# Montrealer sentenced to death in Saudi Arabia



## Mike Baker (4 Mar 2008)

LINK

Montrealer sentenced to death in Saudi Arabia
Updated Tue. Mar. 4 2008 7:08 AM ET

The Canadian Press

MONTREAL -- Friends of a Canadian jailed in Saudi Arabia on murder charges lashed out at Saudi justice and demanded help from the Canadian government Monday upon learning that he was convicted and sentenced to a public beheading.

Mahmoud Al-Ken, a reporter for a Montreal Arabic radio station, says the family of Mohamed Kohail told him Monday that Kohail was found guilty of murder.

He says Kohail is to be beheaded in public but has 80 days to appeal the ruling.

Kohail "got nine court sessions, each court session lasted 10 minutes,'' Al-Ken said.

A spokesman for the Foreign Affairs Department in Ottawa confirmed Monday night that Kohail had been convicted and faces the death penalty.

"We are deeply disappointed at the verdict handed down by Saudi authorities,'' said Bernard Nguyen, a Foreign Affairs spokesman.

Nguyen said Foreign Affairs Minister Maxime Bernier and Secretary of State Helena Guergis had been briefed on the situation and are following it closely.

"We are in close contact with the family and continue to provide consular services,'' Nguyen said. "The family continues to explore other legal avenues including an appeal of this verdict.'' He would not elaborate further, citing the family's privacy.

A close friend of the family called on the Canadian government to take further steps to help Kohail.

"I want the government here to ask on what basis the Saudi government decided this was first-degree murder,'' Mayada Jabri told Info690, a Montreal radio station.

"It was the influence of the other family which got a verdict that was not fair. I only want justice.''

A family friend who spoke with Kohail's parents shortly after the verdict was handed down says they are livid at the Saudi justice system.

"They don't believe by any means they got a fair trial,'' he told The Canadian Press.

The friend, who lives in Montreal and asked that his name not be used, claimed the court ignored evidence that would have cleared Kohail.

He also said Kohail's lawyers were repeatedly denied access to the courtroom.

Kohail was allegedly involved in a schoolyard brawl that left one person dead.

He was arrested along with his brother, Sultan, last spring and imprisoned in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. The younger brother's fate remains unclear.

Dan McTeague, the Liberal critic for consular services, said he hopes the federal government acts swiftly to secure Kohail's release.

Ottawa must also investigate allegations that confessions were obtained under duress, McTeague said.

But he said the government is in an awkward position after a recent decision not to seek clemency in a death penalty case in the United States.

"It has already precluded the standard request for clemency to only request clemency in those cases where it disagrees with the judicial or legal system of another country,'' he said.

"They are starting off from a position that is potentially difficult, not to mention potentially insulting.''

Those who knew Kohail are shocked that diplomatic efforts to lessen the charges failed.

"We originally felt he would not face the death penalty,'' said Barry Gaiptman, a guidance counsellor at Kohail's former school in Montreal who has been circulating a petition calling for his release.

Gaiptman believes Kohail received a rough shake from the Saudi justice system.

"He's a young boy who is certainly not involved in anything more than schoolyard brawl,'' he said.

The family spent several years in Montreal before recently returning to Saudi Arabia.

The two boys were involved in a fight that broke out after a girl's male cousin accused Sultan of insulting her.

The brother demanded an apology, but Sultan refused.

Sultan, then 16, said he called for help from Mohamed when he was confronted by several boys over the insult.

According to the account of the Kohail brothers, Mohamed Kohail arrived at the school with a male friend to face about a dozen of the girl's male relatives and friends. Some were armed with clubs and knives.

One of the attackers was punched, fell to the ground and died.

He has been identified as Munzer Haraki, a cousin of the girl who was supposedly insulted.

Ali Kohail, the brothers' father, has said the family had only temporarily relocated to Saudi Arabia to attend a relative's wedding -- an Arab tradition says three ceremonies must be held.

They always intended to return to Canada, where they still own a home in Montreal.

A Foreign Affairs official has said the department was offering assistance to the Canadians who spent several months in jail before Monday's verdict.



(Mods I never found another article on the same subject, move if needed)


----------



## 1feral1 (4 Mar 2008)

KSA justice is swift. He is a dual citizen, and I don't think Canada can do much but protest.

Since he is still a KSA citizen, and commited this crime on KSA soil, was on trial there, sentanced there, he is bound by the law, and will pay for the crime he committed in his country against another citizen of that country.

Personally I don't think Canada should step in, its the KSA's business, not ours. 

He has only himself to blame, and another Canadian citizen 'of convenience' is about to pay the piper.

As Ned Kelly said before he did the jig on the gallows, 'such is life'. 

Chop-chop!

Wes


----------



## ballz (4 Mar 2008)

Wow, Wes, I gotta say I'm a little more reluctant.

