Is just fine. It would be an injustice to them if they were not allowed to get married... at 10 and 12-years-old. WTF?!!?
Really. What more can you even say to this?
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Am I the only one here who...
...thinks there is a glaring double-standard when it comes to identifying some criminal suspects and not others?
The other day I posted on the report of five men who impersonated doctors so that they could go to a hospital and grope women. Were any one of them named in the report? No. Not a single one.
Today, the same newspaper, reports "Test shows abducted girl was raped," and the article not only specifies the nationality of the alleged attacker, but names him as well!
Glaring double-standard? Just a wee bit. 'Ya think?!?
The other day I posted on the report of five men who impersonated doctors so that they could go to a hospital and grope women. Were any one of them named in the report? No. Not a single one.
Today, the same newspaper, reports "Test shows abducted girl was raped," and the article not only specifies the nationality of the alleged attacker, but names him as well!
Glaring double-standard? Just a wee bit. 'Ya think?!?
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Oh My - A Lot Going on in The Sandbox
This post has turned out to be much lengthier than I originally thought it was going to be. It needs "sub-titles."
11-YEAR-OLD-GIRL'S DIVORCE GRANTED
The 11-year old girl whose own father married her to apedophile 75-year-old man in exchange for him being able to marry that man's 16-year old daughter has been granted a divorce. I posted the story a while ago. Recall that Shaikha, the 16-year-old - who is married to Abeer's 70-year-old father - celebrated the joyous occasion by trying to commit suicide by drinking bleach. The court is scheduled to deal with her marriage on Tuesday. I find it interesting that even though only first names of the girls are are used in the article and it would be difficult for them to be identified, that there is no mention of the two pedophiles old men's names. Wouldn't want the rest of the world to know who they are now, would we? In my opinion, it is all about shame. No one wants to shame anyone - that is unacceptable behavior. But, marrying an 11-year-old girl when you are 75 - almost seven times older than her - is perfectly fine, acceptable behavior, though. The culture in The Sandbox is still very much "honor orientated" and no one wants to create waves by "shaming" anyone. More on that at the very bottom of this post.
MAID ABUSED - ALMOST BLINDED
Ho hum. We have another case of maid abuse. Actually it is pretty severe and certainly nothing to make light of. The maid has lost most, if not all, of her vision as a result of being abused. She is in the hospital. The article says, "An Indonesian made was left with impaired vision after her current Saudi employer's wife allegedly gouged her eyes in the worst case ever of physical abuse reported with the Indonesian Consulate in Jeddah... It is not clear yet why the sponsor's wife did it." Does it really matter why she did it? What matters is that she DID it. Why isn't she sitting in a jail cell somewhere?!? Why aren't authorities doing something about the problem of the abuse domestic help suffers and endures. Oh sure. It is "talked about." The stories are in the newspapers and on the Internet for all to read. But nothing is ever done. I know. I know. I'm jumping to the gun on this. The sponsor's wife probably didn't do anything [the "innocent until proven guilty" mantra doesn't much apply in The Sandbox where justice tends to be "swift and to the point"]. If the case is investigated, we will probably learn that the maid's eyes weren't gouged out by her sponsor's wife, but instead that she ran into a broom - or poked herself in both eyes while washing silverware - or something. Um-hmmm. Sure she did. The Indonesian maid, who is the mother of one child, "has been hospitalized and is recovering." Didi Wahyudi, Minister Consular for Indonesain Citizens in Saudi Arabia says, "According to medical reports, the housemaid has received irreparable damage to her eyesight." The Indonesian Consulate Office has lodged a legal lawsuit against the housemaid's sponsor. I think we all know what the outcome of the legal lawsuit will be. The article, says, "Reminiscent of the pre-Islamic traditions of slavery... the original Saudi employer in Madina handed over the housemaid to one of his relatives as a gift." WHAT!?! "The real culprit [and who, pray tell, exactly, might that be??!] was identified and through legal proceedings, a combination of jail term and compensation of 100,000SR is being demanded for the victim." $26,809.65. Unf'ngbelievable. It is worth noting that in the past week or so there have been a couple of newspaper articles about "slavery" and "human trafficing" in The Sandbox. They are here, and here. I'm sure I could find a couple of more if I did a more diligent search - which I know I've seen - but can't put my fingers on right now. Admittedly I haven't read the articles, but I think I can summarize: There is no slavery and/or very limited human trafficing taking place in The Sandbox, contrary to reports in the newspaper.
RAPED MAID'S DNA PROVES ATTACKER IS THE FATHER
Another "ho hum" matter, here. "A DNA test has proved that the child born to an Indonesian maid who claimed she was raped is that of her alleged 18-year-old Saudi attacker. The 25-year-old maid alleged that the youth, who was 17 at the time, raped her in early 2007, a claim that was previously rejected by the family AND the Bureau of Investigation and Prosecution (BIP) in Riyadh." [Emphasis, mine.] A lawyer representing the Indonesian Embassy, Nasser Al-Dandani, "now hopes the case would be reopened." A letter to the Human Rights Commission has been sent, "which helped to prove the child's parenthood... we are now waiting for the final verdict after we proved that the child is the youth's son." We'll be waiting for the verdict, too. And, knowing other details of the maid's story, we can ascertain that she is going to be held responsible for her own actions. Her "ordeal began when she ran away from her abusive sponsor and sought shelter at the Office for Maid's Affairs with the help of a taxi driver. At the door of the shelter she was met by the 17-year-old youth's family who convinced her to come and work for them." Big mistake. See? This is why it is going to be her fault. She ran away from her "abusive" employer straight into the hands of a rapist. Somewhere along the way, the rapist was detained "for a few days for questioning. The youth denied the accusations and was subsequently released." Of course he was. The case was closed by the BIP due to "lack of evidence." Naturally. "Arab News reported in August that the maid, who was six months pregnant at the time, wanted to establish the fatherhood of her unborn child before returning to her home country. She is now at the Indonesian Embassy with her baby." Like I said, "ho hum." Nothing to see here, folks. Let's move along...
GROPING WOMEN NOT NEARLY AS BAD AS PEEKING AT WOMEN
I did a post yesterday about the five men who were putting on stethoscopes and white doctor's coats to sneak into hospitals to "examine" women." The five men were given minimal jail sentences and fines and told not to do that again. This is just not logical and it makes no sense: A cleaner has been sentenced to jail for two months and is going to be given 50 lashes for "peeking" at women in a hospital. How is it that the five men who were actually, physically groping women are getting away virtually scot free - oh, sure, they're getting some jail time - but they aren't getting lashes. Yet, a cleaner who likely was just doing his job when he happened upon some woman in the state of undress is getting lashed and jail time? Hello? Can anyone explain the discrepancy to me?? Yesterday, I said, "If I had to guess why, I'd say... Never mind. Let's not go there." I think we can all come to the same conclusion as to why the two - similar - crimes are being treated differently - even though, in my opinion, what the five men did was exponentially much worse than what the cleaner did.
STEALING SHEEP IS MUCH WORSE THAN GROPING WOMEN
Who could have guessed that stealing a couple of sheep to feed your hungry family would be treated as a much more serious crime than impersonating a doctor and groping women in a hospital? Apparently it is. The punishment is much, much more severe. That's for sure. "One of the two men... sentenced to three years in prison and 2,000 lashes each for stealing two sheep blamed need and ignorance behind the criminal act. ...with tears running down his cheeks, said he regrets both the criminal act and the verdict... which he did not expect, describing it as 'harsh to the gravity of the crime.'" Who can argue with that? Grope a woman in a hospital - do a short prison visit and pay a fine. Steal a couple of sheep - go to prison for several years and receive 2,000 lashes. [It is noteworthy that the young man and his brother have both been named in the article. The five men who impersonated doctor's and groped women? Nope. Their identity is being kept a secret. [It is all about shame. See the bottom of this post.] Moving on... The sheep-thief is appealing the verdict and said, "I did not expect that I would be sentenced to two years in prison and 2,000 lashes for the theft of two sheep which I and my friend, now my inmate, sold for 700SR to cater to the urgent needs of my family." Apparently the sheep owner has pardoned the two young men. No matter. The verdict stands. The young sheep-thief was "detained in prison for a whole year before the verdict was pronounced." The brother will appeal his case as soon as he is able to come up with the money to do so. Defending him, he said, "his brother did not realize the criminatlity of his act because of his poor education and young age. We hear about crimes bigger than my brother's with lighter sentences." Yeah. We sure do! [You know, crimes like groping women.] The article states, "The verdict was issued after the court verified that the two defendants were not found involved in any other criminal case. Despite this punishment, the prosecution had demanded amputation of their hands..." Well okay, then. In that vein, wouldn't that mean that the five men who were groping women should have had theirhands penis amputated? Hmmph.
