Saudi doubles rape victim's punishent on appeal

[Varaj]

http://www.iht.com/bin/printfriendly.php?id=8582679

Amnesty: Saudi lawyer should not be punished for defending rape victim

The Associated Press
Tuesday, December 4, 2007

CAIRO, Egypt: A Saudi lawyer should not be punished for defending a gang-rape victim who was sentenced to 200 lashes in a case that raised international criticism, the Amnesty International rights group said Tuesday.

The lawyer, Abdul-Rahman al-Lahem, was barred from representing the rape victim after he publicly criticised the sentence against her as he launched an appeal and sought heavier sentences against her attackers.

The victim, known only as the "Girl of Qatif" after her hometown in eastern Saudi Arabia, was initially sentenced in November 2006 to several months in prison and 90 lashes for being alone in a car with a man she was not related or married to, when the two were attacked by seven men who raped both of them. After the appeal, her sentence was doubled last month to 200 lashes and six months in prison.

Al-Lahem, whose license was confiscated during the appeal, now faces a disciplinary hearing Wednesday for "insulting the Supreme Judicial Council and disobeying the rules and regulations" of the judiciary. He could face disbarment.

In a statement Tuesday, Amnesty International said it appeared al-Lahem was being punished "after he criticized (the court's) treatment of his client."

"It is totally unacceptable that Abdul Rahman al-Lahem is facing possible suspension or dismissal from the legal profession simply because of his defence of a young female victim of gang rape," said Malcolm Smart, director of Amnesty's Middle East and North Africa Programme. "He should be allowed to perform all of his professional duties without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference."

"Punishment would amount to a gross violation of international standards protecting the integrity of the legal profession," the statement by the London-based rights group said.

Saudi Arabia has come under sharp criticism for the case, including from its top ally the United States. Last week, the Saudi Foreign Minster Prince Saud al-Faisal said the judiciary would review the case, though details of the review have not been announced.

The woman, who was 19 at the time of the rape in 2006, was convicted of violating the kingdom's strict Islamic laws against mingling of the sexes. She has said she met the young man in his car to retreive a picture of herself from him because she had recently married.

The Saudi Justice Ministry has defended the sentence, saying the girl was having an illicit affair with the friend. The seven men accused of raping the two were initially sentenced to jail terms from 10 months to five years, which were increased to between two and nine years in the appeal.

Amnesty said Saudi laws against unmarried men and women mingling are "inconsistent with international human rights standards, in particular, an individual's right to privacy" and said the case against the girl and the male victim — who received a similar sentence — should be nullified.

"The approach taken by the Ministry of Justice suggests that it effectively considers that the young woman brought the rape upon herself by meeting her companion," it said.
Notes:
International Herald Tribune Copyright © 2007 The International Herald Tribune | www.iht.com


:shock:

[The Winslow]

How low can the Sharia sink? Punishing a rape victim was not enough, so punishing the lawyer that dared to defend her is necessary now? What's next, her mother and sisters?

Oh well. As long as the rapists gets a pat on the back and a crown of laurel for their deeds, we know it's still the same Islam as always.

[Scarbonac]

[snip]

Oh well. As long as the rapists gets a pat on the back and a crown of laurel for their deeds, we know it's still the same Islam as always.


:expressionless:

The seven men accused of raping the two were initially sentenced to jail terms from 10 months to five years, which were increased to between two and nine years in the appeal.

[Eliezer]

With attitudes all over the Islamic world similar to the views of this:


If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it ... whose fault is it, the cats or the uncovered meat? The uncovered meat is the problem.


Made by an Australian Imam:


Sheik Taj Aldin al-Hilali, made the remarks during a Ramadan sermon in Sydney, telling worshipers that women were "weapons" used by "Satan" to control men and alluding "to the infamous Sydney gang rapes, suggesting the attackers were not entirely to blame."


What do you expect?

linkie
(http://blog.washingtonpost.com/worldopinionroundup/2006/10/firestorm_over_australian_cler.html)

[Darkfire]

:vomit:

This is fucking sick. I knew Saudi was fucked up, but this is the most repulsive piece of ruling I have ever seen my life. This shithole and the Wahabist filth it spews out are the cancer at the core of Islam, the sooner the regime and its wannabe iman cronies are neutered (preferably physically) the better this world will be.

