The Dark World of the Arab Child Slave Trade

 Stephen Brown

In a story last week in the British newspaper The Sun, a private investigator stated that Madeleine McCann, the subject of probably the world’s most famous unsolved kidnapping case, is in the United States. The British girl was three years old when she went missing five years ago from a seaside resort in Portugal, where her parents were vacationing. The Portuguese police, in what has been termed a “bungled investigation,” at first accused the parents of the abduction but later cleared them. Portuguese security officials halted their investigation to find the missing child in 2008 after stating she had probably been “stolen to order.”
Since her disappearance, numerous alleged sightings have been made of the little girl across Europe, Africa, in North America and in Australia. The investigator making the latest claim concerning McCann’s whereabouts is an amateur sleuth originally from Angola. He told The Sun that a Portuguese pedophile ring, also responsible for other child abductions, took the McCann girl and has handed his findings over to authorities. The claim that a pedophile ring is responsible for McCann’s disappearance has been made before, especially concerning one in Belgium. And while Madeleine McCann girl may have very well been snatched by such evil hands, it is surprising that an equally depraved institution — one of gigantic size — has never even been considered by investigators or the media as McCann’s possible kidnapper: namely, the Arab child slave trade.
While tens of thousands of adults are also victims of Arab slavers, many people only first took notice of the Arab slave trade in children when reports of enslaved child camel jockeys emerged from Persian Gulf countries. A 2004 HBO documentary on the subject was especially responsible for making Americans aware of this modern-day barbarism. These boys, who were sold by poor parents hoping their offspring would some day experience a better life, were primarily from South Asia. But instead of a life of dignity and meaningful work, they wound up in the Middle East where they were made to race camels for their Arab masters. Beaten and often sexually abused, they were all kept undernourished, so that the camels would have less weight to carry.
“As many as 6,000 child camel jockeys…languished in hidden slavery on ozbah farms, where their masters beat them and starved them to keep their weight down,” wrote E. Benjamin Skinner in his book, A Crime So Monstrous.
When investigating in the 1990s the enslavement of hundreds of thousands of black Africans in Mauritania by Arab-Berber masters, African-American author Samuel Cotton was stunned to discover that African children were still being kidnapped by Arabs traveling with camels carrying big baskets. The child, usually playing alone, would suddenly be snatched from its play and placed in one such basket, after which its new owners hurried away. The children, he was told, are sometimes found later “hundreds of miles away as slaves.”
Also during his investigation, which was summarized in his highly informative book Silent Terror: A Journey Into Contemporary African Slavery, Cotton was told there was “still a huge trafficking in slaves going on between Mauritania and the United Arab Emirates.”
Black African children are also not always stolen so surreptitiously. Until recently in the southern Sudan, the old-fashioned slave raid witnessed villages being burned down, the men killed and the women and children captured. This was the Arab slavers’ main harvesting tool of humans. Thousands of children were captured by this murderous method and forcibly taken as agricultural, domestic and sex slaves to Arab northern Sudan — where many still languish today. Darfur has also seen many children disappear  from both refugee camps and towns subjected to central government attack. They are suspected victims of Arab slave hunters.
But it is not only non-Arab children who are Arab child slave trade victims. An Egyptian newspaper, referring to a 2008 UNICEF report, stated Egyptian children are being bought and sold for about $3,000 for “domestic work and farming, among other things.” This trade in children is so extensive in Egypt, organizations are “employing brokers, and even operating their own web sites.
“Many are also sent to the Gulf States, with orphanages being a major supplier,” the story further reports.
Even from a country as far way as the Philippines children are trafficked to the Middle East. In 2008, for example, 34 minors between the ages of 14 and 16 were rescued at Manila airport by social workers as they were about to depart on fake passports for unnamed Middle Eastern countries. Again, war and poverty played a role in these young people’s desperation. They were from refugees camps in the war-torn southern island of Mindanao where an insurgency is raging between government forces and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front.
While most civilized people nowadays recoil in horror from the idea of slavery, especially when it involves children, many fundamentalist Middle Eastern Muslims do not. In fact, they view the psychological death and destruction of innocent lives as their legal right. Under sharia law, which rules the Sudan and the Gulf States, Muslims are legally allowed to own slaves. Bernard Lewis, the eminent scholar of Islam, writes “…the institution of slavery is not only recognized but is elaborately regulated by Sharia law.” Another reason for this inhuman sense of entitlement is the prophet Muhammad was also a slave owner, setting the example for the fundamentalists.
Besides a codified religious supremacy, there is also the element of racial superiority behind the hideous practice of Arab slavery, especially when it concerns black Africans. Arab racism is at the roots of Islamic slavery that has seen 14 million black Africans enslaved and sold around the Islamic world from the seventh to the twentieth century.
Unfortunately for its victims, the abolition of Arab slavery will be difficult to even initiate — especially when the international community remains deafeningly silent about it. The case of Dr. Abu Zayd, a Cairo University professor and Islamic theologian, amply illustrates the problem.  When Zayd contended that “keeping slave girls and taxing non-Muslims” was contrary to Islam, an Egyptian sharia court forcibly divorced him from his wife and declared him an apostate. He later had to flee to Europe to escape Islamic extremists who wanted to kill him because of his apostate status.
Slavery was only abolished in Saudi Arabia and other states of the Arabian Peninsula in the early 1960s, so one cannot expect an institution that has existed for centuries to being away any time soon. For example, the widow of the emir of Abu Dhabi and her four daughters were caught living in Brussels in 2008 with 20 slaves who they were mistreating. And Dubai is the center for the region’s sex industry that Skinner calls “a place of slavery for women.” Promised jobs, thousands of women full of hope arrive there from Eastern Europe, sub-Saharan Africa and Asia annually only to have their passports taken away immediately upon arrival and to be forced into prostitution.
One Gulf State Arab woman, a former candidate for Kuwait’s parliament, does not even hide the fact there should be sex slaves for Arab men and claims sheikhs and muftis she spoke with in Mecca sanctioned this. As a result, Salwa al-Mutairi wants non-Muslim women captured in war made available to Muslim men, so that the men can be “protected from adultery.” She affirmed: “For example, in the Chechnya war, surely there are female Russian captives. So go and buy those and sell them here in Kuwait…I don’t see any problem in this.”
Al-Mutairi’s despicable utterances came only a week after a Muslim preacher announced that, since Islam allows Muslims to buy and sell conquered infidel women, “When I want a sex-slave, I go to the market and pick whichever female I desire and buy her.”
It is not the purpose or intent of this article to engage in sensationalist or unfounded finger-pointing. But what a crime it would be to neglect finding and freeing a child slave because the hunt for his or her captors would be deemed politically incorrect. Indeed, in light of the widespread phenomenon discussed above, why is the possibility of Madeleine McCann being a child slave somewhere in the Middle East not even remotely considered in the investigation of her disappearance? Yes, it is only conjecture, but so is looking into all the other possibilities. Why, for instance, is publicly hypothesizing that she is probably somewhere in the U.S. considered legitimate, but even breathing a word about the possibility of her being somewhere in the Middle East considered illegitimate — when it is a fact that an international Arab human-slave trafficking business is in full effect?
The fact that the McCanns were at a Portuguese seaside resort when Madeleine was taken made the kidnappers’ task easier. Since the child-snatchers may have very well made their escape by sea, there would be no borders to cross until they reached their destination — potentially a Middle Eastern one. The Islamic world, after all, is very close to Portugal.
The British government has recently assigned 30 detectives in a major effort to locate the missing girl. Of course, myriad evils could be behind this tragic crime. And they must all be looked into. But in light of what is known about the Arab child slave trade, will investigators spend even at least a modicum of time considering the distinct possibility of Middle Eastern sex-slave traffickers’ involvement? The empirical reality would justify it — as it would justify the international community starting to be even slightly interested in, and outraged about, this dark and evil phenomenon in general.

