Reader comments · Gay British man arrested and beaten in Saudi Arabia · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Gay British man arrested and beaten in Saudi Arabia

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. crusing in saudi arabia, has he lost his mind?

    1. According to the article he wasn’t cruising for sex. He answered a text made to look like it was from a friend he knew. Even by entrapment standards that’s pretty low.

  2. I find it hard to believe they went to that much trouble to nab a guy they suspected as gay in revenge for the British judges disclosing the identity of the gay Saudi prince. Its so convoluted. Also what was the content of the text and what was Comiskey’s response that led to his arrest? I bet there’s more to it than simply a text message.

  3. Even if everything in this report is factually correct, it is a stern reminder that there are some brutal and corrupt regimes out there who are beyond what we usually describe as bigoted.

    Nothing can justify what happened to this guy. However, whilst he felt he took care to ensure that he did not contravene the law of Saudi Arabia (however morally wrong it is) – it is clear that whether by entrapment or otherwise he came to the attention of the horrendous religious or secret police.

    I hope he recovers well now that he is back in the UK and that he is able to move on in his life despite the trauma and ordeal he has endured.

    A reminder though for all LGBT people going to Saudi Arabia and similar states to take extreme care to ensure they don’t compromise themselves and thus put themselves in danger (and be aware of the potential for entrapment).

    Also an opportunity to review how we as a nation respond to the lack of humanity evidence in a country who is a political ally.

  4. I dont agree with the laws in this backward country but you go there knowing these countries have very backward views and laws relating to gay people.

    1. Jock S. Trap 1 Apr 2011, 10:47am

      But regardless of who we, we should be able go to a country to work without entrapment for their own gain.

  5. Helen Wilson 1 Apr 2011, 10:06am

    This and previous governments have regularly sign export licences to sell the Saudi government implements that can be used for torture. David Cameron even went as far as acting as salesman to the house Saudi who terrorise women, sexual minorities and other religious sects.

    Saudi Arabia is just as dangerous as Iran and should isolated internationally in the same way. They fund hate preacher and terrorism (9/11 terror attacks have direct links to Saudi Arabia) yet we treat them as our best friends in the Arab world.

    I do hope William Hague will resign after allowing a British citizen to languish in jail being tortured and failing to make waves internationally about it.

    A lot of questions need to be answered by the ConDems about this.

    1) Why was Cameron in Saudi Arabia flogging weapons to the house of Saudi, while one of his citizens was imprisoned and being tortured in the country.

    2) Why the media blackout on the issue. International pressure would of had him released sooner

    1. Helen Wilson 1 Apr 2011, 10:10am

      3) Did William Hague do anything to help this poor man or did his obvious homophobia stop him from acting like a foreign minister should in a case like this?

      4) Why are the house of Saudi invited to the royal wedding?

      1. The House of Saud are, unfortunately, allies of necessity due to their oil reserves and their position to curtail (or not) Islamic extremism. Their main claim to legitimate rule of Saudi Arabia lies on maintaining orthodox Islamic standards in the country. The Saudis are particularly keen not to be seen to bow to international pressure.

        Making ‘a song and dance’ about the imprisonment and torture of a British Citizen, with interviews to the press and statements at the U.N. would have been great politics. Unfortunately, it would have been lousy diplomacy and, I suspect, pretty ineffective at getting this man released.

    2. I either completely agree with all of your comments or suspect they are correct. That said, I think there are some we have to be careful with in terms of evidence.

      Absolutely, 100% we are hypocritical in our varying attitudes to Iran, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Bahrain, Qatar, Syria etc – the manner we respond to some of those countries actions does not seem proportionate when you look at our response elsewhere. Absolutely, Cameron was entirely wrong in his salesman approach to some issues.

      I think there are some issues in Iran (nuclear issues, engagement with the international community etc.) which make that particular country even more dangerous than Saudi Arabia but that is not to minimise the horrendous situation in Saudi Arabia.

      I would be interested in the evidence you say links 9/11 attacks direct to Saudi Arabia. The evidence I have read about links to Saudi nationals but not to the nation. I’m not being naive – just if we are to act on such issues we need to be…

      1. … sure that the Saudi state were involved.

        I would be interested if the press black out was purely an FCO blackout or partly Saudi in origin. It would be interesting in knowing the reasoning behind the blackout – there may be good reason for it (usually to prevent further harm to an individual or group). Before expecting Hague to resign on such an issue, it would be interesting to know what action the FCO did take on this issue – short of sending troops to storm a UK national out of the prison of a foreign power (unlikely!), I think the only options were negotiation and diplomacy – but what did they do (were there covert international efforts?) and were the reasons for the delay difficulties caused by Saudi and threats to the UK national (that made overt international pressure too dangerous) or our inadequacies? I appreciate some of Hagues tenure as foreign secretary hasn’t showered him in glory, but on this issue lets have some facts before demanding his resignation.

  6. Jock S. Trap 1 Apr 2011, 10:45am

    This is utterly disgusting, that a human being to be subjected to this kind of torture Anywhere in the world is not acceptable.

    A clear case of entrapment as revenge for there Gay Saudi Prince here in the UK with the only Huge difference being this British man did nothing wrong. He didn’t kill anyone. He did Nothing wrong.

    To go through the fear of not knowing if he was going to die… words can’t describe.

    Shocking. Disgusting. No surprise religion is behind it.

    1. @Jock S Trap

      It is a vile, horrific case. As if the extreme, outlandish bigotry of this nation wasn’t enough – now at a bit of entrapment of foreign workers into the mix.
      I suspect it was probably a response to the Saudi Prince affair but the timing is odd if that is the case given the number of months that have passed since the UK trial. Given the cloud of secrecy surrounding this case – its difficult for an external observer to gauge the motivation.
      I agree this case is almost certainly motivated by bigotry that is informed by religion.

  7. insert witty username 1 Apr 2011, 10:47am

    The Saudi’s are the ones who back the East London Mosque / London Muslim Center with its proven list of homophobic preachers and where allegedly the “Gay Free Zone” stickers came from the congregation.

    1. I know there is rumour this is the case – but do we actually have evidence of it.

      If it is the case then both the UK (and other) government and other organisations and individuals should be co-operating to apply the strongest possible pressure on the Saudi regime …

      However, I would be reluctant to act on the basis that they support the East London Mosque without evidence that definitively substantiates this. Yes, we need to act to apply strong pressure on Saudi for a whole host of reasons (including religiously motivated bigotry) but lets not undermine our case for action by accompanying it by motivations unless we have clear irrefutable evidence.

    2. Jock S. Trap 1 Apr 2011, 11:41am

      insert witty username

      Not forgetting that a lot of the extra Muslim education given in the UK is from the Saudi curriculum not the UK curriculum.

    3. The Saudis are behind the Shia Muslim minority that cause most of the problems in the UK. It is they that want to dictate sharì’a law, demanding all women wear Burkas and many other extreme authoritarian rules.

      They operate out of the Regent’s Park Mosque and as the “Muslim Council of Great Britain” claim to be the voice of British Muslims, when in fact, the majority of British Muslims are Sunni’s and don’t want anything to do with them or their laws.

  8. The West has supported and armed the hideous regimes in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf for more than half a century because of our dependence on oil and it has left us effectively hamstrung when attempting to challenge these abuses (not that our rulers usually do that). In these circumstances we can only cut them off politically and keep the lights on (and manufacture plastic and drugs) by –
    1 A full-scale invasion and occupation that would make Iraq and Afghanistan look like picnics; or
    2 Get off oil. We won’t have any choice about it by about 2050/60 anyway, and it’s better to start sooner rather than later. We can not only start cleaning up the planet, we might even start cleaning up our human rights record where our foreign relations are concerned.

    1. Dave North 1 Apr 2011, 11:11am

      And once we get off oil these savages will have no more income and can rot in their dust ball countries dreaming of wealth past.

      And good riddance.

      1. Its great to think of these savages rotting in their dust-ball countries but when the oil runs out the whole world is going to be rotting. No more planes, cars, drugs, ipads etc. Its back to the dark ages.

        1. Jock S. Trap 1 Apr 2011, 11:42am

          Yep, good point Jamesh

        2. Well back to the 18th and 19th century I suppose but with new alternative power supplies and a FAR better educated population.

          Planes and cars are totally unncessary to live a happy life.

          1. Jock S. Trap 1 Apr 2011, 12:01pm

            I can live without them. Just not me internet.


          2. I used to work in an internet centre in Docklands and it uses a huge amount of energy to power the servers and to cool them down. If we’re going back to the 18/19th century then we’re all going to be living in our little villages without being able to travel or know what is going on in the world. Might be a blessing not to know about people like the Phelpses though!

        3. Dave North 1 Apr 2011, 1:18pm

          Did you not read the bit where i said “””ONCE”” we get off oil”……..

          IE: Have science created alternates….

          1. Yes thanks, I can read. The problem is that our whole economy has been built on the discovery of oil. It is ready-made, it doesn’t need creating by scientists. Other alternatives so far do not match up in terms of energy spent creating, over energy produced. We need to keep researching and praying!