The poor guy stands up to multiple people that may have been armed, and he's the one that ends up on the guillotine (sp?). While I have to admit, he can't play the self-defense card since it seems like he knew he was going there to scrap a bunch of people, it obviously wasn't first-degree (well at least by our definition). 

Doesn't seem like he was given a fair trial either. I'm with you on everything about him being a Saudi citizen, committing a crime in Saudi, and so he should suffer under Saudi law, but I'd like to see the guy get a fair trial. Also, him being 16 makes me feel more empathic. He's just a kid.


----------



## 1feral1 (4 Mar 2008)

Actually executions are done with a sword, as the condemed is on his knees. All publically too. Like in an open area and many gather to watch. Usually done with many at a go. They chop the hands off kids too, yes for stealing. Usually the right hand is chopped, and they leave the left one, as its considered unclean - remember they wipe their asses with their BARE hands, the left hand, ha!

What you are hearing is their side of the story, not necessarily the actual facts and evidence laid down by the prosecution. Again this violence is related to 'honour' and 'insutling' another.

I've been to 5 islamic countries, thats part of their culture, and we find it hard to comprehend. 

Remember this is the same place you loose a hand for theft, and have you tongue cut out for other silly reasons.

500 yrs from now, if there still is a KSA, this type of justice will remain.

Wes


----------



## Lumber (4 Mar 2008)

Wesley  Down Under said:
			
		

> 500 yrs from now, if there still is a KSA, this type of justice will remain.



The Inquisition ended 500 years ago. What kind of justice did they practice then?

Look a little further back:

The three ordeals came into being as medieval punishment during the reign of Henry II in England. The ordeals were – fire, water and combat. Those who were accused of a crime faced these medieval punishments to prove their innocence. The fire ordeal involved carrying a hot iron bar for a set number of paces. The resulting wound was then bandaged. If in three days time the wound had not gotten better, that medieval punishment proved your guilt. The water ordeal involved tossing a tied up person in a body of water. If they floated, they were guilt.

Nobles faced their own medieval punishment trial to prove their innocence. Trial by combat. Whoever won the battle was in the right.

Failing a trial could result in a number of medieval punishments. Thieves hands were often cut off. Women guilty of murder faced strangling and burning. Those who hunted the royal parks faced the medieval punishment of having their ears cut off. Other crimes called for the medieval punishment of being drawn and quartered. Prison generally wasn’t an option as it was cheaper to hang, burn, or draw and quarter than house the guilty, making medieval punishment something truly to be feared. 

http://www.medieval-castle-siege-weapons.com/medieval-punishment.html

I agree he committed a crime, and should be punished under Saudi law. I can't say if he planned on  killing the man, or just wanted to fend him off, and I can't say whether the trial was fair or not, his family is obviously biased. What I don't agree with is the apparent lack of transparency in Saudi law, as well as the barbaric brutality of Saudi Law.

Sure, it's a different culture, but I'm going to take the high road here and say it is wrong. I'm kind of on the fence over capital punishment, but public executions and beheading by the sword are grotesque and send the wrong image to society; the sword glorifies the execution.


----------



## 1feral1 (4 Mar 2008)

Lumber said:
			
		

> The Inquisition ended 500 years ago. What kind of justice did they practice then?
> 
> Look a little further back:
> 
> ...



What are you smoking Mr O/Cdt?

What does the inquisition have to do with modern KSA law?

Are you saying that in 500 yrs this twisted culture will become civilised? Twisted by our standards, by theirs its as normal as you getting a speeding ticket here.

Go there and even try finding a church or better yet, declare your bible at their Customs office. You'll be in for a suprise.

500 yrs ago their mentality was unchanged, probably even worse. We have evolved into a hold-hands PC society, where criminals have all the rights, and victims have none.

If he has been found quilty of his crime, he pays the price. The KSA will laugh at any attempt by Canada to quash the death sentence.


----------



## Lumber (4 Mar 2008)

Wesley  Down Under said:
			
		

> Are you saying that in 500 yrs this twisted culture will become civilised?



I'm saying that 500-1000 years ago we were no better off, so yes I imagine they will. Maybe even sooner? 



			
				Wesley  Down Under said:
			
		

> The KSA will laugh at any attempt by Canada to quash the death sentence.



You would rather sit silent and idle?


----------



## 1feral1 (4 Mar 2008)

Your argument has no weight. You can't compare us to them.

Responsibility comes with the pros and cons of having dual nationality. I am a dual citizen, and I am aware of my responsibilites in both Australia and Canada.

So if I am caught drink-driving in Calgary, should I get a more leniant sentance if I claim Australian status? I don't think so.

We are all accountable for our behaviour in other countries, regardless of where we live in our own.

As for the arab/islamic culture evolving, well just look what they are CURRENTLY teaching their kids still, both at home and in their own schools. I don't have much faith in that, sorry. It is the 21ct century Lumber, even in the arab/islamic world, they have CNN and computers, fancy cars and money. University educations etc. They are aware of their beliefs and laws, and it works for them. However their beliefs and laws belong over there, not here, and they don't work here, however if you favour honour killings, sharia law and the rest of it, feel free to move there. I don't think their prisons are overcrowding like ours are, because the citizens know whats in store if they decide to go astray.

