Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: MP-Ryan on April 03, 2014, 11:50:59 pm
-
http://www.hrw.org/news/2014/03/20/saudi-arabia-new-terrorism-regulations-assault-rights
The interior ministry regulations include other sweeping provisions that authorities can use to criminalize virtually any expression or association critical of the government and its understanding of Islam. These “terrorism” provisions include the following:
Article 1: “Calling for atheist thought in any form, or calling into question the fundamentals of the Islamic religion on which this country is based.”
Article 2: “Anyone who throws away their loyalty to the country’s rulers, or who swears allegiance to any party, organization, current [of thought], group, or individual inside or outside [the kingdom].”
Article 4: “Anyone who aids [“terrorist”] organizations, groups, currents [of thought], associations, or parties, or demonstrates affiliation with them, or sympathy with them, or promotes them, or holds meetings under their umbrella, either inside or outside the kingdom; this includes participation in audio, written, or visual media; social media in its audio, written, or visual forms; internet websites; or circulating their contents in any form, or using slogans of these groups and currents [of thought], or any symbols which point to support or sympathy with them.”
Article 6: “Contact or correspondence with any groups, currents [of thought], or individuals hostile to the kingdom.”
Article 8: “Seeking to shake the social fabric or national cohesion, or calling, participating, promoting, or inciting sit-ins, protests, meetings, or group statements in any form, or anyone who harms the unity or stability of the kingdom by any means.”
Article 9: “Attending conferences, seminars, or meetings inside or outside [the kingdom] targeting the security of society, or sowing discord in society.”
Article 11: “Inciting or making countries, committees, or international organizations antagonistic to the kingdom.”
So, since I'm presently violating several of these just by posting this, I'd like to take a moment to say something that I hope will turn up in some Saudi lawmakers search feed one day:
Come at me, mullah-****ers.
It goes without saying that I continue to advocate that Western citizens do all in their individual power to avoid sending these intolerant, rights-abusing bastards a single solitary cent.
-
It goes without saying that I continue to advocate that Western citizens do all in their individual power to avoid sending these intolerant, rights-abusing bastards a single solitary cent.
Well, there's this...
http://gbk.eads.usaidallnet.gov/query/do?_program=/eads/gbk/tablesByCountry&cocode=3SAU
-
Well if they're calling us that, might as well go all DURKA DURKA JIHAD.
-
Well if they're calling us that, might as well go all DURKA DURKA JIHAD.
What do you call an atheist holy war?
...
...
...
Jihadn't
-
There are five pillars to modern society:
Don't Segregate.
Don't force people to do things your way.
Don't be a dick.
Don't be a douche.
Don't be an asshole.
-
the legality of visiting politician would be interesting lol
-
This can't possibly be enforced practically, unless you're looking to criminalize any citizen at any time, for any reason (sounds like a lot of human interpretation will go along with deciding who gets arrested under this). It's so anti-societal pretty much turning all of your citizens into terrorists. If someone was a citizen over there, i would think it to be impossible to actually follow this to not be deemed a terrorist.
Maybe somebody should annex saudi arabia :p Bad joke, i know.
-
So all their immediate neighbouring countries are terrorists unless they swear loyalty to the king.
Oman, I'm quite cross.
-
Yemen, it's pretty messed up. Iran from all this nonsense. Why doesn't the leadership get a Bahrain?
-
This can't possibly be enforced practically, unless you're looking to criminalize any citizen at any time, for any reason (sounds like a lot of human interpretation will go along with deciding who gets arrested under this). It's so anti-societal pretty much turning all of your citizens into terrorists. If someone was a citizen over there, i would think it to be impossible to actually follow this to not be deemed a terrorist.
Sigh, this is (again!) totalitarianism 101: you make impossible laws with impossible demands, and thus you can (at will) send to jail anyone you really want. This means that if you abide by the "unofficial" law, you're ok. If, however, you insist on doing things that can piss people off (like say, be skeptical of X or Y or Z, or call for women's rights or whatever), then you have a mark on your forehead and an easy conviction if the Powers that Be want you in jail.
The purpose is not to send everyone who faults in this law into jail, that is indeed impossible. The purpose is to turn most of its citizens illegal so you can **** them whenever you want to.