          2. Jock S. Trap 1 Apr 2011, 1:58pm

            Wind anyone?

          3. You mean the hot air on here??

            The problem with wind is it doesn’t blow all the time and I’m not sure how much energy they provide in the course of the lifetime of a windmill. If it costs more kilojoules to make and maintain than it produces in its lifetime then its not worth it.

          4. Jock S. Trap 1 Apr 2011, 2:50pm

            Oh if it’s constant you want I can give you the address to a friend of mine in Souf London. He could probably light up the whole of Glasgow entirely on his own. However if someone lit a match we’d probably see the light down here in London adding a new way to light up Britain.

    2. @Riondo

      I disagree with the timings you suggest for when we will need to be unreliant on oil but I agree with every other aspect of your comments. There are wide ranging explorations for oil elsewhere (some already successfui) such as Venezuela, DR Congo, Angola, Chile etc. However, on grounds of energy security I would not want to be reliant on any of these sources (but some politicians may choose this).
      We need to ensure our foreign policy isnt influenced by our national interests i.e. oil (or at least can’t be accused of it) and that we can demonstrate that we act ethically. The grey-ness of our foreign policy is damaging in many cases and noticably so when our citizens are in trouble (not of their own making) overseas in nations where we would like to condemn but are impotent due to other interests.

      1. These discoveries have been made years ago but it is only now that the price of oil has reached an all-time high that it is economically viable to extract it. However once you start to expend more energy in extracting it it becomes infeasible. This is the problem with bio-fuel too. Our modern world has been built on oil and it is going to run dry sooner than we think. Most commentators seem to say around 2050…

        1. @Jamesh
          Some of these discoveries were made years ago.
          There have been new finds in all of these areas in the last 18months (including a vast find in DR Congo)/

  9. Actually, I think the thing that makes me the most angry is the media blackout. We expect this kind of horror from Saudi Arabia. But our own media keeping it quiet!

    1. This isn’t anywhere on BBC News.

      1. Jock S. Trap 1 Apr 2011, 11:43am

        It involves helping a British Gay Man, I doubt the BBC has any interest.

        Prehaps a Christian diplomatic envoy should be sent to help?!

        1. Are you saying that the BBC is homophobic?

          Perhaps we could send a Christian envoy or a Jew or an atheist – am sure all capable of speaking rationally to the Saudis (if we chose the right envoy)

      2. Somnolent

        Whilst I fight passionately for free speech and a free media I do recognise that there are rare times when a blackout is helpful

        I know this is a different type of situation but black outs are often requested by police when there is a kidnapping or similar to prevent speculation that could fuel the antagonism of the kidnappers and further endanger the victim. I suspect a similar rationale is used. I am concerned about the apparent length of the blackout – that seems disproportionate at first glance. I would be interested in seeing more of the rationale as to the blackout and what it was hoped would be achieved by it.

    2. dave wainwright 1 Apr 2011, 11:48am

      our own media even manage to avoid reporting on the second biggest annual gathering of people in the London Calendar , rarely is gay pride in London reported on , and when it is it is a grudging few moments under reporting the actual numbers and the sheer size of the event , a virtual media blackout keeping the population in ignorance .

      1. I regularly see coverage of gay pride on BBC News websites and on BBC national news on TV

      2. Jock S. Trap 1 Apr 2011, 12:03pm

        Yeah, I don’t understand why all this media blackout on this British man.

        Also, good point. Pride events should be celebrated not blacked out.

  10. The Saudi’s are the scum of the Earth and think they can do what they like because they hold everyone to ransom with their oil.

    Well sooner or later they are going to run out and then they can revert back to to their roles as stinking camel traders, and we will see who has the last laugh.

    Even now, the uprising of common people in the Middle East is moving and the House of Saud need to watch themselves or they might find themselves hanging from a lampost.

    1. I think the amount of oil there have does, unfortunatley give then great leverage. Also, perhaps this is another reason why the west consistently appears to turn a blind eye to their funding of extremist interpretations of Islam in Uk schools; especially in the form of Washabissm and Deobanism.

      1. Jock S. Trap 2 Apr 2011, 10:53am

        Yeah well said JohnK.

  11. Dan Littauer 1 Apr 2011, 11:41am

    In fact the way this case was handled is highly unusual – in the sense he was jailed (although we do not know the details of events). In most cases Western expats are just deported, so it seems very likely it was a message to the FCO.

    Saudis have to live in the horror and fear of the religious police all the time…

    Read here more about Saudi Arabia and how the Religious Police operates.