[Darkfire]

With attitudes all over the Islamic world similar to the views of this:

Made by an Australian Imam:

What do you expect?

linkie
(http://blog.washingtonpost.com/worldopinionroundup/2006/10/firestorm_over_australian_cler.html)

I expect a wonderful day when Saudi's money dries up and the muslim world no longer has to deal with their exported feaces spewing, Wahabi acololytes.

[Varaj]

I so wish the US wasn't such a supporter of Saudi. I would love to see the US pull out all interests from Saudi.

[Eliezer]

More of same, different source:


Sheik Taj Aldin al Hilali denied he was condoning rape when he made the comments in a sermon last month, and apologized to any women he had offended, saying they were free to dress as they wished.

Hilali was quoted in The Australian newspaper Thursday as saying in the sermon: "If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside ... without cover, and the cats come to eat it ... whose fault is it, the cats' or the uncovered meat's?"

"The uncovered meat is the problem. If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab, no problem would have occurred," he was quoted as saying, referring to the headdress worn by some Muslim women.



linkie (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/26/world/main2125581.shtml)

This Imam said that women are free to dress as they please and that we respect the rights of others, but that if you get raped it's your own damn fault.
:what:

[Eliezer]

I expect a wonderful day when Saudi's money dries up and the muslim world no longer has to deal with their exported feaces spewing, Wahabi acololytes.

Okay, I can get behind that program. My problem isn't generally with Islam, just certain interpretations of Islam. I think a moderate Islam that respects basic human rights like freedom of speech and conscience is better than most religions in the world.

[Darkfire]

I so wish the US wasn't such a supporter of Saudi. I would love to see the US pull out all interests from Saudi.

I'd love to see the US accidently stratigically nuke certain parts of Saudi.

[Vermicious Knid]

I so wish the US wasn't such a supporter of Saudi. I would love to see the US pull out all interests from Saudi.

I wish we had had someone other than Bush in the White House when a bunch of SAUDIS attacked us a few years ago. I'd be much happier if we had invaded and razed Saudi Arabia. Fucking medieval dickheads. :mad:

[Darkfire]

Okay, I can get behind that program. My problem isn't generally with Islam, just certain interpretations of Islam. I think a moderate Islam that respects basic human rights like freedom of speech and conscience is better than most religions in the world.

And I wish more of my brethen had the education to see the rot behind the money sweetened 'gifts' the Saudis scatter around the world.

[Varaj]

I'd love to see the US accidently stratigically nuke certain parts of Saudi.

I think making Mecca glow would be a bad idea. ;)

[Darkfire]

I think making Mecca glow would be a bad idea. ;)

(ouch) Hence the strategic nuking bit ;) and most of the gits don't live in Mecca anyway, they've got their pleasure palaces elsewhere.

[Eliezer]

I think making Mecca glow would be a bad idea. ;)

But hitting the "pagan bypass" around Mecca isn't a bad idea.

[Trainz]

:vomit:

This is fucking sick.

Isn't it.

See, as long as lunatics like you try to diffuse the issue, it'll go on like that.

YOU, sir, ARE the problem. It is pretty fucking sickening to hear you say "This is fucking sick". In fact, it's worse.

Hypocrite.

[Black Angel]

More of same, different source:



linkie (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/26/world/main2125581.shtml)

This Imam said that women are free to dress as they please and that we respect the rights of others, but that if you get raped it's your own damn fault.
:what:

I am in no way condoning any of these acts or comments, but get with the program dude, this is old. Like 12 months old. This guy has been stripped of any representation of the Islamic community in Australia, and has even left the country (I'm pretty sure). By all means if you wish to be unhappy about the situation, do so, but at least try to find recent news.

[Adriak]

Isn't it.

See, as long as lunatics like you try to diffuse the issue, it'll go on like that.

YOU, sir, ARE the problem. It is pretty fucking sickening to hear you say "This is fucking sick". In fact, it's worse.

Hypocrite.

I didn't notice an attempt to diffuse the issue within his responses in this thread. I've never seen Darkfire condone such acts in any thread. Stop trolling.

[Adriak]

How often do cultures defend such acts in the name of their religion? I believe that we often confuse culture with religion and vice versa.

