"Saudi Doctoral Student Gets 34 Years in Prison For Tweets"

The AP reports:

A Saudi court has sentenced a doctoral student to 34 years in prison for spreading "[allegedly false] rumors" and retweeting dissidents, according to court documents obtained Thursday, a decision that has drawn growing global condemnation.

Activists and lawyers consider the sentence against Salma al-Shehab, a mother of two and a researcher at Leeds University in Britain, shocking even by Saudi standards of justice….

Al-Shehab was detained during a family vacation in January 2021 just days before she planned to return to the United Kingdom ….

Judges accused al-Shehab of "disturbing public order" and "destabilizing the social fabric" — claims stemming solely from her social media activity, according to an official charge sheet….

Comments

[Mr. Bumble]

I'm pretty sure Dems would love to use this as a president to go after Trump and those they accuse of disinformation.

[apedad]

Nah, Trump is doing a good enough job laying criminal crumbs that we don't have to make up crap.

[DaivdBehar]

Mr. Bumble is correct.

[Michael P]

Almost. He meant precedent, not president.

It is not nitpicking when one cares enough to correct.

[Mr. Bumble]

Missed that. Only one cup of coffee this morning.

Edit button please!

[DaivdBehar]

This is just the Mafia in power. That leaves pre rule of law remedies, rub outs, hostage taking, drone attacks.

As to the rule of law Dem bullshit. Without access to your laptop for your personal business, who has downloaded any material? I can get you 10 years in federal stir and a $250000 fine for each instance. So Dem are quite selective. If you work, you commit 3 federal delonies a day. I can prosecute every single person here, including Eugene. Send a picture of your house. I can wreck your budget with reports of costly violations to your zoning board.

This is lawfare. This is the Inquisition 2.0. The practioners need to be beheaded, as 1.0 was ended.

[DaivdBehar]

The scumbag lawyer profession must be crushed to save our nation.

Bill Clinton raises taxes on the rich. So the scumbag lawyer puts him through the wringer, not for a blow job, but for lying about a blowjob. Who does not lie about a blowjob if married to a Yale Law alumna? It is almost a duty. Result? Clinton spends 1000 hours on his defense.

Result? Your filthy traitor vile toxic subhuman scumbags? Clinton does not address Al Qaeda after the first WTC bombing.

Result your traitor filth, you vile internal enemy to our country? 9/11.

Naturally, subhuman filth Mueller covered up that factor of 9/11.

[DaivdBehar]

I got blocked by that queer law prof on Twitter. All kinds of people are hurling insults and threats at her. I asked if she was a licensed lawyer. She was suborning grooming and hideous physical child abuse. I had to ask.

[DaivdBehar]

That scary clown is a professor at Harvard Law School.

[Kleppe]

All that Trump has ever been accused of has been made up crap. You guys spent years insisting that he was a KGB agent for crying out loud.

[DaivdBehar]

It is just lawfare. Proof? If Trump gets sick or drops out, it ends in a millisecond.

Lawfare should be criminalized as a theft of tax funds.

[Krayt]

This. So many rage around, useful idiots screaming nobody is above the law. Yet it ends the moment he drops out.

No tax violation investigations, either, if he were still just a fun ostentatious character on TV saying, "You're fired!"

These politicians are lying, facetious frauds. Liars lie.

Hell, the NY prosecutors would probably love if he were still just that guy. That's how you get kickbacks to walk away. Maybe a kid gets a cushy job.

[Krychek_2]

Not sure about agent; he's definitely been their useful idiot.

[AmosArch]

Pee tapes
russia 'hacking' the election
trump attacking his secret service detail.
trump selling nuclear secrets

for not having to make up crap you guys certainly are doing it alot.

[Frank Drackman]

I heard he left his laptop at a repair shop and forgot about it, should be some interesting stuff!

[Davedave]

Why would anyone need to make stuff up, when simply gathering the available evidence - mostly Trump's public statements - leads to an eventual slam-dunk prosecution for treason, and the first ever execution of a former POTUS?

I'm not sure what the US is going to do about the 10 million or so traitors like yourself, but it isn't going to be pretty.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

Do you even know the definition of treason?

[Davedave]

Yes, levying war against the USA. It doesn't require doing so effectually or effectively. He did, we saw it, man's a traitor, done

[Frank Drackman]

Maybe they can execute Jane Fonda at the same time.

[MatthewSlyfield]

US Constitution Art 3 Section 3 clause `1

No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

There is no such thing as a slam dunk prosecution for treason. In fact, the last actual treason charges filed by the US government were from WWII.

