Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai General Chat

On December 14th 2009 the Doha Debate sessions discussed the house motion: The House Thinks Dubai is a Bad Idea.

http://www.dohadebates.com/debates/magic.asp?d=67

Doha Debates general website: http://www.dohadebates.com/debates/past.asp?s=6#

Although the motion was rejected by 38% to 62%, the debate had some very interesting points currently discussed in the world. The moderator was very correct in asking hard questions to all attendees on the panel.

The (Dubai) media was not willing to attend coverage of this debate due to fear of criticizing Dubai and its ruler as the moderator reveals during the debate.

Among the attendees is a courageous Emirati woman with very strong viewpoints, and has fled to the USA as a result of a smear campaign against her: Sharla Musabih

A must-watch for all who are interested in a balanced debate.

Thank You for the link.It was a very interesting debate .

Personally I was against the notion and so were the majority. But I think Sharla Musabih could have clean seeped the opponents only if she had done her home work and had a strong hold over her body as well as English language.She was representing the Human Rights Issues yet she didn't address them in the manner they should have been.Her debate was without any facts and figures. I wish there was someone else at her position, lets say You Robby g or Dr strangelove, then it would have been a block buster debate

Another thing which i keep thinking about is that, if a person, an organization or a country faces trouble, the immediate feelings that they attract from their surrounding is that of sympathy, however in the case of Dubai, unfortunately almost everyone (even the expats who are earning from it) are sarcastic towards it. Who is unfair in this case on a moral bases? Dubai or people related to it?

Ghalib wrote:Thank You for the link.It was a very interesting debate .

Personally I was against the notion and so were the majority. But I think Sharla Musabih could have clean seeped the opponents only if she had done her home work and had a strong hold over her body as well as English language.She was representing the Human Rights Issues yet she didn't address them in the manner they should have been.Her debate was without any facts and figures. I wish there was someone else at her position, lets say You Robby g or Dr strangelove, then it would have been a block buster debate

Another thing which i keep thinking about is that, if a person, an organization or a country faces trouble, the immediate feelings that they attract from their surrounding is that of sympathy, however in the case of Dubai, unfortunately almost everyone (even the expats who are earning from it) are sarcastic towards it. Who is unfair in this case on a moral bases? Dubai or people related to it?

My pleasure.

Regarding your question:
Sympathy isn't widely available in Dubai, because of its mad growth over the years. In essence, the government of Dubai is to blame for not creating an environment based of social and economic stability, rule of law and respect (a sense of home, some tangible residency rights, perhaps some dignity) for every worker that was invited to Dubai. There simply is no real unity and without unity there can be no sympathy...

So people just leave (after being fired and following 30 days to visa expiry) and think back on a nice resume experience, while in real terms, those excentric years in Dubai were nothing more than an (unsustainable) illusion of the mind. Many know it, some are flabbergasted by it. Arriving back home, self-reflection and a more gradual life kicks back in once again.

As for the debate itself. I had alot of my viewpoints confirmed, if not all. Moving on.

Excellent post

It was indeed a very interesting debate, I enjoyed the exchanges. I especially liked the "Emerati" lady (Ooops, she was really an American) It has to be said however that the motion was denied. So now for all the DB's what to say now?

sage & onion wrote:It was indeed a very interesting debate, I enjoyed the exchanges. I especially liked the "Emerati" lady (Ooops, she was really an American) It has to be said however that the motion was denied. So now for all the DB's what to say now?

If you listened correctly (b.t.w. which you never do) she said she was born in the UAE, moved to Dubai in 1984 and lived there for half of her life until 1.5 years ago when she fled to the USA following a fear and intimidating smear campaign against her.

The motion was denied because the motion is to spur debate around the issues regarding the idea of Dubai (vision). If you listened correctly, both parties were divided about the meaning of the motion, being: Is Dubai a Bad Idea?

All agree on the fact that they rather see Dubai grow the way it did over a period of 50 years instead of 15 years and that definition of the motion was not supported by the Emirati(s), because they knew that most voters would have opted AGAINST the motion in that case.
Therefore, if you listened correctly, the moderator (Tim Sebastian) said: 'let him have it' to Simon Jenkins (in favor of the Emirati businessman) in his rebuttal against the motion defined by the Emirati businessmen as being 'Dubai as a whole', instead of the preferred definition of '15 vs 50 years vision (idea) of Dubai growth'.