    1. I do agree that it is an odd handling of the situation, Dan

      Although there have been other cases (both LGBT and not) where British people have offended (the unjust) law in other Arab states. I think of the heterosexual couple in UAE who kissed on a beach etc. It is however, more common to deport. I think that may be partly a message in terms of failure to initially deport, partly a cover up of the injuries caused and partly a message in terms of the duration of the incident (Saudi’s flexing their diplomatic muscle in inappropriate ways)

  12. dave wainwright 1 Apr 2011, 11:45am

    Why would a gay man go to Saudi Arabia ? the lure of a tax free salary is no compensation for the kind of treatment one can expect in a country/state which prohibits homosexuality .

    1. Jock S. Trap 1 Apr 2011, 12:05pm

      He clearly went there to do a job. His sexuality should never come into it. He has been entraped for being Gay but not doing anything sexual so they are in the wrong not this man.

    2. Dave, white gay men go to Saudi Arabia because, yes, the salaries are not taxed, but, also, the weather is gorgeous, one generally lives in fine accommodation, often with a pool, the desert has great beauty, and in that segregated society there are 1000s of Saudi men always out looking for white gay men to fcuk.

      When I was living in Saudi I observed that the white gay men who stayed there for ten years or more (and who were into having sex with Arabs rather than other white expats) were those white gay men with a masochistic streak. They adore the danger!

      I’ll never forget one such. He banged on my door one day and when I opened it he rushed in with his trousers round his ankles and a look of exhilaration on his face! He had just been gang-banged by the five young Yemenis who lived in an adjacet apartment and they then demanded that he pay them. He had grabbed his clothes and fled to my door. I hadn’t even known he was in the building.

      1. OMG Adam

        Do not tell the authorities


        1. Hello, John.

          The chap in question “dines out” on stories such as this. In fact most of the gay white men in Saudi do. When they meet they seek to outdo each other with reports of their “adventures” with assorted Arabs resident in the country – Egyptians, Yemenis, Saudis, and sometimes even Turks.

          Another account I heard first-hand, over coffee one weekend, went along the lines of: “Well, my dear, you should have seen me last night. There I was in the Al Shula Centre on my hands and knees amongst the clothes racks at the bottom of this escalator. And there were people going up and down and all the while I was hidden amongst the clothes sucking off this divine young boy who looked like something straight out of The Nativity!”

          1. Some ole sluts are so desperate, will go anywhere forra bit of c*ck, even if they lose their head.

          2. @rapture

            Really insightful and helpful input to the discussion …

            Unlike your comments elsewhere on here

            I hardly think 36 is old …

          3. @stu , it was response to adams post, not on specific article.

          4. Rapture, you are so right. Hunting for cock in Saudi Arabia has all the thrill, and much much more of the thrill, of hanging round inside public toilets in central Manchester when you KNOW there’s a possibility that the next hunk to wave his cock about at the urinals may actually be a policeman eager to scare the wits out of you and give you a stern warning! In Saudi the “warning” will be even more thrilling: six months in jail and the possibility of getting your neck axed in two, midday in a public square.

          5. @rapture



            Not convinced there are such cases of entrapment in public toilets any longer in the UK. The approach (nationally ACPO endorsed following consultation with various LGBT gtroups) where complaints are made by the public about cottaging is to work with local LGBT groups, advertise locally about concerns about behaviour, high profile visible uniform patrols as a deterrant and only then covert policing if there are serious concerns. In the 7 years I was a police officer, I NEVER encountered a covert patrol – posters, liaison with LGBT groups and high profile patrols but not covert.
            Sure, it used to happen but more than 15 years ago in most areas.
            Many police services actually patrol some cruising sites to protect gay men rather than arrest them.
            I appreciate many people do not believe this and there may be some individual services/officers who lack integrity but generally it is a lot better.

          6. Stu, it seems your flying about all over the place as a health assistant has given you the impression that you are pretty damn close to being GOD, the authority in all things. Maybe it’s time you grounded yourself.

          7. @Pete

            No I certainly am not GOD –

            a) he doesnt exist (as far as I can tell)
            b) I am far from perfect

            My opinions are not based on my flying about … they are genuine opinions … and I engage in debate and am prepared to be shown that I am wrong – if you disagree with my points engage – rather than tell me to be quite …

            I thought this site was to debate …

            My experiences inform my debate – I am strident in some of my views – but so are many others on here …

            In a liberal society – I am as entitled as you are to comment – so please do not try to restrict me or anyone else

    3. @Dave

      One of my jobs has taken me internationally and have been required to travel to Qatar, Congo, Algeria, Uganda, Libya, Bahrain, Pakistan, Iran and other similarly pleasant places for gay people. I appreciate my time there is limited but nonetheless I go with an awareness of the regime in those countries and an intention of not compromising myself. I shouldnt have to be concerned about the regime – but the reality is that it does exist.