My decisions are based on life experiences in Kuwait, Iraq, Qatar, the UAE, and The Maldives, and current affairs which are todays news, not speculation with student know-it-all mentality, of our own 500 yrs in the past. It was not that long ago (1962) we were still hanging people in Canada, and in 1972 in Australia.

I am far from idle, but if that is the law of the land for the crime he committed, so be it. Too bad if he is Canadian, as being a Canuck does not make you a special case. Not long ago, an Australian was hung in Singapore for drugs. The Australian government protested, and he still did the jig. He too was a dual citizen, but Vietnamese/Australian. A known drug crime related person, whose lifestyle caught up with him, and he paid the price, knowing that if he was caught, the penalty was death.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (4 Mar 2008)

So lumber because we are westerners we are above another nations law?

From what I have read about executions in KSA they are over a lot quicker then lethal injections or the electric chair.


----------



## Lumber (4 Mar 2008)

Wesley  Down Under said:
			
		

> not speculation with student know-it-all mentality,



It always has to come down to who I am, not what I say, doesn't it?



			
				Wesley  Down Under said:
			
		

> So if I am caught drink-driving in Calgary, should I get a more leniant sentance if I claim Australian status? I don't think so.



No, but if I were living in Australia and found out that the barbaric Canadians wanted to cut your hands off so you couldn't drive, I'd be appalled.


----------



## Lumber (4 Mar 2008)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> So lumber because we are westerners we are above another nations law?
> 
> From what I have read about executions in KSA they are over a lot quicker then lethal injections or the electric chair.




Bien-sure que non! Our laws do not supersede theirs. I believe that they are more morally right then their, "above" theirs.

And I'm not so much disturbed by the painfulness of the punishment, but the brutal message it sends to the society as to the righteousness of such brutal punishment.


----------



## benny88 (4 Mar 2008)

Lumber said:
			
		

> No, but if I were living in Australia and found out that the barbaric Canadians wanted to cut your hands off so you couldn't drive, I'd be appalled.



  Be careful of being high and mighty and calling cutting off hands off barbaric, it's just different. As it was said, it's as normal as getting a speeding ticket.



Wes, I'm very interested in your remarks, coming from someone with so much experience in the Middle East, interesting perspective. Although I don't think it's fair to address Lumber by his rank and point out that he's a student as if those things automatically bar him from having a relevant or correct opinion


----------



## 1feral1 (4 Mar 2008)

benny88 said:
			
		

> Be careful of being high and mighty and calling cutting off hands off barbaric, it's just different. As it was said, it's as normal as getting a speeding ticket.
> 
> 
> 
> Wes, I'm very interested in your remarks, coming from someone with so much experience in the Middle East, interesting perspective. Although I don't think it's fair to address Lumber by his rank and point out that he's a student as if those things automatically bar him from having a relevant or correct opinion



Sorry, its usually the snotty-nosed-inexperienced-low-ranked-student-mentality who tend to gobb off that they know all about life on here, a repeat preformance all too often. Of course all through a text book and INet sources. He flaunts his rank on his avatar.

I kind of relate this to reading about open heart surgury, then performing such on an live person.


----------



## 1feral1 (4 Mar 2008)

Lumber said:
			
		

> 1. It always has to come down to who I am, not what I say, doesn't it?
> 
> 2. No, but if I were living in Australia and found out that the barbaric Canadians wanted to cut your hands off so you couldn't drive, I'd be appalled.



1. Actually it comes down to both in your case. Attitude means everything Lumber. Many O/Cdts have the maturity, the sense to listen comprehend, and understand much better than you are showing us on here.

2. Well thats obsurd, and unrealistic, and you are openly demonstrating your ignorance by posting such silly things.

We already know the reality of drink driving is a loss of license or gaol in our countries, and we already know that the pentalty for murder in the KSA is death. So, don't be silly.


----------



## Lumber (4 Mar 2008)

Wesley  Down Under said:
			
		

> 1. Actually it comes down to both in your case. Attitude means everything Lumber. Many O/Cdts have the maturity, the sense to listen comprehend, and understand much better than you are showing us on here.
> 
> 2. Well thats obsurd, and unrealistic, and you are openly demonstrating your ignorance by posting such silly things.
> 
> We already know the reality of drink driving is a loss of license or gaol in our countries, and we already know that the pentalty for murder in the KSA is death. So, don't be silly.



1. I have been listening (reading) attentively (just noticed you changed the post where you accused me of being a know-it-all), and I've comprehending everything you've said. Your new, edited post seem to sum up to the argument that "We are all accountable for our behaviour in other countries, regardless of where we live in our own." OK, agreed. I never said we weren't, I said that the laws that this poor chap found himself under were barbaric and they should be changed, period.



			
				benny88 said:
			
		

> Be careful of being high and mighty and calling cutting off hands off barbaric, it's just different. As it was said, it's as normal as getting a speeding ticket.