---

Article printed from FrontPage Magazine: http://frontpagemag.com

URL to article: http://frontpagemag.com/2011/06/10/the-dark-world-of-the-arab-child-slave-trade/

Now KSA: Half of all Saudi women are fat

Female obesity is a Gulf-wide problem (File)

Nearly half of Saudi women aged between 30 and 45 years are fat and this makes them more vulnerable to heart diseases, according to a medical study published in a local newspaper on Monday.
The study about heart problems in the Gulf Kingdom was conducted by Salman Medical Centre at King Fahd Health City in Riyadh and covered Saudi women aged 30-45 years, Alyoum Arabic language daily said.
“The study found that nearly 50 per cent of the women surveyed are suffering from obesity,” the paper said, quoting Dr Mustafa Yousuf, the Centre’s head.
“These results constitute an alert for the future because obesity often leads to high blood pressure, diabetes and heart problems.”
He said the study also found that  23-25 per cent of those women suffered from hypertension, adding that 55-75 per cent of the heart patients at the Centre had diabetes. “This means we have a big problem, which should be taken into consideration and attended to.”

Another day, another misogynist fatwa…

A document went viral all across the online news agencies and social media. The document is dated Sunday the 31^st of October and in it is a fatwa and not just any fatwa, an official fatwa from the governmentally appointed committee for fatwas i.e. the highest council of our ultra conservative version of Sunni Islam. What’s so important that this committee would get together and issue a document and on the very same day release it to the press? Women, of course! A quick translation of the document:

This fatwa is issued in reply to the below question:
Several companies and shops are employing women as cashiers who serve both men and women as families. Each day these women cashiers meet dozens of men, and speak to them while handling back and forth money and receipts. In addition these women cashiers are required to undergo training, attend meetings and interact with their colleagues and supervisor at work. What is the ruling on women working as such? What is the ruling regarding companies and shops that recruit women? Please advise.
After study, the committee has come to the following reply:
It is not permitted for a Muslim woman to work in a place where they intermingle with men. A woman should stay away from places where men gather. She should search for employment that does not expose her to temptation nor make her a source of temptation. And what you have mentioned in your question does expose her to temptation and tempt men, hence it is Islamically prohibited. And the companies that employ women are collaborating with them in what is Islamically prohibited and thus they too are committing a prohibition. It is known that whoever fears God by leaving what God has prohibited and does what God asks of him, God will then facilitate his affairs, just as promised in the Quran (translation* verse 3/Al Talaq):
{And He provides for him from (sources) he never could imagine. And if any one puts his trust in Allah, sufficient is (Allah) for him. For Allah will surely accomplish his purpose: verily, for all things has Allah appointed a due proportion.}
And the Prophet PBUH said: It will not be that you abandon something for the sake of God, but that God will compensate with what is better for you. (my translation)

There is a glimmer of hope here though. First off, this council, throughout its history, has prohibited things that remain legal, such as music and satellite TV channels that are not Islamic. So this fatwa might join the list of things that Saudis feel unwarrantedly guilty about but still do. It would be a shame if another door closes in the faces of women who are in desperate need of jobs.
A scan of the document:

Saudi pink ribbon breaks Guinness record

Arab News

JEDDAH, Oct 29: Over 5,000 Saudi and expatriate women on Thursday created the world’s largest human pink ribbon in aid of breast cancer awareness in Jeddah. According to organizers, the number of women coming into the Education Ministry Stadium in the Faisaliah district exceeded 5,000. However, around 1,000 left before the actual formation of the ribbon due to the delays in getting the sheer numbers of people organized. The women were able to break the record within the first two hours of the event, as both Saudis and expatriate residents came out in droves to support one single yet very important cause. The Riyadh-based Zahra Breast Cancer Association organized the event. Princess Reema bint Bandar bin Sultan, founding member of the association, was the driving force behind the campaign, held under the support of the Sultan bin Abdul Aziz Foundation. Princess Reema said the private sector and the government have been very supportive of the foundation’s breast cancer awareness initiative. “Let it be known that as of this day, ignorance is no longer an excuse and no woman should be allowed to be left to suffer in silence,” Princess Reema had said at the launch of the awareness campaign. Attendance at Thursday’s event easily topped the previous record of 3,640 set in Germany in 2007. Thousands of pink scarves were distributed at the entrance gate and the women returned them to the organizers when they left. The pink human chain, consisting of both Saudis and expatriate residents donning the pink tops and scarves, was built in the shape of the global ribbon of breast cancer awareness. Saudis and foreign residents, including Arabs, Indonesians, Americans, British, Filipinos and Asians, had been streaming into the stadium since 5 p.m. Only those with transport problems and young children left early. Participant Aseel Hindi is a 26-year-old math teacher who came all the way from Makkah. “We knew about the event through Facebook three days ago, and we as friends managed to gather and come a long distance to be part of the new Guinness record for the first time ever in our lives,” she said. Over 100 media outlets from around the globe also attended. It was also the first time women in Jeddah were able to experience the atmosphere of a stadium in the Kingdom. The stadium was half open, which led participants to cluster in one place. Students from different schools and universities as well as employees of companies and hospitals attended. Some students said the atmosphere was great and enjoyed socializing with each other. Sixteen-year-old high school student Nouf said she and her classmates knew nothing about the illness and were only there because they had been asked to attend by their teachers. According to Colleen, who came along with her British friends at the start to support the cause, the event was great but the numbers caused some delays. “We came because we really wanted to be part of (this event) because it is the first time that something like this is happening in Saudi Arabia,” she said. “It is disappointing, everybody here wants to be part of this and be involved, but it [took] a long time.” Private school teachers were in a rush to leave because they had to take the pupils back to school. One of the teachers said: “We’ve been here since five and have promised (parents) that the students will be back by 9:30 p.m. and the event is going on for too long.” “I thought some sessions or awareness flyers would be distributed to help us learn more about the illness. We even expected some victims to come,” said participant Um Tariq. Breast cancer is the most-diagnosed form of cancer in Saudi Arabia, accounting for 12.4 percent of all cancers and 23.6 percent of cancers among women, according to a study by the Saudi Cancer Registry.