The point is not that Dubai as a city state is inherently bad. Not at all. Its about social and economic disruptions that put enormous strains on the people of Dubai (and international resources) due to its massive growth. Thats why Dubai's vision was a bad idea aswell as the lack in use of available lessons from the history of capitalism. It was short sighted and badly governed.

The point of the House's provokingly defined motions is to provoke thoughts and ideas around a subject. Its not about demonizing Dubai. Every sane mind knows that.

Ofcourse, Sage is off base once again. The biased mind can't accept constructive criticism. We already knew that from experience, right Sage?

give us your conclusion robbyg , what do you think?

This is a useless debate, it s not going ot happen, period, it was a sarcastic joke. There are way too many UN employees to grant immunity in an environment of so many anachronistic laws, the UAE does not recognize the State of Israel, and the whole purpose of the UAE would be to turn the Dubai based UN as a marketing tool.

capsicum wrote:This is a useless debate, it s not going ot happen, period, it was a sarcastic joke. There are way too many UN employees to grant immunity in an environment of so many anachronistic laws, the UAE does not recognize the State of Israel, and the whole purpose of the UAE would be to turn the Dubai based UN as a marketing tool.

Wrong thread

Alhamdulillah, the work that Sharla has done is just truly amazing. The UAE media likes to say things that are horrendously not true but let me remind you guys one thing, Sharla has support from the ruler of Dubai, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid. Thus, she was invited to a court hearing to represent the Maktoum family on the camel jockey issue.

She is now helping out people in Ethopia and I wouldn't be surprised if she came back to Dubai soon. May Allah (SWT) reward her for all her tremendous accomplishments. Ameen.

mehreen wrote:Alhamdulillah, the work that Sharla has done is just truly amazing. The UAE media likes to say things that are horrendously not true but let me remind you guys one thing, Sharla has support from the ruler of Dubai, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid. Thus, she was invited to a court hearing to represent the Maktoum family on the camel jockey issue.

If she was there to represent the Maktoum family, you wouldn't have know it from her introduction.
She was given all of the credit for the camel jockey issue and the Maktoum family was not mentioned.
Why has she fled the country if she has the support of the ruler?

I don't think that either side performed well.
The 'for' was vaugely harping on about human rights.
And the 'against' was replying with 'it happens everywhere'

We have yet to see bottom in Dubai.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... qk6U&pos=4

just finished 15 minutes of it, heard three speakers speak, Simon Jenkins, The UAE Freedom Fighter and the gentleman who teaches at Sorbonne.

Simon seems the most knowledgeable, but for some reason is restrained. The freedom fighter may have valid points, but she's talking absolute rubbish, and the economist at Sorbonne? Interesting analogy pre 2003 and post 2003 Dubai.

Will watch the remaining some other time. It's way too long to watch at one go!
Oh BTW brilliant post Robby!

Misery Called Life wrote:just finished 15 minutes of it, heard three speakers speak, Simon Jenkins, The UAE Freedom Fighter and the gentleman who teaches at Sorbonne.

Simon seems the most knowledgeable, but for some reason is restrained. The freedom fighter may have valid points, but she's talking absolute rubbish, and the economist at Sorbonne? Interesting analogy pre 2003 and post 2003 Dubai.

Will watch the remaining some other time. It's way too long to watch at one go!
Oh BTW brilliant post Robby!

You should watch some more on Doha Debates. Some very interesting topics pass the venue.

As for Sharla Musabih, how can you say she talks absolute rubbish?
She has first class experience with the treatment of the lower class: maids, workers, prostitutes and other trafficked or abused men and women. She has erected the first UAE shelter for these unfortunates and experiences their misfortune everyday when she lived in Dubai. How can you say she talks rubbish? She talks from experience.

As for her debating style, I agree, she's a little unprepared and emotionally involved. But then again, without people like her those victims don't get any support from the government. They get either jailed and deported or shut up.

I don't think you give her enough credit for her experiences and work.

mehreen wrote:Alhamdulillah, the work that Sharla has done is just truly amazing. The UAE media likes to say things that are horrendously not true but let me remind you guys one thing, Sharla has support from the ruler of Dubai, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid. Thus, she was invited to a court hearing to represent the Maktoum family on the camel jockey issue.

She is now helping out people in Ethopia and I wouldn't be surprised if she came back to Dubai soon. May Allah (SWT) reward her for all her tremendous accomplishments. Ameen.

Mehreen, from what I recall, Sharla was doing her work for many years in Dubai - uninterrupted, and to say the very least, unsupported, except by those close to her and through donations. When I say unsupported, she did not have the support of Sh. Mohammed. She was allowed to run her operation, but she did not get support. Abuse against women was accepted in the UAE. She basically opened the door and let the secret out that it was being ignored.

To get international recognition that the UAE was cleaning up the human rights issued that were exposed, one of the things the government did was to open a "safe house" to do similar work as Sharla. Prior to its opening a smear campaign started to take place against her. Before that, all you ever read about Sharla was the good that she did. She was also very humble and kept a low profile. In light of the fact that she was operating for many years, why were only good things written about her and then all of a sudden - pow!!!

If she did have the support of Sh. Mohammed, why did she leave the country?? Possibly she stepped on the big toe of a very important person who didn't take kindly to it and thought he or she would do something about it. Maybe she came across some information that would have been damaging to someone. If either was the case, or something similar, and she had the support of Sh. Mo, which meant she had his ear if need be, it would never had gotten as far as it did!!

I don't think she willfully left the UAE to take up permanent residence in Ethiopia. If she is indeed residing in Ethiopia, what is of her husband - she was married to a local who was very generous in supporting her cause. I also believe that she had children. Where are they??

Personally, I think she was forced to leave before finding herself set up by trumped up allegations by 2 or 3 very scared housemaids who, I believe, were pressured into making those statements. She got out of the UAE before she found herself in jail. Call me a skeptic, but there was something very wrong with the way things happened for her.

Dubai has this uncanny way of making a person become jaded and distrustful.

RobbyG wrote:

Misery Called Life wrote:just finished 15 minutes of it, heard three speakers speak, Simon Jenkins, The UAE Freedom Fighter and the gentleman who teaches at Sorbonne.

Simon seems the most knowledgeable, but for some reason is restrained. The freedom fighter may have valid points, but she's talking absolute rubbish, and the economist at Sorbonne? Interesting analogy pre 2003 and post 2003 Dubai.

Will watch the remaining some other time. It's way too long to watch at one go!
Oh BTW brilliant post Robby!

You should watch some more on Doha Debates. Some very interesting topics pass the venue.

As for Sharla Musabih, how can you say she talks absolute rubbish?
She has first class experience with the treatment of the lower class: maids, workers, prostitutes and other trafficked or abused men and women. She has erected the first UAE shelter for these unfortunates and experiences their misfortune everyday when she lived in Dubai. How can you say she talks rubbish? She talks from experience.

As for her debating style, I agree, she's a little unprepared and emotionally involved. But then again, without people like her those victims don't get any support from the government. They get either jailed and deported or shut up.

I don't think you give her enough credit for her experiences and work.

Nothing against the freedom fighter and I said she may have valid points but hey you need to present urself well. Her intro in the show? She keeps going on about her roots and something about the good old days.
Off course I know what she's trying to say, but the uninformed viewer, he's definitely not going to hold a favorable opinion.
The problem essentially was that she's a human rights activist, the debate had more to do with economics along with good governance, unfortunately the freedom fighter seems stuck in between. She should have come better prepared. At least that's what I gathered from the opening 15 min.
Now I'm more than prepared to modify my impressions but going by some of the posts on the thread it doesn't seem like she's improved through the course of the debate.

I agree with your take on her performance. Spot on.

If you understand what she means to say, as I arguably do, then the picture becomes clear. For someone uninformed about those facts and happenings, her statements seem somewhat erratic indeed.

Interesting debate as they all gave examples lol.. Well look at this, look at that..

I have looked at the debate ,it has some interesting points and poor opinions , and I belevie it has so of what I might calling fighting the idea of an Arabic Islamic country being developed in another way racism. it could only be my view bcz they are talking about my country but I just want to add something to the discussion.

now why do I think so ,well bcz of the fact that the UK journalist had no ground to stand on, on his conclusion that Dubai is a bad idea just bcs it is broke !! the hosts replied "well the UK is more broke than dubai so is UK a bad Idea" and as usual he ran a way from answering.and him calling development "mad" was just a cheap observation from a journilist.
that human right woman what ever her name just want Dubai to stand still and freez from the 80s !! she kept talking that Dubai should've stayed the way it was at that time! for god sack she was also in disagreeing of the school system, and she is GET this in disagreement with labors being in UAE and having a chance to live .the hall show was a shame.