-
Yemen, it's pretty messed up. Iran from all this nonsense. Why doesn't the leadership get a Bahrain?
What's that? Can't hear you over the sound of my Qatar :P
-
This can't possibly be enforced practically, unless you're looking to criminalize any citizen at any time, for any reason (sounds like a lot of human interpretation will go along with deciding who gets arrested under this). It's so anti-societal pretty much turning all of your citizens into terrorists. If someone was a citizen over there, i would think it to be impossible to actually follow this to not be deemed a terrorist.
Sigh, this is (again!) totalitarianism 101: you make impossible laws with impossible demands, and thus you can (at will) send to jail anyone you really want. This means that if you abide by the "unofficial" law, you're ok. If, however, you insist on doing things that can piss people off (like say, be skeptical of X or Y or Z, or call for women's rights or whatever), then you have a mark on your forehead and an easy conviction if the Powers that Be want you in jail.
The purpose is not to send everyone who faults in this law into jail, that is indeed impossible. The purpose is to turn most of its citizens illegal so you can **** them whenever you want to.
This already happens in many if not all countries. (http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2013/06/no-one-is-innocent.html)
-
Weird. Weird and unacceptable.
I've been in the United Arab Emirates and I enjoyed the experience mostly because those places, and the people who live there, were decades ahead of our stereotypes; Dubai in particular was clean, livable and very well organized. The inhabitants of those lands are more polite than many southern Europeans, yet they keep supporting leaders who come out with this sort of weird ideas. It sucks when innovation and tradition combine the wrong way.
-
I've been in the United Arab Emirates and I enjoyed the experience mostly because those places, and the people who live there, were decades ahead of our stereotypes; Dubai in particular was clean, livable and very well organized. The inhabitants of those lands are more polite than many southern Europeans, yet they keep supporting leaders who come out with this sort of weird ideas. It sucks when innovation and tradition combine the wrong way.[/color]
Yeah, the UAE is a great place, except for that whole nasty habit of charging and jailing rape victims.
-
This can't possibly be enforced practically, unless you're looking to criminalize any citizen at any time, for any reason (sounds like a lot of human interpretation will go along with deciding who gets arrested under this). It's so anti-societal pretty much turning all of your citizens into terrorists. If someone was a citizen over there, i would think it to be impossible to actually follow this to not be deemed a terrorist.
Sigh, this is (again!) totalitarianism 101: you make impossible laws with impossible demands, and thus you can (at will) send to jail anyone you really want. This means that if you abide by the "unofficial" law, you're ok. If, however, you insist on doing things that can piss people off (like say, be skeptical of X or Y or Z, or call for women's rights or whatever), then you have a mark on your forehead and an easy conviction if the Powers that Be want you in jail.
The purpose is not to send everyone who faults in this law into jail, that is indeed impossible. The purpose is to turn most of its citizens illegal so you can **** them whenever you want to.
My point is that the law simply can't even begin to be abided by. It's not even worth trying since too much convenient human interpretation will go along with interpreting the law to apply to the offenders; wishfully interpreting offenses to fit a purposefully designed interpretable law. Nothing will ever be so cut, dry, and clear with this.
You were the one who said jail, all i said was arrested (i suppose being disappeared also fits in with this if the local government decides not to make a public display with a bull**** arrest). In this scenario of horrible government which is popping up all over the world even in america (particularly getting after elimination of due process), not everyone goes to jail. I'm thinking right now of people getting sent to labor camps, target practice, and human experimentation.
But, why make ****ed up laws when you could just get due process eliminated? Luckily it's not that easy, ****ed up laws, feeding sheeple propaganda, and make due process totally seem uncool to the cool kids; it's a long or short road for any government to go down. It was a little shorter in america, due process hasn't been eliminated, but it's been greatly bypassed so that way you can do whatever you want to your citizens for any made up reason.
-
Yeah, the UAE is a great place, except for that whole nasty habit of charging and jailing rape victims.
What's up with that anyway? I can't find any logic to it.
-
All the same fundamental reasons the US makes life hard for rape victims, really. Just much, much more so.
-
If they think they're doing Muslims all over the world any favors, well, they aren't. Looks like they're going for a full-on totalitarian on that one. Despite Wahhabism being what it is, I don't think this is particularly related to religion, other than it's caused by the same mindset that makes them endorse such a narrow-minded and strict version of Islam.