  13. Saudi Arabia is as savagely backward as Uganda and Iran is on the subject of homosexuality.

    Saudi Arabia has oil and is an ally however so there will be little condemnation from the British government about this.

    The place is a horrific dump.

    Women have NO rights in Saudi Arabia.

    I would question this nurse’s sanity however. What on EARTH was he thinking when he moved to the hellish dump of Saudi Arabia.

    Yes the wages may be good, but clearly they were not worth it.

    I think the British government needs to issue an official warning that no British citizen will be safe once they enter the dump that is Saudi Arabia

    1. @David

      Whilst I empathize with your views, I don’t think that this incident alone means all Britons are necessarily in danger in Saudi Arabia. There are thousands of Britons there working as medics, contractors etc and few actually have an experience such as this.

      I do agree there is the potential for there to be safety concerns for Britons there but not that being in the country is inherently dangerous for every Briton. I do think LGBT Britons are at more risk than heterosexuals.

  14. Some ‘fun’ Saudi facts.

    Women are not allowed to drive.
    Women are not allowed out in public on their own.
    Women are not allowed to work without her husband or father’s permission.
    When women are allowed to work they cannot work in the same room in a man.
    If a man divorces his wife and decides not to give her money then she is doomed.

    Are representatives from the House of Saud invited to the wedding of William Windsor and Kate Middleton?

    They must be disinvited immediately. They are evil scum.

    1. I agree that they should be uninvited, but we are a major manufacturer of weapons and torture devices and Saudi is one of our main customers. While we have our immoral arms industry we will have to keep regimes like Saudi sweet which is why you see our politicians fawning over them and our royals having to invite them.

    2. The arms trade is just the tip of the iceberg. Saudi Arabia has 60% of the Middle East’s oil.
      One pony little diplomatic incident like that could bring Britain to a standstill within days. Great sentiment, but try getting into the real world, and not some mouthy internet rhetoric.

      1. If we develop our own energy security then we would be able to adopt a fully ethical foreign policy which may have an influence

  15. A simplistic view could be along the lines that while laws like this exist in some countries as LGBGT people we just refuse to go there whether on holiday or for work. I do not see why we should spend our money or bring some of our excellent services to those countries while they refuse to respect our human rights.

  16. Nikki Hatch 1 Apr 2011, 12:25pm

    Very scary. It is hypocritical how we ignore the oppression of leaders in Saudi and Bahrain because of our lust for oil yet insist on the dictators of Libya and Egypt to resign.

    1. Its an interesting one because the oil argument doesnt seem to fully work … Libya apparently is about oil so we are taking (limited) military action … The reason we dont condemn Saudi is oil … Now that seems a tad contradictory to me …

      1. However, the manner we had responded to the crises in Libya and Egypt has been very different to how we approach our relations with Tunisia, Algeria, Yemen, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Jordan, Iran, Qatar etc

        Then when you look at other places not linked to the current waive of restlessness in N Africa/Arab countries we again lack consistency when you compare how we treat Libya with Zimbabwe, Uganda or Burma

  17. KSA is exactly like the RCC priesthood were homosexuality is concerned. They’re just all liars.

  18. john sharp 1 Apr 2011, 12:57pm

    for me Islam is already below all standards
    i will never respect this religion that wants me stoned to death as i am gay
    lets now imprison all Saudi and all Muslims for being Muslims
    stupid to stupid

  19. Excessive wealth clearly doesn’t inspire excessive intellect or tolerance – Their beliefs and laws have always been wriiten to benefit MEN – Hetrosexual men – they are primitive retards who only understand brut force – evolution will deal with them in less time than you think.

  20. Saudi Arabia is currently a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council. Members are chosen from the full membership of the UN. But a glance at the list of UNHRC members since its establishment in 2006 will show immediately that recognition of human rights is not a requirement of membership. Perhaps even more frighteningly, it could be the changing face of global human rights which embraces the stoning of adulterous women and the beheading of homosexuals.

    1. Jock S. Trap 1 Apr 2011, 2:00pm

      Yep definitely one to keep an eye on.

    2. All 56 members of the Organisation of Islamic Conference rejected the UN Declaration of Human Rights, replacing it with the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights Under Islam. In that latter declaration, all rights are subject to sharia law. According to the popular books on this barbaric legal system, slavery is legal and execution is mandated for homosexuality. All 56 countries of the OIC should be kicked out of the U.N. Maybe that would draw some attention to the fact that islam sees non-muslims as sub-human.

