Skip to main content

The Saudis and ISIS. A case of tweedledumb and tweedledee?

Paul McGeough, Chief foreign correspondent for the Fairfax Press, has been covering and writing about the Middle East for many years.

In his latest piece for The Age, he not only shows our hypocrisy about condemning ISIS whilst looking on Saudi Arabia as an ally, when the actions of both are pretty much the same.

"We're all braced for another grotesque video clip from the fundamentalist nutters of the so-called Islamic State, because they've released a primer on the likely beheading of two Japanese hostages – unless Tokyo will hand over a $US200 million ransom in the coming days.

IS's video production values are sickeningly creepy – the prisoners in orange jumpsuits; their would-be executioner in black, wielding a knife and spewing bile.

But in matters of jurisprudence, the Saudis are every bit as sickening as IS. They share the same Saudi-sponsored, ultra-conservative strain of Sunni Islam. And they think alike on crime and punishment – they both want to kill, kill, kill.

Homosexuals? Kill them! Adulterers? If they're married, stone them to death; if they are unmarried, a lashing will do. A thief? Chop off a hand or a foot.

But best of all, both the Saudis and IS get off on a good beheading. According to Human Rights Watch, there were 87 beheadings in Saudi Arabia last year – and they're off to a great start this year, with 11 beheadings already and still two Fridays left in January.

Those silly Saudis think they can kid us into believing that they are not like that, but in recent weeks we have had a wondrous display of Riyadh's hypocrisy.

They dispatched Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Nizar Madani to Paris for the leaders-linking-arms rally in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo massacre – which was as much for freedom of speech as it was against terrorism. But back in Saudi Arabia, they were calling for crowds to assemble for the first in a series of 20 lashings for 31-year-old Raif Badawi, whose crime was to express himself freely.

Badawi is, or was, a blogger before they shut him down in 2012, because of his criticism and questioning of the religious establishment – for which his punishment was fixed at 1000 lashes, 10 years in jail and a fine of more than $US260,000.

In many ways Badawi is quite conservative. Urging a separation between church and state is not exactly radical; he rebuked the Muslims who lobbied for the right to open a mosque near New York's Ground Zero.

And never mind the ballyhoo in the post-Charlie Hebdo world, with constant demands for Muslims to seriously debate the use and abuse of their religion. That's precisely what  Badawi was doing – and look where it got him.

On January 9, the slight-framed  Badawi was hauled from a bus in a square outside a mosque as Friday prayers ended in the port city of Jeddah – and dealt the first 50 of his 1000 lashes, by a uniformed man brandishing a wooden cane."


Continue reading here.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Reading the Chilcot Inquiry Report more closely

Most commentary on the Chilcot Inquiry Report of and associated with the Iraq War, has been "lifted" from the Executive Summary.   The Intercept has actually gone and dug into the Report, with these revelations : "THE CHILCOT REPORT, the U.K.’s official inquiry into its participation in the Iraq War, has finally been released after seven years of investigation. Its executive summary certainly makes former Prime Minister Tony Blair, who led the British push for war, look terrible. According to the report, Blair made statements about Iraq’s nonexistent chemical, biological, and nuclear programs based on “what Mr. Blair believed” rather than the intelligence he had been given. The U.K. went to war despite the fact that “diplomatic options had not been exhausted.” Blair was warned by British intelligence that terrorism would “increase in the event of war, reflecting intensified anti-US/anti-Western sentiment in the Muslim world, including among Muslim communities in the

Robert Fisk's predictions for the Middle East in 2013

There is no gain-saying that Robert Fisk, fiercely independent and feisty to boot, is the veteran journalist and author covering the Middle East. Who doesn't he know or hasn't he met over the years in reporting from Beirut - where he lives?  In his latest op-ed piece for The Independent he lays out his predictions for the Middle East for 2013. Read the piece in full, here - well worthwhile - but an extract... "Never make predictions in the Middle East. My crystal ball broke long ago. But predicting the region has an honourable pedigree. “An Arab movement, newly-risen, is looming in the distance,” a French traveller to the Gulf and Baghdad wrote in 1883, “and a race hitherto downtrodden will presently claim its due place in the destinies of Islam.” A year earlier, a British diplomat in Jeddah confided that “it is within my knowledge... that the idea of freedom does at present agitate some minds even in Mecca...” So let’s say this for 2013: the “Arab Awakening” (the t

An unpalatable truth!

Quinoa has for the last years been the "new" food on the block for foodies. Known for its health properties, foodies the world over have taken to it. Many restaurants have added it to their menu. But, as this piece " Can vegans stomach the unpalatable truth about quinoa? " from The Guardian so clearly details, the cost to Bolivians and Peruvians - from where quinoa hails - has been substantial. "Not long ago, quinoa was just an obscure Peruvian grain you could only buy in wholefood shops. We struggled to pronounce it (it's keen-wa, not qui-no-a), yet it was feted by food lovers as a novel addition to the familiar ranks of couscous and rice. Dieticians clucked over quinoa approvingly because it ticked the low-fat box and fitted in with government healthy eating advice to "base your meals on starchy foods". Adventurous eaters liked its slightly bitter taste and the little white curls that formed around the grains. Vegans embraced quinoa as