2008 JEDDAHPOPULATION CONTROL ROAD CARNAGE STATISTICS
According to the report, which, by the way, is for only one city in The Sandbox, and not the entire country, in 2008 the average death toll due to road carnage was "1 person almost every day." There were "90,377 accidents." Do the math. That is 247 1/2 accidents PER DAY in Jeddah, alone. Well, my goodness. No wonder the traffic police are not patrolling traffic and issuing citations to violators. They are far too busy investigating accidents! Of course, if violator's were actually issued citations that would stick in court and then heavily fined or jailed, there would be fewer accidents. I know. I know. That is rational thinking - logical, even - and this is a "LFZ."* There were "333 deaths" and "2,572 injuries" as a result of the "90,377 accidents." Supposedly there were "2,182,497 traffic violations" for "using the mobile phone while driving, littering, and jumping red lights." Not one for speeding or improper overtaking. Not a single one. Surprised? I'm not. Oh, and I'm calling BS on the violations. I'm not actually saying that those violations weren't reported - but since I have yet to see a single driver be pulled over for any of those violations on this part of the country, I find it quite difficult to believe that that many drivers on the other side of the country were issued violations. The report also asks, "Who are these drivers?" and answers that they "are mostly 18-30 year-olds." No. You don't say...
JEALOUSY WRECKS MARRIAGES
Almost comical. There is a lengthy article in one of today's English newspaper, "When jealousy wrecks marriages," that reports on several situations of women who are accusing their husband's of being jealous. What I find comical about it is the fact that it is okay for a man to have up to four wives - and the wives are not supposed to be jealous - but the same does not hold true for the wife who is not allowed to even look at another man, let alone have another husband. It is not worth disseminating the article paragraph by paragraph, and made-up story after made-up story. The double-standard is astounding.
Yeah. Plenty for one day, I'd say.
No. Wait. Just a couple more things...
About the 11-year-old who is identified albeit by first name only, and that the 75-year-old man she was forced to marry was not identified at all - because of the "shame" factor, I wanted to specifically quote Sandra MacKey from her book, "The Saudi's: Inside the Desert Kingdom," but when I went to find the exact paragraph I wasn't able to find it. I will find it - I will post it. Look for a future post on just this - Sandra's book - in the near future. If you are so inclined to read a book about Saudi Arabia and are going to read only one, this would be one I would highly recommend. Yes, there are certainly others that are a little less dated and more current insofar as politics from this part of the world play a part in politics in the rest of the world, but all-in-all, Sandra MacKey wrote a very, very good book.
And, finally - I have a little * in this post where I wrote about the road carnage statistics in Jeddah next to "LFZ," which I use to denote "Logic Free Zone."
11-YEAR-OLD-GIRL'S DIVORCE GRANTED
The 11-year old girl whose own father married her to a
MAID ABUSED - ALMOST BLINDED
Ho hum. We have another case of maid abuse. Actually it is pretty severe and certainly nothing to make light of. The maid has lost most, if not all, of her vision as a result of being abused. She is in the hospital. The article says, "An Indonesian made was left with impaired vision after her current Saudi employer's wife allegedly gouged her eyes in the worst case ever of physical abuse reported with the Indonesian Consulate in Jeddah... It is not clear yet why the sponsor's wife did it." Does it really matter why she did it? What matters is that she DID it. Why isn't she sitting in a jail cell somewhere?!? Why aren't authorities doing something about the problem of the abuse domestic help suffers and endures. Oh sure. It is "talked about." The stories are in the newspapers and on the Internet for all to read. But nothing is ever done. I know. I know. I'm jumping to the gun on this. The sponsor's wife probably didn't do anything [the "innocent until proven guilty" mantra doesn't much apply in The Sandbox where justice tends to be "swift and to the point"]. If the case is investigated, we will probably learn that the maid's eyes weren't gouged out by her sponsor's wife, but instead that she ran into a broom - or poked herself in both eyes while washing silverware - or something. Um-hmmm. Sure she did. The Indonesian maid, who is the mother of one child, "has been hospitalized and is recovering." Didi Wahyudi, Minister Consular for Indonesain Citizens in Saudi Arabia says, "According to medical reports, the housemaid has received irreparable damage to her eyesight." The Indonesian Consulate Office has lodged a legal lawsuit against the housemaid's sponsor. I think we all know what the outcome of the legal lawsuit will be. The article, says, "Reminiscent of the pre-Islamic traditions of slavery... the original Saudi employer in Madina handed over the housemaid to one of his relatives as a gift." WHAT!?! "The real culprit [and who, pray tell, exactly, might that be??!] was identified and through legal proceedings, a combination of jail term and compensation of 100,000SR is being demanded for the victim." $26,809.65. Unf'ngbelievable. It is worth noting that in the past week or so there have been a couple of newspaper articles about "slavery" and "human trafficing" in The Sandbox. They are here, and here. I'm sure I could find a couple of more if I did a more diligent search - which I know I've seen - but can't put my fingers on right now. Admittedly I haven't read the articles, but I think I can summarize: There is no slavery and/or very limited human trafficing taking place in The Sandbox, contrary to reports in the newspaper.
RAPED MAID'S DNA PROVES ATTACKER IS THE FATHER
Another "ho hum" matter, here. "A DNA test has proved that the child born to an Indonesian maid who claimed she was raped is that of her alleged 18-year-old Saudi attacker. The 25-year-old maid alleged that the youth, who was 17 at the time, raped her in early 2007, a claim that was previously rejected by the family AND the Bureau of Investigation and Prosecution (BIP) in Riyadh." [Emphasis, mine.] A lawyer representing the Indonesian Embassy, Nasser Al-Dandani, "now hopes the case would be reopened." A letter to the Human Rights Commission has been sent, "which helped to prove the child's parenthood... we are now waiting for the final verdict after we proved that the child is the youth's son." We'll be waiting for the verdict, too. And, knowing other details of the maid's story, we can ascertain that she is going to be held responsible for her own actions. Her "ordeal began when she ran away from her abusive sponsor and sought shelter at the Office for Maid's Affairs with the help of a taxi driver. At the door of the shelter she was met by the 17-year-old youth's family who convinced her to come and work for them." Big mistake. See? This is why it is going to be her fault. She ran away from her "abusive" employer straight into the hands of a rapist. Somewhere along the way, the rapist was detained "for a few days for questioning. The youth denied the accusations and was subsequently released." Of course he was. The case was closed by the BIP due to "lack of evidence." Naturally. "Arab News reported in August that the maid, who was six months pregnant at the time, wanted to establish the fatherhood of her unborn child before returning to her home country. She is now at the Indonesian Embassy with her baby." Like I said, "ho hum." Nothing to see here, folks. Let's move along...