I do on other hand agree that Dubai should've been more controlling of its businesses and should’ve looked at the labors condition without anyone telling them to so , it is their job and liability and they have no excuse even if other countries have the same problem.

uaekid wrote:I do on other hand agree that Dubai should've been more controlling of its businesses and should’ve looked at the labors condition without anyone telling them to so , it is their job and liability and they have no excuse even if other countries have the same problem.

Kid, I'm curious about the labor conditions in AD. Are the laborers in AD living a much better standard of life that those in Dubai? Are you saying that there are no labor camps?? Are they living in work compounds with decent accommodations? Can you say that they are making decent wages?? Are their working conditions by far better than those in Dubai??

Aren't the same laborers who built Dubai now building AD???

I'm sensing some hostility in your lines dear. I though we are talking about Dubai and I'm not the labor minister for you to direct those questions to me hon but as fare as I know AD built or building a new labor city with new standers. If you are "curious" then you can always do your own search or send an inquiry of your 6 questions to AD government .


It does not matter where it is , it is a matter of a government obligation and AD is no different from Dubai in taking responsibilities to whom ever is in their land.

uaekid wrote:I'm sensing some hostility in your lines dear. I though we are talking about Dubai and I'm not the labor minister for you to direct those questions to me hon but as fare as I know AD built or building a new labor city with new standers. If you are "curious" then you can always do your own search or send an inquiry of your 6 questions to AD government .


It does not matter where it is , it is a matter of a government obligation and AD is no different from Dubai in taking responsibilities to whom ever is in their land.

No hostility here hon. But you were making a point about Dubai and labour. I was just asking if the labour conditions in AD were far better than Dubai. Since you are so knowledgeable about AD, it would be safe to assume that you could provide information surrounding labour there. Actually, I don't think the labour conditions in AD are any different from any other emirate. I did read about a "labour city" being built in AD, which is a correction of the past and current conditions.

Keep in mind that AD is now making its mark on the international community and building a "labour city" would certainly make them look good, and it does. AD came into the race long after Dubai established itself, allowing it to learn from Dubai's mistakes - which included bad press on labour conditions. Better late than never I guess. I do hope that they set some salary guidelines for the laborers. They are the most under paid people in the UAE and the hardest working.

Bora Bora wrote:

uaekid wrote:I'm sensing some hostility in your lines dear. I though we are talking about Dubai and I'm not the labor minister for you to direct those questions to me hon but as fare as I know AD built or building a new labor city with new standers. If you are "curious" then you can always do your own search or send an inquiry of your 6 questions to AD government .


It does not matter where it is , it is a matter of a government obligation and AD is no different from Dubai in taking responsibilities to whom ever is in their land.

No hostility here hon. But you were making a point about Dubai and labour. I was just asking if the labour conditions in AD were far better than Dubai. Since you are so knowledgeable about AD, it would be safe to assume that you could provide information surrounding labour there. Actually, I don't think the labour conditions in AD are any different from any other emirate. I did read about a "labour city" being built in AD, which is a correction of the past and current conditions.

Keep in mind that AD is now making its mark on the international community and building a "labour city" would certainly make them look good, and it does. AD came into the race long after Dubai established itself, allowing it to learn from Dubai's mistakes - which included bad press on labour conditions. Better late than never I guess. I do hope that they set some salary guidelines for the laborers. They are the most under paid people in the UAE and the hardest working.

I agree 100% , minimum wages should be set and enforced, hopefully they are waiting for the new banking payable system to take effect to set a minimum wage for those workers. I mean so many companies made a hell out of money in such a developing country.

but seriously hon, the country can't do allot with the companies greed for cash, one example is that we outsourced one of our tasks and in the contract we forced the company to a specific salaries to our employees that will be transferred to them, they agreed to it but when the deal was signed we were surprised to know that they deducted half of that salary for so many fees toward their employees !! and shockingly some how the employees agreed to those fees and terms and still working for that company .