2. First, I was being hypothetical to illustrate that I wasn't advocating you be treated under different laws, but that I am distraught by the type of punishments in KSA. 

Next, you're both saying that cutting off someones hands ISN'T barbaric? Someone might recall that I put fourth the idea of more serious punishments for crimes to deter crime, but cutting someones hand off? There is no way I will ever accept anyones opinion that bodily mutilation is acceptable, no matter the crime! It's irrelevant that "it's as normal as getting a speeding ticket", cutting someones hand off, flogging or what have you, have no place in the rule of law!


----------



## medaid (4 Mar 2008)

Lumber said:
			
		

> I said that the laws that this poor chap found himself under were barbaric and they should be changed, period.



Why? Just because you say so? Because of your VAST experience in Arabic, Islamic traditions? Because of your extensive cultural knowledge? Come on! It's people like you that think everything the Western society does is right, it's correct and everyone else is just plain stupid. Give me a BREAK. 

Let's just be honest here, even the OLDEST European country, kingdom, history is merely a fraction of those in the Middle East and Asia. You THINK the Western nations have it all figured out? No. We've got our OWN problems, and laws that aren't effective. You think their punishment are barbaric, but guess what? It's effective and it serves as a great deterrent. Now that being said, their laws are drawn from Religion. If you want to change the laws, you've gotta change the religion. How do you propose we do that huh? 

Oh wait... there's already a war on right now due to religion, or rather the extremists who have used religion as the launching point to commit acts of terror against the Western nations. Why? Because of the West's... oh what? wait... say it isn't so.. RELIGION! Also our LAWS, also our CULTURE... when will this ever end?! 



			
				Lumber said:
			
		

> 2. First, I was being hypothetical to illustrate that I wasn't advocating you be treated under different laws, but that I am distraught by the type of punishments in KSA.
> 
> Next, you're both saying that cutting off someones hands ISN'T barbaric? Someone might recall that I put fourth the idea of more serious punishments for crimes to deter crime, but cutting someones hand off? There is no way I will ever accept anyones opinion that bodily mutilation is acceptable, no matter the crime! It's irrelevant that "it's as normal as getting a speeding ticket", cutting someones hand off, flogging or what have you, have no place in the rule of law!



You ignorant... oh my goodness...


----------



## aesop081 (4 Mar 2008)

Lumber said:
			
		

> I said that the laws that this poor chap found himself under were barbaric and they should be changed, period.



How would you react if someone from over there came here to Canada and told us to change our laws ( after one of their citizens broke one of them) ?


----------



## mover1 (4 Mar 2008)

When In Rome......

You will find, that on many deployments, we as Canadian Service Men and Women fall under the host countries laws. We are not above them and on your various in breifings the JAG will most likeley tell you so, basically we are SOL.

This kid who is being beheaded, well he knew the law or should have been aware of it prior to doing what he did. After all they were DUAL CITIZENS!
No sympathy here


----------



## Lumber (4 Mar 2008)

MedTech said:
			
		

> You ignorant... oh my goodness...



Ignorant of? (Serious question)



			
				CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> How would you react if someone from over there came here to Canada and told us to change our laws (after one of their citizens broke one of them) ?



I'll respond fully to you two later, leafs are on and there's cold beer in the mess.

Cheers


----------



## S.Stewart (4 Mar 2008)

Much of countries laws such as the one in question, are based on religious laws not ethics. If one wants to embrace and live among a culture that isnt not the westernized culture that they are familar with one should get familar. If you are going to live in a Country you should abide, and respect their laws, while harsh they are in place for a reason. 

Keep in mind a human being did die, while in our culture that wouldnt be ground for death, but many cultures practice "an eye for a eye" if you will. This is just going to turn into a political circus, I doubt the young male in question will be put to death. The bottom line is IMO is that if you going to apparently live in a Country and imbrace their culture, that you should embrace everything, including their law of the land.


----------



## ballz (4 Mar 2008)

I admit I don't have a vast knowledge of the Middleast, its culture, its religions, its laws, any of it. I just find one theme of this thread to be very hypocritical.

If we are in no position to tell them that they should change their laws because that's just the way it is over there and its normal and its accepted and yada yada yada, then wouldn't that lead one to assume that we're in no position to be in Afghanistan to bring all the changes we are bringing over there, since, after all, that's just the way it is over there and its normal and its accepted and yada yada yada.

Again, I could be way off base with it all. I won't pretend to know anything.