GROPING WOMEN NOT NEARLY AS BAD AS PEEKING AT WOMEN
I did a post yesterday about the five men who were putting on stethoscopes and white doctor's coats to sneak into hospitals to "examine" women." The five men were given minimal jail sentences and fines and told not to do that again. This is just not logical and it makes no sense: A cleaner has been sentenced to jail for two months and is going to be given 50 lashes for "peeking" at women in a hospital. How is it that the five men who were actually, physically groping women are getting away virtually scot free - oh, sure, they're getting some jail time - but they aren't getting lashes. Yet, a cleaner who likely was just doing his job when he happened upon some woman in the state of undress is getting lashed and jail time? Hello? Can anyone explain the discrepancy to me?? Yesterday, I said, "If I had to guess why, I'd say... Never mind. Let's not go there." I think we can all come to the same conclusion as to why the two - similar - crimes are being treated differently - even though, in my opinion, what the five men did was exponentially much worse than what the cleaner did.
STEALING SHEEP IS MUCH WORSE THAN GROPING WOMEN
Who could have guessed that stealing a couple of sheep to feed your hungry family would be treated as a much more serious crime than impersonating a doctor and groping women in a hospital? Apparently it is. The punishment is much, much more severe. That's for sure. "One of the two men... sentenced to three years in prison and 2,000 lashes each for stealing two sheep blamed need and ignorance behind the criminal act. ...with tears running down his cheeks, said he regrets both the criminal act and the verdict... which he did not expect, describing it as 'harsh to the gravity of the crime.'" Who can argue with that? Grope a woman in a hospital - do a short prison visit and pay a fine. Steal a couple of sheep - go to prison for several years and receive 2,000 lashes. [It is noteworthy that the young man and his brother have both been named in the article. The five men who impersonated doctor's and groped women? Nope. Their identity is being kept a secret. [It is all about shame. See the bottom of this post.] Moving on... The sheep-thief is appealing the verdict and said, "I did not expect that I would be sentenced to two years in prison and 2,000 lashes for the theft of two sheep which I and my friend, now my inmate, sold for 700SR to cater to the urgent needs of my family." Apparently the sheep owner has pardoned the two young men. No matter. The verdict stands. The young sheep-thief was "detained in prison for a whole year before the verdict was pronounced." The brother will appeal his case as soon as he is able to come up with the money to do so. Defending him, he said, "his brother did not realize the criminatlity of his act because of his poor education and young age. We hear about crimes bigger than my brother's with lighter sentences." Yeah. We sure do! [You know, crimes like groping women.] The article states, "The verdict was issued after the court verified that the two defendants were not found involved in any other criminal case. Despite this punishment, the prosecution had demanded amputation of their hands..." Well okay, then. In that vein, wouldn't that mean that the five men who were groping women should have had their
2008 JEDDAH
According to the report, which, by the way, is for only one city in The Sandbox, and not the entire country, in 2008 the average death toll due to road carnage was "1 person almost every day." There were "90,377 accidents." Do the math. That is 247 1/2 accidents PER DAY in Jeddah, alone. Well, my goodness. No wonder the traffic police are not patrolling traffic and issuing citations to violators. They are far too busy investigating accidents! Of course, if violator's were actually issued citations that would stick in court and then heavily fined or jailed, there would be fewer accidents. I know. I know. That is rational thinking - logical, even - and this is a "LFZ."* There were "333 deaths" and "2,572 injuries" as a result of the "90,377 accidents." Supposedly there were "2,182,497 traffic violations" for "using the mobile phone while driving, littering, and jumping red lights." Not one for speeding or improper overtaking. Not a single one. Surprised? I'm not. Oh, and I'm calling BS on the violations. I'm not actually saying that those violations weren't reported - but since I have yet to see a single driver be pulled over for any of those violations on this part of the country, I find it quite difficult to believe that that many drivers on the other side of the country were issued violations. The report also asks, "Who are these drivers?" and answers that they "are mostly 18-30 year-olds." No. You don't say...
JEALOUSY WRECKS MARRIAGES
Almost comical. There is a lengthy article in one of today's English newspaper, "When jealousy wrecks marriages," that reports on several situations of women who are accusing their husband's of being jealous. What I find comical about it is the fact that it is okay for a man to have up to four wives - and the wives are not supposed to be jealous - but the same does not hold true for the wife who is not allowed to even look at another man, let alone have another husband. It is not worth disseminating the article paragraph by paragraph, and made-up story after made-up story. The double-standard is astounding.
Yeah. Plenty for one day, I'd say.
No. Wait. Just a couple more things...
About the 11-year-old who is identified albeit by first name only, and that the 75-year-old man she was forced to marry was not identified at all - because of the "shame" factor, I wanted to specifically quote Sandra MacKey from her book, "The Saudi's: Inside the Desert Kingdom," but when I went to find the exact paragraph I wasn't able to find it. I will find it - I will post it. Look for a future post on just this - Sandra's book - in the near future. If you are so inclined to read a book about Saudi Arabia and are going to read only one, this would be one I would highly recommend. Yes, there are certainly others that are a little less dated and more current insofar as politics from this part of the world play a part in politics in the rest of the world, but all-in-all, Sandra MacKey wrote a very, very good book.
And, finally - I have a little * in this post where I wrote about the road carnage statistics in Jeddah next to "LFZ," which I use to denote "Logic Free Zone."
Monday, January 12, 2009
Tell me this little tyke...
...isn't blessed with some talent! She is just too cute!!! Go little girl, go!
The video of a very young child - three, four? - doing a major gymnastics floor routine is here. Well worth the click to watch it. Oh, yes. Well worth it.
I don't know how I got to it - Yahoo, maybe? But oh my gosh. I had to watch it several times!!!
There isn't any information as to who the little girl is or her story or anything like that. But I hope her parents are very, very, very proud of her. The little tyke has some spunk! Yep. Lots of it.
Hey. Sometimes I just like to share...
The video of a very young child - three, four? - doing a major gymnastics floor routine is here. Well worth the click to watch it. Oh, yes. Well worth it.
I don't know how I got to it - Yahoo, maybe? But oh my gosh. I had to watch it several times!!!
There isn't any information as to who the little girl is or her story or anything like that. But I hope her parents are very, very, very proud of her. The little tyke has some spunk! Yep. Lots of it.
Hey. Sometimes I just like to share...
Do I have any readers from Abu Dhabi?
DH and I want to plan a short getaway so that he can go somewhere and play golf. We can go to Bahrain any time we want - and from what I have recently heard, the new Riffa golf course is not as nice as the old Riffa golf course. So, Bahrain is out. We've been to Dubai. I could go there again. We want to go somewhere fairly close-by. Oman is a possibility. [AIO, can you help me out here? What's the golf like there?]
I'm thinking Abu Dhabi, though. Can anyone give me recommendations as to what the golf courses are like there? Will there be a lot of choice or limited choice? If DH is going to be playing golf all day - I want to be laying on the beach [we will go in April] reading, and drinking icey cold beverages that have little umbrellas and rum in them... Recommendations for that? What is the shopping like? Is an abeya required to be worn by Western women, or is Saudi Arabia the only country in the Middle East that requires us to don black before we leave the house?
Any assistance that Abu Dhabi visitors to this blog could provide to us would be most appreciated!!!
I'm thinking Abu Dhabi, though. Can anyone give me recommendations as to what the golf courses are like there? Will there be a lot of choice or limited choice? If DH is going to be playing golf all day - I want to be laying on the beach [we will go in April] reading, and drinking icey cold beverages that have little umbrellas and rum in them... Recommendations for that? What is the shopping like? Is an abeya required to be worn by Western women, or is Saudi Arabia the only country in the Middle East that requires us to don black before we leave the house?
Any assistance that Abu Dhabi visitors to this blog could provide to us would be most appreciated!!!
Liquor to be Destroyed
This is alcohol abuse! 4,375 bottles of booze are going to be destroyed.* An Arab national, who, obviously, must of had some pretty big brass ones to try to smuggle 364 and a half cases of booze, was caught. What the heck were you thinking?!? Do you not know what the penalty for something like this is? Didn't anyone tell you???
*I heard a great story the other day about what happens to confiscated booze. This forum, however, is not the right place for it. It will have to be saved for the book...