[Eliezer]

I am in no way condoning any of these acts or comments, but get with the program dude, this is old. Like 12 months old. This guy has been stripped of any representation of the Islamic community in Australia, and has even left the country (I'm pretty sure). By all means if you wish to be unhappy about the situation, do so, but at least try to find recent news.

It's not news, its trends. Establishing trends does require going back more than seven days.

[Trainz]

I didn't notice an attempt to diffuse the issue within his responses in this thread. I've never seen Darkfire condone such acts in any thread. Stop trolling.

Sorry.

I'll behave now.

[Pigs in Space]

It's not news, its trends. Establishing trends does require going back more than seven days.

By that logic, given that he got kicked out of his Imamship by the muslims in Oz, then there must be a trend away from his stupid shit too!

[Eliezer]

By that logic, given that he got kicked out of his Imamship by the muslims in Oz, then there must be a trend away from his stupid shit too!

I hope you're right. That he was kicked out is a great thing. However, given the limited information I could glean from the sources I found it only shows the Australians took a firm stand on the situation. I don't know how much of the influence was Muslim Australians or non-Muslim Australians.

Unfortunately, the type of teaching the this Iman did is extremely common among imans trained after the Wahabi school of thought. There's a reason Darkfire is so vehement about it. It's just anti-Islamic to hold that people aren't accountable for their actions.

[GhostWolf69]

I know I should not post this... I will sound like a nazi but I have to set the record straight (according to me, I know).

1. Saudi sentenced the rapists to 2 - 9 nine years for RAPE.

2. Saudi then sentence the girl to 200 lashes and 6 months, NOT for being raped, but for having an illicit affair with a friend.

So in the court's defence I would say these two events are unrelated. It's two separate things. She is NOT punished for being raped. She is punished for having an illicit affair. They just happened to be "imbedded" in the same case. So in essence the Defence lawyers was not defending her against accusations for "being raped". He was defending an adultress who just hapened to have been raped.

Ok?

Now let the muslim bashing continue, lord knows it's easy enough to find ammo and hatred even if you stay to the facts.

/wolf

[Trainz]

2. Saudi then sentence the girl to 200 lashes and 6 months, NOT for being raped, but for having an illicit affair with a friend.

You know what we do to people who torture women and sequestrate them for 6 months, even if the motive is that the woman cheated on her husband?

We send them to jail. For a very long fucking time. NO matter the woman's racial or religious background.

I realize not all countries or religions act like that, and they should be educated, transformed, and if all else fails destroyed, so that the rest of the not-insane world can live in peace.

[GhostWolf69]

You know what we do to people who torture women and sequestrate them for 6 months, even if the motive is that the woman cheated on her husband?

We send them to jail. For a very long fucking time. NO matter the woman's racial or religious background.

I realize not all countries or religions act like that, and they should be educated, transformed, and if all else fails destroyed, so that the rest of the not-insane world can live in peace.

I'm just saying you can keep your facts straight and hate them for the "right" reasons.

I'm not defending Sharia, but I have to say I don't sympathize with your sentiment, which to me seems to be based on:

"[Anyone who is diffrent than me has to be] educated, transformed, and if all else fails destroyed, so that [I and people like me] can live in peace."

... I don't know... sounds a little harsh to me.

/wolf

[Varaj]

I know I should not post this... I will sound like a nazi but I have to set the record straight (according to me, I know).

1. Saudi sentenced the rapists to 2 - 9 nine years for RAPE.

2. Saudi then sentence the girl to 200 lashes and 6 months, NOT for being raped, but for having an illicit affair with a friend.

So in the court's defence I would say these two events are unrelated. It's two separate things. She is NOT punished for being raped. She is punished for having an illicit affair. They just happened to be "imbedded" in the same case. So in essence the Defence lawyers was not defending her against accusations for "being raped". He was defending an adultress who just hapened to have been raped.

Ok?

Now let the muslim bashing continue, lord knows it's easy enough to find ammo and hatred even if you stay to the facts.

/wolf


My understanding is both the woman and the man she was with were both unmarried. She is being punished for being alone with a man not for adultery or an affair.
If you stick to the facts it is easier to bash peoples switching the facts. :)

[GhostWolf69]

My understanding is both the woman and the man she was with were both unmarried. She is being punished for being alone with a man not for adultery or an affair.
If you stick to the facts it is easier to bash peoples switching the facts. :)

Ok that may be my insufficient understanding of the word adultery then. Maybe it cannot be used when neither person is married?

