Saudi Arabia declares all atheists are terrorists in new law to crack down on political dissidents

[kpete]

Atheists, peaceful protesters and those who go to fight abroad have all been brought under the auspices of new "anti-terror" laws

Saudi Arabia has introduced a series of new laws which define atheists as terrorists, according to a report from Human Rights Watch.

In a string of royal decrees and an overarching new piece of legislation to deal with terrorism generally, the Saudi King Abdullah has clamped down on all forms of political dissent and protests that could "harm public order".

..............


Article one of the new provisions defines terrorism as "calling for atheist thought in any form, or calling into question the fundamentals of the Islamic religion on which this country is based"


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/saudi-arabia-declares-all-atheists-are-terrorists-in-new-law-to-crack-down-on-political-dissidents-9228389.html

[randys1]

1. Do we need their oil?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

11. How easily could you live without your car? N.T.

[randys1]

15. That doesnt answer the question, at all

[Rex]

14. No.

Not at all.

[nationalize the fed]

57. Not anymore

The end of the oil age is here but few have noticed.
Dr. Kaku gets it

A Manhattan type project could wean the US completely off of any dependence on foreign oil or energy.

But drone bombing, Syria and Ukraine are the priorities

[Warren Stupidity]

2. Saudi Arabia is a hell hole of religious idiocy.

I disrespect the shit out of that place.

[RKP5637]

27. K&R! n/t

[DetlefK]

35. Noteworthy exports: oil, Bin Laden, 9/11-terrorists, the ideology of ISIS...

[Jefferson23]

3. One day their leaders will fall......the sooner the better. n/t

[Douglas Carpenter]

17. and who do you think would be the most likely force to replace the royal family if they fall?

I'll give you hint - if it happens any time soon it will not be westernized liberals.

[Jefferson23]

19. Are you suggesting those in power now, can't ever be defeated by seculars in SA?

The Saudi leadership likes very much to rule and control their people and they
do so, in part, by fueling religious fundamentalism..they take advantage of this population
as they are less likely to desire a democracy.

[Douglas Carpenter]

20. I would say - and I did live there for more than 20 years - for the forseeable future there is a

0% chance that the Royal Family could be defeated by liberals or secularist. Eventually they may be. But not for the foreseeable future. I would also say that there is a 99% chance that if the House of Saud was to collapse in the foreseeable future - there would be total mayhem and Talaban level Islamist extremist would take over large parts of the country while tribes fight it out to the death. Eventually the dynamics could change. But not any time soon.

[Jefferson23]

21. You have a greater perspective than I do then. I said, one day..yet I would not imagine that

day to be so far into the future as you do. That is tragic, as there is so much good that
could come from such a departure.

Thank you for the added personal perspective...I appreciate it. I remember your posts
from I/P and know you don't exaggerate nor propagandize.

[Douglas Carpenter]

24. I appreciate that - unfortunately some people cannot get nuances

When I have told people that I was openly gay in Saudi Arabia and so were lots and lots of foreigners I knew were also - people got it in their heads that I was supportive of their system. Well of course I am not. I was just trying to communicate that places are not necessarily the caricature that is widely held. The royal family is outrageously corrupt. Even though the religious authorities are loathed by a good deal of the population - probably the vast majority - they nonetheless have a kind of psychological bullying power over the populace. The idea of secular rule is something most have never really thought about.

[Jefferson23]

25. For what it's worth, I appreciate your perspective. It is late evening here now, but I will try and

find an article I posted that reflects some of the aspects of their society and
governance that you have shared. I would appreciate your thoughts about it.

Will post it when I can...thanks.

[rogerashton]

56. What about the Shiites and immigrants who do the actual work in SA?

Of course they are not likely to support a secularist government -- quite the contrary -- but as I understand it, the Saudi working class is largely immigrant, and to some extent Shiite. Am I wrong? and if not, what would that imply for a post-Saudi situation? Sunni-Shiite civil war?