*I heard a great story the other day about what happens to confiscated booze. This forum, however, is not the right place for it. It will have to be saved for the book...
Count is at four, or is it five?
2009 is still new. We are not even half-way through January.
Interesting, though, isn't it, that only the names of certain criminals are published and others are not. Very telling. Much like the "name that Party" game the news media plays in the States...
"An Arab national was beheaded on Sunday..."
Interesting, though, isn't it, that only the names of certain criminals are published and others are not. Very telling. Much like the "name that Party" game the news media plays in the States...
"An Arab national was beheaded on Sunday..."
Not Enough Jail Time and No Lashes!
Why is it that five men who posed as doctors to "examine" female patients were ONLY sentenced to six months in prison and fined SR100,000 each??? [$26,809.65] I hope that women in this Country will express so outrage at this. Much, much lesser crimes have resulted in men being jailed for years and given lashes. These five are basically being let off the proverbial hook with less than a slap on the hand. If I had to guess why, I'd say... Never mind. Let's not go there. But look at what they've done?!? They've pretty much been able to abuse innocent women who will now never trust anyone in a white coat, again. Perverts and sickos. The world is just full of 'em.
TSA Restrictions Now Applicable
Some - how many years? - after the TSA banned the carrying on of any and all liquids in luggage, similar rules have been adopted in The Sandbox. Effective today, "all types of liquids such as water, juice, Pepsi, perfumes, oils, drugs, creams, toothpastes, shampoos, gels, etc. if the package size is in excess of 100 ml" will not be allowed in passenger carry-on luggage. The Ministry of Interior in cooperation with the GACA [General Authority of Civil Aviation] is enforcing the ban in compliance with a decision of the International Civil Aviation Organization... to ensure the safety of passengers.
Passengers have been asked to cooperate "with the inspection teams that will be in charge of using special equipment to check carry-on luggage." Oh my gosh. This is going to be a nightmare for the airport employees. I can just picture the pandemonium this is going to cause. I've blogged before on how I so much dislike having to board a plane from the airport, here, and would rather spend the extra time, money and inconvenience to go to Bahrain to get on a plane. The passengers, here, tend to be unruly and refuse to believe that a "queue" is something they must participate in - getting on a plane requires a lot of "queuing." Getting boarding passes, going through security, getting on the plane... You can stand in a line for an hour to get through security at an airport here and not move a single inch toward being screened because families cut in front from the left and right and not a single official standing in a uniform anywhere will do anything about it. Now you're going to add checking carry-on luggage to this already out of control process? Oh, you poor workers. Women are going to go bonkers if you open their luggage - their husband's will be right there defending them and telling you that you cannot touch anything. I can picture it. It is something you'd have to experience to get the gist of...
"The liquid ban on international flights is part of a series of preventive and precautionary measures to ensure the security and safety of flights in the wake of the emergence of new forms of threats to use some of these banned substances against civil aviation in different parts of the world." Does someone know something that we don't?
Passengers have been asked to cooperate "with the inspection teams that will be in charge of using special equipment to check carry-on luggage." Oh my gosh. This is going to be a nightmare for the airport employees. I can just picture the pandemonium this is going to cause. I've blogged before on how I so much dislike having to board a plane from the airport, here, and would rather spend the extra time, money and inconvenience to go to Bahrain to get on a plane. The passengers, here, tend to be unruly and refuse to believe that a "queue" is something they must participate in - getting on a plane requires a lot of "queuing." Getting boarding passes, going through security, getting on the plane... You can stand in a line for an hour to get through security at an airport here and not move a single inch toward being screened because families cut in front from the left and right and not a single official standing in a uniform anywhere will do anything about it. Now you're going to add checking carry-on luggage to this already out of control process? Oh, you poor workers. Women are going to go bonkers if you open their luggage - their husband's will be right there defending them and telling you that you cannot touch anything. I can picture it. It is something you'd have to experience to get the gist of...
"The liquid ban on international flights is part of a series of preventive and precautionary measures to ensure the security and safety of flights in the wake of the emergence of new forms of threats to use some of these banned substances against civil aviation in different parts of the world." Does someone know something that we don't?
Do you have any idea how foolish this...
...makes you look? No wonder people in other parts of the world just shake their heads and say, "What a strange country." Of course, little articles like this are only just a teeny tiny little part of why they shake their heads in utter bewilderment.
A wedding reception "ended in pandemonium and the divorce of the newly wed couple over a dispute of whether or not there should be musical instruments at the reception. The mothers of both the bride and groom agreed that singers would not play any string instruments." The bride's mother then "secretly paid 8,000SR" [$2,144.72] for "a violin performance." "...the groom's mother exploded with rage and began abusing the bride's mother." After a physical fight, "the still angry mother of the groom ordered her son to pronounce divorce, which he immediately did." [What a wimp! The groom.]
Sure you are upset that you are not married, now. Maybe you're 17 and your chances of finding a husband are dwindling. But trust me, Bride, whoever you are, this is NOT a man that you even wanted to be married to in the first place.
Imagine six months from now, if you were married to him and he complained to his mother that you folded his socks wrong. Never mind. Bad example. Your maid probably folds the socks. Okay. Imagine six months from now, if you were married to him and he complained to his mother that you accidentally showed your face to some of his friends when they were over visiting - because you forgot to put your head-covering on before walking past the opening to the room in your own house. What do you think his mother is going to order him to do then? Beat you senseless. That's what. Two years from now you'd be sitting on the couch all day watching soaps, getting fat, eating bon bons and talking on your mobile, asking your BBF what happened to your life.
Don't worry Bride. Just because now you are divorced and "damaged goods." Another man will come along. So what that he will probably be old enough to be your grandfather and already has three wives. Look at the bright side. You'll be married and not an old spinster.
Ahh. Happy, marital bliss, in The Sandbox...
A wedding reception "ended in pandemonium and the divorce of the newly wed couple over a dispute of whether or not there should be musical instruments at the reception. The mothers of both the bride and groom agreed that singers would not play any string instruments." The bride's mother then "secretly paid 8,000SR" [$2,144.72] for "a violin performance." "...the groom's mother exploded with rage and began abusing the bride's mother." After a physical fight, "the still angry mother of the groom ordered her son to pronounce divorce, which he immediately did." [What a wimp! The groom.]
Sure you are upset that you are not married, now. Maybe you're 17 and your chances of finding a husband are dwindling. But trust me, Bride, whoever you are, this is NOT a man that you even wanted to be married to in the first place.
Imagine six months from now, if you were married to him and he complained to his mother that you folded his socks wrong. Never mind. Bad example. Your maid probably folds the socks. Okay. Imagine six months from now, if you were married to him and he complained to his mother that you accidentally showed your face to some of his friends when they were over visiting - because you forgot to put your head-covering on before walking past the opening to the room in your own house. What do you think his mother is going to order him to do then? Beat you senseless. That's what. Two years from now you'd be sitting on the couch all day watching soaps, getting fat, eating bon bons and talking on your mobile, asking your BBF what happened to your life.
Don't worry Bride. Just because now you are divorced and "damaged goods." Another man will come along. So what that he will probably be old enough to be your grandfather and already has three wives. Look at the bright side. You'll be married and not an old spinster.
Ahh. Happy, marital bliss, in The Sandbox...
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Add "yoga" to the list...
...of fatwa's. Things not allowed. Oh, sure. Many take up yoga for "physical exercise and contemplation," but apparently the undertones of what further and serious study of yoga could possibly influence makes it bad. It is not allowed.
Common Sense - Complete Lack of It!
The title of this post could also be, "Job Security." With such a callous lack of common sense, the members of the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice will have plenty to do and thus provide them with years and eons of "job security."