Child bride horrors last a lifetime

By Mohammed Jamjoom, CNN

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Sana'a, Yemen (CNN) -- Reem al Numeri is 14-years-old and recently divorced. She was 11 when she says her father forced her to marry a cousin more than twice her age.
Reem says she has been stigmatized by her divorce and now lives the life of an outcast. Without a husband or father to support her, she cannot attend school.
Her story has echoes of Nujood Ali -- the Yemeni girl whose story sparked an international outrage that many thought would force change in the country.
But a bill to outlaw child marriages got blocked and the practice continues. On Saturday, Yemen's parliament will look again at child marriage.
Reem's desperate pleas to stay a child fell on deaf ears as her father forced her to marry a 32-year-old cousin. "He said you need to go into the room where the judge is and tell him you agree to the marriage," Reem said. "I said I won't go in there - he took out his dagger and said he'd cut me in half if I didn't go in there and agree."
For Reem, the terror and the trauma were just beginning. She said she was told to sleep with her husband, but refused. She locked herself in a bedroom every night to ensure her safety but, according to Reem, he managed to sneak in and raped her.
Reem said members of her family first ordered her to submit, then expected her to celebrate. "They chose not to buy me any bridal dresses until they were sure I'd had sex with him because they didn't want their money to go to waste," she said. "Once they were sure, they bought me the bridal clothes and threw me a party. After that, I burned the white bridal dress I was given and then I used a razor to try to kill myself." Reem's father and ex-husband did not return CNN's calls.
In Yemen, a deeply tribal society, the issue of child marriages is a complicated one.
Two years ago, 10-year-old Nujood Ali shocked the world when she took herself to court in Yemen's capital city of Sana'a and asked a judge for a divorce.
After a well publicized trial, she was granted one -- and became a heroine to those trying to shine a spotlight on the issue of child brides in Yemen, where more than half of all young girls are married before age 18, mostly to older men.
In 2009, Yemen's parliament passed legislation raising the minimum age of marriage to 17. But conservative parliamentarians argued the bill violated Sharia, or Islamic law, which does not stipulate a minimum age of marriage.
And because of a parliamentary maneuver the bill was never signed into law.
More than 100 leading religious clerics called the attempt to restrict the age of marriage "un-Islamic".
Mohammed Aboulahoum, who advises Yemen's president, said the law should be passed, but he added the fight against child marriage restrictions were a distraction -- a way for the parliament to avoid bigger, more sensitive, political issues.
"I think there should be an age limit," Aboulahoum said. "And if you sit even with the religious people and you ask them, would you let your daughter marry at the age of 12 or 13, they would tell you no. So it is something, we use it more for politics."
Reem's attorney, Shada Nasser, is one of Yemen's most well known advocates for children's rights.
Nasser has represented several child brides seeking divorce, including Ali. She doesn't even think the practice should be called marriage. "I think it is rape," she said.
But Nasser also has hope that Reem's generation will help build a new Yemen, free of child marriages.
"Who can build this Yemen?" asked Nasser. "Me? No - all these small girls -- they must build Yemen. But all these girls need a good law - a family law." Nasser begs the clerics standing in the way: "I ask them to give these girls mercy."
A prominent Yemeni human rights activist, Amal Albasha, is also outraged the practice continues. Her organization, Sisters Arab Forum, tries to intervene on behalf of child brides, to stop the marriages from taking place. Albasha added that nothing will change until people in Yemen try to fully understand the horror a child bride goes through.

"You know, just two days ago, a 9-year-old girl got married in Taiz." she said. "Just think about the pain, the fear -- just think about a 9-year-old with a 50-year-old in a closed room," said Albasha. "The experience remains until the day of death."

GORDON DUFF: ISRAEL-SAUDI WAR PACT ON IRAN “HOGWASH”

Gordon Duff

The London Times reported today that Saudi Arabia has given permission for Israel to fly over their territory to attack unspecified “nuclear facilities” in Iran.  Mention of specific Saudi actions including deactivating their air defense systems to allow Israel use of their airspace was directly referenced by the Times in their story by Hugh Tomlinson.  However, not only is such a possibility not a possibility, the story itself is designed to destabilize world markets.
Iran is capable of closing the Straits of Hormuz and stopping all oil shipments from, not only the Persian Gulf states, including Kuwait and Iran but Saudi Arabia itself.  At the first sight of an Israeli plane, every tanker and oil facility in the Gulf would be destroyed and the Saudi capital in ruins from Iranian missiles.
The closing of the Straits alone would crash the world’s stock markets instantly throwing the world into an immediate depression.  Oil would go over $250 a barrel overnight and gas prices in the US would hit $10 per gallon.  This is not speculation.

IRANIAN SILKWORM MISSILE NEAR HORMUZ

Iran’s military capability has been focused entirely on closing the Straits and cutting off much of the world’s oil supply.  Thousands of Chinese Silkworm missiles are at the ready, set into the islands of the Straits seized by Iran years ago or hidden along the coastline or on mobile launchers.  In fact, the US Navy is would have to immediately withdraw from the region.
Every defense specialist in the world knows all of this.  The United Arab Emirates sits across the Straits from Iran and stares into this mass of missiles, torpedo boats and submarines.  They are funding a massive missile defense system and have even considered spending billions to construct a canal bypassing the narrow straits.  Iranian troops have been dug into islands adjacent to the Straits for decades.  When talking about the Straits of Hormuz, the term “tight as a tick” comes to mind.  “Duck in a barrel” is another analogy with us being the ducks.
The game isn’t to start a war, knowing full well that America would be required to defend Saudi Arabia though there are no agreements to defend Israel, especially if they are the aggressor.  With over $2 trillion dollars pumped from the US economy by Israeli-American companies like Goldman Sachs during the Bush sponsored “pump and dump,” the “banksters” weren’t satisfied.  They now want to pick America’s bones.
Any attack on Iran that involved Saudi Arabia in any way would bring an automatic response from Pakistan.  Without their military efforts, the US would be forced to withdraw from Afghanistan in weeks.  Even with their help, and increased force levels, America’s presence is unsustainable as the Karzai government has already collapsed.  Nobody is admitting it yet but Karzai and his US backers rule nothing and control nothing, even worse than when Bush left office.
The real players in the Middle East are Turkey, Iran and Pakistan.  Two of these nations are major US allies.  The population of the three nations exceeds that of the US and their combined armies number, with reserves at two million, over double that of the United States.  Were the three to join together, Afghanistan and Iraq would be forced, out of survival to join in, creating a contiguous state, a nuclear state, capable of taking Saudi Arabia in days and doing so without any US resistance.  After all, these are American allies and Saudi Arabia would be, technically, an aggressor nation.  Though mutual defense pacts do not include Iran, a history of resentment against Saudi-Israeli collusion and the current chill between Israel and Turkey would build this polyglot coalition state almost overnight.
In the long run, such a country would be the real strategic partner the US has always desired, with a single nuclear arsenal under Pakistani control and Iranian issues eliminated as they would be the junior power in a coalition with decades of ties to the US.  If any of this seems difficult to grasp, position papers outlining this exact situation have been around for years.
Given the chance, Israel would join this group of states.  Those familiar with private “back channel” diplomatic initiatives know that this has is considered.  Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan all maintain a covert level of cordial relations with Israel, relations poisoned by the Gaza crisis.
Israel’s aggressive stance toward apartheid expansionism, fueled by the hubris supplied by American hegemony in the region is only one of the considerations needed in evaluating the dynamic in the region.  The humiliation Turkey suffered, despite the fact Turkey’s powerful military has always worked closely with Israel, threatens to destabilize their civilian government and add to Islamic militancy there.
Iraq is going through a rough period after recent elections.  They are expect to ask the US to keep troops in place in significant numbers well past the agreed upon date of withdrawal.
Iran, a country whose civil government is extremely unpopular with its own people, maintains stability through police state tactics rivaling those of the Shah’s Savak and punishes its own population by maintaining status as a rogue state, a virtual pariah nation, as a way of clamping down on dissent.
Afghanistan is in total collapse.  Along with the Taliban, a number of additional divides with the nation have occurred and the new national army and police force are total failures.  An informal defacto government is now ruling increasing areas of the country and may be able to build stability if certified by the royal families.  President Karzai is trying to work closely with Pakistan, a major policy change for him, out of a combination of necessity and panic.  However, Karzai has burned too many bridges to be able to bring cordial relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan, nations with a history of rivalry and some acrimony.
Pakistan may be the key to the puzzle.  Pakistan’s unsteady democracy has been ineffective but current military leadership in Pakistan is highly competent, very pro-US and moderate.  The primary problems are Pakistan’s economy, nearing total collapse and the instability of terrorism that has pushed Pakistan to the edge.  Pakistan’s desire is to underwrite economic growth but has no oil resources for such as task.  Without the ability to overcome internal corruption and address the root causes of extremism in the tribal areas along the border with Afghanistan, Pakistan faces destabilization.  Membership in a coalition state would address some of these problems.  Occupation of Saudi Arabia under an “Islamic Protectorate” necessitated by Israeli incursions into Saudi airspace would solve all of Pakistan’s problems.
The media can be a powerful thing.  When a story, such as the one in the London Times, could jolt markets or push nations to irational acts, a poor understanding of regional conditions and history could have quite another effect, one entirely unexpected.

Our Madness Un-Limited ??????

