont you think a very idealistic picture of homogenity is given to the children, which can be easily shattered by the outside realities? If the society outside the schools is also homogenius atleast in appearance, then there wouldn't be any problem.
The turban incident you quoted has a chance of repeating, since the children (and future citizens) may not learn to accept that Turban wearing Sikhs are different from Turban wearing Arabs.
I think exposing children to cultural differences, enables them to know what each religion stands for and understand the symbols.
A basic cornerstone of any democracy is that the citizens have the right to practise whatever their religions teach in such a way that it doesn't harm the rights of anybody else. I fail to see how veils or turbans or crosses or skull caps would negatively affect children.

I am somehow not with you because I have not come across any hindu custom or symbol being systematically denigrated by any government. Some primitive customs like animal sacrifice had to go, and I have no issues if the law enforcement was harsh on such practises.

Its not law or law enforcement i am talking about. its the mindset of the people, that has been moulded since independence to look down upon their own culture and traditions. This aspect is more often than not present mainly in Hindus. this has been encouraged by Nehruvian socialists who accept anything European as superior.

An offshoot of all this is that a Hindu is expected never to hurt the feelings of a minority, even via jokes, whereas this does not apply to the rest.

Why do you think undesirable Hindu fundamentalist elements are gaining sympathy slowly? Call it "appeasment" or whatever, but the fact is its happening. The cause for this is not the people, but political parties who practice vote bank politics.



HEY...!!!! aren't we straying away from the topic being discussed? Better start a new board to discuss this.

[Salahuddin]

Excuse me, I am a "bhai" not a "behn"

I m glad u cleared that up. Sorry I was misled by the hotshorts nickname. Somehow is a tad girlish.... in my opinion. But hey, whatever floats your boat.

For your information, unlike the CNN, BBC is anti america and pro-arab, even in the palestine situation. It did not even support the American-British war in Iraq.

BBC can never be pro-arab and anti-america. The media is the strongest tool to sell a countrys policy to its citizens and to the citizens of the world. If BBC publishes 95 pro-capitalist articles, it has to publish 5 that are pro-arab just to mislead the public into thinking that, hey we are playing fair. And it works.. cuz it has apparently caught your attention. Anyways, this is a whole different discussion. The British are always the 'meethi churi', if you know what I mean. If u remember, they started their 'campaign' in India doing trade as the 'British East India Company', and today we are all slave to their customs, their traditions, their way of life, their ideology, their culture and their language. I must say I have a greater command over the English Language than urdu, hindi or telugu being a person of indian origin. The British always have a plan. Anyways, thats a whole different discussion.

In a sense of fair play if BBC critisizes arabs for anything, it does not mean that it "sold its conscience to the devil". I am sorry, but you sound like a typical paranoid muslim, thinking anybody who points out any fault in him is evil.

If I think anyone who distorts the truth, or invents half truths is worse than the devil, then yes I am a paranoid muslim. The hypocrites are the worst among men.

Even countries like Dubai, Tunisia, Syria, Libya, Egypt, Oman, Morocco and many Central Asian countries (the '**stans') are self-professed Islamic countries, but they do not force non-muslim ladies to move about in hijab.

Correction!! All the aforementioned countries have a muslim majority, but the government is not islamic, the constitution was drafted by the British, they implement the English Law. So they are self-professed socialist/capitalist countries. In fact Egypt and Oman cringe at being called muslim countries. And they did not adopt Shariah Law. Hence and therefore, they are not islamic countries. Dubai however shopped at the Islamic Warehouse and picked and chose what it liked, so there is a warped Shariah Law in place. Which again is an irony, because you cannot implement the Shariah Law unless you are a part of the Islamic System at the core. Either way, if they are 'self-professed' islamic countries, like you said, then they should make sure that the 'hijab' is implemented in its entirety.

French muslims are being very vocal in their protest. Please note that this is possible only in a democracy. Lets see anybody, arab or non-arab, publicly protest ANY law in Saudi Arabia.....! I am sure this stifling of voices is not sanctioned by Quran!