A twenty-stupid-something year old woman managed to escape from a group of kidnappers. Come on, woman. What the heck were you doing that you got into a car with a man - who I think you probably knew - at night, anyway? Have you NO F'NG CLUE as to what happens in situations like this? Oh, sure. She's claiming she was kidnapped. I guess she could have been. My initial, gut-reaction, though, to this story is that she wasn't "kidnapped." I mean, come on... "The unnamed woman told commission members that she was kidnapped by a man who drove her to a place where his friends were camping." No. Just doesn't mesh. Then "the men [allegedly] tied her up and forced her to take some type of pills." If there was more than one man involved would they really have to tie her up? I don't think so. "She said the men drank alcohol and that some of them tried to rape her. She, however, escaped as they were very drunk." Um-hmm.
I'm calling BS on the whole story. A young woman - and in her 20's she is old enough to know better - was with a man and then when things - whatever "things" - started to escalate and she realized that what she was doing wasn't particularly "honorable," and she was probably late for her curfew or something - she makes up some cockamany story to cover her tracks. I'm guessing that there are some who will believe her, but I'm not one of them.
"Sheikh Abdul Rahman ibn Hamad Al-Diag, chairman of commission... warned women against riding alone with non-related men and called on parents not to allow their daughters to venture out alone at night." Gee. Ya think?
And, I think that my version of the story is much closer to the truth than the version in the newspaper.
A twenty-stupid-something year old woman managed to escape from a group of kidnappers. Come on, woman. What the heck were you doing that you got into a car with a man - who I think you probably knew - at night, anyway? Have you NO F'NG CLUE as to what happens in situations like this? Oh, sure. She's claiming she was kidnapped. I guess she could have been. My initial, gut-reaction, though, to this story is that she wasn't "kidnapped." I mean, come on... "The unnamed woman told commission members that she was kidnapped by a man who drove her to a place where his friends were camping." No. Just doesn't mesh. Then "the men [allegedly] tied her up and forced her to take some type of pills." If there was more than one man involved would they really have to tie her up? I don't think so. "She said the men drank alcohol and that some of them tried to rape her. She, however, escaped as they were very drunk." Um-hmm.
I'm calling BS on the whole story. A young woman - and in her 20's she is old enough to know better - was with a man and then when things - whatever "things" - started to escalate and she realized that what she was doing wasn't particularly "honorable," and she was probably late for her curfew or something - she makes up some cockamany story to cover her tracks. I'm guessing that there are some who will believe her, but I'm not one of them.
"Sheikh Abdul Rahman ibn Hamad Al-Diag, chairman of commission... warned women against riding alone with non-related men and called on parents not to allow their daughters to venture out alone at night." Gee. Ya think?
And, I think that my version of the story is much closer to the truth than the version in the newspaper.
Sad and Scary
DH and I took The Kids for their walk yesterday afternoon. If DH goes with us, then both Kids can go at the same time. I can't do the two of them together anymore. Honestly, since the fall, and with a couple of other instances - mostly involving "K A T S" - I don't know how I ever managed the two of them together as well as I did. Something very sad and scary happened yesterday. I couldn't sleep last night because of it. And, yes, I am overly sensitive to these kinds of things. Instead of trying to process what was my first class in "Modern Standard Arabic," which, by the way cannot be processed, but more on that later, I spent the night just thinking about how frightened and lonely and hungry and scared the stray dog we ran into must be.
Pretty dog. Some sort of light-colored Shepard. Alaskan somethingorother, Malmute, Husky? I don't know. Very handsome though - with light gray and beige fur - and very light blue / gray eyes. Young. Obviously young. Not a puppy, but not full-grown, either. And thin. Very, very thin. I'm going back up to where we saw him / her this morning with food. DH says he thinks that it is probably someone's pet that just got out. He always tries to make me see things like this from a much different angle than I do. No. I doubt very much he was someone's pet that just got out. And if he [we'll call him "he," but since, again, everything happened so quickly, I didn't take proper notice of the hind-end of the dog to determine whether it was a he / she] is someone's dog - that someone doesn't deserve him. Why didn't he have a collar on? And why was he so damn thin?!?
No. Unfortunately he is just one of millions of dogs that someone probably got as a little puppy and then decided that once the puppy got a little bigger that it was too much work or something and the dog got "kicked to the wayside." Why!!? WHY??? There are far too many people that should be on some sort of list as not ever being allowed to have pets!!! We have lots and lots and lots of stray cats in this part of the world. No one - well that's not entirely true - we do have PAWS - does anything about the situation. Dogs, too. After I did the post about seeing stray dogs at a mall, a local blogger brought to my attention the stray dogs down by the Holiday Inn - and now I've seen them there, too. They are here. And, of course, with no one doing anything about the situation it will only become worse with time. No way to stop the population of them growing.
What was scary was that once again, all of the sudden, a dog just appeared. No warning. No barking on his part - no noise of him coming. I tense up immediately. The Baby, no doubt, senses this. She starts going ballistic. Then The Boy realizes what is going on and he wants in on the action, too. If I would have had both of them - by myself - I would have never been able to control them. I was having a hard enough time controlling The Baby; DH had The Boy. It was ten minutes - no I am not kidding - of both Kids doing all they could to be freed from our clutches to get to this poor stray dog - and did the stray dog high-tail it off to wherever he had come from? No. He kept following us. It was an actual, physical work-out, just pulling and tugging The Baby to get her to come with me instead of trying - with all her physical might - to get to the stray dog behind us. DH, with The Boy, was experiencing the exact same "work-out."
I hate to think of the fur that would have flown if my two Kids would have gotten to the poor stray. Why they have it in for some dogs, and not for others, is beyond me. Yes, they are socialized. They play beautifully with other dogs - IN A CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT. Outside of that "environment," however, oh my gosh - it is a completely different story. Is it my fault - because I do get tense - that they - my Kids - feel the need to protect me? Probably. How do you control that - the fear of the unknown - unknown as in what might happen? As we continued along - with our two Kids doing their best to NOT continue with us, but instead, go back to - good grief - who knows what my two Kids were wanting to do - I found a stick and grabbed it. For one brief second I considered using the stick to beat The Baby [no - of course I would NEVER do that!!!] just to get her to behave. When the stray finally decided that he really didn't want to follow us after all and headed a different direction, I very calmly said to DH, "You know I would hate to have to ever beat a dog with a stick." DH replied, "But you would if you had to." Yes. I would. The stick is outside by the front door. It is more of a pole than a stick. A dowel. I'll be grabbing it again, today, before we head out on our walk. On second thought, there is a metal dowel in the garage that I used to carry when we'd walk around the golf course - where there were stray dogs. I'm grabbing the metal "stick" before we head out today...
My decision to not take "Modern Standard Arabic," this session of Adult Education has been made. I got the work out from last night and started to look at it - along with a simple page from the reading / writing class I took almost three years ago - and decided that I need to take the reading / writing class again. This is from last night's class:
I don't have a clue - not a clue - what these sentences say. I know one of them has the words "United Nations" in it, another has "father" but in the "formal" sense as opposed to the "informal" sense [whalid is the formal; abu is the informal]. The words "literature," and "Egyptian" are in these sentences somewhere, as well. The alphabet pages that I grabbed to use as a handy reference are of no help. Nonewhatsoever. It would take me days to try to decipher and translate the sentences, above, one letter at a time...
Pretty dog. Some sort of light-colored Shepard. Alaskan somethingorother, Malmute, Husky? I don't know. Very handsome though - with light gray and beige fur - and very light blue / gray eyes. Young. Obviously young. Not a puppy, but not full-grown, either. And thin. Very, very thin. I'm going back up to where we saw him / her this morning with food. DH says he thinks that it is probably someone's pet that just got out. He always tries to make me see things like this from a much different angle than I do. No. I doubt very much he was someone's pet that just got out. And if he [we'll call him "he," but since, again, everything happened so quickly, I didn't take proper notice of the hind-end of the dog to determine whether it was a he / she] is someone's dog - that someone doesn't deserve him. Why didn't he have a collar on? And why was he so damn thin?!?