[Frank Drackman]

Saudi Arabia? Dude's lucky they didn't chop off his Tweeter

[MatthewSlyfield]

Activists and lawyers consider the sentence against Salma al-Shehab, a mother of two and a researcher at Leeds University in Britain, shocking even by Saudi standards of justice….

Not a dude...

[Mr. Bumble]

Dudette?

[MatthewSlyfield]

The problem is she doesn't have a "tweeter" to chop off.

[Frank Drackman]

Haven't ever satisfied a woman, have you?

[Frank Drackman]

You ain't woke, (man!) just because she's a mother don't mean nuttin'

[David Welker]

This is just a more extreme manifestation of cancel culture. The idea that a person should be punished for having ideas that some or many or most people disagree with is not unique to Saudi Arabia.

I think many of us grew up with the idea that everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But at the same time, since we live in a democracy, we also have reason to worry about the opinions of others, since there is always a chance of those opinions coming into and impacting your life without your individual consent.

This worry about opinions has always been in the background, but for the most part people suppress their fears when they encounter someone whose opinions they think would result in negative consequences if translated into public policy. And when I say suppress their fears, I mean they realize that the opinion of any one person is unlikely to be translated into public policy, so that instead of going into “self-defense mode” over differences, they can have a reasonable conversation over differences of opinion and exhibit curiosity rather than fear when someone has ideas that they believe would have bad consequences if implemented. In general, this tolerance even extended to elected officials, whose opinions really can more directly translate into public policy. The idea that everyone is entitled to their own opinion was just strongly part of our culture.

There are exceptions to this tolerance, which is ordinary in America, but increasing fraying. After WWII, two classes of ideas that were not tolerated were those associated with racism and communism. In both cases, opinions of these sorts were considered too dangerous to be tolerated anymore. Hitler’s racist ideology had resulted in the literal extermination of millions of people. And similarly, Stalin and Mao exterminated millions to advance communist ideals. So, people understandably had a very visceral sense of the dangerous consequences of a certain class of ideas. Overall, I believe that in both cases, our fears of ideas in these two classes was too high, in the sense that seeking to punish instead of persuading people based on our own fears is not really justified in a democracy. There is a strong tension between thinking that (1) people should govern themselves and (2) they can’t be allowed to fully think for themselves and certain ideas are just too scary and too dangerous to tolerate even in individuals.

I think the pandemic has been a real challenge traditional liberalism. Normally, if people have deviant ideas, it doesn’t really impact you. But during the pandemic, many feared that the incorrect beliefs of their individual neighbors would perpetuate the pandemic. In response, you had social media companies step in and decide to suppress what they deemed to be misinformation about the pandemic.

But this theme of suppressing “misinformation and disinformation” has also extended beyond just opinions regarding the pandemic to include many other opinions with public policy implications too.

Overall, I would suggest we should not allow the themes of “misinformation and disinformation” to become excuses for censorship. Social media companies have been abusing and leveraging their market power to censor opinions and I believe that is ultimately unhealthy for democracy. One can claim that a social media company is “just” a private company, but that ignores power that has been created by a combination of first mover advantage and network effects.

[Eric VonSalzen]

Thanks David, you are right on (almost) everything you say about this. I won't cavil about details, because the barbarians are at the gate.

[myself]

It's fascinating that you equate criticizing someone for their opinions (and a private company sometimes even refusing them a platform) with imprisoning someone for 34 years.

It's also fascinating that you think "Social media companies have been abusing and leveraging their market power to censor opinions and I believe that is ultimately unhealthy for democracy". The election of the highly undemocratic Trump which culminated in an attempted insurrection to negate an election all occurred largely before media companies started banning prominent far-right personalities.

[David Welker]

Cancel culture goes well beyond criticism to firing with really the end goal being the economic destruction of the person.

The comparison is not to the punishment, but the underlying desire to punish people for their ideas.

[Bored Lawyer]

Good thing the Administration is working to encourage development of domestic energy sources, so we don't have to go begging to these lowlifes.

/sarc

[shawn_dude]

Biden approves largest oil/gas lease in history. -- FOX news.

Biden administration launches $6B project to save nuclear power plants.

Also, solar power.

So besides encouraging fossil fuels, nuclear, and renewable domestic energy sources, the Biden administration is totally not doing these things.

Maybe expand your news sources?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

A return to Saudi Arabia for a vacation seems reckless and naive, particularly for someone disinclined to appease the Saudi rulers.

Saudi Arabia is a lousy country, its rulers are lousy people, and the United States can't stop appeasing the Saudis fast enough. (Terminating support for Israel on the same day would be smart.) Give the Saudi royal family a glide path toward a peaceful resolution (disclaiming their inherited positions and most of their wealth in exchange for security assurances). If the Saudis won't accept it, start supporting the royal family's opponents.

