Bush claims faulty memory on Saudi rape trial

It was hard not to be appalled by the news last month out of Saudi Arabia. A young woman had been gang raped — and then charged as a criminal for being in the car of a man who was not a relative. On November 16, a Saudi court sentenced the rape victim to six months in jail and 200 lashes — more than doubling her initial penalty.

CNN’s Ed Henry pressed the president on the matter at this morning’s White House press conference.

Q: Thank you. Another issue — on another issue of credibility in the Mideast, at the Annapolis summit, you used your influence to get Saudi Arabia to the table. But I wonder whether now you will use your influence to do something about the Saudi rape case that’s gotten so much international attention. What goes through your mind when you hear about a 19-year-old Saudi women getting gang-raped by seven men and basically a Saudi court blames the victim and sentenced her to 200 lashes? You spoke to King Abdullah by telephone in the last couple of weeks. Did you press him on this case? If so, what did you say? And if not, are you giving him a pass?

BUSH: My first thoughts were these: What happens if this happened to my daughter? How would I react? And I would have been — I would have been — I’d have been very emotional, of course. I’d have been angry at those who committed the crime, and I’d be angry at a state that didn’t support the victim. And our opinions were expressed by Dana Perino from the podium and —

Q: But did you press King Abdullah about it, personally?

BUSH: I talked to King Abdullah about the Middle Eastern peace. I don’t remember if that subject came up.

Bush was with Abdullah just last week. The president may have a lot on his plate, but he’d probably remember if he pressed the Saudi King about a rape trial eight days ago.

TP, which has the video, provides some important context.

Despite the President’s strident rhetoric supporting global human rights, the administration has so far refused to condemn the Saudi government and push it to lift the sentence. When asked about the case last month, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said only that the situation is “very discouraging and outrageous. There is an appeals process and we hope that the verdict changes.” State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said that the administration was “astonished,” but had “nothing else to offer.”

Looks like human rights aren’t as important as old “family friends.”

I’d just add that Ed Henry pressed the issue a little more, asking Bush, “But if it’s that important to you, why wouldn’t you bring it — at that level, bring it directly up to King Abdullah?”

The president responded, “We’ll have plenty of time.” I suspect the rape victim in Saudi Arabia facing six months in jail and 200 lashes would disagree.

This administration has more memory leaks than Microsoft Windows.

  • Bush was capable of remembering that his press secretary made a statement about it, but he can’t recollect whether he spoke to Abdullah about it personally?

  • They know you’ll just flag your lips and do nothing , they know it and count on it .
    Had enough yet ?

  • Doesn’t remember? He was so moved by the incident, thinking about what he would feel if this young woman was his daughter, but somehow he doesn’t remember if he mentioned it to the man he held hands with? Right.

    How I wish someone would stand up at the next Bush presser and ask, “Mr. President, are you having memory problems that the American people should be aware of? Let me ask that again, in case you don’t remember the question – stay with me, here – do you have a problem with your memory?”

    Or, maybe something like this: “Mr. President, about the only excuses you have not given for not knowing something, or not remembering something, are that your dog, Barney, ate the reports. Or that the memo fell in the toilet. Or that you spilled something on it. Or you left it at Camp David, or at the ranch, or someone must have taken it. Sir, this isn’t middle school, and we’re not buying it.”

    I can dream.

  • Must suck for an addict whose favorite drug dealer is such a creep. What’s worse for Bush is that the die-hard moronic 30% will really not like this.

  • Yeah, Anne, dream on. BTW, your comments are always so thoughtful and trenchant. You should consider getting your own blog. You always make sense…

  • How hard would it have been for Bush to have said, “It will really mean a lot to the American people if you consider intervening on this woman’s behalf to give her a pass.”

    She didn’t even merit a for-show attempt from him, it seems. That Abdullah really holds the strings with Bush.

  • I love how he has to bring up his daughter in order to think about how he would “feel” about a young woman being punished for being raped (while the male friend, who was also raped, was not punished).

    Most human being wouldn’t have to do that — they have the this thing called “empathy” that gives them the ability to understand a horrific situation without having to refer to one of their own. I guess it must be a byproduct of him being a sociopath.

