Posted on 06/13/2002 2:00:00 PM PDT by vannrox
OK, that's a lovely thought. Hope they didn't mean that literally.
Let me rephrase that:
Do women have any rights at all under Sharia law?
Any woman stupid enough to marry a Saudi .. or any Arab/Moslem for that matter .. deserves what she gets.
It does say, though, that a document called 'Marriage to Saudis' is available from the consulate in Riyadh.
Girls, marry a nice well-off farmer boy from Iowa. You'll have a good life, and be able to eat bacon, ham, poke chops and barbequed ribs as an extra added attraction.
Leni
Got it. This may have come from the US Embassy in Riyadh. "The Embassy of Saudi Arabia" is confusing, though I'm sure that wasn't vannrox's intention.
Another post, which I can't find, has testimony by Daniel Pipes before a House or Senate committee, concerning Americans in Saudi Arabia. He mentioned a document -- this one? -- formerly posted on the State Department's website, then removed at Saudi insistence.
Last week we featured a word in “diplospeak” — words and phrases only diplomats can utter with a straight face.
This week we’d like to offer somewhat the opposite, that is, words diplomats would rather never say. We found an appropriate sample right on the State Department’s own Web page.
A big chunk of American diplomatic resources go towards helping and advising Americans overseas. The Office of Children’s Issues, which helps Americans with hundreds of international child custody and abduction cases every year, has a Web page that provides general information about the relevant legal standards in dozens of countries.
In some Islamic countries, women do not have the same rights as men, including over the fate of their own children.
Apparently the U.S. Embassy in Riyadh was asked to prepare a report on the situation in Saudi Arabia, considered to be a rather conservative Islamic state, where most domestic matters are settled by religious law.
So the embassy interviewed a number of American wives in Saudi Arabia about their experiences and created a pamphlet called “Marriage to Saudis.”
The eight-page document includes important discussions like “Can an American mother flee the Kingdom with her dual national children?” and “Will you be permitted to travel separately from your husband?” It provides a great deal of information of the practical aspects of a woman’s life in Saudi Arabia, which provides none of the equal protections of American life.
But the embassy also felt it was important to include the following:
“To a much greater degree than in the West, Saudi children are indulged. Little girls are dressed in miniature prom dresses, little boys wear the latest in Western sport togs. Both wreak havoc.”
And
“American wives must suffer silently when the children of various relations run riot through the house.”
And
“Every family member feels free to give an opinion on any facet of another family member’s life.”
And
“Children are not expected or encouraged to leave the nest; rather, extended adolescence can occur well into a man’s early 30s.”
All that is well and good, and may describe households outside of Saudi Arabia as well.
But when the pamphlet was brought to the attention of the State Department, an official said it would be taken off the Web site while it is being revised. (We have saved a copy of the page here.)
“In general, it does present an accurate picture of what American women could face when marrying into the Saudi culture,” the official said.
I wanted to know what the Saudis make of the State Department’s matrimonial advice.
A man at the Saudi information bureau in Washington who didn’t give his name took it all in stride.
“Individuals have a choice if they fall in love,” the official said. “They have a choice if they want to marry.”
“As a government agency, the State Department has the right to issue warnings about what to expect,” the Saudi added.
“We cannot expect the Japanese to be British or the British to be American.”
Now that’s diplomatic.
A good percentage of Saudis are closet terrorists, and the rest are terrorist supporters.
I'd be so bold as to say the only good Saudi is a .....
I must say it is difficult to feel for a women who marries a Muslim and then breaks dumb when he goes radical...
If you are an American Woman you gotta be a space cadet to marry a Muslim man from the Middle East, I dont care how smooth he is or isnt.
Strike a blow for going into marriage with your emotions being subordinate to "competent" jedgement.
This is the Daniel Pipes testimony I mentioned in #30. Here's an excerpt:
REP. DOUG OSE (R-CA): Now, I do want to pay a compliment to the State Department. The State Department has posted on its website an advisory to Americans considering marriage to Saudis. But what I don't understand is why that advisory has been taken off the website.Apparently, my recollection -- removed at Saudi insistence -- was half-correct. It was removed, but (according to the Pipes's recollection) under pressure from CAIR. Of course, that doesn't exclude the possibility of Saudi pressure as well.MS. ANDRUCH: I was not aware that it was taken off the website? There's one on Islamic law that's on our website, it's a travel-dot- state-dot-gov.
REP. OSE: Travel-dot-state-dot-gov.
MS. ANDRUCH: Yes sir.
REP. OSE: So, this one that refers specific to Saudi Arabia has or has not been removed?
MS. ANDRUCH: I-I don't know if it's on there right now, so I'll have to check.
REP. OSE: Dr. Pipes?
MR. PIPES: If my recollection is correct, it was taken down at the behest of an Islamic group in the United States.
REP. OSE: It was taken down at the behest of an Islamic group in the United States? Which Islamic group?
MR. PIPES: I believe it was the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
REP. OSE: And with whom did they communicate their interest-
MR. PIPES: They protested this document to the State Department, which proceeded to take it down.
REP. OSE: Well, did they protest it on the basis of inaccurate information?
MR. PIPES: They said it was discriminatory. This is all from memory it was a couple of years ago. I believe they said it was discriminatory.
REP. OSE: Is there information in this material that's inaccurate?
MR. PIPES: I don't think that was their point. I think it was that posting this about marriage to Saudis, as opposed to, say, marriage to Canadians, was discriminatory.
REP. OSE: Have we had any protests about the postings on Sharia?
MR. PIPES: I'm not sure.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.