[/quote]

Why are we having this discussion again. The constitution in France allows a protest, because it makes you think that your opinion counts. So if Muslims are protesting, they still following the Law of the Land that has given them the right. If there is any Law that a muslim government imposes, that goes against the Quran, the hadeeth, and the Sunnah of the Prophet (sas), then muslims are allowed to protest. There is a lot of protests that go on against the Saudi government against the American presence, against Saudis foreign policy etc. So I am not sure, where you got the information that you cannot publicly protest in SA.



Anyways my dear bhai, when I started my earlier post, I just wanted to clarify certain aspects of the hijab, the misinterpretation of islamic values, etc. My intention was not to start a war of words with anyone.

If I reply to you with the intention to explain and clarify something, then Allah swt is with me. If I reply to you on a personal note, then the devil is with me. And I am afraid that if I continue answering some of these posts, then my weaknesses will get the better of me. I dont want to be in a situation where I am replying just for the heck of saying something.

May Allah give you hidayat!! and myself too!!

[Salahuddin]

Seems, saudi arabia doesnt allow other nationals or people of other faith to practice their religion in saudi, even in private.

This half-truth is very particular of a hypocrite. You are not allowed to practice any religion other than islam in public. But you CAN practice your religion in private.

Amidst all the propaganda he popped a good question that made me think. When the western countries got their constituition they were predominatntly christian, infact they were 99.9% christian, yet they allowed others to practice their religion without subduing them or forcing them to convert (Lets not talk about missionary work here for a moment).
He says, that when we (as in west) allow them (muslims) to follow and spread their religion freely, we expect them to allow us to atleast practice (if not allowed to spread) our religion in their land.
I think he has got a good point. Why should I open my doors to you knowing fully well that your doors are closed for me? I am not talking about Islam, but a country's policy which you are defending.

I am glad it made you think. But you have to look back into history to answer this. When the Christian crusaders took over spain in the 14th century, they killed majority of the non-combatant muslim population, including women and children. The remaining were asked to convert to Christianity or migrate to the Ottoman turkish ruled regions. They also slaughtered a number of Jews, who were also given the ultimatum to either convert or flee or be killed. The Jews who had no army or political power seeked refuge in the Islamic lands, where they prospered. This is what the 'Christian' crusaders did.
Now going back to the constitution, of the present day western powers, their constitution was drafted not by Christians but by early Capitalists. The basic tenet is the separation of the church and the state. Profit is the motive and self-interest is the criteria. Ways justify means. If the porno industry generates 1 billion dollars in taxes, employs an estimated 1.5 million americans, then hey, its a good thing. Did you know that fornication is strongly prohibited in Christianity too, and yet you can legally run a strip bar, have a legar whorehouse in Nevada, under the laws of a so-called christian run government. So my friend, the western governments are not Christian. The dont like to Pope to run the show. They want a ruthless capitalist in power. And allow the people to treat religion in a strictly spiritual way.
Meaning I can be a muslim, as long as I dont influence the capitalist way of life. I can be muslim as long as I treat islam as a religion and not a way of life. I can be a hindu too, as long as I treat my religion on a purely spiritual level but be a capitalist at heart. Jacques Chirac never said he wanted to erase islam from France, he said I want the muslims in france to call themselves, French-Muslims. Which means he wants them to follow the french version of islam.
The war on terrorism is not a war between the muslims and christians. Its a war between the islamic ideology and the capitalist ideology. Hinduism is never a threat to Capitalism because it does not ask you to propagate the religion all over the world, and convert everyone to the hindu way of life., or the hindu political system (??), or the social or justice system, or the hindy foriegn policy. Islam does that. Hence its a threat to the capitalists and it must be contained. The west is never threatened by liberal muslims, in fact they cozy up with them. Musharraf is a good example. The west is always threatened by practising muslims. And they are conveniently labeled as 'fundamentalists', another word coined by the west for someone who does not agree to their ideas.
Sadly, Saudi is the only place in the world that is remotely following parts of the Sharia law, and it is such an eyesore for the west, that they have to demonize it at every chance they get. And the media is controlled by them so they have a greater audience to sell their ideas. Invent lies, distort the truth, always leave a gray area. Also you are never subdued or forced to convert to islam in Saudi like your above quote implies. Islam was never propagated by subduing or forcing people to follow it. Even though the western historians make you believe that it did. The muslims ruled India or parts of it for approximately 800 years. If a people are forced to convert or subdued to follow a religion for 800 years, then there would have been less than 5% hindu population in India. But that was not the case.
The Christian crusaders for example did that in Spain or Andalous as it is known in Islamic history. It was in the 15th century, that it was a thriving islamic region with a lot of islamic scholars, libraries, masajid etc. And today there are very few traces of islam in spain. This is what 700 years of subjugation, force and suppression do to a people. It only leaves sad remnants. The Jews are doing it in Palestine. again thats another topic.

