American businesswoman jailed in Saudi - for going to STARBUCKS..

[The Crusader]

here, read for yourselves:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle3321637.ece

on the other hand, here it is:

A 37-year-old American businesswoman and married mother of three is seeking justice after she was thrown in jail by Saudi Arabia's religious police for sitting with a male colleague at a Starbucks coffee shop in Riyadh.

Yara, who does not want her last name published for fear of retribution, was bruised and crying when she was freed from a day in prison after she was strip-searched, threatened and forced to sign false confessions by the Kingdom's “Mutaween” police.

Her story offers a rare first-hand glimpse of the discrimination faced by women living in Saudi Arabia. In her first interview with the foreign press, Yara told The Times that she would remain in Saudi Arabia to challenge its harsh enforcement of conservative Islam rather than return to America.

“If I want to make a difference I have to stick around. If I leave they win. I can't just surrender to the terrorist acts of these people,” said Yara, who moved to Jeddah eight years ago with her husband, a prominent businessman.
Related Links

* Does Islam fit with our law?

* Saudi King spares rape victim from lashes

Her ordeal began with a routine visit to the new Riyadh offices of her finance company, where she is a managing partner.

The electricity temporarily cut out, so Yara and her colleagues — who are all men — went to a nearby Starbucks to use its wireless internet.

She sat in a curtained booth with her business partner in the café's “family” area, the only seats where men and women are allowed to mix.

For Yara, it was a matter of convenience. But in Saudi Arabia, public contact between unrelated men and women is strictly prohibited.

“Some men came up to us with very long beards and white dresses. They asked ‘Why are you here together?'. I explained about the power being out in our office. They got very angry and told me what I was doing was a great sin,” recalled Yara, who wears an abaya and headscarf, like most Saudi women.

The men were from Saudi Arabia's Commission for Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, a police force of several thousand men charged with enforcing dress codes, sex segregation and the observance of prayers.

Yara, whose parents are Jordanian and grew up in Salt Lake City, once believed that life in Saudi Arabia was becoming more liberal. But on Monday the religious police took her mobile phone, pushed her into a cab and drove her to Malaz prison in Riyadh. She was interrogated, strip-searched and forced to sign and fingerprint a series of confessions pleading guilty to her “crime”.

“They took me into a filthy bathroom, full of water and dirt. They made me take off my clothes and squat and they threw my clothes in this slush and made me put them back on,” she said. Eventually she was taken before a judge.

“He said 'You are sinful and you are going to burn in hell'. I told him I was sorry. I was very submissive. I had given up. I felt hopeless,” she said.

Yara's husband, Hatim, used his political contacts in Jeddah to track her whereabouts. He was able to secure her release.

“I was lucky. I met other women in that prison who don't have the connections I did,” she said. Her story has received rare coverage in Saudi Arabia, where the press has been sharply critical of the police.

Yara was visited yesterday by officials from the American Embassy, who promised they would file a report.

An embassy official told The Times that it was being treated as “an internal Saudi matter” and refused to comment on her case.

[Vince S.]

Title's a bit misleading. She was arrested for sitting with a man in public with whom she was not married to.

Their house, their rules. I love how she wants to stay to try to "change" the way things are run there. I really do love ethnocentrism.

Not saying I agree with what happened to her, but again, "their house, their rules".

[Lesfunk]

don't go to other countries, especially ass backwards ones, and complain when YOU break their rules.
Nobody put a gun to her head and forced to her to go to That toilet.

[hbarcat]

Originally Posted by Vince S.

Title's a bit misleading. She was arrested for sitting with a man in public with whom she was not married to.

Their house, their rules. I love how she wants to stay to try to "change" the way things are run there. I really do love ethnocentrism.

Not saying I agree with what happened to her, but again, "their house, their rules".

How convenient to be able to claim the moral high ground (not being an ethnocentrist) by simply ignoring an evil perpetuated by a totalitarian government on its captive citizens. But I suppose I'm in the minority to think that it's desirable to support any effort to try to actually make wholesale changes to such barbaric medieval practices that have been condemned to the dustbin of history by 4/5 of the countries on Earth.

[Pilgrim]

Originally Posted by hbarcat

How convenient to be able to claim the moral high ground (not being an ethnocentrist) by simply ignoring an evil perpetuated by a totalitarian government on its captive citizens. But I suppose I'm in the minority to think that it's desirable to support any effort to try to actually make wholesale changes to such barbaric medieval practices that have been condemned to the dustbin of history by 4/5 of the countries on Earth.

It's not necessarily "...an evil perpetuated by a totalitarian government on its captive citizens." It's THEIR religion and THEIR country. I don't agree with it, but I'm not surprised at all. Anyone living in-country wouldn't be surprised, either.

There are many aspects of their religion I don't like, but it is ABSOLUTELY as valid as any Christian, Jewish or other religion. It's not my religion and it may not be yours, but when you live in a country that's ruled by religious laws, you better conform. This is one reason I choose not to consult in these countries outside the US.

If she wants to stick around and feels she can be part of changing it, then that's her decision.

[john turner]

Originally Posted by Vince S.

Title's a bit misleading. She was arrested for sitting with a man in public with whom she was not married to.

Their house, their rules. I love how she wants to stay to try to "change" the way things are run there. I really do love ethnocentrism.

Not saying I agree with what happened to her, but again, "their house, their rules".

that cannot be used as an excuse to violate fundamental human rights.