    3. Not only is Saudi Arabia a member of the UNHRC it claims to believe in equality and rights as declared by universal declaration of human rights. That is patently not true. Unfortunately, whilst there has been some (very limited) progress in human rights at the UN in terms of more than 80 nations signing a statement regarding sexual orientation and gender equality – the universal declaration does not specifically embrace sexual orientation or transgender issues as factors that should be recognised by all nations in terms of human rights. Saudi Arabia was one of the nations (led by Syria) that signed a counter statement expressing a view that gender issues and sexual orientation were not factors that could be granted equality and compared them to paedophilia which were sexual urges that should be controlled by the state ….
      I’m too impatient for us to get this right.

  21. Let’s suppose there was a country where they –legally- can kill black people for being black. Would it be logic for a black guy to go there for work? I would never step a foot in such a criminal state where LGTB can even face death, even if nothing could tell me out.

    1. Its an option. Some of us dont get options as to which other countries work takes us to.

      1. You are right. Didn’t take into account the slavery factor.

        1. Oh some of us are itinerant travellers for work – 36 countries in last 15 months as flight medic

          So I could refuse a trip but as I am paid per job not salaried – it would be self damaging as I would not get as many tasks.

          Slavery no – economics yes

          I could resign … but thats not a real choice and why should I let the existence of bigoted regimes stop me doing a job I enjoy

          I am aware of the regimes – wish they didnt exist but I have to travel to them if I am to stay in this role

          1. I see your point and I respect your willingness to take the risk anyways. I know that it’s almost impossible that they find out your sexual orientation if you really –and I mean seriously- keep it to yourself when you are at those countries, not even receiving suggestive calls or messages from abroad –those regimes like to check everything- but even so, it’s sad and frightening. Sad and frightening that your life can depend on someone’s religious whim about what you are suppose to be and think, no contest allowed. Yeap, I know that homosexuality is more practiced behind doors in Muslim countries than anyone not well informed could suspect and that some people get confused by that and get ugly surprises, sometimes motivated solely on the police’s greed. Take care and good luck.

          2. @Lexxs

            Thank You.

            I do recognise the risk and I am careful about what I say, calls I make etc when In a country where the regime is known to be of risk to gay people.

            It is very sad that some of us have to make risk assessments regarding how open we are about who we are. For me, I have some risk as an itinerant traveller but it is more risky for those who work on contracts (or permanently) in those countries. However, it is far worse for those who are LGBT people and nationals of those nations.

            I am in awe of those LGBT people in nations such as Saudi, Bahrain, Iran, Uganda etc. where being honest about who you are is potentially damaging to your freedom/safety/life.

            Thanks again for your message

  22. These stories write themselves.

    1. Hatred-spewing group/individual is prevented from spewing hatred by sensible people.

    2. Temporarily silenced hater seeks publicity screaming, ‘But it’s my RIGHT to spread hatred, and if you don’t agree that’s DISCRIMINATION!!!!’

    3. Courts (except in USA) explain, ‘No, actually you don’t have a right to spread hatred against minorities. It’s not religious discrimination – that’s the law for everyone.’

    4. Return to step 1.

    1. Arggh!

      Posted on the wrong story. Very sorry. Please ignore.

      1. Jock S. Trap 2 Apr 2011, 11:03am

        I can’t, it’s too intriguing!

        1. I must admit it is intriguing – be intersting to know specifically which thread it did apply to

  23. Quite simply Islam is evil! It is a religion for primitive people living in a primitive society which is what Saudi Arabia is.

  24. Sorry for the errors. The posting should read: Quite simply Islam is evil . It is a religion for primitive people living in a primitive society which is what Saudi Arabia is.

  25. johnny33308 1 Apr 2011, 5:19pm

    People, more proof that gay people should not travel to Muslim countries or work in them either. There is absolutely no reason for us to spend our money in places that are destrimental or hostile to gay people. There are plenty of other truly nice places to go. Personally, I think any gay person going to one of these sorts of places is not at all prudent and even stupid. Why bother with such places at all? Is it worth your life to go to such places? That is exactly what one risks by going to a Muslim country. It is a sad fact, but a fact nonetheless, friends. Don’t do it.

    1. It is a shame that some people here think it is worth the risk of being beaten, imprisoned or even executed for the tax free salary. I would rather be poor and alive than rich and dead. You can’t take the money with you.

      As for the commet regarding the man who enjoys being gangbanged in a muslin country for the forbidden thrill and then refuses to pay for the prilvilege. I hope he gets found out and they take his head…I sure won’t miss him! He knows the risks and the laws, if you aren’t willing to follow the laws of a country (regardless of what you think of them) don’t go.

