W Stands for Women: Just When You Thought You Had No More Contempt Left for Bush...

Last month, I wrote about the Saudi woman who had been gang-raped and then sentenced to six months in prison and 200 lashes for appealing the verdict in the case (which originally sentenced her to 90 lashes for the crime of "being in the car of an unrelated male at the time of the rape"). At the time I noted:

That's terrorism, plain and simple. When women are tortured in this way, it a threat to other women that they, too, will be tortured if they get the idea in their pretty little heads to vigorously pursue justice after being raped. They are being terrified so they will keep silent.

This is being done by one of our "allies."

But don't expect President George "W stands for Women" Bush to give a flying shit about this brand of terrorism in Saudi Arabia when he doesn't even care about misogynist terrorism in America.
Today, CNN's Ed Henry (bless him!) asked Bush whether he raised concerns about the case during any of his recent conversations with Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah. Bush's response is a total disgrace—even for him.

Henry: On another issue of credibility in the Mid East—At the Annapolis Summit you used your influence to get Saudi Arabia to the table but I wonder whether now you will use you influence to do something about the Saudi rape case that has gotten so much international attention? What goes through your mind when you hear about a 19 year old Saudi woman getting gang raped by seven men and basically a Saudi court blames the victim and sentences 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 very emotional, of course. I'd have been angry at those who committed the crime, and I would be angry at the state that didn't support the victim, and our opinions were expressed by Dana Perino from the pul—podium.

Henry: 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.

Henry: If it was that important to you why wouldn't you at that level bring it directly up to King Abdullah?

Bush: There's plenty of time. He knows our position loud and clear.
The reality, however, as noted by Think Progress, is that when Perino was asked about the case last month, she merely noted that the case is "very discouraging and outrageous" and that the White House had "hope that the verdict [will change]" with the appeals process. And if wishes were horses, beggars would ride. So what about actually doing something about it? State Department spokesperson Sean McCormack magnanimously acquiesced that "most people would find [this case] relatively astonishing" but insisted the US State Department couldn't do anything.

But, in fairness, probably no one at the State Department considers King Abdullah a personal family friend, unlike the president.

Maybe next time these two assholes go for a romantic stroll together, they could find some time to talk about the pesky issue of state-sponsored terrorism against the state's own women.

That is, if Bush can remember and all.

[More at The Carpetbagger Report and C&L.]

Shakesville is run as a safe space. First-time commenters: Please read Shakesville's Commenting Policy and Feminism 101 Section before commenting. We also do lots of in-thread moderation, so we ask that everyone read the entirety of any thread before commenting, to ensure compliance with any in-thread moderation. Thank you.

blog comments powered by Disqus