No. Unfortunately he is just one of millions of dogs that someone probably got as a little puppy and then decided that once the puppy got a little bigger that it was too much work or something and the dog got "kicked to the wayside." Why!!? WHY??? There are far too many people that should be on some sort of list as not ever being allowed to have pets!!! We have lots and lots and lots of stray cats in this part of the world. No one - well that's not entirely true - we do have PAWS - does anything about the situation. Dogs, too. After I did the post about seeing stray dogs at a mall, a local blogger brought to my attention the stray dogs down by the Holiday Inn - and now I've seen them there, too. They are here. And, of course, with no one doing anything about the situation it will only become worse with time. No way to stop the population of them growing.
What was scary was that once again, all of the sudden, a dog just appeared. No warning. No barking on his part - no noise of him coming. I tense up immediately. The Baby, no doubt, senses this. She starts going ballistic. Then The Boy realizes what is going on and he wants in on the action, too. If I would have had both of them - by myself - I would have never been able to control them. I was having a hard enough time controlling The Baby; DH had The Boy. It was ten minutes - no I am not kidding - of both Kids doing all they could to be freed from our clutches to get to this poor stray dog - and did the stray dog high-tail it off to wherever he had come from? No. He kept following us. It was an actual, physical work-out, just pulling and tugging The Baby to get her to come with me instead of trying - with all her physical might - to get to the stray dog behind us. DH, with The Boy, was experiencing the exact same "work-out."
I hate to think of the fur that would have flown if my two Kids would have gotten to the poor stray. Why they have it in for some dogs, and not for others, is beyond me. Yes, they are socialized. They play beautifully with other dogs - IN A CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT. Outside of that "environment," however, oh my gosh - it is a completely different story. Is it my fault - because I do get tense - that they - my Kids - feel the need to protect me? Probably. How do you control that - the fear of the unknown - unknown as in what might happen? As we continued along - with our two Kids doing their best to NOT continue with us, but instead, go back to - good grief - who knows what my two Kids were wanting to do - I found a stick and grabbed it. For one brief second I considered using the stick to beat The Baby [no - of course I would NEVER do that!!!] just to get her to behave. When the stray finally decided that he really didn't want to follow us after all and headed a different direction, I very calmly said to DH, "You know I would hate to have to ever beat a dog with a stick." DH replied, "But you would if you had to." Yes. I would. The stick is outside by the front door. It is more of a pole than a stick. A dowel. I'll be grabbing it again, today, before we head out on our walk. On second thought, there is a metal dowel in the garage that I used to carry when we'd walk around the golf course - where there were stray dogs. I'm grabbing the metal "stick" before we head out today...
My decision to not take "Modern Standard Arabic," this session of Adult Education has been made. I got the work out from last night and started to look at it - along with a simple page from the reading / writing class I took almost three years ago - and decided that I need to take the reading / writing class again. This is from last night's class:
I don't have a clue - not a clue - what these sentences say. I know one of them has the words "United Nations" in it, another has "father" but in the "formal" sense as opposed to the "informal" sense [whalid is the formal; abu is the informal]. The words "literature," and "Egyptian" are in these sentences somewhere, as well. The alphabet pages that I grabbed to use as a handy reference are of no help. Nonewhatsoever. It would take me days to try to decipher and translate the sentences, above, one letter at a time...
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Posting Will Suffer
I started my fourth Arabic class tonight. I started taking Arabic shortly after we came to The Sandbox and took a couple "conversational" Arabic classes. I learned how to say "hello" [marharba], "please" [min fadlak], "thank you" [shukran] and "big dog" [kalb (dog) kabeer (big)]. To say that my Arabic conversational skills are basic is an understatement. They are the utmost basic. I can come up with a couple more words, but certainly nothing I could hold a conversation with. Then I took a reading / writing class a couple of years ago. It was difficult, but I thoroughly enjoyed it.
Tonight I went to class, "Modern Standard Arabic," which is supposed to teach me how to use my [utmost] basic skills in combination with reading / writing. My gosh. I thought for sure we would at least review the alphabet. I thought wrong. Very wrong. We started out with vocabulary and these were the words: literature, building, Egyptian, work, live and six other words - I think there were eleven in all. Then we moved to four verbs - none of which I can rattle off, here, now. Minutes later we were constructing sentences IN ARABIC. "Nour studies literature at an Egyptian university." What?!? You've got to be kidding me. Totally lost. I mean totally. I am considering retaking the reading / writing course to get back up to speed. When you don't use something on a regular basis and when it has been two - almost three - years since taking that course - trust me, you'd be lost.
If I decide to continue with this course - and that decision is up in the air, as of now, tonight, then I need to do a cram refresher course from the reading / writing course I took before and I only have tonight and tomorrow to do it. The next class is on Monday evening. Yikes!
Posting will suffer if I stay in the course... And so will my brain. I'm all up to learning Arabic. I have personal reasons for wanting to do so. But I really think before I try reading sentences such as "Nour studies literature at an Egyptian university" that I need to be able to at least recognize the letters. I didn't recognize them. Not a single one. It is definitely not an easy language to master - speaking it - or reading and writing it. Arabic has THREE different forms for every letter - depending on if it goes at the beginning of the word, or if it is in the middle of the word, or if it is the last letter of the word. Making my decision as I type this and think this through a bit more. I need a refresher course on reading and writing. That course is on Sunday and Tuesday. I don't think I need to show up for "Modern Standard Arabic" on Monday...
Tonight I went to class, "Modern Standard Arabic," which is supposed to teach me how to use my [utmost] basic skills in combination with reading / writing. My gosh. I thought for sure we would at least review the alphabet. I thought wrong. Very wrong. We started out with vocabulary and these were the words: literature, building, Egyptian, work, live and six other words - I think there were eleven in all. Then we moved to four verbs - none of which I can rattle off, here, now. Minutes later we were constructing sentences IN ARABIC. "Nour studies literature at an Egyptian university." What?!? You've got to be kidding me. Totally lost. I mean totally. I am considering retaking the reading / writing course to get back up to speed. When you don't use something on a regular basis and when it has been two - almost three - years since taking that course - trust me, you'd be lost.
If I decide to continue with this course - and that decision is up in the air, as of now, tonight, then I need to do a cram refresher course from the reading / writing course I took before and I only have tonight and tomorrow to do it. The next class is on Monday evening. Yikes!
Posting will suffer if I stay in the course... And so will my brain. I'm all up to learning Arabic. I have personal reasons for wanting to do so. But I really think before I try reading sentences such as "Nour studies literature at an Egyptian university" that I need to be able to at least recognize the letters. I didn't recognize them. Not a single one. It is definitely not an easy language to master - speaking it - or reading and writing it. Arabic has THREE different forms for every letter - depending on if it goes at the beginning of the word, or if it is in the middle of the word, or if it is the last letter of the word. Making my decision as I type this and think this through a bit more. I need a refresher course on reading and writing. That course is on Sunday and Tuesday. I don't think I need to show up for "Modern Standard Arabic" on Monday...
Ransom paid, ship released, pirates drown
Perfect. Call it karma. Call it whatever you want. The Sirius Star, an oil tanker, carrying some 250 gazillion gallons of oil from Saudi Arabia was hijacked in November. The pirates wanted some ridiculous amount of cash to release the ship and the ship's 25 crew members. The story has a happy ending though. The pirates were only able to collect $3,000,000 in ransom. That's not the happy part. This is: "...things went badly wrong for the pirates... they squabbled over how to split the money and than a wave washed off their getaway boat and drowned five of them." Pure schadenfreude! Bwahhh ha ha hah!!!
Read about this first at JammieWearingFool. Dinah Lord has it posted, as well.
Our two local newspapers, today, both have an article about the Sirius Star, but say nothing about the five pirates going for a swim with the fishes in the deep blue sea...
Read about this first at JammieWearingFool. Dinah Lord has it posted, as well.
Our two local newspapers, today, both have an article about the Sirius Star, but say nothing about the five pirates going for a swim with the fishes in the deep blue sea...