----------



## Lumber (4 Mar 2008)

ballz said:
			
		

> I admit I don't have a vast knowledge of the Middleast, its culture, its religions, its laws, any of it. I just find one theme of this thread to be very hypocritical.
> 
> If we are in no position to tell them that they should change their laws because that's just the way it is over there and its normal and its accepted and yada yada yada, then wouldn't that lead one to assume that we're in no position to be in Afghanistan to bring all the changes we are bringing over there, since, after all, that's just the way it is over there and its normal and its accepted and yada yada yada.
> 
> Again, I could be way off base with it all. I won't pretend to know anything.



We support the democratically elected government. If that democratically elected government votes in laws that appear anathema to western countries, there's nothing we can do about it but urge them to change their ways. Better a democracy than the Taliban


----------



## tomahawk6 (4 Mar 2008)

Mohamed Kohail evidently committed a capital crime in Saudi Arabia.I assume that Kohail is a muslim and is aware of Saudi justice. His death sentence will be carried out and that is that.


----------



## aesop081 (4 Mar 2008)

Hey Lumber......

You going to answer my question ? It was an honest one so i would really like you to answer it.


----------



## ballz (5 Mar 2008)

Lumber I don't know how your answer relates to my question whatsoever.


----------



## Greymatters (5 Mar 2008)

ballz said:
			
		

> If we are in no position to tell them that they should change their laws because that's just the way it is over there and its normal and its accepted and yada yada yada, then wouldn't that lead one to assume that we're in no position to be in Afghanistan to bring all the changes we are bringing over there, since, after all, that's just the way it is over there and its normal and its accepted and yada yada yada.



Its not that we cant tell them to change their laws, and its not that we arent already encouraging to conduct reform, but it takes time to change a society and the rules they live under. Its just not the Canadian way to go into a country and strong arm them into making legal, social, and cultural changes.

Geez, sound a bit like the the Prime Directive doesnt it?


----------



## Lumber (5 Mar 2008)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> How would you react if someone from over there came here to Canada and told us to change our laws ( after one of their citizens broke one of them) ?



Well... I don't know all Saudi Laws (at the same time, I don't know all Canadian laws), but from what I do know they can result are much "harsher" punishments. 2-3 Days in jail and a fine for speeding, cutting off ones hand for stealing, public beheading for murder. Like I said, I can't assume to know for certain, but it seems like no matter the crime, the punishments there are worse then here. 

So why would someone from KSA want to change one our laws _*after*_ breaking them? He wouldn't want to make his punishment harsher (unless he's EXTREMELY pious), so maybe he'd want to make them less harsh? Actually either way, he'd be free to try. 

OK lets forget picking apart the hypothetical situation, I understand what you were trying to say. I guess my reaction would depend on what he was basing his grievance upon. What factors were causing his desire to have the law changed. If he was basing his grievance on some universal moral principle, I would probably not oppose him very much. 

For example, lets say he does not believe in the statute of limitation and  it is his opinion that if you are found to have committed a crime long in the past (say, having stole candy from a store many year ago), that you should still be prosecute and punished. I personally wouldn't agree, but I can see his side of the story, and frankly I wouldn't make a fuss of the change actually came about. If he wanted people to have their hands cut off for stealing, believing such a harsh punishment would deter future crime, I would say that the punishment is to severe for the crime, and that it may deter some crime, but it also would cause resentment towards the institution of law and government.

On the other hand, if he wanted a law changed based on religious or cultural grounds, that I would no agree with. 

First! You might say our laws are based on Western culture; they are based on Western values. Personally, I don't see our culture and values as simply "different" from Eastern ones. In some regards, they are. But things such as fairness, democracy, the rule and transparency of the law, and most importantly equality are not merely aspects of "western" culture, they are self evidence truths of the human race. Murder is not wrong because the Bible or the Qur'an say it is so, it is wrong because, well it simply is! You don't need a supernational explanation for it, you don't need any deep explanation for it; it is a reality of nature, just like gravity or inertia. 

So how would I react in this regard? If he said "I want it to be a law that women must wear a Burka, because that is part of my heritage/culture" or "I want people to have their hands severed for stealing, because that is Islamic law" (<--is it?), I would say give me a logical reason why these punishment are appropriate, explain to me how they would benefit society as a whole and the individual in question (where appropriate), and prove to me that they will not harm society, and you'll have (most likely) convinced me. 

Very controversial view point, and this can't possibly cover all angles. For example, a Sikh in Toronto is petitioning the government to have the requirement to wear helmets when riding a motorcycle removed because by his religious customs he cannot wear any headdress overtop of his Turban. I understand his particular religious custom, and I do not want to interfere with his religious practices. I am without religion, but I am not against religion. However, the law was designed to protect the safety of the individual, and thus society as a whole. I can not see the government to make an exception in this case.


----------



## Greymatters (5 Mar 2008)

Lumber said:
			
		

> I would say give me a logical reason why these punishment are appropriate, explain to me how they would benefit society as a whole and the individual in question (where appropriate), and prove to me that they will not harm society, and you'll have (most likely) convinced me.