    Also, the transcript over at ThinkProgress had Bush saying this:

    And our opinions were expressed by Dana Perino from the pulpit — from the podium.

    Wee bit of a Freudian slip there, don’t ya think?

  • The woman isn’t being punished for being raped. The rapists are in prison for that. She is being punished for being with an unrelated male (and then for speaking out). Saudi law and punishment are barbaric but this one falls within their everyday system. Not really something a President would intervene in.

  • Jerome,
    We have our own laws that are regularly enforced, but extenuating circumstances can be considered by the judge. If a US woman sits in a car and sells pot to the driver, she is breaking the law and potentially faces jail time. However, if the woman was raped in the process, she would likely be given probation rather than serve the jail time. The Saudi woman could certainly have an official record based on the law she broke, but I think most people were surprised that even a strict Islamist wouldn’t show just a bit of compassion. Instead, she actually got a stiffer sentence for trying to defend herself.

    Further, the US is supposed to have the moral authority to get these kinds of punishments changed. We may not have any business telling another country what laws they should have, but flogging is wrong and there is no excuse for the US not to say so.

  • I wonder, do Iranians flog and jail women for “being with unrelated males”? Funny how that Axis of Evil thing works.

    People, when you fill your cars with gas, remember who those bastards are that your money is going to. We go to war to remove Saddam because he was a dioctator, and we send Abdullah billions of dollars every week. We hold his hand and kiss his ass, knowing full well that things like this (and worse) go on every damn day:

    The woman was originally sentenced in October 2006 to 90 lashes. But when she appealed, the court more than doubled her sentence.

    The husband said the judge was pursuing “a personal vendetta.”

    “We were shocked when the judgment changed and her sentence was doubled,” the husband said. “We were looking for pardon; instead, she got double the whipping and more jail time.”

    A court source told Arab News, an English-language Middle Eastern daily newspaper, that the woman’s sentence was increased after the woman spoke to the media about the case.

    http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/11/21/saudi.rape.victim/

  • Jerome, don’t the Saudi courts convict Saudi women of this offense even if they were held under duress (that is, against their will) by the unrelated male they are charged with being alone with? That’s what happened in this case.

    This flies in the face of a basic principle of Western law. You can’t convict someone of committing a crime under duress under a Western legal system anymore than a legislature can pass a law that says “Mr. So-and-so is guilty of X and will be punished by two years in prison.” And it’s a safe bet the principle originated from even before our societies turned to Christianity.

    This is the country Al Qaeda came from by the way. We haven’t had anything even remotely as bad as Al Qaeda, with the exception of maybe Timothy McVeigh, since the Ku Klux Klan was murdering people. Isn’t it about time we distanced ourselves from these barbarians until they catch up, and find a way to rely on alternative fuels so we don’t have to pay their upper-class ridiculous profits to run these disgusting regimes? Bush and the Republicans don’t have what it takes to stand up to them, it seems.

  • Re: racerx’s comment, if the husband was interceding for the woman, it seems doubtful she wasn’t under duress when she was with the rapist. At least, it’s unlikely this guy thinks so.

  • The only reason I would like Hillary to win the presidency is for her to deal with sexists of all stripes from a position of power.

  • To the suggestion that this case is within the “everyday system” and not extra punishment for speaking out or defending herself, I ask why was her lawyer, one of the leading (and few) civil rights attorneys in Saudi Arabia disbarred for her appeal?

    Moreover, if this really is within SA’s “everyday system,” perhaps we should be exerting a lot more pressure on them to change their “everyday system.” Friends don’t let friends violate civil rights and all that.

  • Swan–
    Actually, IIRC, the husband okayed his wife to be with this man — all she wanted was to get a picture from him of her and him together (before she was married).

    And the guy she was with was also raped, according to a few reports I’ve read. Naturally, he got no punishment at all for being with her (at least none that’s been reported).

    As to Jerome’s comment that this just “falls within their everyday system” — that doesn’t mean the system is correct. And Bush can do damn plenty, considering his position.

    Of course, given his close ties to the Saudi royal family, it’s not too surprising he did nothing. After all, we all know that the Saudis have sponsored more terrorism than Iran and Iraq put together, yet we don’t see Cheney and Co. clamoring for invasion, now do we?