So if tomorrow, the Americans decide that, "ah well, saudis are not allowing our soldiers in riyadh to practice christianity, so we will ban all saudis coming to America from practicing islam as long as they are in America!". Would that be acceptable? The saudis can dictate terms only in Saudi and not in US.

America is too smart to do that. But it will definitely tell all Saudis, we will get ur american born children. We will sell the american way of life to them 24/7 so that when they grow up, they are just muslims by name. What to do u think is the state of the second generation Indians living in the US. I see my cousins, my friends, and a lot of families around me. The only people hanging on the islamic values, or indian values are the first generation people like myself who migrated here. The second generation is 10% indian/muslim, and 90% american capitalists. These are the same people who will leave their parents at the senior shelter because they are too 'busy' to take care of them. because they have neither islamic or indian values in them, and the capitalist criteria is self interest. And its not in his interest to take care of his ailing mom cuz its too time consuming and expensive etc. I have a lot of examples in my extended social circle in Chicago or California.

On the same lines, Since constituition can be changed, Imagine if a new french government comes to power in paris today and they decide that their forefathers were wrong in declaring france as a secular country where it should have been christian since majority is christian and they ammend the constituition to make it christian and outlaw practice of other religions and it gets passed as democracy = majority, would it be right?[/

quote]

That is never going to happen dude!! By the way, most french that I know are atheists.

[GaramMasala]

Just wanted to say that i spent most of my years in Saudi Arabia.................Jeddah to be exact.............dont wanna live there anymore.......the life is just too repressing ......i mean common ppl ......lemme share a li'l story ..............i was at this mall called jumjoom ............pretty famous place.........and me and my friends were chillin out fer a while on the second floor of the building..............a police officer ....who had his pants all the way up his ass (slim li'l guy).......comes up to me an' says ........"Its not allowed to stand here"......there was a saudi teenage group right close to ours.........they were lookin at us an' had grins runnin accross all their faces...........Man that moment i just felt soo discriminated........obviously the pol officer didn't have anything to say to those other arab kids...........



yes i know this is a very small incident..........but yo if you go through this each day of yer life.........ya would know what kinda hell some ppl live thru over there ....jus fer the sake of money .................









Well that's all from me fer a while ..............latez everyone

[prranashehardotcom]

it might be great to say that no body goes empty handed from saudi arabia, but it is to be brought to atention, that only the men live a life. the females are burkha shrouded with as much freedom as a caged lab-rat. guys please grow up and stop raving about only the monetary aspects of a kingdom where human souls and freedom are absolutely non existant.

Dear Patakha , pls dont mind if u dun like then go ... Saudi Arabia dont want you i guess....