They've already done this in their country.  Thats why it is part of their law.  Most religious laws are based on valid and time-proven methods of deterance and punishment, regardless of whether other societies consider them barbaric or not.  

Look at our Western society. We were still hanging people here in Canda up until 1962.  In England, women were burnt at the stake up until 1790. The punishment of being drawn and quarterd was not abolished until 1870.  Capital punishment is still practiced in parts of the US. 

Other countries around the world are still catching up to the self-proclaimed 'liberated' western concepts - dont expect miracles overnight...


----------



## Lumber (5 Mar 2008)

Greymatters said:
			
		

> Other countries around the world are still catching up to the self-proclaimed 'liberated' western concepts - dont expect miracles overnight...



I don't, but someone claimed that 500 years from now the KSA would still be just as uncivilized. I disagree.


----------



## Yrys (5 Mar 2008)

Lumber said:
			
		

> I don't, but someone claimed that 500 years from now the KSA would still be just as uncivilized. I disagree.



Lots of people would disagree with the fact that "KSA is uncivilized" .


----------



## 1feral1 (5 Mar 2008)

Lumber said:
			
		

> I don't, but someone claimed that 500 years from now the KSA would still be just as uncivilized. I disagree.



Give it a rest Lumber.

If you're going to use my quote, at least have the intestinal fortitude to quote me proper by using my name, after all I said it. The term 'someone' is demostrating nothing but your contempt and your level of maturity overall. Either grow up, debate with a little but of realism, and stop stiring the pot with the troll mentality.

Islamic countries not only read their koran, but live by it, literally, that is not going to change. With one example alone, look at the Taliban's governing of Afhganistan before the 11 Sep attacks. If it was not for the harbouring of OBL, they would still be doing things the way they were, and they still want to now.

Its your integrity on here, not ours, and not that you seem to care anyways.

EDITed for clarity


----------



## Greymatters (5 Mar 2008)

Some parts of KSA social and civil manners and culture could be considered more 'civilized' than western standards... such as treatment of guests and business dealings... but yes some elements of the population will likely still be following 'the old ways' 500 years from now (i.e. look at some religious groups around today that still refuse to use technology because its not mentioned in the bible)...


----------



## ballz (5 Mar 2008)

Yrys said:
			
		

> Lots of people would disagree with the fact that "KSA is uncivilized" .



And that is game, set, and match.


----------



## 1feral1 (5 Mar 2008)

Meanwhile in the KSA, they watch their TVs, read their INet news sites, see the daily BS and sickening violence committed in the huge western cities, and shake their heads in true disgust. 

There is no boyz-in-da-hood crap going on overthere. Yes and near empty prisons too. Kind of makes a guy wonder at times.

In many ways we are uncivilised, but on a different tier.

In their eyes we are the Great Satan, who are stupid enough to pay $100 a barrel for their black gunk which comes from the ground. Not long ago, they were poor, lead a nomadic life, and the main mode of tpt was donkeys and camels. 

If it was not for oil, they would still be third world shitholes. Outside the cities they still are.

In Kuwait, I observed more camels in one hour then I did in the first 45 yrs of my life. In Baghdad, I saw more donkeys pulling carts in one day than I did my whole life also.

Lumber and his ilk only gets to see this stuff on the news and read about it on the INet, yet try to show us on here they are the true SMEs, and really know it all.

EDITed yet again for clarity and spelling


----------



## Lumber (5 Mar 2008)

Wesley  Down Under said:
			
		

> The term 'someone' is demostrating nothing but your contempt and your level of maturity overall.



The post of mine your are referring to was in a response to someone else telling me that changes in KSA could not happen overnight. I was explaining to him that I didn't think they would. I didn't use your name, not out of contempt, but because I didn't see the need. I was clarifying my position, why bring you in it? 

See, I did it again. In explaining to you something about one of my posts, I have not given you the actual name of the above mentioned person, he doesn't need to be referred to by name either. No insult was intended, I appologize if you took it that way.

_*EDIT: I just checked the guidelines, and I'm suppose to provide name of the person I am quoting. While I was only paraphrasing, I still think this rule applies and I'm sorry that I didn't. Still, no insult or implied contempt intended.*_



			
				Wesley  Down Under said:
			
		

> Lumber and his ilk only gets to see this stuff on the news and read about it on the INet, yet try to show us on here they are the true SMEs, and really know it all.



I have done nothing but express my opinions and beliefs have not claimed to be a know it all. True I said that I was taking the "mightier than thou" road in affirming that cutting someones hand off is barbaric, and once again when I claimed religion and culture, while in our laws, should eventually not be part of it at all. That's my belief, and I have faith in my belief. If someone came on here and said "Do not trouble youselves, for all these laws are insignificant, our Lord Jesus Christ is the only real judge," would you call him a know it all?



			
				Wesley  Down Under said:
			
		

> Islamic countries not only read their koran, but live by it, literally, *that is not going to change. *



Everything changes.