She was charged with having an "affair" with a man... none of them was married (I know that), and that is what made it a crime, to "be with" a man you're not married to. (According to this Law).

So she is still a harlot and should be punished for it. (According to this Law)

I am sticking to facts (or trying to). However my language skills could apparently improve. Sorry.

/wolf

[Varaj]

Ok that may be my insufficient understanding of the word adultery then. Maybe it cannot be used when neither person is married?

She was charged with having an "affair" with a man... none of them was married (I know that), and that is what made it a crime, to "be with" a man you're not married to. (According to this Law).

So she is still a harlot and should be punished for it. (According to this Law)

I am sticking to facts (or trying to). However my language skills could apparently improve. Sorry.

/wolf

Adultery requires one of them to be married. The same with an affair (under most connotations in English). The word you are looking for is fornication.

[The Winslow]

Adultery requires one of them to be married. The same with an affair (under most connotations in English). The word you are looking for is fornication.

Or the more scientific term: pre-marital hanky-panky. ;)

[GhostWolf69]

Adultery requires one of them to be married. The same with an affair (under most connotations in English). The word you are looking for is fornication.


Thank you. I'll make a note of that. :o

/wolf

[Eliezer]

2. Saudi then sentence the girl to 200 lashes and 6 months, NOT for being raped, but for having an illicit affair with a friend.

So in the court's defence I would say these two events are unrelated. It's two separate things. She is NOT punished for being raped. She is punished for having an illicit affair. They just happened to be "imbedded" in the same case. So in essence the Defence lawyers was not defending her against accusations for "being raped". He was defending an adultress who just hapened to have been raped.

Well to be clear, the sentence increase upon appeal was because the defendant and her lawyer tried to influence the judiciary through the media and that the sentence was too lenient compared to the norm in such cases. So apparently the original court took into account she had been raped and gave her a less than normal sentence. That's also the reason the lawyer faces a disciplinary hearing, not for defending his client but for the way he went about it. I can understand some judges being upset about someone trying to force their hand based on a media campaign.

Now, the law that the rape victim is accused of breaking isn't having had illicit sex, but of being in the presence of a man who is not her husband or relative unescorted. The law she had broken concerned segregation of the sexes. The "illicit affair" was having a male friend and meeting with him. Usually the punishments for having sex are much harsher and the assumption in the minds of the Saudis is that they are having sex, however, in the interest of being clear: She was not convicted of fornication, but of violating segregation laws.

The reason she wasn't found guilty of having sex is that the law requires that she be caught in the act to prove the case.

[GhostWolf69]

Well to be clear, the sentence increase upon appeal was because the defendant and her lawyer tried to influence the judiciary through the media and that the sentence was too lenient compared to the norm in such cases. So apparently the original court took into account she had been raped and gave her a less than normal sentence. That's also the reason the lawyer faces a disciplinary hearing, not for defending his client but for the way he went about it. I can understand some judges being upset about someone trying to force their hand based on a media campaign.

Now, the law that the rape victim is accused of breaking isn't having had illicit sex, but of being in the presence of a man who is not her husband or relative unescorted. The law she had broken concerned segregation of the sexes. The "illicit affair" was having a male friend and meeting with him. Usually the punishments for having sex are much harsher and the assumption in the minds of the Saudis is that they are having sex, however, in the interest of being clear: She was not convicted of fornication, but of violating segregation laws.

The reason she wasn't found guilty of having sex is that the law requires that she be caught in the act to prove the case.

Even better. Thank you for clearing that out. :cool:

/wolf

[Goblin Girl]

I so wish the US wasn't such a supporter of Saudi. I would love to see the US pull out all interests from Saudi.
Yes, I wish that too.

Unfortunately, they have oil and we need it.

[Scarbonac]

http://www.abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=4012640&page=1




By LARA SETRAKIAN
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates, Dec. 17, 2007


A Saudi Arabian rape victim charged with jail time and 200 lashes has been pardoned by Saudi King Abdullah. The woman was jailed after being found in a car with a man to whom she was not related.

A group of men pulled her from the car and raped her, before she was arrested.