What's The Count?
It is a new year. Last year's total was 102. So far this year three or four...
A traffic police officer has been executed. The criminal, who is identified in the article, was convicted "of kidnapping an expatriate man, raping him and taking away his money at gunpoint... taking the mobile phone... and driving under the influence of liquor." Bizarre. Just bizarre.
"During investigation [sic], Al-Oqail acknowledged the crime he had committed... The court decided to execute the man as a deterrent and lesson to others..." I'm telling you, this kind of justice works. The courts in the States - the judges - the attorneys for the criminals? Wusses!
A traffic police officer has been executed. The criminal, who is identified in the article, was convicted "of kidnapping an expatriate man, raping him and taking away his money at gunpoint... taking the mobile phone... and driving under the influence of liquor." Bizarre. Just bizarre.
"During investigation [sic], Al-Oqail acknowledged the crime he had committed... The court decided to execute the man as a deterrent and lesson to others..." I'm telling you, this kind of justice works. The courts in the States - the judges - the attorneys for the criminals? Wusses!
Thursday, January 08, 2009
It is gonna be messy. I just KNOW it is!
The big water bowl in the back yard that I float around in all summer, "working," has been leaking for sometime. No biggie. Every morning we'd just throw the hose in it and bring the water back up to where it needed to be. No, Rev. It "iz not leeeeeking in the valve." We quit filling the pool and the water just kept draining out. A couple of days later the water level was well below the valve [don't ask me why it is called the valve - I would call it a "jet," but whatever] and it was past the "filter level," too. The water continued to go down. It was leaking more slowly, but it was still leaking. Somewhere... The pool contains a lot of water. You'd think with the amount of water that was leaking out we'd have a sink hole in our back yard somewhere. We don't. DH called Rev and said, do you think it's the light? Is it leaking through there? Rev came by. His answer was, "Weel seeee." And, then Rev had his worker - out regular pool guy - take the light out. Only the light isn't in there with a couple of screws. It was grouted in. So, the light has now been hammered and chipped out. The light is not the problem.
The light - dangling and useless.Two days ago, Rev came by and was trying to tell me what he thinks the problem is now. None of what he said made any sense to me - phonetically or literally. I basically threw my hands up in the air and said, "Rev, I don't understand a word you are saying to me and the words that I do understand make absolutely no sense. You need to talk to DH." Rev's standard response to me - always - is, "Yeah, yeah, yeah." No, Rev. Do it now. Call him on his cell. The number is 050-555-5555. Rev set up a time to meet DH this morning at 8:30. When Rev tells DH something - he keeps his word. If he tells me something - he blows me off, completely. I would much rather that DH deal with the man. I just don't have the patience.
The problem, apparently, is behind the tile. The cement must be cracked somewhere and water has been slowly leaking - increasing in its frequency - for sometime now. The tile is going to have to be taken out, the cement repaired, then the whole area will be regrouted and retiled. Great. Rev took one of the tiles with him - he is going to try to match it. Good luck with that. The pool is some twenty-plus years old. Those tiles were likely a much different color blue then than they are now - between the chlorine and the sun. The new tiles are never going to match the old tiles. Not a big deal, really, as far as I'm concerned. Rev has yet to tell us what it is going to cost to repair the pool. We will be responsible for the cost, not the company which DH works for which rents us the house, even though we don't own the pool. Whatever.
What I am not pleased about is the mess it is going to make - of our entire back yard and patio area. There is no way it is going to be a nice, neat, quick one-afternoon fix and repair job. Rev does not work that way. He is spread too thin, here, with all the work he does. For certain things we can find someone else to do the work and conversely, with other things, Rev seems to have a monopoly on - pools being one of those "things." Great. He will show up one afternoon when he had said he'd be here in the morning, start a job, then tell me he'll be back the next day and we won't see him for a week. That the backyard is The Kids play area and "business" area is a big concern. I am incredibly anxious over the pool now NOT having water in it. DH says I'm being overly frantic over nothing. No. I don't think I am.Not enough that I was worried about The Kids falling in the pool when it had water in it. Now, I'm worried about The Kids falling in the pool while it is empty. It won't be The Baby, either. Nope. It will be The Boy. And he will be hurt. I'm picturing broken legs. Plural. I am very careful about them being out there. I am either out back with them, or I am in the kitchen where I can keep an eye on things at all times. That is their backyard - their play area. One of them is going to run by - too closely to the edge - and wham! It is going to hurt. A lot. I've been taking them out at night separately to do business. At least during the day they can see where the big hole is, but at night - the pool light has been disconnected and "removed," and I'm just concerned for their safety. Their little playmate, Nuffie, hasn't been over to play in the yard because with the three of them there IS going to be an accident. So far, Nuffie is the only one of them that hasn't been in the pool. I would hate to see her get hurt.
The Baby, The Boy, and Nuffie [red collar] playin!
The Baby and Nuffie
The three of them: Nuffie, The Baby, and The BoyThe good thing - if there is something good about having to have your pool completely drained, untiled, repaired, retiled, etc., is that it is too cold to be spending time outside either by or in the pool. Since it has to happen - the work on the pool - better it has to happen now, in January, instead of in June when we are using the pool every day. The pump on the pool broke about two weeks ago - completely broke - and we started letting it drain on its own for the first week. Then we had it manually - with an electric pump - emptied. We have gone a week now with a completely dry pool. Let's just see how long it takes Rev to get his act together and get our pool fixed. We know how long it took him to do the work in the bedroom - six weeks, from start to finish, maybe a little longer. I'm guessing the work on the pool won't be done until sometime in March...
The Shoe is on the Other Foot
We can expect prompt action to this complaint where Saudi workers are complaining of having to work long hours and for payment of overtime. If the workers were from Bangladesh or India, the case would drag on for months years. I have posted time and time and time and time and time again on how workers - the imported workers - are mistreated, be it by unpaid wages, or long hours, or actual physical abuse. The stories are all different and all the same. But, let Saudi workers complain and someone takes notice. Action, too, I'm betting.
There are some differences in this particular complaint, though. The first glaring one being that Arab News has named the company! Companies are almost never named - I know of ONE time, previous to this - and one time only. So, why has the company, Saudia Catering, been named this time?
For starters because 100 Saudi employees "filed a case complaining of discrimination and slave-like work conditions." Hmmm... What about all those other cases? Tell me there wasn't discrimination involved and slave-like work conditions! "In a signed document... employees alleged that the company is violating labor laws and endangering national security by employing overstayers in its operations department - the final line before food and drink are boarded onto aircraft." So what. The company is violating labor laws. Big deal. Companies here violate labor laws. Today is different than any other day, how? It is the way it is, here. And, someone tell me how the overstayers are "endangering national security?" Are you afraid that an overstayer is going to poison the food or coffee? Is that what you mean by "endangering national security?"
Employees are "fed up with the company's illegal activities." And, like I already asked, what about ALL the other companies that engage in somewhat unscrupulous labor activities? We already know the answer to that, though, don't we... The employees "allege problems began two years ago with the appointment of a new unit manager who began shifting Saudis from jobs that met their qualifications to jobs unrelated to their training and education level, such as technicians being moved to manual work." Oh for goodness sakes. Quit 'chur whining. A previous gardener we had, who was trained to be an electrician, was promised a great job in Saudi as an electrician before he left Bangladesh. That great job? He is a gardener.
Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what the real problem is. The Saudis are upset because "unqualified foreign workers... have been given supervisory positions." There you go. The gist of the problem, right there. One of the Saudi employees [who has not been "named"] says, "Labor Minister Ghazi Al-Gosaibi previously stated that the Kingdom is not a recruitment agency for foreigners. All our country's jobs must be for our sons and daughters." No one would disagree that the country's jobs should be done by this country's own "sons and daughters," but if we - all of us ex-pats - leave tomorrow to let you have the jobs, this country will immediately come to a screeching halt.