The labor camps, well that is a diff story bora bora and half of the blame goes to labors themselves to be honest ! they just don't seem to care for cleaning their surrounding and bathrooms and make their rooms as a storage not caring for fire hazards and so on. I mean new camps with new regulations wont do any good if the ppl living in them don't care themselves. I will personally take you to a camp city ,it's made out of huge building with enough rooms but the organizing inside makes it looks like a dumping place. They have to understand that no one will clean after them and for them.

uaekid wrote:

Bora Bora wrote:

uaekid wrote:I'm sensing some hostility in your lines dear. I though we are talking about Dubai and I'm not the labor minister for you to direct those questions to me hon but as fare as I know AD built or building a new labor city with new standers. If you are "curious" then you can always do your own search or send an inquiry of your 6 questions to AD government .


It does not matter where it is , it is a matter of a government obligation and AD is no different from Dubai in taking responsibilities to whom ever is in their land.

No hostility here hon. But you were making a point about Dubai and labour. I was just asking if the labour conditions in AD were far better than Dubai. Since you are so knowledgeable about AD, it would be safe to assume that you could provide information surrounding labour there. Actually, I don't think the labour conditions in AD are any different from any other emirate. I did read about a "labour city" being built in AD, which is a correction of the past and current conditions.

Keep in mind that AD is now making its mark on the international community and building a "labour city" would certainly make them look good, and it does. AD came into the race long after Dubai established itself, allowing it to learn from Dubai's mistakes - which included bad press on labour conditions. Better late than never I guess. I do hope that they set some salary guidelines for the laborers. They are the most under paid people in the UAE and the hardest working.

I agree 100% , minimum wages should be set and enforced, hopefully they are waiting for the new banking payable system to take effect to set a minimum wage for those workers. I mean so many companies made a hell out of money in such a developing country.

but seriously hon, the country can't do allot with the companies greed for cash, one example is that we outsourced one of our tasks and in the contract we forced the company to a specific salaries to our employees that will be transferred to them, they agreed to it but when the deal was signed we were surprised to know that they deducted half of that salary for so many fees toward their employees !! and shockingly some how the employees agreed to those fees and terms and still working for that company .

The labor camps, well that is a diff story bora bora and half of the blame goes to labors themselves to be honest ! they just don't seem to care for cleaning their surrounding and bathrooms and make their rooms as a storage not caring for fire hazards and so on. I mean new camps with new regulations wont do any good if the ppl living in them don't care themselves. I will personally take you to a camp city ,it's made out of huge building with enough rooms but the organizing inside makes it looks like a dumping place. They have to understand that no one will clean after them and for them.

Can't argue with you on the point about the condition of the camps. What will happen with the labour city that will be constructed will end up being nothing more than a slum. Hopefully it will be far far out in the desert and out of sight. The intentions are good and well meaning and it certainly isn't anyone's responsibility to keep it clean other than those that live there. Slums aren't built, they are made by the people who dwell in them.

Bora Bora wrote:

mehreen wrote:Alhamdulillah, the work that Sharla has done is just truly amazing. The UAE media likes to say things that are horrendously not true but let me remind you guys one thing, Sharla has support from the ruler of Dubai, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid. Thus, she was invited to a court hearing to represent the Maktoum family on the camel jockey issue.

She is now helping out people in Ethopia and I wouldn't be surprised if she came back to Dubai soon. May Allah (SWT) reward her for all her tremendous accomplishments. Ameen.

Mehreen, from what I recall, Sharla was doing her work for many years in Dubai - uninterrupted, and to say the very least, unsupported, except by those close to her and through donations. When I say unsupported, she did not have the support of Sh. Mohammed. She was allowed to run her operation, but she did not get support. Abuse against women was accepted in the UAE. She basically opened the door and let the secret out that it was being ignored.

To get international recognition that the UAE was cleaning up the human rights issued that were exposed, one of the things the government did was to open a "safe house" to do similar work as Sharla. Prior to its opening a smear campaign started to take place against her. Before that, all you ever read about Sharla was the good that she did. She was also very humble and kept a low profile. In light of the fact that she was operating for many years, why were only good things written about her and then all of a sudden - pow!!!

If she did have the support of Sh. Mohammed, why did she leave the country?? Possibly she stepped on the big toe of a very important person who didn't take kindly to it and thought he or she would do something about it. Maybe she came across some information that would have been damaging to someone. If either was the case, or something similar, and she had the support of Sh. Mo, which meant she had his ear if need be, it would never had gotten as far as it did!!

I don't think she willfully left the UAE to take up permanent residence in Ethiopia. If she is indeed residing in Ethiopia, what is of her husband - she was married to a local who was very generous in supporting her cause. I also believe that she had children. Where are they??