Once pardoned, the woman was released from jail and returned home to her family, officials say.

The monarch traditionally grants pardons in advance of Eid al-Adha, a Muslim holiday that begins Wednesday. Saudi Arabia's Justice Minister told Al-Jazeera daily newspaper that the king has the "right to overrule court judgements if he considered it benefiting the greater good."

The sentence spurred headlines and criticism from around the world. Human Rights Watch and other foreign observers, including the White House and U.S. presidential contenders Sen. Hilary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama, called her punishment and the circumstances surrounding it outrageous.

"The kingdom certainly took a lot of heat," Kenneth Katzman, a Middle East specialist with the Congressional Research Service, told ABC News. "[The pardon] is not surprising in a case where it's so hard to defend what happened. They caved in."

In testimony exclusively obtained by ABC News the young woman described what happened and how she was treated in the months that followed.

"Everyone looks at me as if I'm wrong. I couldn't even continue my studies. I wanted to die. I tried to commit suicide twice," she reportedly said of her emotional state shortly after the attack.

The woman, known anonymously in the Saudi press as "Qatif Girl" for the eastern province town where the crime took place, was originally sentenced to 90 lashes for being in a state of "khalwa" — seclusion with a male who's not a relative.

But the General Court of Qatif increased the punishment after she took her case to the press. Authorities deemed it an "attempt to aggravate and influence the judiciary through the media," according to Saudi Arabia's English-language newspaper Arab News.

The seven attackers were convicted of rape and given sentences that ranged from two to nine years in prison, according to Arab News.

A number of Saudi women and activists spoke out against the woman's punishment. The case led to calls for reform and greater individual rights within the Saudi legal system.

Waheja Al-Huwaider, a human rights advocate living in Saudi Arabia, told ABC News that the publicity has been a good thing.

"We are very thankful to this young lady that she decided to go to the media with her case. Because of that and because of her courage — maybe we will have something different than before."

"We don't have any written laws for any kind of crime. [The outcome] depends on the judges and how they see the case," she told ABC News.

Abdullah has already announced a set of revisions to Saudi Arabia's judicial system, which is dominated by strict interpretations of Muslim Shariah.

"This is the time to seriously consider the scope and purpose of our judicial reform," May Dabbagh, a Saudi native and research fellow with the Dubai School of Government, wrote in an editorial.

"There are thousands [if not more] of undocumented stories of injustice in our courts. Not all are as wretched as the fate of the Qatif girl but all are dishearteningly unjust."

Katzman sees legal reform as a challenge across the region. "What we're seeing not only in Saudi but in other Gulf Arab states is they're rapidly modernizing in some areas but the judiciaries tend to remain in the hands of conservative clergy, so legal reform tends to be the slowest," he said.

There were some particularly religious women who supported the court's ruling to punish the victim, Huwaider told ABC News. But a royal pardon was the outcome she expected, as objections to the case spread across the kingdom and over sectarian lines.

"The educated Shia and the Sunni were against it. I think that's really good. It gives good confidence that people can come together and can be cooperating together if there's something wrong going on."

he victim's attorney, human rights lawyer Abdul Rahman Al-Lahem, had his license revoked for talking to the press about the Qatif case.

The Saudi Ministry of Justice had accused him of "faulty behaviors [that] contradict the ethics of his profession and violate the provisions of practicing law," a move Lahem interpreted as retaliation for taking on the controversial case.

[Ancalagon]

Well it's good that *some* sense prevailed.

Saudi Arabia showed some sign of evolving in the right direction. Like the fact the rapists got a more severe punishment, that's good, or that they are thinking about modernizing their laws. It just seems to be moving so slowly... but at least it's moving.

[Dacke]

They should ask the French how to deal with clergy in positions of secular power. I hear they had some ideas on how to handle those about 2 centuries ago.

[Varaj]

Good to hear.

[Northcott]

What a fucking horrible and sad and uplifting tale. It's good to hear that she wasn't made to suffer more, and perhaps even better to hear that this may be part of a greater movement toward a more compassionate society, with both (educated) Shia and Sunni seemingly seeking justice in this case.

But the very notion that it happened, and that this kind of thing -- and worse -- happens all over the world, every day. Fucking appalling.