Few days back two Saudi Clerics and advisor to Royalty issued a ‘Fatwa’ (Islamic Edict) for women who wish to travel with male driver who is not their blood relative to breast feed the male so that he becomes their maternal relation. “The man should take the milk, but not directly from the breast of the woman,” Al Obeikan said. “He should drink it and then becomes a relative of the family, a fact that allows him to come in contact with the women without breaking Islam’s rules about mixing.”

While Al Obeikan advises that milk should be pumped and then given in a glass, another Saudi sheik, Abi Ishaq Al Huwaini, argues that men should suckle directly. This has given birth to another debate that how the women would prove before police authorities or in court that she had breast fed the male. Would she do so in presence of three adult male witnesses or a video of such act would be enough proof. “The thought of a huge hairy face at a woman’s breast does not evoke motherly or even brotherly feelings. It could go from the grotesque to the erotic but definitely not maternal.” the Saudi women rights group argues.
Is this the extreme of madness and giving bad name to Islam? Certainly NOT. Our holy brothers, the Taliban are chopping off heads of our soldiers and pump gasoline in their bodies before setting on fire to watch ‘body dance’ in name of religion of peace. The Prophet of Islam (PBUH) would surely not that pleased on these news. But do these self proclaimed custodians of Islam care about the message of God and the teachings of messenger (PBUH)? Is not this what Church was doing with Christianity in medieval times?
If that all is not enough to make a joke of religion, than for what we have our Lordships in superior courts? Just recently Supreme Court passed a judgement declaring itself to be custodian of ‘imaginary’ basic features of constitution. It also announced to judge the righteousness of lawmakers under article 62 and 63. That was followed by Lahore High Courts orders to ban Facebook and Youtube for having blasphemous content without even trying to understand that such content was not the property of these websites.

If you are thinking that Taliban or Saudi clerics are insane than you are definitely wrong. Yesterday Lahore High Court ordered to ban Yahoo, Google, Amazon, Hotmail and several other website for having blasphemous content. Yes, it is not a joke as it is difficult to imagine the insanity of Saudi clerics or Taliban, our Lordships are not behind in race. Apart from the debate that other website have such content or not or should be banned by court, does Google really has any content at all on its page?

Who can tell our Holy Lordships in superior courts that Google is not even a website! The learned judge who passed this Talaban verdict does not posses the basic knowledge about internet and how does a search engine work. But it is a court order and must be complied by government otherwise Qazi Hussain Ahmad and Imran Khan are always ready for a ‘long march’ to get court orders implemented. Who can explain to them that poor search engine got punished for no fault!
When we think that this might be the extreme of stupidity, they are there to surprise us, stay tuned, more to come and all in name of Islam.

Science ends here

Nadeem F. Paracha

Many Arab as well as some western academics (who were paid large sums of money and perks) were continuously invited to the rich, conservative kingdoms and asked to scribble books claiming that the Muslim holy book was punctuated with scientific truths hundreds of years before the West discovered them in their labs. — Illustration by Abro

I am itching to get my hands on a recently published book, God Created the Universe by Fatehulla Khan. After reading the review of the book, I can safely assume it is yet another document in the long line of glorified assertions that much of what we call scientific truths today was mentioned in the scriptures a long time ago.

Ever since the late French physician, Maurice Bucaille — on a hefty payroll of the Saudi royal family in Riyadh — wrote Islam, Bible & Science (1976), many believe that ‘proving’ scientific truths from holy books has been the exclusive domain of Muslims. However, in spite of being impressed by the holy book’s ‘scientific wonders’, Bucaille remained a committed Christian.

Very few of my wide-eyed brethren know that long before Muslims, certain Hindu and Christian theologians had already laid claim to the practice of defining their respective holy books as metaphoric prophecies of scientifically proven phenomenon. They began doing so between the 18th and 19th centuries, whereas Muslims got into the act only in the 20th century.

Johannes Heinrich’s Scientific vindication of Christianity (1887) is one example, while Mohan Roy’s Vedic Physics: Scientific Origin of Hinduism (1999) is a good way of observing how this thought has evolved among followers of other faiths. It is interesting to note how a number of Muslim ‘scientists’ have laboured hard to come up with convoluted interpretations of certain scriptures. Ironically, their ancient counterparts, especially between the 8th and 13th centuries in Baghdad and Persia, had put all effort in trying to understand natural phenomena and the human body and mind through hardcore science and philosophy.

Those great men of Islamic antiquity weren’t over-reading into divine texts for scientific answers; instead, to them God’s command to reflect on nature and the world around them was enough to inspire them to become dedicated rational scientists and philosophers. They were celebrated not only by Muslims, but humanity at large for their scientific prowess.

But, alas, beginning around the early 1970s, with the collapse of a secular nationalist mindset in the Muslim world, and the rise in influence of totalitarian oil-rich puritanical monarchies, Muslim polities and mindset began to suspect science as a tool of western and communist social engineering and imperialism.

Whereas the wealthy monarchies remained firmly in the western camp during the Cold War, they aggressively proliferated reactionary literature that attacked both western and Marxist ideas across the Muslim world. Added to this was the propagated perception that modern science was the creation of the continuing Judo-Christian tradition (nay, ‘conspiracy’) aimed at undermining Islam.

Many Arab as well as some western academics (who were paid large sums of money and perks) were continuously invited to the rich, conservative kingdoms and asked to scribble books claiming that the Muslim holy book was punctuated with scientific truths hundreds of years before the West discovered them in their labs.

This practice — clearly emerging from a mixture of an inferiority complex and the passion for shouting down modern liberal and leftist notions — sanctified myopia and an unscientific bent of mind in the Muslim world. As many Muslim scientists such as Ziauddin Sardar and Pervez Hoodbhoy, and renowned Islamic scholars like Muhammad Akhund, have already lamented, Muslims through such literature are actually encouraged to drop out of any field or lab work required for genuine scientific research. Many are persuaded to follow the belief that all they need to know about science is already in the holy book.

Rationalist Islamic scholars have been insisting throughout the 20th century to date that the holy book is less a book of laws or science. It is an elaborate moral guide for Muslims in which God has given the individual the freewill to decide for him or herself through exerting their mental faculties and striving to gain more empirical knowledge.

Iranian writer, Vali Reza Nasr, is right to mourn the trend today that though most Muslims are quick to adopt western science, they simply refuse to assume a rational scientific mindset. No wonder then, for example, most Pakistanis still don’t have a clue about what the country’s only Nobel Prize winning scientist, Dr Abdus Salam, got the award for, but many are quick to quote from books written by super cranks like Harun Yahya and Maurice Bucaille, explaining how things like the Big Bang and others are endorsed in the holy book.

In addition to such claptrap, there are already books out there claiming that electricity can be generated from jinns. A whole session was organised in Islamabad in the late 1980s during the Ziaul Haq regime in which fringe crackpots (disguised as scientists) were invited by the dictator to determine the ‘speed of heaven’, and how to overcome the energy crisis with the aid of jinns!

So why read books of science, or enter a lab to understand the many workings of God’s nature and creatures; just read the holy book. Who knows you may find a theory on time travel and laser guns in it as well? Forget about all those great Muslim scientists of yore, or Abdus Salam, Einstein and Stephen Hawking. Just get in touch with your friendly neighbourhood jinn for all your energy needs.

A Sad Day

Susie of Arabia

This. Announcing one’s sins is seen as encouraging others to also break the rules, or in other words, promoting crime. This might explain why many people in Saudi Arabia seem to be in denial about the existence of crimes and bad behavior here in the first place – because it is not to be discussed. But is this healthy for the society?

During the past several months, there has been unprecedented talk of reform here in this country. Several religious leaders have spoken out in favor of sweeping changes and a loosening of the strict codes of enforced morality that grip this country, ranging from support of women driving to relaxing the stiff rules which prohibit gender mixing. I wrote about some of these topics in a recent post on this blog.