Personally, I think she was forced to leave before finding herself set up by trumped up allegations by 2 or 3 very scared housemaids who, I believe, were pressured into making those statements. She got out of the UAE before she found herself in jail. Call me a skeptic, but there was something very wrong with the way things happened for her.

Dubai has this uncanny way of making a person become jaded and distrustful.

Very well said, Bora. You're correct. My wordings were off on that one. Yes, she doesn't have the support from the ruler of Dubai, but I am always positive, and I am hoping that one day, she will get the support that she deserves from Sheikh Mohammed. I shouldn't have implemented that on my previous post because that post makes it sound like she does have the support from the ruler of Dubai - which in fact, she really doesn't. InshAllah, InshAllah; may Allah (SWT) be on her side and support her in every way possible. She is in America at the moment and she has opened a shelter in Ethopia. They are going to LOVE her down there!

Bora Bora wrote:

mehreen wrote:Alhamdulillah, the work that Sharla has done is just truly amazing. The UAE media likes to say things that are horrendously not true but let me remind you guys one thing, Sharla has support from the ruler of Dubai, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid. Thus, she was invited to a court hearing to represent the Maktoum family on the camel jockey issue.

She is now helping out people in Ethopia and I wouldn't be surprised if she came back to Dubai soon. May Allah (SWT) reward her for all her tremendous accomplishments. Ameen.

Mehreen, from what I recall, Sharla was doing her work for many years in Dubai - uninterrupted, and to say the very least, unsupported, except by those close to her and through donations. When I say unsupported, she did not have the support of Sh. Mohammed. She was allowed to run her operation, but she did not get support. Abuse against women was accepted in the UAE. She basically opened the door and let the secret out that it was being ignored.

To get international recognition that the UAE was cleaning up the human rights issued that were exposed, one of the things the government did was to open a "safe house" to do similar work as Sharla. Prior to its opening a smear campaign started to take place against her. Before that, all you ever read about Sharla was the good that she did. She was also very humble and kept a low profile. In light of the fact that she was operating for many years, why were only good things written about her and then all of a sudden - pow!!!

If she did have the support of Sh. Mohammed, why did she leave the country?? Possibly she stepped on the big toe of a very important person who didn't take kindly to it and thought he or she would do something about it. Maybe she came across some information that would have been damaging to someone. If either was the case, or something similar, and she had the support of Sh. Mo, which meant she had his ear if need be, it would never had gotten as far as it did!!

I don't think she willfully left the UAE to take up permanent residence in Ethiopia. If she is indeed residing in Ethiopia, what is of her husband - she was married to a local who was very generous in supporting her cause. I also believe that she had children. Where are they??

Personally, I think she was forced to leave before finding herself set up by trumped up allegations by 2 or 3 very scared housemaids who, I believe, were pressured into making those statements. She got out of the UAE before she found herself in jail. Call me a skeptic, but there was something very wrong with the way things happened for her.

Dubai has this uncanny way of making a person become jaded and distrustful.

your statement is not fair at all bora bora, and you are taking her side without any realistic facts, I hope you are not doing this just bcz she is an American.
!
why are you being skeptic about the things that happened for her and not the thinks she did ? selling children .
why are you referring to the complain of those 2 housemaids as an allegation and not true practice from her ?.

neither me or you knows her in person or dealt with her and if your opinion is only biased on thoughts, well you shouldn't ! bcz we are talking about human life's and rights to speak and when they did use this righ you called it an allegation and that those women "were pressured into making those statements" !!! why are you taking chances on their life's, isn't there a slit possibility that they are right ? Isn't there a possibility that she was using that organization as a cover for human trafficking ? if no ,why not ?

the reason I think your statement of a government "cover up" is questionable is bcz of the simple fact that she has been operating that organization for so many years and the government was knowledgeable of it since then and did not go against her even after the camel jockey issue which was a big hit, right ?..... why would they force housemaids to do so just now ??? they could've done it by then, right.?

but when she is cough selling and trafficking "new borns babies" and the hall operation was uncovered you are "skeptic" why isn't there the possibility she is the one covering up and not the government ? I'm sorry but I don't see any strong evidence of your claims unless you have other facts than just thoughts.