[Cat of Ulthar]

I realize not all countries or religions act like that, and they should be educated, transformed, and if all else fails destroyed, so that the rest of the not-insane world can live in peace.

:shock: Trainz, you're scaring me. If I don't believe what you believe, then I should be educated and transformed, and if I still don't agree with you I should be destroyed? How very American of you. I think I'll pass, thank you.:grey:

[Hatter]

:shock: Trainz, you're scaring me. If I don't believe what you believe, then I should be educated and transformed, and if I still don't agree with you I should be destroyed? How very American of you. I think I'll pass, thank you.:grey:

I don't think that's what Trainz was saying....

However, I can speak for myself when I say that Fundamentalist Islam as presented in several Middle Eastern nations is a threat to me. It is foolish to disregard that threat. I can make the distinction, of course, between the religion of Islam and the political structures that allow the radical interpretations of Islam to become so dangerous.

[Cat of Ulthar]

However, I can speak for myself when I say that Fundamentalist Islam as presented in several Middle Eastern nations is a threat to me. It is foolish to disregard that threat. I can make the distinction, of course, between the religion of Islam and the political structures that allow the radical interpretations of Islam to become so dangerous.

Don't equate fundamentalism with terrorism. The Saudi government is fundamentalist, but rather heavy-handed on (suspected) terrorists. They do not want to lose their big buddy US. The Saudi government is in no way a threat to you, unless you go and visit their country and behave against their laws.

[Eliezer]

Don't equate fundamentalism with terrorism. The Saudi government is fundamentalist, but rather heavy-handed on (suspected) terrorists. They do not want to lose their big buddy US. The Saudi government is in no way a threat to you, unless you go and visit their country and behave against their laws.

That's right, if you're not a muslim and driving from the Red Sea port of Jiddah to the capital make sure you take the pagan bypass around Mecca so as to not pollute the holy city with your unclean presence.

(And yes, they really do have the non-muslim bypass around Mecca.)

[Cat of Ulthar]

That's right, if you're not a muslim and driving from the Red Sea port of Jiddah to the capital make sure you take the pagan bypass around Mecca so as to not pollute the holy city with your unclean presence.

(And yes, they really do have the non-muslim bypass around Mecca.)

I know. Non-muslims are not allowed in Mecca and Medina. Do you really care? It's their holy cities, they want to be just among themselves there. What does that have to do with fundamentalists and terrorists?

(And the holy cities have always been off limits to non-muslims, that's not a Wahhabi invention.)

[Hatter]

Don't equate fundamentalism with terrorism. The Saudi government is fundamentalist, but rather heavy-handed on (suspected) terrorists. They do not want to lose their big buddy US. The Saudi government is in no way a threat to you, unless you go and visit their country and behave against their laws.

I've no doubt that the Saudi government wishes to maintain it's present state of goodwill with the US, however that certainly has not kept Saudi citizens from becoming terrorists (the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi) or Saudi money from funding terrorist operations. It's fundamentalism that allows unethical leaders to manipulate disenfranchised muslims into committing barbarous acts.

[Eliezer]

I know. Non-muslims are not allowed in Mecca and Medina. Do you really care? It's their holy cities, they want to be just among themselves there. What does that have to do with fundamentalists and terrorists?

(And the holy cities have always been off limits to non-muslims, that's not a Wahhabi invention.)

I thought my comments were rather pertinent in relationship to your statement:

The Saudi government is in no way a threat to you, unless you go and visit their country and behave against their laws.

No matter how silly it may seem to us (or wrong) if we obey their laws we're pretty safe in Saudi Arabia.

[Pigs in Space]

I so wish the US wasn't such a supporter of Saudi. I would love to see the US pull out all interests from Saudi.

I'm pretty sure that's what Osama wants too!

You're an Osama lover!

[Varaj]

I'm pretty sure that's what Osama wants too!

You're an Osama lover!

In this instance I agree with him. The US creates a lot of our own problems. Our middle eastern policy has been 200 years of fuck ups. Reap, sow, all that.

[Trainz]

:shock: Trainz, you're scaring me. If I don't believe what you believe, then I should be educated and transformed, and if I still don't agree with you I should be destroyed? How very American of you. I think I'll pass, thank you.:grey:

I had to go back and read the context in which I was stating such a drastic prose.

Well, it stands. Within it's original context.