My last post told you about an MTV True Life program that showcased four different Saudi young people here in Jeddah. Each of their stories focused on different challenges that these youth face living in Saudi Arabia. This program has caused quite a stir here in the Kingdom. I think it showed how very normal the youth here are and how they have similar feelings and aspirations to young people all over the world. But it now appears that the religious police have filed a suit against these young people for the crime of muhjahara. By next week, the Islamic Sharia Court will make the decision as to whether to proceed with the charges against the show’s participants or not.

I truly hope that the court decides against pursuing this case. The outcome will reveal exactly how deeply committed the current leaders are as far as reform and progress for Saudi Arabia. Although these young people are not representative of all youth here in KSA, there are many that feel the same way as they do – and many adults as well. They took a giant courageous step to appear on the show and articulate their feelings about the changes they would like to see in Saudi Arabia, their homeland. They only want to better their country and make it more livable, especially for young people. It is widely agreed that the kingdom is sorely lacking in activities for its residents, and when events are planned, many times they are shut down. Instead of punishing these spirited youngsters for bringing attention to problems here, Saudi Arabia should focus on making changes to improve the quality of life for all of its citizens.

Dr. Khalid Alnowaiser, a Saudi lawyer, wrote this excellent op-ed piece recently for Arab News called "Challenges Facing Young Saudis," which emphasizes the changes he feels are necessary for Saudi Arabia to move forward in today's world.

Cleavage = Earthquakes! Suntans = Jail!

I try not to talk about religion very much on this blog because it is such a volatile topic that people get really worked up over - and I am clearly no expert in this department. I read and hear so many different and conflicting interpretations all the time, it's difficult to decipher "what is" and "what isn't" when it comes to religion. People believe so many different things and always seem to make it so complicated, when it shouldn't be. And then when I ask questions because I don't understand, some people think I'm being disrespectful - when I really just want answers. So it is with trepidation that I write this post.

Recently, however, there were a few news reports coming out of the Middle East regarding religion that I found were just begging for questions to be asked.

First, one of the most significant stories concerns Sheikh Ahmed Al-Ghamdi (right), the head of the Makkah religious police, who has come out with a few extremely controversial comments regarding traditional Saudi Islamic behavior. The Sheikh is preaching that gender segregation is not supported by Islam and that it represents cultural extremism as it is practiced in Saudi Arabia. The other issues the Sheikh has made waves about recently concern the enforced closings of businesses during prayer times and men praying in the mosques together. Al-Ghamdi says that businesses should not be required to close during each of the five daily prayers. He went further to say that nothing in the religion says that men must pray the daily prayers together in groups at the mosques. I like this guy! I really like him!

At the very least, Sheikh Al-Ghamdi has ruffled the feathers of the religious police in KSA, as he works for them and it is their job to enforce these religious ideals that Al-Ghamdi now claims are unnecessary. His liberal statements are totally out of sync with those of the mostly conservative religious scholars in KSA. Other religious clerics have slammed Al-Ghamdi for his heretical remarks and some people have called for his dismissal or even death. It was initially reported that Al-Ghamdi was relieved of his duties, but within a very short time that statement was retracted allegedly due to intervention from someone within the royal family. Al-Ghamdi's fate at this point is not clear. To read more about this controversy, please see Saudi Woman's opinion piece called "The Man of the Hour."

More repercussions have surfaced in the wake of Al-Ghamdi's remarks when a group photo of Saudi women with the King and the Crown Prince of KSA made headlines around the world of late, further fueling the fiery flap on the issue of gender mixing. The profound significance of this photo is that it seems to indicate that on the highest level here in Saudi Arabia, opinions are changing about men and women socially mixing together. Another kicker is that most of the women in the photo are not wearing the traditional face veil (called niqaab) that a large percentage of Saudi women always wear when out in public. Indeed religious police in KSA have scolded many women for not having their faces covered.

But then, on the other side of this gender mixing tug-of-war, in this article in Arab News, you have this Saudi religious cleric, Abdul Rahman Al-Barrak (right), urging that "modernists" be ignored. He said that "liberalization of women was one of the major outcomes of the enemies’ plots" and decries gender mixing as "keys for evil."

Another news making story came out of Iran when a religious cleric there blamed earthquakes on women who did not dress modestly. Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi was quoted as saying, “Many women who do not dress modestly ... lead young men astray, corrupt their chastity and spread adultery in society, which consequently increases earthquakes.” You know, I was okay with what he said until those last four words...


I have a feeling that this guy is just basing his statement on the fact that seismologists have been saying for 20 years that there is a high likelihood that Tehran, the country's capital city, will be hit by a major earthquake in the near future. Interestingly enough, Tehran sits amidst dozens of fault lines, yet has not suffered a major earthquake for 180 years. I'll bet that when and if the earthquake happens, Sedighi just can't wait to say, "See? I told you so!" and of course, women will be blamed for the natural disaster!


And now, in expectations of this earthquake blame game, women are already being punished - just in case - in Iran. It has been announced that women sporting suntans will be arrested! Why? Because it violates Islamic values - what?

Do people REALLY believe stuff like scantily dressed women cause earthquakes? Seriously? If you know of any scientific explanation, please fill me in.

Are there other places, outside the Muslim world, where religious police ensure that women are dressed modestly enough and if they're not, they can be sharply hit about the ankles with a stick or suffer other consequences? Or where men are rounded up at prayer time to go pray?

How exactly is a woman with a "healthy glow" violating religious values - especially if it is not known where/how/or with whom she got the suntan in the first place? Do YOU agree that having a suntan is a valid offense that someone should be arrested for?


Do other religions around the world even HAVE religious police that make sure its followers behave "morally" according to the religion?

Should religion be FORCED on people? Are Muslims in KSA "enslaved" by religion? Since there is "no compulsion in Islam," why do people in KSA not have a "choice" of whether they want to be Muslim or not? Why do I always hear and read that there is "no compulsion in Islam," yet clearly here in KSA, that is not the case? And why, too, is it even necessary for there to be religious police here in the first place, especially since there is supposedly "no compulsion in Islam?" What does it say about a religion that needs religious police to enforce its religious doctrines? And isn't that considered "compulsion?"

I've asked a lot of questions here - I invite civilized, respectful discussion, without attacks and insults, please...

What’s front page news in Saudi Arabia?

It never fails to amaze me how in a country where women are only seen covered head to toe in black and get educated and work in mostly gender segregated institutes, and yet men are completely obsessed with them. The latest is a fatwa that originated in Egypt and was recently renewed by Shiekh Al Obiekan in a TV interview. He was asked if it was alright to breastfeed a grown man in order to be able to raise the segregation rule between a man and a woman and he replied with a yes! This was given major coverage in both AlWatan Newspaper and AlRiyadh Newspaper. But before I go into the details of the fatwa, some background information:

Breastfeeding is encouraged in Islam up to the age of two, after which the child has to be weaned. If a woman breastfeeds a child that is not her own, that child becomes her son by breastmilk and she and her daughters do not have to cover from him when he becomes an adult. However she has to breastfeed him before he turns two and it has to be five separate fulfilling sessions of breastfeeding. This is popular in Saudi Arabia especially among sisters because then they won’t have to worry about segregating their kids later. The cousins would be considered as “breastmilk siblings”.

It all began in May 2007 when an Egyptian Sheikh called Mohammed Atiya came out with a fatwa advising women to breastfeed their male coworkers if their job entails spending time alone together. Shiekh Atiya was quickly fired from his post at the Azhar University and the whole thing was swept under the rug. Until this week when Shiekh Al Obiekan, a royal judicial consultant at the Saudi Ministry of Justice renewed it all by replying to a question on a TV interview. He stated that in cases where a household needs an unrelated man like a driver to repeatedly visit the house, it is allowed for the woman of the household to breastfeed the stranger so he becomes a relative! The shiekh’s only condition is that the man does not drink directly from the woman’s breast but that the milk be pumped and then offered to the man in a glass. But this condition was revoked by another sheikh, Abi Ishaq Al Huwaini, who insists that the breastmilk must be sucked by the man directly from the breast!