OH CRAP! Did I just make ANOTHER affirmation? Crap, but I haven't been in the sandbox yet! Guess I am just a know-it-all...


----------



## Yrys (5 Mar 2008)

Lumber said:
			
		

> Everything changes.



There will always people that will follow their religion to the letter or to extrem.
That is the nature of the human beast...


----------



## Lumber (5 Mar 2008)

Yrys said:
			
		

> There will always people that will follow their religion to the letter or to extrem.




Just like in "western christian" countries.


----------



## Yrys (5 Mar 2008)

Lumber said:
			
		

> Just like in "western christian" countries.



? I was not writing about muslin, but religions, including any christians ones.

So I don't understant the point you were traying to make.


----------



## Lumber (5 Mar 2008)

Yrys said:
			
		

> ? I was not writing about muslin, but religions, including any christians ones.
> 
> So I don't understant the point you were traying to make.



Sorry, thought you were trying to say things didn't change. 

I was agreeing with you! And reaffirming what I said.


----------



## Yrys (5 Mar 2008)

Lumber said:
			
		

> Sorry, thought you were trying to say things didn't change.



Things always change. It may take decade or century for the changes to be noticeable, but live is usually movement.

An example : I've read this week about a young french neonazi. Some people in France are starting to dig to what was theirs
racines in or before WWII. So some of them are discovering past or presents relatives that were jews, but had to appear Christians to survived.
Some really youngs ones were then disguised as Christians so never had  know or acknowledge theirs roots. This neonazi, upon discovering past jews
in his family tree, converted to Judaism.

BUT at the same time, humanity will always, for the foreseeable future,  remain humanity, and there will always be extremists.
Not the same people, or about the same things, but still there.


----------



## Greymatters (5 Mar 2008)

Yrys said:
			
		

> This neonazi, upon discovering past jews in his family tree, converted to Judaism.



So, in reality he was just looking for a social group that could give him the love and support he needed?  Almost brings a tear to my eye...  :


----------



## dwalter (5 Mar 2008)

This whole discussion (If it can really be called that) about values in the Middle East and the West really drives home some important points I learned in my Cultural Anthropology class this year. Now to start I want to say I have no experience in the middle east, since we studies Africa and South America, however the concept I feel like I should share is universal to anthropology around the world. 

The main concept we learned had to do with removing our cultural bias when viewing another culture, or to quote my professor "To make the strange familiar and the familiar strange."

We live in Canada, anyone who was born in Canada and grew up here as well was exposed to Canadian culture, way of life etc... And that becomes our version of common sense. What we think is just every day good sense, does not apply anywhere out of Canada, or even out of your own home in some cases. Common sense can change even from one city to another. 

The point I am trying to make is that before a person can evaluate another culture such as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, a person has to try and remove themselves from the views they grew up with, and begin understanding the point of view of the culture in question. The middle east gets all the attention these days, but they are not the only ones using the Islamic justice system. Many countries in Africa are Islamic states, and follow the same rules. 

I'm definitely not trying to stir up any case and argument, but I do want to say that applying Canadian views to any other country, is going to make anything they do seem strange. So, make the strange familiar. Often the only way to do this is to live among the people, but failing that, read about them, learn about their culture, they background, and look at it objectively before making any claims about the level of 'civilization'. 

There is a very good article which I will post on here if I can find an online copy. I think you will all find it really interesting and relevant to the topic at hand.


----------



## dwalter (5 Mar 2008)

Here is the article I referred to in my above post: http://oak.cats.ohiou.edu/~thompsoc/Body.html

It is truly interesting to read, I certainly enjoyed it once I figured out the meaning behind it.


----------



## ballz (5 Mar 2008)

Wesley  Down Under said:
			
		

> Meanwhile in the KSA, they watch their TVs, read their INet news sites, see the daily BS and sickening violence committed in the huge western cities, and shake their heads in true disgust.
> 
> There is no boyz-in-da-hood crap going on overthere. Yes and near empty prisons too. Kind of makes a guy wonder at times.
> 
> In many ways we are uncivilised, but on a different tier.



Now this here sparks some curiousity within me. I just want to make sure I'm understanding what you're saying. Would you say that the way we view some of their daily life as too barbaric, they would view some of our daily life as pure anarchy? In one sense, we are both the extremes of each other? So we view their extreme as crazy because we are on the other end of the extreme, which no doubt has its downfalls. Am I starting to understand or still way off base?

When I get back from my daily life today, I'm going to search up crime rates and all that to see how effective there systems are or how uneffective our systems are. I guess you could look at it either way huh?


----------



## Yrys (5 Mar 2008)

Intelligent Design said:
			
		

> Here is the article I referred to in my above post: http://oak.cats.ohiou.edu/~thompsoc/Body.html
> 
> It is truly interesting to read, I certainly enjoyed it once I figured out the meaning behind it.