[Jefferson23]

84. Here is the article I mentioned last night, I had posted it some time ago. I felt it gave a

very good account of the politics and governing we see, and the horrific consequences.

See what you think:

The Tragedy of Great Power: The Massacre of Gaza and the Inevitable Failure of the Arab Spring


Opinion
The Tragedy of Great Power: The Massacre of Gaza and the Inevitable Failure of the Arab Spring
Khaled Abou El Fadl ABC Religion and Ethics Updated 9 Aug 2014 (First posted 8 Aug 2014)

Israel wants to destroy Hamas in order to continue controlling the fate of Palestinians, neutralizing their nationalism and breaking their will to resist.

After the military coup in Egypt, I braced for the slaughter in Palestine. Sadly, one's worst possible fears materialized with nightmarish predictability.

It is not a coincidence that Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) - the two countries who pressured the White House not to trust the elected government in Egypt, and who were blatant and even rather insolent in their support of Abdel Fattah al-Sisi's coup - are the same countries that assured Israel of their covert support if Israel would take out Hamas. But it is not this fact alone that is so telling.

After the coup in Egypt, there was an unprecedented media campaign by the state-controlled media outlets against Hamas. For the first time in Egyptian history, it seemed that the Egyptian official discourse about political Islam and Hamas was scripted, not just by Fox News and its likes, but by Netanyahu and Likud politicians. Hamas was being accused of killing Egyptian soldiers in the Sinai and of every other imaginable vice. The unimaginable happened, and the Egyptian government invited and hosted well-known Islamophobes in Cairo where they spewed their typical venom against a poor captive Egyptian audience.

Soon after the coup, the Sisi government started to repeat an Israeli narrative, which is factually indefensible - that Hamas is a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. Indeed, Hamas was influenced by the thought of particular orientations of the Muslim Brotherhood, but the two movements have very distinct pedagogies, objectives and methodologies.

http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2014/08/08/4064106.htm

[Fumesucker]

4. Calling the fundamentals of Islam into question is terrifying to Islamic authority

So of course atheists are terrorists, they are doing violence to the tenets of Islam, the very heart of Saudi society, the Ummah.

[Politicalboi]

5. So I'm a terrorist in the land of Saudi

Fuck you assholes. Go drink some oil.

[atreides1]

6. Sounds like the perfect place for the Neo-Christians.

All they have to do is take it away from the current owners...

[GummyBearz]

7. We brought this on ourselves

we brought this on ourselves with all of our islamophobia. Now they are getting us back with atheismophobia. Whats next??

[Yo_Mama]

10. We DIDN'T start THIS fire.

It's been burning for a long, long time. Wahabism dates back to the 1700s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabism

Wahhabism is named after an eighteenth century preacher and scholar, Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (1703–1792).[16] He started a revivalist movement in the remote, sparsely populated region of Najd,[17] advocating a purging of practices such as the popular cult of saints, and shrine and tomb visitation, widespread among Muslims, but which he considered idolatry, impurities and innovations in Islam.[5][18] Eventually he formed a pact with a local leader Muhammad bin Saud offering political obedience and promising that protection and propagation of the Wahhabi movement, would mean "power and glory" and rule of "lands and men."[19] The movement is centered on the principle of Tawhid,[20] or the "uniqueness" and "unity" of God.[18]

The alliance between followers of ibn Abd al-Wahhab and Muhammad bin Saud's successors (the House of Saud) proved to be a rather durable alliance. The house of ibn Saud continued to maintain its politico-religious alliance with the Wahhabi sect through the waxing and waning of its own political fortunes over the next 150 years, through to its eventual proclamation of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in 1932, and then afterwards, on into modern times. Today Mohammed bin Abd Al-Wahhab's teachings are state-sponsored and are the dominant form of Islam[3][21] in 21st century Saudi Arabia.

[hifiguy]

12. Wahhabism is probably the only "religious" dogma

even worse than fundy Xtianity.