The whole issue just shows how clueless men are. All this back and forth between sheikhs and not one bothers to ask a woman if it is logical, let alone possible to breastfeed a grown man five fulfilling breastmilk meals. As I’m writing this, I’m cringing at just the thought of it. I’m a huge advocate of breastfeeding and I’ve exclusively breastfed my three kids for at least six months each. Plus I’ve also done the “breastmilk sibling” thing for two nephews and a niece. Breastfeeding a baby is hard work and it takes a toll to be able to produce enough for a one year old, I can’t even imagine how much a thirty year old would need. Women do not produce breastmilk on demand, you have to have had a baby recently and breastfeed that baby daily or otherwise the milk will dry up within a few days. Also breastmilk is not that appetizing, it has the look and taste of skim milk, so not that many men would be able to stomach five meals of it. Moreover the thought of a huge hairy face at a woman’s breast does not evoke motherly or even brotherly feelings. It could go from the grotesque to the erotic but definitely not maternal!

Here - Drink This!

Susie of Arabia!

Warning: Please go to the bathroom to relieve yourself BEFORE reading this post. I don't want to be responsible for you wetting yourself... don't say I didn't warn you.

Just when you thought some things couldn't get any more bizarre in this part of the world than they already are, a learned Saudi cleric, Sheikh Abdul Mohsen Al-Obeikan, is doing some quick backpedaling after publicly supporting a fatwa (religious ruling) which basically says that it's okay for working women to breastfeed male co-workers, as this would be a legitimate way of getting around gender segregation in the workplace here in Saudi Arabia.

Three years ago, an Egyptian sheikh caused quite an international ruckus when he was asked in a televised interview about whether it was acceptable for an adult male to drink the milk from a lactating female co-worker in order to establish a maternal bond of sorts, thereby precluding the strict gender segregation rule in the workplace. As if the question itself wasn't bizarre enough, the fact that he answered a resounding "YES!" was enough to provoke widespread shock and disbelief, as well as plenty of head shaking and hair pulling.

According to Islam, if a nursing mother breastfeeds an infant who is not her own on five separate occasions, a legally recognized familial bond is established between the two of them, plus the nursing donor's immediate family. This means that if the child is a male, when he grows up, the gender segregation issue does not come into play - meaning that the woman and her daughters would not have to cover up around him and they can socialize together. Apparently this is done frequently in Saudi families between sisters so that gender segregation won't affect the families getting together once their children are grown, since all the cousins would then be considered "milk siblings." At the same time, it also means that these cousins would not be allowed to marry each other, as is often done within Saudi families. This also implies that there would logically be no chance of any illicit sexual relations between any of them since that would be incest.

This milking bond came into question last year when 75-year-old Syrian widow, Khamisa Mohammed Sawadi, who was living in Saudi Arabia, was arrested and sentenced to 4 months in prison and 40 lashes because two young men (one of them her "milk" son) entered her residence bearing several loaves of bread. The two young men were also arrested and sentenced to about the same punishment as the old woman. The last I read about this case was in December 2009 stating that all appeals were denied for all three and that the sentences stand. I have to admit that at 50-something, it might be hard to believe that the woman actually breastfed her husband's nephew. But why on earth would it be a crime in the first place to be kind and considerate to an elderly woman? Something is seriously wrong for this to be a crime.

Sheikh Al-Obiekan seemed to think that drinking a woman's pumped breastmilk out of a glass and not suckling directly from the woman's breast is a perfectly reasonable and acceptable way to skirt around and avoid the strict religious ban on gender mixing in this society. But in a bizarre twist to this already unbelievable story, another equally intelligent and enlightened religious scholar and voice of reason disagreed with that (don't get too excited just yet!). This other guy said that the milk should be suckled right from the woman's breast! Forget the fact that Islam also says that nursing should be done during the first two years of a child's life and mentions nothing at all about the ridiculous notion of woman nursing a grown man.

I'm just trying to imagine a prim and proper Saudi woman here covered in black from head to toe whipping out her breast - five separate times, mind you - and offering it to an unrelated man just so she can legally work with him! The whole image is just so absurd. I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried. Don’t these religious scholars have more important issues to worry about than to continually fantasize about womens' breasts? And what exactly are they trying to do to Muslim women? And how is the woman's husband supposed to take all of this?

Head Count

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia will be taking a census of the entire country in the coming months. This will be the fourth census taken since 1974. The last census which was in 2004 revealed the population of the country to be 22 million, comprised of about 73% Saudi nationals (about 16.5 million), and the rest were expatriates from other countries. In the entire Gulf Coast region, Saudi Arabia is the largest country both in land area and in population, making up a good 60-65% of the populous of the region.

The Kingdom has employed and trained about 40,000 workers to conduct the census. The Saudi government has called upon all Saudi citizens and foreigners to cooperate in providing accurate information to the various questions concerning the demographics, economic and social makeup of all people living here. The census form consists of 59 questions and supposedly takes about 15 minutes to complete. The entire Gulf region is working together to take a joint census in all of the Gulf countries.

I can't really speak for the other Gulf area countries, but I can only imagine what a difficult and challenging task this must be to undertake in a place like Saudi Arabia, especially considering how this society is set up. First of all, I would doubt that there would be any female census takers since women cannot drive and it wouldn't be acceptable for a woman to come calling to a stranger's home, even if she would be on official state business. The working hours here are so irregular because of the five prayer times during each day, that I wonder how these census takers will manage to find men at home to talk to because if the man of the house is not at home when the census takers arrive, the women will not open the door or speak to a strange man. Many men work normally into the evening hours because the working day is chopped up so much to accommodate prayer times.

Another problem I see is that there are no street addresses here in Jeddah, and I think it's the same in the rest of the country. Many streets do not even have names. Logistically speaking, taking a census here must be a nightmare. What about the thousands of Bedouins who still roam the deserts here and don't really have one permanent abode? There are many who still live in tents and move frequently. How can anyone ensure that they will be counted? Yet another questionable issue is the fact that Saudi Arabia has so many poor and uneducated illegal aliens living here. Thousands have come to this country on the pretense of fulfilling their Hajj requirement in Islam and end up staying here permanently and illegally, in hopes of forging a better life than what they had in their own countries. Even though I read that these overstayers need not worry about being caught and sent back to their countries or thrown in jail, I'm sure that most of them will not get this message and would be fearful of answering questions like this. I just don't see how accurate a census can really be here.

I would just love to see the census form: Head of Household; Wife #1 and children; Wife #2 and children; etc. Number of people total in the household, including all wives and children, grandparents, maids, drivers, gatekeepers, nannies, cooks, etc. This could be really interesting...

Behind the glitz

By Rafia Zakaria

Building towers is risky business. In fact, the very dynamics of the architecture of towers and their historical symbolism suggest acts of defiance. Dubai’s Burj Khalifa, now the world’s tallest building, takes the act of rebellion against physical limitations to new levels — literally.

Over 100 storeys, it boasts the world’s highest swimming pool and perhaps as expiation also the world’s highest mosque. Its golf course requires over four million gallons of water a day. Last week, amid much fanfare, the legendary tower finally threw open its majestic doors to the public.