[Mr. Bumble]

Why would anyone ever accept a "security assurance" from the US?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

The alternative would be to have the United States side overtly with people and entities aiming to depose the Saudi royals without much regard for the fate of the Saudi royals.

[David Welker]

Israel is a functioning democracy. Unlike most of its neighbors.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

It functions in an ugly manner in some ways, however, enabled by economic, military, and political support from the United States. Unless Israel changes course to substantial degree, I expect Israel to lose that American support and deservedly so. Israel should be free to continue to engage in ugly conduct, but it should not be permitted to do so in reliance on American support.

[legalizeshrooms]

America should be proud to defend Israeli civilians from Hamas rockets.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

America should be disgusted and offended concerning support for Israel, a country that engages in severely ugly conduct in the occupied territories and shabby, superstition-steeped conduct throughout Israel.

[David Welker]

"severely ugly conduct in the occupied territories"

What conduct are you concerned about, specifically? And I assume you agree that Israel does have a need to defend itself, right?

"shabby, superstition-steeped conduct throughout Israel"

You mean many of them are religious? I think those who oppose them are also religious and also engage in what you would call "superstition-steeped conduct." Right?

[legalizeshrooms]

Israel has a need to be defended by America.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

The discriminatory brutality (the type of behavior that has precipitated international condemnation, from which Israel is shielded because the United States lets Israel hide behind American skirts).

The government and laws that let superstitious, obsolete misogynists reign (literally kicking women off the bus, for example) and subsidize indolence and freeloading based on superstition.

Mostly, though, it's the immoral, brutal right-wing belligerence.

I also believe Americans should hold Israel to account for cuddling with Trump and for trying to make support of Israel's right-wing ugliness a left-right divider in American politics. Israel is entitled to side with a lout like Trump, slap Obama, and elect an asshole like Netanyahu, for example, but my response would be to give Israel an opportunity to learn how it would fare without a big brother (and my tax dollars, and America's military and United Nations veto) to hide behind.

[legalizeshrooms]

Americans can hold Israel to account without leaving her undefended.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

How?

What deadline should be established for Israel to stop its abusive conduct in the occupied territories and to stop discriminating on the basis of superstition throughout Israel?

What penalty should be imposed for engaging in immoral right-wing belligerence.

What price should be charged for nuzzling with Trump and Netanyahu and taking sides in American politics?

I am open to suggestions short of withdrawing American support of Israel. How could Israel demonstrate it has changed, and what consequences would be imposed for its misconduct?

[legalizeshrooms]

For example, our Secretary of State has asked Israel to review its rules of engagement in the west bank,
https://www.israeltoday.co.il/read/the-audacity-us-tells-israel-to-review-idf-rules-of-engagement/

[legalizeshrooms]

Reviewing the rules of engagement would also reduce the risk of friendly fire.

[David Welker]

I am not completely understanding.

With respect to enlightened views regarding the role of women, I am not sure that the opponents of Israel are better. Also, the conflicts that Israel are involved in feature violence on both sides.

Overall, Israel is a functioning democracy. I think we should support it.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

And I think we should enable it to do as it wishes, without our help.

Let's see which position prevails as America continues to progress.

[Frank Drackman]

Anti Semite, and a Chile Molester, what a combo!

[Orbital Mechanic]

In the meantime here in the old U.S.ofA. The land of the free, women who have been abused alongside their children by their children's partners get 30 years in prison for the crime of not fighting back hard enough.

That same year, a parole board in Oklahoma refused to shorten the sentence of Tondalao Hall, a Black woman never charged with abusing her children, but sentenced to 30 years in prison for failing to tell police about the abuse her boyfriend inflicted, the AP reported. Robert Braxton Jr. had choked, punched, and broken the ribs and femur of Hall’s 3-month-old daughter and was sentenced in 2006 to probation and two years already served while he waited for his trial.

The report covers about 130 women in this category. Yes Saudi Arabia needs a revolution but we need to stop pretending we are so much better here. For starters, there will be people posting right here that this report should be dismissed as a fantasy of liberals promoting CRT or something. We need to stop paying any attention to them.

[DaivdBehar]

Thank the scumbag lawyer profession. They are not protecting us. They are prosecuting the wrong people.

[David Nieporent]

The particular sentence for Hall (whose sentence was ultimately commuted) was insane, but she let her boyfriend severely abuse her children and did nothing at all about it (not "not fighting back hard enough"); that sounds just a bit more worthy of prison time than criticizing the government.