In order to survive the human race is going to have to outgrow the need for belief in Iron Age fairy tales. Evolve or perish.

[GliderGuider]

61. Given that religion has been an innate part of the human makeup since the beginning

the remaining option is "perish". Which we're doing very well at:

Rate of environmental degradation puts life on Earth at risk, say scientists

Humans are “eating away at our own life support systems” at a rate unseen in the past 10,000 years by degrading land and freshwater systems, emitting greenhouse gases and releasing vast amounts of agricultural chemicals into the environment, new research has found.

Of nine worldwide processes that underpin life on Earth, four have exceeded “safe” levels – human-driven climate change, loss of biosphere integrity, land system change and the high level of phosphorus and nitrogen flowing into the oceans due to fertiliser use.

“When economic systems went into overdrive, there was a massive increase in resource use and pollution. It used to be confined to local and regional areas but we’re now seeing this occurring on a global scale. These changes are down to human activity, not natural variability.”

Compared to the global religion of economic growth, Wahabbism is just a flea-bite.

[Pooka Fey]

73. Excellent post +1

[PeaceNikki]

16. Wow...

[Desert805]

23. Are you kidding?

We "brought laws" in Saudi Arabia-- laws that only affect those IN Saudi Arabia... on ourselves?


Huh?

[m-lekktor]

30. so they are punishing THEIR atheists

for OUR Islamophobia? yeah that makes sense!

[Humanist_Activist]

33. I nominate this as perhaps the dumbest post of the past 2 days, anyone want to second it? n/t

[beam me up scottie]

34. Done.

And that's saying something.

[LostOne4Ever]

44. It is sad that you have to limit it to only two days...

[font style="font-family:papyrus,'Brush Script MT','Infindel B',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]But there have been so many stupid posts the last week I completely understand.[/font]

[Codeine]

83. sigh.

[Warren DeMontague]

37. Oh bull.

not everything is "our fault".

[RedCappedBandit]

53. I think everyone is missing your sarcasm. nt

[GummyBearz]

62. thanks

It happens often.. at least now I know some people got it

[grossproffit]

63. Uh,no, we did not bring this on ourselves.

[Pooka Fey]

71. NO. But the long line of reply posts refuting you, you brought THOSE on yourself

[GummyBearz]

74. Indeed

I brought a long line of people missing the sarcasm on myself... oh well, it happens

[Pooka Fey]

79. Poe's Law "Without a clear indication of the author's intent, it is difficult or impossible to tell

"Without a clear indication of the author's intent, it is difficult or impossible to tell the difference between an expression of sincere extremism and a parody of extremism."

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Poe%27s_Law

Poe's Law should be generalized to include sarcasm.

[Pooka Fey]

72. The sarcasm smily is your friend

Thought you were serious there, GummyBearz

[tenderfoot]

75. Oh brother...

[hifiguy]

8. Worst Country On Earth. Period.

Kim Jong Dingbat's personal fiefdom of dingbattery is a distant second at best.

Saudi Arabia is without question the asshole of the world.

[Surya Gayatri]

58. And, unfortunately so filthy rich that they can buy compliance

with their medieval madness.

Everybody kissing the hems of their haute couture religious robes in hopes of getting some of that oil money.

[Bandit]

9. So much better than Cuba....Right?????

Right up Republican's alley, this type of Government.

[Rex]

13. I would expect such from a monarchy. Not like that form of governance respects human rights.

The only thing that matters in a monarchy is the royal family and members of the court.

[Arugula Latte]

18. Religion was made up for this exact reason -- to keep people in line.

Saudi Arabia must be feeling the effects of the Internet. People can compare notes on not buying into the primitive mythological bullshit, and the PTB don't like it.

[RKP5637]

28. Exactly! Religion is all about political power and control over people. The rest of it,

"the primitive mythological bullshit" is just that, bullshit, to keep the herd in line! Yep! TPTB don't want anything disrupting their control mechanisms.