You are entitle to your opinion but I know you can do better than just thoughts dear.

uaekid wrote:

Bora Bora wrote:

mehreen wrote:Alhamdulillah, the work that Sharla has done is just truly amazing. The UAE media likes to say things that are horrendously not true but let me remind you guys one thing, Sharla has support from the ruler of Dubai, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid. Thus, she was invited to a court hearing to represent the Maktoum family on the camel jockey issue.

She is now helping out people in Ethopia and I wouldn't be surprised if she came back to Dubai soon. May Allah (SWT) reward her for all her tremendous accomplishments. Ameen.

Mehreen, from what I recall, Sharla was doing her work for many years in Dubai - uninterrupted, and to say the very least, unsupported, except by those close to her and through donations. When I say unsupported, she did not have the support of Sh. Mohammed. She was allowed to run her operation, but she did not get support. Abuse against women was accepted in the UAE. She basically opened the door and let the secret out that it was being ignored.

To get international recognition that the UAE was cleaning up the human rights issued that were exposed, one of the things the government did was to open a "safe house" to do similar work as Sharla. Prior to its opening a smear campaign started to take place against her. Before that, all you ever read about Sharla was the good that she did. She was also very humble and kept a low profile. In light of the fact that she was operating for many years, why were only good things written about her and then all of a sudden - pow!!!

If she did have the support of Sh. Mohammed, why did she leave the country?? Possibly she stepped on the big toe of a very important person who didn't take kindly to it and thought he or she would do something about it. Maybe she came across some information that would have been damaging to someone. If either was the case, or something similar, and she had the support of Sh. Mo, which meant she had his ear if need be, it would never had gotten as far as it did!!

I don't think she willfully left the UAE to take up permanent residence in Ethiopia. If she is indeed residing in Ethiopia, what is of her husband - she was married to a local who was very generous in supporting her cause. I also believe that she had children. Where are they??

Personally, I think she was forced to leave before finding herself set up by trumped up allegations by 2 or 3 very scared housemaids who, I believe, were pressured into making those statements. She got out of the UAE before she found herself in jail. Call me a skeptic, but there was something very wrong with the way things happened for her.

Dubai has this uncanny way of making a person become jaded and distrustful.

your statement is not fair at all bora bora, and you are taking her side without any realistic facts, I hope you are not doing this just bcz she is an American.
!
why are you being skeptic about the things that happened for her and not the thinks she did ? selling children .
why are you referring to the complain of those 2 housemaids as an allegation and not true practice from her ?.

neither me or you knows her in person or dealt with her and if your opinion is only biased on thoughts, well you shouldn't ! bcz we are talking about human life's and rights to speak and when they did use this righ you called it an allegation and that those women "were pressured into making those statements" !!! why are you taking chances on their life's, isn't there a slit possibility that they are right ? Isn't there a possibility that she was using that organization as a cover for human trafficking ? if no ,why not ?

the reason I think your statement of a government "cover up" is questionable is bcz of the simple fact that she has been operating that organization for so many years and the government was knowledgeable of it since then and did not go against her even after the camel jockey issue which was a big hit, right ?..... why would they force housemaids to do so just now ??? they could've done it by then, right.?

but when she is cough selling and trafficking "new borns babies" and the hall operation was uncovered you are "skeptic" why isn't there the possibility she is the one covering up and not the government ? I'm sorry but I don't see any strong evidence of your claims unless you have other facts than just thoughts.

You are entitle to your opinion but I know you can do better than just thoughts dear.

Shame on you for saying that I might be siding with her because she was "American". And even if I was, it is no different that you siding with a local. Sidetracking: you put up a good fight on a veiled support of Eisa. Get back on track: Sharla's more of a UAE national than she is "American", having lived her life in the UAE. I don't care if she was from Borneo and her skin was blue and white stripes.

I was only pointing out the obvious. There are many things that are questionable. You know as well I do that people (housemaids, laborers, etc) can be intimidated to say things that aren't true. The threat of arrest for trumpted up charges, deportation, or any other threat that bears on an individual. After all the work Sharla put into her cause it just seems unlikely that after so many years she gets involved in child trafficking. It would have been easier for her to do it and get away with it at the beginning, and very foolish to do it after having been operational for so long and laws were put in place about it. Maybe she was trying to put the child in a home, to be adopted. Maybe it didn't happen? Who knows??? I don't and neither do you.

like I said before I don't care for Essa case or did support him, all was I trying to say was the manipulating way of lawyers in court, now back to the issue in hand if you base your trust on her just bcz she has been doing good things for so long, well so did the UAE government for a longer period , effort and spending than she did !!