The worst thing is, I guess that noone is going to care. They're doing this to their own citizens, and the whole country is so backwards and rotten that they're going to get away with that. All the world cares about is oil they buy from them.
-
Maybe the UN will censure them? Not that that does any good.
-
If Saudis consider atheists terrorists now, does it mean they will also start to fund atheist organisations?
-
All the world cares about is oil they buy from them.
And the military hardware they can sell them.
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/02/14/saudi-arabia-canada-military_n_4790626.html
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/feb/19/bae-typhoon-jet-deal-saudi-prince-charles
-
If Saudis consider atheists terrorists now, does it mean they will also start to fund atheist organisations?
A good saudi is a muslim saudi, and a good saudi arabia is an izlam saudi arabia. Yes possibly they might perhaps for the fun thought of retarded hypocriticality.
You do bring up a good point though. If atheists are labeled as terrorists. Then that means you can of course label atheist organizations as terroristic. Atheists really really don't want to be likened to terrorists.
-
And the military hardware they can sell them.
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/02/14/saudi-arabia-canada-military_n_4790626.html
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/feb/19/bae-typhoon-jet-deal-saudi-prince-charles
Yeah, that too. Also, I wonder, who exactly is responsible for those decisions? Since Saudi Arabia is a monarchy, I'd suspect the Sultan is at least partially to blame, but I don't think he's making all those decisions personally (though he certainly does sign this crap). Perhaps his successor (generally considered liberal, for a Saud, and notably not too corrupt) will be better...
-
No, Dragon, the Monarch is entirely to blame for this. Absolute authority means absolute responsibility, and decisions like these are the reason why western countries got rid of the old aristocracies, or relegated them to tabloid fodder.
-
I'm not denying that it isn't Sultan's fault. I worded it wrong in the previous post. He signed it, and that's why he's responsible for it. He's been criticized for doing things like that before, BTW (and I'm not particularly fond of him). The question is, who actually came up with that idea? I wonder about which of his advisers actually wrote this and gave it for him to sign. While it has no bearing on how the situation would look under the current Sultan, it might give us some insight whether this stupid edict is gonna be thrown out under his successor (along with the guy who proposed it, as it often happens), or if it's gonna stay. Sultan is responsible for all that happens under him, but he's not El Presidente from Tropico, and does not micromanage everything himself. Internal politics within the court are a thing, too, and also influence the monarchy's politics. Here, it probably depends whether the minister who proposed it counts among the allies of the currently designated successor. If he doesn't, there's hope for Saudi Arabia yet.
Also, the problem with that particular monarchy is that it's essentially a bunch of desert farmers who suddenly got rich on oil. They say that when a rich man becomes poor, he becomes a sheep, but then a poor man becomes rich, he becomes a wolf. The latter case is essentially what is happening here, with corruption galore, excessive spending, noveau riche "style" and all signs that show that those people have no idea what to do with the amount of money they have. And of course, no amount of money can buy one out of small-village mentality and bigotry. Which is why we have Wahhabism, a rather uninspired, short-sighted, strict and literal interpretation of Islam. They're essentially a 1st world country with 3rd world mentality. Those problems are not exclusive to them, and not really correlated with them being a monarchy. In fact, I'm pretty convinced that if they were a democracy, things would be just as bad, and with no hope for a change, to boot (whereas now, after the current Sultan dies, it seems that we'll get someone much better).
Well, not that it all matters to businessmen. As long as they don't declare oil buyers and weapon sellers terrorists, the world isn't gonna care. There will be some token uproar from various freedom movements over the world, and that's all. Shi'a Muslims are probably gonna be furious (rightfully so), but it's not like anyone in the West will listen to them, since in popular opinion, Muslim=terrorist anyway. And it's not like any country in the Muslim world can exert pressure on Saudi Arabia, in fact, it usually works the other way. This is gonna be a problem for Muslims in general, though, since Mekka and Medina both happen to be in Saudi Arabia, and that new law means they pretty much could pick any pilgrim out and arrest him/her on the spot.
-
Brief tangent: Is it "sultan" or "king"? The [english translation of] the law in the OP mentions "kingdom", but... idk, which is it?