Another employee [who asked not to be named] said, "We don't want all the jobs as stated by the minister, we just want the jobs that are currently reserved by his office for Saudis." Ahh. So you really don't think that ALL the jobs here should be for this country's "sons and daughters," then. What you do think is that if there is a simple desk job, where you can push around some paper and play with your mobile phone for eight hours while receiving the pay of a CEO, then that job should - rightfully or not - be yours. You don't want some job that requires cooking chickenfishlamb stew - actually preparing the product which your company provides. Why didn't you just say so? Now we can begin to "understand" the problem and work toward a solution. No more Saudis will be in the kitchen. They can all sit at desks. How long do you think Saudia Catering will be able to stay in business - as a company that provides a product - food for airplane passenger consumption - if there are only desk jockeys and no cooks?
"The employees also allege their marriages are strained due to being forced to work long shifts, sometimes up to 16 hours a day, and on their days off." Cry me a river. There are a lot of employees in this country who don't even get to see their families after work! They come for two-year stints before they are allowed to go home!!! Oh, and "days off?" The laborers here are lucky that they get ONE DAY off - they don't get "days off!" According to someone [unnamed, of course], "This has created a problem for us in our homes. Our wives are not convinced that we're being forced to constantly work long hours and on our days off and holidays. Some of the guys have even got divorced." Hmm. The comments I so want to make here are just not appropriate. I am going to refrain...
The article says, "The employees are also calling for Saudia Catering to define the nature of their jobs, and offer them fair working hours, appropriate salaries, housing allowances, payment for overtime and other expenses as required under Saudi labor law." If Saudia Catering has to do this, then shouldn't ALL companies be required to do so??? Apparently it is the law... Never mind. "We don't want any special treatment... If any one slacks in performing his duties then it's the company's right to take action." Yeah. Let me be the first to call BS on that! Oh, and good luck to the company for trying to get rid of someone, a "local," for slacking off in performing his duties. Um-hmm...
Another [unnamed] employee says, "We've backed our case with sufficient evidence. We're not going to get tired and back off or slack, as the company wants us to. On the contrary, we're not going to give them what they want." Well okay, then. There you have it. I am not familiar with all of the airlines that Saudia Catering serves, but am making a note to myself right now to make sure I pack my own lunch before I next get on a plane. If Saudia is not going to have cooks in the kitchens anymore then they are not going to have a product to provide - food on airplanes - and we are all going to be very hungry if we board a long flight... It is as simple as that.
There are some differences in this particular complaint, though. The first glaring one being that Arab News has named the company! Companies are almost never named - I know of ONE time, previous to this - and one time only. So, why has the company, Saudia Catering, been named this time?
For starters because 100 Saudi employees "filed a case complaining of discrimination and slave-like work conditions." Hmmm... What about all those other cases? Tell me there wasn't discrimination involved and slave-like work conditions! "In a signed document... employees alleged that the company is violating labor laws and endangering national security by employing overstayers in its operations department - the final line before food and drink are boarded onto aircraft." So what. The company is violating labor laws. Big deal. Companies here violate labor laws. Today is different than any other day, how? It is the way it is, here. And, someone tell me how the overstayers are "endangering national security?" Are you afraid that an overstayer is going to poison the food or coffee? Is that what you mean by "endangering national security?"
Employees are "fed up with the company's illegal activities." And, like I already asked, what about ALL the other companies that engage in somewhat unscrupulous labor activities? We already know the answer to that, though, don't we... The employees "allege problems began two years ago with the appointment of a new unit manager who began shifting Saudis from jobs that met their qualifications to jobs unrelated to their training and education level, such as technicians being moved to manual work." Oh for goodness sakes. Quit 'chur whining. A previous gardener we had, who was trained to be an electrician, was promised a great job in Saudi as an electrician before he left Bangladesh. That great job? He is a gardener.
Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what the real problem is. The Saudis are upset because "unqualified foreign workers... have been given supervisory positions." There you go. The gist of the problem, right there. One of the Saudi employees [who has not been "named"] says, "Labor Minister Ghazi Al-Gosaibi previously stated that the Kingdom is not a recruitment agency for foreigners. All our country's jobs must be for our sons and daughters." No one would disagree that the country's jobs should be done by this country's own "sons and daughters," but if we - all of us ex-pats - leave tomorrow to let you have the jobs, this country will immediately come to a screeching halt.
Another employee [who asked not to be named] said, "We don't want all the jobs as stated by the minister, we just want the jobs that are currently reserved by his office for Saudis." Ahh. So you really don't think that ALL the jobs here should be for this country's "sons and daughters," then. What you do think is that if there is a simple desk job, where you can push around some paper and play with your mobile phone for eight hours while receiving the pay of a CEO, then that job should - rightfully or not - be yours. You don't want some job that requires cooking chickenfishlamb stew - actually preparing the product which your company provides. Why didn't you just say so? Now we can begin to "understand" the problem and work toward a solution. No more Saudis will be in the kitchen. They can all sit at desks. How long do you think Saudia Catering will be able to stay in business - as a company that provides a product - food for airplane passenger consumption - if there are only desk jockeys and no cooks?
"The employees also allege their marriages are strained due to being forced to work long shifts, sometimes up to 16 hours a day, and on their days off." Cry me a river. There are a lot of employees in this country who don't even get to see their families after work! They come for two-year stints before they are allowed to go home!!! Oh, and "days off?" The laborers here are lucky that they get ONE DAY off - they don't get "days off!" According to someone [unnamed, of course], "This has created a problem for us in our homes. Our wives are not convinced that we're being forced to constantly work long hours and on our days off and holidays. Some of the guys have even got divorced." Hmm. The comments I so want to make here are just not appropriate. I am going to refrain...
The article says, "The employees are also calling for Saudia Catering to define the nature of their jobs, and offer them fair working hours, appropriate salaries, housing allowances, payment for overtime and other expenses as required under Saudi labor law." If Saudia Catering has to do this, then shouldn't ALL companies be required to do so??? Apparently it is the law... Never mind. "We don't want any special treatment... If any one slacks in performing his duties then it's the company's right to take action." Yeah. Let me be the first to call BS on that! Oh, and good luck to the company for trying to get rid of someone, a "local," for slacking off in performing his duties. Um-hmm...
Another [unnamed] employee says, "We've backed our case with sufficient evidence. We're not going to get tired and back off or slack, as the company wants us to. On the contrary, we're not going to give them what they want." Well okay, then. There you have it. I am not familiar with all of the airlines that Saudia Catering serves, but am making a note to myself right now to make sure I pack my own lunch before I next get on a plane. If Saudia is not going to have cooks in the kitchens anymore then they are not going to have a product to provide - food on airplanes - and we are all going to be very hungry if we board a long flight... It is as simple as that.
Punishment for Alcohol
Authorities don't fool around when it comes to drugs and alcohol. The warnings are loud and clear. Just. Don't. Do. It. The risk of getting caught is just too great. It doesn't seem to stop some people though. I'm sure it is a lucrative business - the amount of money that can be made. And, if there was no demand, there would be no supply, right?
Three [four?] men have been sentenced to prison terms and lashings for "liquor making and distribution and corruption." The article was printed without being edited. I can't tell if there were three our four men involved. One line says, "an Arab and two Africans," and the next says, "the Arab... the other three's..." No matter. Fifteen years in prison between them, and 1,300 lashes is a substantial punishment.
Three [four?] men have been sentenced to prison terms and lashings for "liquor making and distribution and corruption." The article was printed without being edited. I can't tell if there were three our four men involved. One line says, "an Arab and two Africans," and the next says, "the Arab... the other three's..." No matter. Fifteen years in prison between them, and 1,300 lashes is a substantial punishment.
Another Blackmailer Caught
They are a problem. Those pesky camera phones. The situation is just going to get worse. The young men are going to bear the brunt of the abuse - insofar as being arrested. The young women? Nah. Even though they are foolish enough to let themselves be photographed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