    There’s a reason.

  • I’m sure there are a lot of Republicans who like the idea of going back to the days when wonen were chattel – property owned first by their fathers, and then by their husbands. Life was so much simpler them, when women knew their place and were content to stay in it.

    I’m only surprised that Bush didn’t say something that indicated that it was probably her own fault she got raped, and while the rapes were probably bad, she still needed to be taught a lesson – kind of a variation on ” if a woman doesn’t want to be raped, she shouldn’t dress/talk/act like she wants to have sex, and if she happens to get pregnant, well, we’ll just prevent her from obtaining emergency contraception or an abortion, and that’ll teach her!

  • I’m sure there are a lot of RepublicansAmericans who like the idea of going back to the days when wonen were chattel – property owned first by their fathers, and then by their husbands. Life was so much simpler them, when women knew their place and were content to stay in it.

    And therein lies root cause number of one of Hillary Derangement Syndrome, and the reason the day the ultimate glass ceiling breaks cannot come too soon as the first step in forcing this pernicious view back into the hole it crawled out of.

  • Bush would likely not remember if HE had been raped 8 days ago. He stumbles through life in a mostly happy daze, still grooving on the fact that he’s the president, although he’s not quite sure how he got there. Just as well. If he took an objective, honest look at what a mess he’s made of it, he’d run out into traffic.

  • I’m sure there are a lot of Republicans who like the idea of going back to the days when wonen were chattel – property owned first by their fathers, and then by their husbands. Life was so much simpler them, when women knew their place and were content to stay in it.
    –Anne

    Someone earlier suggested that you get your own blog, and I just have to second that.

    Not because I want you to go away — oh dear no!

    It’s because you have some of the best comments I’ve ever read. Seriously. Tremendous stuff worthy of it’s own spotlight.

    **stands and claps**

    (Note: Zeitgeist and Former Dan should probably do the same — all of you folks are incredibly impressive.)

  • how convenient of the GREAT president bush to forget. well, If the camel riding mud eating inbred hairballs in saudi Arabia go thru with this atrocity, it is my personal opinion that every living thing should be obliterated in Saudi Arabia.
    this dark ages crap has nothing to do with an “eye for an eye” and if this girl is punished
    for being raped, then we as a nation should take 1,000,000 saudi lives for every lash.
    surely, there can’t be more than 200,000,000 of the inbred backwardassed turds.
    we should kill every last one of the miserable wankers.
    if we had a president and a government with any testosterone, she would already be exiled
    out of that upholstered hell hole. kill em all, let ALLAH sort em out

  • [You guys are making me blush…thank you for such kind comments…MarkD, I love your passion and your humor, and your devotion to honesty. I think everyone here brings something unique and I truly enjoy the passion I read here, the chance to think about an issue or an event from a different perspective. And my favorite thing is that people can offer a different opinion, find engagement and not ridicule.]

    Zeitgeist – you’re right – it should have been “Americans” and not just “Republicans.”

  • Jerome,
    We have our own laws that are regularly enforced, but extenuating circumstances can be considered by the judge. — TR @12

    And therein lies the dog, buried. There was a reason the judge didn’t consider extenuating circumstances (including her husband coming to her defense): she’s Shia, while Saudi Arabia is, essentially, Sunni. What’s good for me is not for thee (quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi). Even some Sunnis are appalled.

    PS I agree with everyone else that Anne’s comments are fantastic but, please, I’d much rather read them here than on a separate blog. It’s hard enough to keep up with those blogs I have already bookmarked…

  • What Mark D said, the WH cleaned up the transcript. He actually said “pulpit” first instead of podium. Which is telling in so many ways.

  • Jerome probably reads stories like this one-handed while he strokes that eensy-weensy thing that passes for his “manhood.” It’s what’s called “Republican sex.”

  • This administration has more memory leaks than Microsoft Windows

    I would’ve said that’s impossible, but you may be right :/

  • The girl is lucky. In some communities the she would be killed by a member of her own family for such a disgrace that brings shame to her family. In Iraq, Sadam Hussain outlawed this tribal practice. Now that he is gone, this horrific custom is making a comeback in Iraq.

  • Comments are closed.