Previously known as Burj Dubai the structure was renamed Burj Khalifa in honour of the Abu Dhabi ruler and UAE president who had bailed out struggling Dubai with a sum of billions of dollars. Envisioned and designed by a Chicago firm, the Burj is said to have been inspired by the vision of architect Frank Lloyd Wright’s Sky City which was to be built in Chicago. However, it was never realised as it lacked both the funds and labour. Neither of these were seemingly a problem in the construction of the Burj which employed thousands of labourers from Pakistan, India and Bangladesh for several years for its construction.

According to reports, the vast majority of these workers have never even been to the top of the building they spent years constructing. But not seeing the view from the top is hardly the biggest problem faced by those who constructed the Burj; there are allegations that many have died in the construction of the Burj. Such construction projects take a huge toll. Records kept by the Indian mission for only one year showed that nearly 1,000 Indian workers had died, more than 60 in accidents on the site. The Pakistani and Bangladeshi missions do not keep records of the many labourers who have died possibly deterred by the criticism of the UAE authorities. Based on estimates the total number of workers killed in such construction projects is believed to be well into the thousands.

Days after the opening of the Burj a UAE court absolved the president’s brother for the beating and torture — an event that was videotaped — of an Afghan grain merchant. Sheikh Issa Bin Zayed Al-Nahyan was recorded brutally thrashing the man, stuffing sand into his mouth, burning his private parts with cigarettes and beating him with a nailed board. The video, which is available on the Internet, shows the sheikh literally pouring salt on his bloody wounds.

The court that heard the case acquitted the sheikh on the grounds that he had been under the influence of ‘drugs’. Put simply, despite incontrovertible recorded evidence, the sheikh was simply too powerful to be brought to task for hurting a man who was in the Emirati scheme of things little more than a slave.

The inauguration of the tower and the acquittal of the sheikh is a lurid juxtaposition of the hypocrisy, gluttony and crude injustice that lies beneath a glitzy façade. None of the innovation or glamour is indigenous; the architecture is American, the designers European and the slave labour South Asian.

Only 10 per cent of Dubai’s population is indigenous and actually has some say in how the emirate is run. The rest, either labourers or the educated middle class from Pakistan, Bangladesh and India, are only too happy to swallow their pride and meekly accept second-class status as gratitude for employment. The slave-like labourers languish in camps hapless and helpless at the hands of sheikhs and companies who may choose to abuse them at whim.

In the meantime, the lurid contrast of limitless wealth and gluttonous consumption is seemingly lost on middle-class expatriates in Dubai. The expat bankers, engineers and doctors who have got work permits to escape dim prospects in their own countries unquestioningly consume the capitalist wealth of Dubai without ever contesting the injustice of their own political silencing. They wander in the malls, stare in veneration at the towers and flaunt their designer trinkets at cousins and relatives left at home as markers of their economic superiority.

Never once do they ask what basis of justice allows a government to pay two people different amounts based on their nationality. Nor do they wonder at the justifications of virtual labour camps where workers toil for 18 hours a day and are not paid for months, conditions that would result in protest in any part of the developed world. Similarly, tourists from around the world visiting Dubai are happily duped by the fireworks, the pretty beaches and now the tall towers without taking a moment to question the inequity that fuels them or the injustice that makes them possible.

True, injustice exists everywhere and Dubai sustains Pakistan’s exported labour force whose remittances are crucial to the country’s economic survival. But it must be remembered that the case of Dubai is unique. There is no place in the contemporary West where workers may live and work and even be born and never have the opportunity to participate in the governance of the country.

Unless those who make up the expatriate labour force of the emirates are allowed a voice Dubai’s progress will continue to be a product of exploitation of poverty and need.

Indeed, if the world is revolted by reports of torture in Guantanamo, and campaigns to hold the US accountable, so too must it demand accountability for the sheikhs of Dubai without being duped by the luxurious façade of their towers.

The writer is an attorney and director at Amnesty International, US.
rafia.zakaria@gmail.com

Hayat (PVPV) al Badiah assualts a citizen after he dropped off his wife at a mall

A Saudi citizen, Al Qahtani, has requested that the authorities open an investigation with members of the PVPV, Badi’ah Branch, accusing them of assaulting him and tearing his clothes after he had dropped off his wife at a local mall.
Al Qahtani told the authorities that his wife had wanted to meet up with her family at a mall west of Riyadh and after he dropped her off he went to a nearby grocery shop where he was accosted by a group of men and pulled outside. They forced him into a car that had the PVPV logo on it.

Al Qahtani added that they then took him back to the mall where he had left his wife and during the trip they insulted him and called him names that he alleged should never come from a Muslim man’s mouth. At the mall, they forcefully pulled his wife outside amid her screams and a gathering crowd. They then interrogated us.

The PVPV members then took Al Qahtani to their Badiah offices and confiscated his car, mobile and wallet. They examined and searched the contents of each.
When the PVPV members finally figured out that they were wrong, the assailants warned Al Qahtani to not report the incident to the papers and one of the members even admitted that he had just finished a course in how to interact with the public.

Al Qahtani requests through this article that the General President of the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, Sheikh Abdul Aziz Ahumain investigate the matter and hold the assailants accountable for how they treated him and his wife. He added that his wife is now traumatized since the incident.

It should be noted that the citizen filed an official complaint at the Police Department against the individuals who assaulted him. And in turn, Riyadh Newspaper contacted PVPV Badi’ah Branch and could not get any response.

The comments on the newspaper website were 951. I glanced quickly through them and noticed a shift in that previously when such incidents are reported the majority of the comments were made by zealous fans of the PVPV who would go as far as blame those who write negatively about the PVPV for the bad weather because God is punishing us for criticizing the PVPV. And there are some who believe that the PVPV are the extension or at the same level as the Sahaba, the Prophet’s (PBUH) companions. These people did ot have the usual strong presence but there were a few who are in denial regarding the PVPV’s behaviour. They write that either the assailants were not PVPV but men posing as PVPV to dirty their reputation and others wrote that Al Qahtani has to have done something wrong, otherwise these men would not have done this. But I was happy to see that even those who seem like extreme fundamentals have started to write that we should hold PVPV individuals accountable.

I don’t know what really happened but I don’t think that Al Qahtani would take it this far if he had been lying or even exaggerating. I do know of a friend of mine who was out at a fast food restaurant with her brother for dinner and the PVPV refused to believe that they were brother and sister and took them to the PVPVheadquarters where their father had to come and get them. They were not physically harmed but it was distressing to have to prove that they were siblings just because they wanted a quick bite to eat. And a relative of mine has been interrogated several times at coffee shops whenever he takes his wife out. What my friend and my relative’s wife have in common is that both do like to dress in expensive and embroidered abayas and they both did not have young children with them. So maybe that was what caused the PVPV in Al Qahtani’s case to jump to conclusions.

Land of Contrasts & Contradictions

As a newcomer, I have observed that Saudi Arabia is a very interesting place - a land of stark contrasts and confusing contradictions.

For example, in an area of new and elegant walled villas in the city, the neighboring empty lot is, more often than not, filled with rubble and garbage. This doesn't seem to bother the residents because no one takes any steps to improve it. One can see sights like this all over Jeddah. My husband Adnan told me that when there is new construction, the debris is just hauled off the lot and dumped at the nearest empty lot. I wondered out loud about how unfair that is to the empty lot’s owner, but Adnan said that somehow, because everyone does this, it all evens out eventually. There are some of the most modern and amazing structures here that I have ever seen, and right next door might be a garbage and rubble-filled lot, or maybe a 500 year old crumbling and decaying building.

Or out in the country, there might a lavish walled villa in the middle of nowhere, and just a short walk away, people are living in tents in the desert. And even more interesting is that the tents may have TV antennas and cars parked outside. There is such an interesting - and sometimes odd - mix of the old and the new, the elegant and the decrepid, the haves and the have-nots.