  26. When in Rome……

    1. , do not fall for entrapment

      1. Jock S. Trap 2 Apr 2011, 11:04am

        Damn!! but I like Italians..


        1. lol me too

          I thought they would be too Catholic for you though, Jock ;-p

  27. Saudi muslims have got to the most brain dead and disturbed people on the planet? Of course beating gay men and chopping their heads off is barbaric and wrong. And as someone else pointed out, feminism hasn’t quite kicked off yet over there. But one of the other things that makes me puke, is 8 year old girls being married off to 50 year old men – saudi arabian state sanctioned sharia law paedophilia. You just can’t make up what goes on in that hellhole – and as someone else pointed out – our government, and the US government sell billions of pounds worth of weapons to them. It’s amazing what you can get away with if you own a few oil wells these days.

  28. Ah yes – this would be another reason for me not to visit this barbaric country with it’s backward outlook on life.

    1. Indeed you have a very strong argument there Dan

  29. Religious Police, is that anything like the regular police? In America they seem to be becoming more like the Religious Police. God help us they have a Religious Police State in the middle east. I was against the bombing but now I think I might change my mind.

    1. Sal,

      Here is an article of Saudi religious police

      not quite the FBI, NCIS or similar …

  30. They are not evolved enough to understand the free will of the people and we are all children of God.

  31. HomoPride 2 Apr 2011, 3:50am

    It is really baffling to hear or read stories like these. Homophobia is rampant in most parts of the world and this is a fine example. If you can get jailed for being gay, this world is extremely deluded.

  32. Why would anyone go to work in such places? Principles should come before ‘money’!

    1. Principles are complex things.

      I dont stay for more than a few days in any of the countries I visit so my risks are less than those who are there for months or longer.

      For some people though, they may be a particular person who is needed to travel to provide specialist input to a particular project etc and that the contract may be jeopardised if they do not travel and other people’s livelihood may be dependant on that contract. Travelling then despite disagreeing intently with the regime is having principles in my view. Just as it is to recognise the failings and bigotry of the regime.

      Principles are complex.

    2. Jock S. Trap 2 Apr 2011, 11:07am


      I guess people love countries and cities for all sorts of reasons.

  33. When I worked there they weren’t chopping the heads of gays, anything but, I mean, who would be left for single men to have sex with. Knocking off gays, yes, chopping, most definitely not.

  34. This is yet another sad testament to what happens to someone who opens their mind to bigots, racists, and tyrannical religions and the regimes that support them. We unfortunately need to be as closed minded as they are to protect ourselves before there are none of us left to protect. Tolerance of intolerance = stupidity and death.

    1. Jock S. Trap 2 Apr 2011, 2:56pm

      Yet how can you expect change if we insist on hiding ourselves?

      care is needed, granted but people make their own choices.

      In this case entrapment was used to arrest the man. It was unfair and hardly suitable for any legal stance. Then we are talking about a different society.

      Your comment borders on the ‘Well if he will go there what do you expect’. That is No excuse. No-one deserves to be treated like this esp as they have done Nothing wrong. It’s also insulting to those who live their and have no choices but risk their lives to be themselves.

      No human is better than another and they have no rights to treat people born force to obey religion chosen.

      1. @Jock

        Absolutely! 100% agree that whilst, in many cases, care is needed people make their own choices and that by being hidden we do nothing to advance our demand for equality.


        I also don’t think there is any evidence that the British guy who was set up, throttled and made to think he may die opened his mind to the regime of Saudi Arabia

    2. I profoundly disagree – by having closed minds we make ourselves as bad as the bigots are

  35. Jock S. Trap 2 Apr 2011, 4:40pm

    Am getting really p!ssed off with crazy Nutjobs able to use multiple names via PinkNews comments. With that and hijacking of other people names it totally ruins the debate experience here. I wish PinkNews would see how important PinkNews reader are and stop this abuse, acting in the interests of the genuine not the loony.

    1. Jock S. Trap 2 Apr 2011, 4:41pm


      Did of course mean readers not just the 1 reader.

      1. Have you had your name hijacked too?

        1. This happened to me on Facebook including my photo and the guy who did it started to add some of my friends too!

          1. Jock S. Trap 4 Apr 2011, 7:51am

            Thats bad Jamesh. It’s happened to me several times on here but not recently.

        2. Happened to me twice today, some other “Will”….

    2. Don’t be so possessive about your handle, Jock. It’s what people write that matters, not what handle goes with it.

      If PinkNews were to make everyone log in, keep out the bigots and nutters, these boards would hardly ever be visited.

      1. Jock S. Trap 5 Apr 2011, 9:42am

        Not when it’s done to make you look like your the one who wrote it, thats called bullying. Or are you that thick?

        It’s not acceptable. End of!

        Luckily sure your in a Very small minority.

        1. Am I that thick?

          Hmmm. So you address complete strangers insultingly, do you?

          I wonder if maybe that’s why someone or some people have deliberately used your handle?

          1. And I wonder if that same person might also use the name Adam?

          2. Why does everyone think that throwing round insults is a way of winning an argument?

          3. Ok not everyone – but a few frequent posters

          4. Jock S. Trap 6 Apr 2011, 9:05am


            So you made the accusation without knowing the facts… hmmm how refreshing.

            Genuine people who come here to debate and know how to debate don’t feel the need to change names to make point. Why do that to score. Debate isn’t about winning or losing, it’s about opinion.

            Nice to see your come here, Not knowing the facts then make excuses for it.

            Charmed, I’m sure.

          5. Jock S. Trap 6 Apr 2011, 9:05am

            Good point Eddy.

  36. As a Saudi Gay man who fled the country – at least temporarily – I can’t believe this $h!t is still happening. But then again it’s been years since I last visited. I assume the religious police is given more power now that Prince Nayef (minister of interior) is trying to appeal to the clergy in the wake of anti-government sentiment . What’s even more disturbing is that the Queen of England had the audacity to welcome King Abdullah of Saudi with open arms in 2009. All for the sake of oil… Thousands of Gay Saudi men beheaded, yet with severe media censorship, the word never gets out and the international community is silent. I think every gay man who reads this article should spread awareness of the situation in Saudi. People the punishment for homosexuality in Saudi is DEATH … no joke .. However, if you’re connected and or from the royal family, you’re let go. They sometimes lock’em up for months and inject them with male hormones if they don’t catch them red handed.. Such a pity.

  37. oe yes we all know that arabs like it up the ass as well as gays. you feckers. practice what you preach please it’s just a bloody fecking huge joke. we all know your women have to be virgins before marriage so its ok to feck each other but not for a gay man. well what else can i say…….

    1. Actually, Mark, Arab men do not like it up the arse. They might if they tried it but their conditioning is such that they can only think of themselves as MEN if they give it, either to women or other men. Hence, it is very rare to find an Arab who will agree or wish to be passive. Any Arab who becomes known as a passive partner has “had it”, forever: shame, “homosexual”, “like a woman”, lowest of the low.

      Sad but true.

      They are all victims of the ridiculous nonsense of Islam. Worse than Christianity.

  38. I wonder if the police would have entrapped and beaten that Saudi prince who sexually tortured his manservant to death. Somehow I doubt it. I doubt it’s as much about revenge as it is about diverting attention from the horrific practices of the ruling class there.

    1. I take your point Daniel but I think if this is related to the Saudi Prince issue then it is more likely to be about revenge.

      My reason would be that the ruling classes and religious leaders are more than comfortable with the “moral” justification of their regime (in their view), They see their stance as being correct. They feel the prince (and hence the Saudi regime) was disrespected by the UK courts. They would want revenge – time and time again they have been shown to work along the lines of revenge being an honourable motive.

      1. I don’t agree. Having lived and worked in Saudi and many other Islamic states for most of my life, and always in totally Muslim environments, not in Western environments, and often very close to fundamentalist Muslims, as opposed to moderates, I have witnessed and heard of many frightful treatments of gay people in such countries and very seldom was it anything whatsoever to do with revenge. Usually it is simply to do with the determination and zeal of wild-eyed and ugly Muslim fundamentalists. (I NEVER came across a good-looking, handsome, Muslim fundamentalist. The good-looking ones always had too much of an interest in any sex they could get, and were grateful for it!)

        1. @Simon T

          I agree with your point but then I would suggest if the attack was more to do with vilification of a gay man than revenge – then this case had nothing at all to do with the British trial of the Saudi Prince (hence my initial comment that *if* this had anything to do with the Prince …)

  39. I lived and worked in Saudi Arabia for over 20 years. I slowly learned about these “entrapments” from stories, and from my own experiences. Once you know what and where they are, you can pretty design your proclivities around them and go your merry way. It’s sad that Mr Comiskey did either not listen to warnings before or he was just plain unlucky to respond to an entrapment. I mean, people going into Saudi Arabia to work know pretty much what they are going into. Oh stop pontificating about how homophobic and xenophobic they are yada-yada–all that is a given. The onus is on you to figure out how to make money and come out of it with your head intact; after all, you wanted to be there, didn’t you?

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.