Enough "blame", let's talk fixes. What do?
-
what do? Say "Oh dear" and get on with your life.
-
Brief tangent: Is it "sultan" or "king"? The [english translation of] the law in the OP mentions "kingdom", but... idk, which is it?
A king. I just checked. I feel a bit embarrassed now, as a monarchist, I should be the one to know those things. Oh, and I suppose now I'm a terrorist squared. :) I'm not only an atheist, but also mixed up titles of Sultan and King, which are not quite the same thing, and this is probably disrespectful. Should probably send them some C^2-16 (or maybe lay off mathematics... :)).
-
@Luis: seriously?
We can't just say "it's somebody else's problem" every time this happens, because sooner or later it's going to be our governments that are doing it. And there are plenty of choices between "grab a plane ticket and a rifle" and "do absolutely nothing". For example, calling for the UN to impose meaningful, targeted sanctions.
-
TBH, I'm not afraid of this particular thing spreading to other Arab countries, much less the whole world. It's another achievement of Wahhabist BS, and they're considered to be missing the point even by other Sunni.
UN can't really do much in that case, I'm afraid. Heck, a good part of the Saudi populace is probably happy about this, because small-minded villagers are just like that (and no matter how much money they have, the majority in SA still has the mentality of such villagers). Perhaps someone could,let's say, "accelerate the country's motion through the line of succession", but I don't think it's likely.
Or we could just form a brigade out of all terrorists created by this new law. By my estimates, if everyone brought a gun and some explosives (perhaps also donate some money for AA/AT missiles), we'd conquer Saudi Arabia in the name of freedom, justice and The Flying Spaghetti monster in no time. :)
-
@Luis: seriously?
We can't just say "it's somebody else's problem" every time this happens, because sooner or later it's going to be our governments that are doing it. And there are plenty of choices between "grab a plane ticket and a rifle" and "do absolutely nothing". For example, calling for the UN to impose meaningful, targeted sanctions.
I say you are probably ignorant of your limits. The UN in these things are trapped by the existence of many muslim countries who would veto any attempt like this without even looking at it, although I am well aware of the 2011 breakthrough resolution concerning blasphemy laws in the UN. It is well know the lobbying capacity of Saudi Arabia in all these discussions, who even managed to get their OIC "commended" while they were doing despicable work regarding this issue (and still are).
So, be my guest and continue the conversation, I think that's the most we can do honestly. Saudis will continue doing the ****ty things they are doing until oil is no longer the world's prime commodity. That time will be the game-changer in all of this, but we still have to wait decades. I expect little to change in Saudi Arabia until then (unless there's some kind of shadow government preparing a big ass reform when the king dies or something that I am not aware).
-
Mmm... Wait, veto? Isn't that only the security council?
Does the UNHRC have to get approval from the main governing body when it says "that's a violation"?
-
Mmm... Wait, veto? Isn't that only the security council?
Not only that but only the permanent SC members have veto power. And this is hardly a matter of security. UN aside, Saudi Arabia has a lot to lose with their international respect, which is the only reason any of their poor choices have been reversed in the past.
-
It's hardly limited to Saudi Arabia. If international respect (and public respect in general) and such wasn't a factor, the world would've been a much worse place. Saudis can get away with all this precisely because the world doesn't care about what they do to their own citizens, but any attempt at enforcing their bigotry on foreigners would quickly draw everyone's ire. Noticed how UAE and their treatment of rape victims only got any attention when a Norwegian woman was raped there? As long as the populace puts up with that and doesn't rise up in arms (unlikely, as I said, narrow minded ones are most likely fine with it, smart ones are too scared to complain), it's unlikely that UN, or anyone, will ever do anything about any of it.
Also, keep in mind that Saudi Arabia is enormously corrupt. This new law will probably be a new source of extorting bribes out of people, and nobody rich will ever suffer because of it. In there, you could be an atheist nudist with a taste for pork, but if you pay the right people the right sum, they'd find you've been going to the Mosque since before you were born, you've memorized Koran and have been to Mekka and Medina at least once per year. That's how things work in Saudi Arabia, and in most countries this corrupt. In practice, a terrorist would be someone who doesn't want to pay a bribe, or someone who wants to mess with the political system that enables the corruption to continue.