so why are sure that the government pushed the housemaids to do so and giving sharlah and excuse that well "Maybe she was trying to put the child in a home, to be adopted" ? you are questioning us and trusting her based on nothing dear.

you do know trafficking exists and allot of it here ! why can't she part of it?

and lets not talk about the abusing issue right now until we finish "if you want" why you give such a statement and calling it obvious ! what is obvious to me is that if they wanted her out ,they would've don't it long before, I just do not get you..


later on I will get back at you in why the government wont cover such things as the abuse of housemaids ,women and labors.and yes such things are here, UAE is not haven.

uaekid wrote:like I said before I don't care for Essa case or did support him, all was I trying to say was the manipulating way of lawyers in court, now back to the issue in hand if you base your trust on her just bcz she has been doing good things for so long, well so did the UAE government for a longer period , effort and spending than she did !!

so why are sure that the government pushed the housemaids to do so and giving sharlah and excuse that well "Maybe she was trying to put the child in a home, to be adopted" ? you are questioning us and trusting her based on nothing dear.

you do know trafficking exists and allot of it here ! why can't she part of it?

and lets not talk about the abusing issue right now until we finish "if you want" why you give such a statement and calling it obvious ! what is obvious to me is that if they wanted her out ,they would've don't it long before, I just do not get you..


later on I will get back at you in why the government wont cover such things as the abuse of housemaids ,women and labors.and yes such things are here, UAE is not haven.

You don't get me because you don't want to.

Kid, did you study law? Because you certainly use fact and fiction to your convenience. You can make an innocent person look guilty and at the same time make a guilty person look innocent.

First, all your statements regarding Eisa: I thought we were debating the way the justice system works. You keep insisting that I'm making it about Eisa. It is about Eisa's trial, not Eisa himself. You want to give the justice system the benefit of the doubt and you actually, whether you realize it or not, alluded to the fact that the case against him was not "proven", or was "proven" to exonerate him, either way.

You are right when you say lawyers are manipulative, which is a developed skill, and to which I agree. But there are levels - from being really bad at it to being extremely good at it - example of extremely good: lawyers who represented OJ Simpson. Eisa's lawyer failed miserably in that area, but that wasn't really important now, was it since all needed to do was to go through the motions. If Eisa's lawyer was half way good at what he did he would have been more imaginative and creative in making it appear to be a half-way intelligent defense; at least somewhat believeable to the viewing public. But, you seem to be the only one who doesn't think that the "trial" was a sham. Kid, a kid just out of university with a law degree could have tried that case and did a better job. You see, the defense wasn't manipulative, imaginative or creative enough to make it remotely plausible. If anything, he embarrassed the justice system more than it needed to be if he's the one that came up with the "proof" and the story that went with it. Do you really believe that that was the first time Eisa pulled that?? It's just the first time he got caught.

You see all the arguments you give me about Sharla - basically saying why isn't it possible that she did what she was accused of - are the same arguments I use with you regarding Eisa. You have always avoided giving an answer as to whether or not you thought he may or may not have done what he was accused of. You avoided speaking your opinion on exactly what you think as to the trial. And, my reference to housemaids probably being scared into making such statements - it happens and you know it happens. Don't tell me you never heard of at least one story on how the police got a "confession" out of someone?? If you never did, then you are living in a cave!!!!!

Me:
Eisa - GUILTY
The Trial: A SHAM

Kid:
Eisa - ?
The Trial: ?

As for Sharla: we will never know the story as to what transpired. She has two things to consider: her husband, who is a local and her children. She may have a lot to say, but best to suffer in silence for the sake of her husband and children. I stated the obvious to you - how she was able to do her work for so many years and then all of a sudden she's a criminal. Why would she do what she was accused of when she was getting alot of press for all her work. That would be a terribly stupid move at a time when she was becoming somewhat of a public figure. Common sense dictates. If you read my post you will see that I use the word may be or possibly. May be and possibly means it could or could not have happened. You know as I know, crap happens in Dubai. You also know it's kind of a Vegas thing - what happens in Dubai, stays in Dubai.

So, are you going after her because she's American and trying to see the possibility of her being guilty, and defend Eisa's trial because he's a local and the "evidence" proved he was innocent?

There is no heaven on earth. But you sure work hard at trying to make Abu Dhabi as being pretty close to it.