Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 12/02/2004 7:06:19 PM PST by Land_of_Lincoln_John
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Land_of_Lincoln_John

Such a Modern Nation, eh?

(end sarcasm)


2 posted on 12/02/2004 7:14:24 PM PST by fastattacksailor (Free KoolAid for all DUmmies!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John

I don't get it. Is it that they are afraid that they will take pictures of other women without their veils? I am assuming their colleges are segregated by sex.


3 posted on 12/02/2004 7:17:10 PM PST by foolscap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
“Confiscating or destroying the product isn’t the solution,” said college faculty member Dr. Eiman. “It’s not about the product it’s about conduct. We can’t stop the development of technology but we can develop human behavior. But to treat those using mobiles with cameras like those misusing their mobile cameras, is itself bad conduct and unjust.”

PING! Discredited Gun-Grabber Argument.

4 posted on 12/02/2004 7:17:34 PM PST by eagle11 (Once a people invents a word for "liberty", they are restless until they win if for themselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John

Let me predict the next rule that will be enacted: if a man takes a picture of a woman, the woman will be punished.


5 posted on 12/02/2004 7:18:03 PM PST by Huntress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
In the case where the student commits a second offense, her guardian would have to sign a written oath that she would abide by regulations. This would be in addition to a SR500 deduction from her student salary that would go to the Students’ College Fund/Treasury.

"Guardian" being her male representative, husband, father etc. Since women in Saudi are treated like property, little better than pets or slaves, it seems they are not even permitted to sign an oath themselves saying they will abide by "phone use" regulations.

It gives you an insight into the mindset of Islamic gender apartheid in Saudi, and why they will confiscate phones instead of trusting it in the hands of a mere woman.

9 posted on 12/02/2004 7:31:15 PM PST by USF (I see your Jihad and raise you a Crusade ™ © ®)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John

“I bought my sister and wife mobiles with cameras,” said Nidhal Tariq, a STC employee. “I trust them with it. The fuss that’s being made about mobile cameras is ridiculous. If this is how we’re going to deal with modern and developing technology, then we might as well ban cars that can cause accidents, televisions that can display indecency, the Internet that can indulge the corrupted.”

That's exactly what exported Wahabism did to Afghanistan. Televisions, computers, etc., were all banned as being unislamic. I'm surprised Suadi Arabia, the birthplace of the Wahabis, is so liberal ono the issue.


10 posted on 12/03/2004 6:24:26 AM PST by doc30 (Democrats are to morals what and Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
Huda Abdulghani. “Are they allowed to carry mobiles with cameras on campus? How come they’re to be trusted and we’re not?”

Because you are chaatle miss Abdulghani and will be for your entire life unless you convert to areal religion nota cult and migrate to a real country and not a 14th century cesspool

12 posted on 12/03/2004 6:56:25 AM PST by freepatriot32 (http://chonlalonde.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson