According to the State Department, Saudi Arabia “does not provide legal protection for freedom of religion, and such protection does not exist in practice.”

I’m not trying to say that the Taliban were not evil. They were, and the world is a better place without them. The Taliban were extreme because they were trying to establish Wahhabi-style purity in a culture that was unaccustomed to these restrictions. If we compare their regime to the mass murder, oppression and grave desecration that accompanied the establishment of Saudi Arabia, the Saudis still look savage in comparison. From a “>Muslim site:

“The Wahhabi’s believed that visiting the graves and the shrines of the Prophets, the Imams, or the saints was a form of idolatry and totally un-Islamic. Those who did not conform to their belief were killed and their property was confiscated…

1924 AD Wahhabi’s entered Hijaz for a second time and carried out another merciless plunder and massacre. People in streets were killed. Houses were razed to the ground. Women and children too were not spared.

Awn bin Hashim (Shairf of Makkah) writes: “Before me, a valley appeared to have been paved with corpses, dried blood staining everywhere all around. There was hardly a tree which didn’t have one or two dead bodies near its roots.”

1925 Madina surrendered to the Wahhabi onslaught. All Islamic heritages were destroyed. The only shrine that remained intact was that of the Holy Prophet (saw).

Ibn Jabhan says: “We know that the tomb standing on the Prophet’s grave is against our principles, and to have his grave in a mosque is an abominable sin.”

Tombs of Hamza and other martyrs were demolished at Uhud. The Prophet’s mosque was bombarded. On protest by Muslims, assurances were given by Ibn Saud that it will be restored but the promise was never fulfilled. A promise was given that Hijaz will have an Islamic multinational government. This was also abandoned.

1925 AD Jannat al-Mu’alla, the sacred cemetery at Makkah was destroyed along with the house where the Holy Prophet (saw) was born. Since then, this day is a day of mourning for all Muslims.

Is it not strange that the Wahhabi’s find it offensive to have the tombs, shrines and other places of importance preserved, while the remains of their Saudi kings are being guarded at the expense of millions of dollars?

….

Are the Muslims who describe these atrocities Saudi bashers? Is the State department Saudi-bashing? If so, then the world is filled with Saudi bashers.

So, who is to blame for worldwide Saudi bashing? The world or the Saudis?

If you can’t see a difference between a country that

encourages women to be educated,

encourages women to hold jobs,

has among the highest female literacy rates in the Arab world

from a country that

kills women for attending schools

kills women for wearing makeup

kills women for working outside the home

kills women for listening to music

kills women for attempting to teach reading

then you’ve actually lost it and again devolve into pure-and-simple Saudi bashing.

2)It’s probably far more common to be killed illegally by relatives than executed by the legal system for extramarital sex. So a secular Saddam isn’t going to help.

3)Hijab vs. Saddam – easy choice, especially when air conditioners are relatively available.

Sometimes, Sharia isn’t a law – sometimes it is just a matter of personal habit or custom. That’s the only form that can really be called liberal. That’s the form that comparable to the Christian customs we grew up with.

Most of Sharia, like a lot of Christian customs, evolved in an era where the average lifespan was about 30, where people got married and started having kids around the age of 12-14, and so on. The same is true of the (culturally) Christian values most of us here in the US grew up with.

The Taliban’s version of Sharia was a little less strict than the currently practiced Saudi version.

The Pakistani version is “liberal” As far as I know, women have the right to vote and women are active participants in the political process. Two women have been elected as Prime Minister in Pakistan.

Despite that, women in Pakistan still suffer under the horrific system that Dean describes above. All Shariah laws are apartheid laws and they’re all a violation of basic human rights.

The United Nations should do something to oppose Shariah in all forms; NGOs are also supposed to support basic human rights, but we know how effective these organization have been. What are we paying them for?

Thie issue is moot: they came across a convoluted compromise most could live with. Which is how these things usually work.

The question now goes to whether it will be ratified, and how well the Sunni minority accepts the many compromises.