[hbarcat]

Originally Posted by Lesfunk

don't go to other countries, especially ass backwards ones, and complain when YOU break their rules.
Nobody put a gun to her head and forced to her to go to That toilet.

Would it be an accurate comparison to say that a black European traveling to America in the 1950's who made the mistake of sitting down to dinner in a restaurant for whites only and subsequently gets dragged off to jail and beaten up is in the wrong for breaking the house rules? I always thought that those who struggled to end such injustices were actually noble and courageous, not being whiny complainers meddling in affairs not their business.

[Lesfunk]

not the same thing.
Beating up someone for being a certain race is a crime in our country

[hbarcat]

Originally Posted by Pilgrim

There are many aspects of their religion I don't like, but it is ABSOLUTELY as valid as any Christian, Jewish or other religion. It's not my religion and it may not be yours, but when you live in a country that's ruled by religious laws, you better conform. This is one reason I choose not to consult in these countries outside the US.

It would be more accurate to label such countries as theocratic dictatorships as opposed to secular democracies. To concentrate on the specifics of religion is to miss the point; the crucial difference is the accountability of their respective governments, and the evil inherent in dictatorships which deny basic human rights of its citizens.

[Lesfunk]

Originally Posted by john turner

that cannot be used as an excuse to violate fundamental human rights.

tell it to the religious extremeist holding the gun in your face
They don't care what YOU think is right.
They aren't so easy to reason with either

[hbarcat]

Originally Posted by Lesfunk

not the same thing.
Beating up someone for being a certain race is a crime in our country

It isn't ......now.

Many people fought very hard to change the rules so that a black person could sit down in a restaurant with whites and not get dragged off to jail (where they were typically beaten up, lawfully or not).

[Lesfunk]

If you want to go over there and convert those people, Be my guest buddy. Good luck.

[hbarcat]

Originally Posted by Lesfunk

If you want to go over there and convert those people, Be my guest buddy. Good luck.

I have "people" who are doing that on my behalf. Unfortunately, they're being actively opposed by those who profess to support secular democracy, but only to the extent that it can be achieved by negotiating with dictators.

[Lesfunk]

...ah...nevermind

[FL Knifemaker]

Originally Posted by john turner

that cannot be used as an excuse to violate fundamental human rights.

Uh........................yes it can We used to burn women for being witches. Give them another 200 years, they will come around.

[ROON]

+1 to what someone else said. Their country, their religion, their rules. You must obide them.

It's very well known that in some Islamic countries even holding hands with a person of the opposite sex you are not married to is a crime. So you don't do it. I got home last Friday after two weeks in countries bordering Saudi Arabia. There was a beautiful Grand Mosque in Oman which I would have loved to have gone in, but I wasn't in the right dress code. Stupidly I turned up in shorts and a t-shirt. Males must have their arms covered down to their wrists, I think shorts are acceptable though. I didn't go in, so I didn't get arrested. Simple as that. Muslims are not "crazy" and "barbaric" people. The men and women I met were all very lovely and gave great hospitality.

Now I know Saudi Arabia is different to Oman and the United Arab Emirates (where I went). And I applaud the woman for respecting their customs and wearing a head-dress. But she should have known that going in the family area with someone not in your family is a crime. Even I know that.

My dad has been to Saudi Arabia three or four times on business, he says it's a strange sort of place, but he got treated with nothing but respect. You respect them and their customs, and they'll respect you.

[ROON]

Originally Posted by hbarcat

How convenient to be able to claim the moral high ground (not being an ethnocentrist) by simply ignoring an evil perpetuated by a totalitarian government on its captive citizens.

Saudis aren't captive. They can go where-ever they please.

Westerners aren't allowed to go into Saudi-Arabia (unless you're on business or whatever), but the citizens can cross borders to other Arabian countries without even needing a passport. All they need is photo ID. I'm not sure about traveling out of Arabia, but I'm sure they're allowed to do that also.

[Josh Ryan]

Originally Posted by hbarcat

How convenient to be able to claim the moral high ground (not being an ethnocentrist) by simply ignoring an evil perpetuated by a totalitarian government on its captive citizens. But I suppose I'm in the minority to think that it's desirable to support any effort to try to actually make wholesale changes to such barbaric medieval practices that have been condemned to the dustbin of history by 4/5 of the countries on Earth.

I agree with you. claiming their house etc. and all that BS is moral relativism and IMO a steaming pile of an excuse. I've heard the exact same lines used to refernce genitla mutilation, etc.

[hbarcat]

Originally Posted by ROON

Saudis aren't captive. They can go where-ever they please.

My use of the word "captive" was meant to illustrate the fact that the rules the citizens follow are not subject to review. There are, of course, varying degrees of dictatorship, and I've heard Saudi Arabia described (rightly or wrongly) as one of the more "benign" dictatorships, but it doesn't make living there as a woman any easier. And I can't imagine large numbers of women who live there now, all of a sudden deciding that they're tired of being treated as property, leaving the country for more democratic alternatives.

[doctorjazz]

1. All humans, regardless of religion or culture of origin, are born with an inviolable right to their own lives, liberty, and property. This is a law of nature, higher than any statute.

2. The Saudi's laws contradict natural law, therefore people of every faith (or lack thereof) can be reasonable in asserting that they are immoral. The woman isn't wrong, Saudi law is.

Did I leave anything out?