I was so distracted by the weirdness of the Nacireman society (and wondering why I never read about themelsewhere)  that it took me  : "I was able, however, to establish sufficient rapport with the natives to examine these shrines and to have the rituals described to me." to wake  me up to the truth...

4 paragraphes to catch it... Must sleep more, I'm slow.


----------



## tomahawk6 (5 Mar 2008)

When you travel abroad a person is subject to the laws of the country they visit.If you break a law you can and will be prosecuted.In some countries you can buy your way out of trouble and in others there is no recourse. Pedophiles that go to the PI or Thailand and break local laws will spend their time in prisons that we would condemn as unfit.Smuggle drugs into Turkey and Turkish prisons arent very friendly  places. Smuggle drugs in Singapore and you die. Lesser offenses you can be canned - something we consider brutal. The point I make is that when you leave your home country you wil NOT be treated the same as you would in Canada or the US. Our standards are pretty high,but in many countries prisons are supposed to be bad places.In some countries life in prison can be improved to tolerable levels if you have money.If you go to reside in SA you better know ahead of time that the justice system is harsh perhaps even medieval but you commit the crime you are going to pay the price. I have zero tolerance for this guy,he made his own bed and now must lie in it. My advice to others is - stay home.


----------



## Timex (5 Mar 2008)

I'm no expert in Saudi Law so this is more of a question than a statement. Isn't this story going to play out like this? The family will petition a member of the Royal Family to intercede, blood money will be offered to the victims family, if they accept then the sentence can be commuted or something along those lines. I seem to remember cases like this coming up in the past.


----------



## vonGarvin (5 Mar 2008)

As I recall from the radio news yesterday, Blood Money was an option put forth by the victim's family. The convicted man told his family to not accept it: he was/is innocent (er sei unschuldig: God, sometimes German is much more accurate in these cases).

Anyway, as stated by T6 (and perhaps to amplify), if you don't like a certain country's laws, don't visit there, unless you are prepared to face their version of justice.


----------



## Lard of the Dance (5 Mar 2008)

Little off topic but I have to ask. Does this fellow have Canadian citizenship? I read that his family owns a house in Montreal, but he and his family were not born here and currently live in KSA. One of the comments earlier in the thread mentioned the term "citizen of convenience". I have to agree.


----------



## dwalter (5 Mar 2008)

Yrys said:
			
		

> I was so distracted by the weirdness of the Nacireman society (and wondering why I never read about themelsewhere)  that it took me  : "I was able, however, to establish sufficient rapport with the natives to examine these shrines and to have the rituals described to me." to wake  me up to the truth...
> 
> 4 paragraphes to catch it... Must sleep more, I'm slow.



Don't worry, it took me even longer to catch it the first time I read it. It's a pretty interesting way of looking at things though isn't it?


----------



## Rodahn (5 Mar 2008)

Intelligent Design said:
			
		

> Don't worry, it took me even longer to catch it the first time I read it. It's a pretty interesting way of looking at things though isn't it?



I caught on right at the begining, but then again I can remember reading it in school many years ago.....


----------



## Greymatters (7 Mar 2008)

Intelligent Design said:
			
		

> Here is the article I referred to in my above post: http://oak.cats.ohiou.edu/~thompsoc/Body.html
> 
> It is truly interesting to read, I certainly enjoyed it once I figured out the meaning behind it.



When it comes to social anthropology, I prefer Rick Mercer. 

Id be more interested in this guy's studies of their relatives, the Naidanac tribe.


----------



## Yrys (7 Mar 2008)

back on track :

Are our diplomats that dense?

Colby Cosh, National Post   Published: Friday, March 07, 2008



> It's not the first time Stockwell Day is getting a bit of a bum rap from critics and journalists. Canada's favourite political punching bag is being
> worked over this morning thanks to the case of Mohamed Kohail, a 23-year-old dual citizen of Canada and Saudi Arabia who is currently awaiting a death
> sentence in the desert kingdom for being part of a mob that invaded a schoolyard and killed a student in a mass brawl. Last year the justice department
> refused to lobby for the life of Ronald Allen Smith, an Alberta man facing lethal injection in Montana for a heinous murder no one seriously doubts he committed,
> ...


----------



## Yrys (1 Apr 2008)

Ambassador meets with Canadian facing beheading



> The Canadian ambassador to Saudi Arabia has met with a Canadian man who is facing a public beheading.
> 
> Ambassador Ron Davidson met today with Mohamed Kohail and members of his family to discuss Kohail's appeal of his murder conviction. Foreign Affairs Department
> spokesman Rodney Moore says he cannot go into the specifics of the meeting, citing privacy issues. The meeting comes a day after the lawyer for Kohail was threatened
> ...



Link


----------



## Yrys (5 Apr 2008)

Sultan Kohail , the brother of the man condemn to decapitation, was sentence to 1 year in prison and 200 lashes.
I wonder how they do the punishment : number of lashes in one seance, medical attendance, etc...

French article :

Un ado canadien condamné à 200 coups de fouet


----------