There seems to be little in the way of planning and zoning or code enforcement. Parking lots - when you are lucky enough to go to a place that has them - have tight spaces, narrow lanes, and are very crowded. Parking here seems to be an after-thought. Cars are haphazardly parked wherever, and many times, cars are double or tripled parked, blocking traffic lanes. Every day I see cars driving the wrong way on one way streets or divided boulevards. The main reason for this happening is because there are so many one ways and divided streets with sometimes no way to make a u-turn or left turn for quite a distance, so everyone resorts to driving on the wrong side of the street.

The materials and designs used in construction are oftentimes obviously top of the line, elegant and intricately detailed, and rooms are decorated with gorgeous chandeliers and amazing ceilings that I have never seen the likes of anywhere. The outside walls of many buildings are completely tiled or are covered with beautiful stone or even marble. Even the sidewalks and entire courtyards are totally and beautifully tiled. However, the workmanship can be sloppy or unfinished. In our apartment, for example, I am still trying to get off splatters of paint, stain, grout, and "I-don’t-know-what-else" that are all over the floor tiles and baseboards. And there is this white paper that is glued all the way around a dark wood doorway molding that I am still trying to get off. Plus, I have had to take a razor to the wall tiles in the kitchen and all the bathrooms because the workmen didn’t clean off the grout properly as they were working.

Music is another subject that is really confusing in Arabia. But what makes it even more confusing is that music is a much disagreed upon subject here and this is because even Islamic scholars cannot agree among themselves. Consequently, some people in Arabia believe that music is “haram” or forbidden by Islam, and others feel that music is "halal" or allowed. There are confusing passages in the Koran that at one time seem to condemn music and then there are other passages that appear to condone it. Meanwhile, TV here has dozens of Middle Eastern music channels.

Even my husband confuses me about Islam's view of music. When we first met, Adnan absolutely loved music, collected many albums, could even name really obscure artists, and constantly listened to music. But now, he has made a 180 degree turnaround and even tries to discourage our 14 year old son's naturally inherited love of music, telling him that it is a waste of time. Adnan's mom and sister also both believe that music is haram (bad). One of our young adult neices even declined to attend a wedding because there was going to be music and dancing. It makes me wonder: why would there be music and dancing at a wedding anyway when it is supposed to be forbidden?

I have read that music is bad because certain types of music are sexy, alluring, or evil, among other things. Dancing is also considered inappropriate, yet the Middle East is where Belly Dancing originated. And still others believe that only certain musical instruments are acceptable. Many people here, like my husband, consider music as basically a waste of time. Yet verses from the Koran are always sung, and prayers are sung, and this is ok. To me, this is a form of music. To many Muslims, even beautiful classical music is bad. I can understand how they might consider rap music, heavy metal, or songs with vulgarity and wrong messages in them as bad...but beautiful classical music? I just cannot be convinced of this way of thinking. And I cannot help but feel badly for the people who have been convinced that all music is evil and wrong - because, being a lover of many kinds of music myself, I know what they are missing out on, and sadly, they don't.

Despite all of this, satellite TV here is loaded with dozens upon dozens of channels that are Middle Eastern music all the time. I am amused watching music videos of men singers dressed in their full traditional garb, swaying, winking, dancing, and moaning. And then, there's the heavily made up Middle Eastern women - who are supposed to be modest - making videos exposing their cleavage in snug fitting attire, batting their false eyelashes directly into the camera, tossing their hair and their hips around in very suggestive movements and overtones, wiggling and jiggling to the beat. Stores here are loaded with Middle Eastern music CDs and videos. If this type of stuff is plastered all over TV and in stores, then why do I and all the other women here have to wear the abaya out in public? I don't get this.

Here in Arabia, certain Western ideas have been readily embraced, while at the same time, they have fiercely held on to many traditional, and archaic, customs as well. They definitely pick and choose carefully what they wish to accept or reject. Technology and architecture are state of the art here. But Western influences, especially social and moral attitudes and behaviors, have been unquestionably rejected.

Another area of confusion for me is women wearing makeup. Women here are not supposed to attract the attention of other men, hence the abaya, the hair covering, etc. Yet out in public, many of the women, even those in veils, wear tons of eye makeup. Most women seen on TV here wear an obscene amount of makeup, so much so that many of them look plastic (think Tammy Faye!). I went to my first Saudi wedding (read all about it in a previous chapter) and most of the women wore lots of makeup. Adnan's mom Tata apparently told him to tell me to stop putting on makeup when we go out because I will attract too much attention from men and I should only wear makeup for other women, like at a wedding, or only for my husband. Proper women - good Muslim women - do not want to attract the attention of other men in public. I have noticed that men and women don’t really look at each other or make eye contact when they are out in public anyway. It is improper for a man to look at or speak to another man's wife. So, why then do so many women wear so much makeup if it is supposed to be unacceptable and other men aren't supposed to look at women anyway?

And, of course, there’s the clothing and hair covering thing that I also find contradictory. If the Koran says that both men and women should dress modestly, then why aren’t men required to cover up like the women? I even keep my hair covered whenever I am in the presence of any of my brothers-in-law, even though Adel saw my hair when he visited us in America, but now it’s not acceptable. I can remember seeing Moslem families at Disney World in Florida on a hot humid summer day, with the father comfortably dressed in a tank top and shorts, while the mother sweltered in her black abaya and headscarf. How is this even remotely fair or justifiable?

Most people here are extremely polite and courteous and mind their own business. But just get those men behind a wheel (remember women cannot drive here), and it is pure mayhem and aggression, constant horn honking, cutting other drivers off, and total disregard for normal driving rules. My husband tells me that women aren't allowed to drive here for several reasons. One reason is for their own safety. In the big cities here, driving is very stressful because of all the traffic, the lack of traffic enforcement (I haven't seen any tickets being given out, much less any drivers pulled over by the cops), and the fact that the drivers here do virtually anything they want with no regard for others. Another reason, Adnan says, is because the men drivers would find it too distracting to see women behind the wheel and it would cause more accidents. Another possible explanation is because women aren't really supposed to go places without their husbands, although this is not necessarily the way it really is here. In fact women aren't supposed to be in a vehicle without a male relative, yet taxi cabs do a flourishing business here because women aren't allowed to drive, and many families employ a full-time driver to take the lady of the house out wherever and whenever she wishes.

The people here in Arabia cherish their kids, but to date, I haven't ever seen one baby in a car seat (although I'm not saying that all parents here don't use them) or one child buckled up with a seat belt. Kids ride standing up, jumping around the car, hanging out the windows, or even driving on daddy's lap! Adnan says this is "freedom," even though it used to upset him if we saw something like that in the states. Of course adults don't buckle up here, hence they don't buckle up their kids. I feel like we may be the only people here who buckle up at all.

The Koran encourages Muslims to take care of and have respect for their bodies, and it forbids Muslims to indulge in things that are harmful to the body, like alcohol, illegal drugs, or smoking. But so many people smoke here, and from what I understand, there are people who do drugs here as well. To me, this is hypocritical by just picking and choosing what they want to follow from the Koran and discarding what they don't want to adhere to. Hmmm, I wonder how many of the religious police smoke?

And one last thing for now that I don't quite get: portraits of people (like family members) are not displayed at all around the home here. Soon after I got here, I was told by Tata not to hang any family portraits on the wall, and to not have them in frames on a table or displayed in any way. I could remember learning years ago from Adnan that Muslims do not wear likenesses of people or any creature that has eyes, like on a T-shirt or a hat. It is forbidden, partly having to do with idolotry and possibly having to do with "evil eyes" or such. Ok, I can understand that and accept it. But what I don't understand is: why is it ok then to have huge photos and likenesses of the King (and other high ranking members of the Royal Family) plastered everywhere, on buildings, inside buildings, on signs, on billboards, on advertisements, etc.? Isn't this some form of idolotry?

I could go on and on, but I think that's enough to ponder for now. It all just seems so confusing and contradictory. I just don't get it!