[purranasheshardotcom]

Alll wat i wan to say is ... ppl who dont like dis place they can leave why the hell they stay in such a country where they dont have any respect ........ jst for money sake ?? if so ... then they are cheap

[CtrlAltDel]

Alll wat i wan to say is ... ppl who dont like dis place they can leave why the hell they stay in such a country where they dont have any respect ........ jst for money sake ?? if so ... then they are cheap

yes...everyone apart from Whites and Arabs who work in Saudi Arabia, do so only for money. why only non-muslims, even muslims from India, Pakistan etc are treated like dirt n cheapen themselves there.

btw, since u have brot up this page, heres a sample of Saudi Arab ki zindagi..
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=1&section ... m=4&y=2006[url]

Tired of Male Domination, 5 Women Change Sex
Reuters

RIYADH, 4 April 2006 — Tired of playing second fiddle to men in Saudi Arabia, five women decided if you can’t beat them, join them. Al-Watan daily newspaper said the five women underwent sex change surgery abroad over the past 12 months after they developed a “psychological complex” due to male domination. Women in Saudi Arabia are not allowed to drive or even go to public places unaccompanied by a male relative. The newspaper quoted a senior scholar as saying the authorities have to fill what he described as a legal vacuum by issuing laws against sex change operations. An Interior Ministry official told Al-Watan such cases are examined by religious authorities, and sometimes by psychologists, but those who undergo sex change are never arrested.

[/b][/url]

[CtrlAltDel]

...and one more instance of "Saudi Arab ki Zindagi", to those who feel its next to heaven on earth.



http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1501032.cms

Pak teen raped, jailed in Saudi Arabia
[ Monday, April 24, 2006 10:14:45 amAGENCIES ]

KARACHI: Isma Mahmood’s world has come crumbling down, her hopes dashed to the ground. And all for no specific fault of her own.

Mahmood, 16, was deported to Pakistan last month after having served six months in shackles and handcuffs in a prison in Saudi Arabia. Her crime—being raped by a Saudi man.

“It’s difficult for me to talk about what happened to me, from rape to prison and from prison to deportation,’’ Isma said, in the office of a rescue trust in Karachi where she sat with her sister Muna, 18, who was also deported.

Isma’s parents, originally from the central Pakistani city of Multan, were trafficked to Saudi Arabia around 20 years ago. “Though both of us were born there, we are Pakistanis,’’ Isma said.

Human rights groups say hundreds of people, particularly young women, are still trafficked from South Asia every year, with many going on to face a life blighted by physical and often sexual abuse.

In Isma’s case, being born in Saudi Arabia was no help when she was raped last year in the holy city of Medina. “I was the victim, I was raped and molested but I was named as the accused, and the man who committed the crime was not touched,’’ she said, hiding her face with both hands in shame.

“He first kidnapped me, dragged me into his car,’’ Isma said. “At first he asked me to sleep with him and offered good money. When I refused and tried to resist, he warned me of dire consequences and raped me in the car.’’

The unnamed man warned her she would be imprisoned if she went to police , and said that the Saudi sponsor who brought her parents to the country through a Pakistani agent would have them all expelled.

“I am very powerful and could declare you a bad girl. Your father’s sponsor is my friend and he will not support you,’’ she quoted the man as telling her. The sponsor, too, threatened Isma and Muna, warning they would be punished unless they kept silent, she said, asking that the sponsor’s name not be revealed to spare her family any additional grief.

“I and my sister thought otherwise and we went to the police as we expected justice. But after a few hours of filing the report the police allegedly changed it,’’ Isma said. Under pressure from the Saudi sponsor, Isma’s parents asked her to withdraw her allegations.

“I never wanted my parents to get into trouble as they were at the mercy of the sponsor and he lived in our neighbourhood. So I did not speak much but police still put me behind bars,’’ she said.

[Mayavi Morpheus]

This is just a case of racism. Arabs never treated Indian/Pakistanis/Bangladeshis/Lankan as equals, not withstanding the fact that the later are Muslims too.

On a different note, if she were raped in Pakistan, she would have been sentenced for adultery under Hudood laws. The cops do not need to alter the FIR at all.

[sp]

i always knew these carnivore girls were upto something

the sight of a female eating meat is intimidating

i guess these girls have been mutated to have a y chromosome along with the two usual x chromosomes meant for girls

carnivore girls are no different than men and this story proves it



only our herbivore women are truly feminine

[CtrlAltDel]

abaaaaaaaa will u stop this nonsense abt herbivore n carnivore...