[David Welker]

I agree. 30 years in prison may be excessive, but prison is justified. A parent has an obligation to protect their children.

It sounds like the actual perpetrator of the violence got goo little punishment.

Overall, many of our states do not seem to have great systems for ensuring that like cases are treated alike. A lot random of factors seem to influence individual punishment, including the identity of the judge, prosecutor, etc that ideally would be less impactful.

[Harvey Mosley]

I'm not sure that 30 years is excessive for not reporting that kind of abuse of your own child but I could be persuaded. I am sure that any sentence that allows the actual abuser to continue breathing is way too lenient.

[Bob from Ohio]

"we need to stop pretending we are so much better here"

Yet we are so much better here. Hall had a lawyer, was tried in open court before a jury with procedural safeguards, and public pressure actually worked [eventually] to free her.

The bad thing is the man's sentence.

[Michael P]

It does sound like the man got way too short a sentence, but 30 years seems excessive for what she did (according to that brief blurb). Men tend to be physically larger and stronger than women, so they can often intimidate them through threat of violence. I can't see sentencing someone to 30 years if that was what happened.

[Bob from Ohio]

Yes, way excessive. Sounds like the man's sentence was a plea bargain as well. Was there an evidence problem? I just don't think "OMG we are like the Saudis!" explains much.

I would like to know if she was willing to testify against him? He was in jail, not an imminent threat any longer.

[David Welker]

He was in jail, but maybe she was afraid of other people in addition to him? And maybe she was afraid of what he would do when he got out? (Based on the rather short sentence here, is that even an irrational fear?)

I definitely think she had a duty to overcome any fear she experienced to protect her daughter. But we shouldn't forget that physical violence can be terrifying.

I am interested in the decision-making here. The difference in sentences between the direct abuser and the indirect abuser seems unreasonable. I wonder what was behind the discrepancy.

[AmosArch]

You think people should be permitted to let their children be beaten up? Thats pretty sick...and on top if this you're unironically pretending to be superior.

[Orbital Mechanic]

This sounds a lot like "are you poor? Just buy more money you idiot! It is nobody's fault but your own!"

Let's see if you get mugged how much responsibility for getting beat up you will take. My guess: none.

[AmosArch]

She stood by probably for years and allowed her children to be savagely beaten and then ran around minimizing and denying any responsibility or remorse. textbook enabler who probably saw nothing wrong with what was happening and is only now trying to cover her butt. And you and your compatriots in the media exalt this creature as a shining hero just because she has a vag. What a sick person you are.

[legalizeshrooms]

It’s good at least she was given a trial.

[legalizeshrooms]

“Al-Shehab was detained during a family vacation in January 2021 just days before she planned to return to the United Kingdom”. She was probably being spied on

[Curle]

Might have accidentally flagged a comment for review while scrolling.

[Krayt]

99% of flagging is probably accidental.

Places like Google review this kind of stuff, recognize process or ergonomic problems, and fix it. Here, no.

[Toranth]

Well, that's alright, because they don't do anything about flagged posts, anyway.

[great Unknown]

This is just the Saudi version of "insurrection". Except that they have hard evidence.

[shawn_dude]

Note to self: when you successfully escape a repressive, autocratic government, never go back for any reason.

[gormadoc]

Interesting that the sentence was increased to 34 years from six based on her appeal.

[great Unknown]

again, no different than prosecutors offering a plea deal, but if you don't accept, they're going to make it a capital case.

[santamonica811]

It's probably worth mentioning that she's a Shiite Muslim (Saudi Arabia is Sunni, for the most part). No idea if religious discrimination played a role in her barbaric sentence.

[great Unknown]

again, perfectly analogous to political discrimination in the US system.

[M L]

Trump is also about to be prosecuted for tweets that made people mad. Though not as ostensibly.

[DaivdBehar]

Great comment, bruh. Can you say it in Ebonics?

[DaivdBehar]

Excellent point, bruh. See you next Tuesday.

[David Welker]

I didn’t say anything about ghosting. That is a passive aggressive way to manage communication, but ghosting isn’t censorship.

Shadow banning, on the other hand, is secret censorship. A desire to give people the illusion they are speaking, but everyone is tuned out whether they individually want to be or not.

[Michael P]

QA has trouble engaging with what other people actually write, so he tends to invent things and pretend they said those instead.

It's a hell of a rut to be stuck in, but he apina his wheels and digs it deeper anyway.

[David Welker]

Rev:

Ugly conduct in comparison to whom? For as long as I have paid attention, it seems that there is an ongoing intractable conflict.

[David Welker]

The above comment is in the wrong place.