[ChosenUnWisely]

22. Saudi is doing what most christians in America WISH they could do.

[RKP5637]

31. Exactly! Some definitely would IMO. n/t

[Surya Gayatri]

59. ^^^This!^^^ with a caveat...

I would just add R/W Fundamentalist X-tians.

Bit of broad-brushing there...

[oldandhappy]

26. Saudi Arabia parades itself as a modern country in front of the world

while practicing barbaric and outrageous behaviors against the citizens of the country. Our government is entirely too cozy with them. Their oil is not finite. Our coziness should not be infinite.

[bullwinkle428]

29. Those fuckers actually had the gall to participate in that march for

free speech in France last weekend.

[ChosenUnWisely]

39. The USA also conducts barbaric and outrageous behaviors against the citizens just like Saudi Arabia

Sure the USA might not lop off heads in public but the state (government) still murders its citizens.

It sounds like your beef is with the method not the act itself.

[liberal_at_heart]

40. death penalty, never ending war, for profit health care, US citizens dying from hunger,

more citizens in prison than any other nation, more guns and gun deaths than any other nation; we definitely have no room to judge.

[ChosenUnWisely]

42. But they are bad becasue they are Muslims and da USA is good cuz of Jesus

the 3 major religions all started in the ME so I say we take all the faithful stick them all in say the ME and let them all duke it out with each other and leave the rest of the real civilized people alone.

[liberal_at_heart]

45. Personally I would rather see more respect and tolerance for all people. I realize that is a long

shot but hey there are a lot of impossible things that humans have reached for. Sometimes we accomplish the impossible. Sometimes we don't.

[ChosenUnWisely]

47. Well that would be nice but in my life experience

the least tolerant amongst humans are the religious.

Religion, ALL Religion, is the root of the problem.

[liberal_at_heart]

49. It is greed and power that are the root of the problem.

Humans would still fight each other for power and control even if there weren't any religion.

[ChosenUnWisely]

52. Perhaps but religion makes it worse and a convenient excuse

to kill others for power and greed,

[beam me up scottie]

32. And we're called intolerant because we mock religion.

[Behind the Aegis]

36. That is how it breaks down.

Thems the rules!

Just be happy this wasn't Syria, or this thread would go all kinds of sideways! LOL!

[beam me up scottie]

77. Ikr?

Being intolerant of religious intolerance makes me intolerant though.

The day religion stops creating victims is the day I leave it alone.

[Warren DeMontague]

38. Peoples religious belief must be forever immune to criticism, remember.

Even when that belief means arresting anyone who doesnt believe what they do.

[beam me up scottie]

78. Yep. Religious beliefs are deeply personal and off limits.

And, hey, it's not like they're killing infidels or anything...

[redgreenandblue]

41. Who funds and supports Saudi Arabia?

[Behind the Aegis]

43. Atheists?

Or is your post ? Written word being confusing sometimes.

[redgreenandblue]

46. Answer to my question: Many Western nations.

When you are a sponsor of something then you, at least in part, own it.

[Behind the Aegis]

48. And "Saudi Arabia declares all atheists are terrorists " is okie dokie how?

"When you are a sponsor of something then you, at least in part, own it. "

So, you are claiming atheists sponsored something? Were chalky candy bars involved?

[redgreenandblue]

50. I'm not saying it is ok. I'm saying the US and many other Western nation share responsibility

for the conditions existing in Saudi Arabia, by funding and supporting its leaders.

Germany has not too long ago delivered tanks to Saudi Arabia, after Angela Merkel called it "an island of stability".

[Behind the Aegis]

51. But the US and other Western nations are not atheists.

Soooooooo...kinda falls flat on it's face. Seems the only one to blame here is Saudi Arabia.

[liberal_at_heart]

55. so the US giving money to leaders who outlaw atheism is okay?

And Germany giving tanks to leaders who outlaw atheism is okay? Wow. You are giving me a headache. I'm done reading your posts.

[Behind the Aegis]

65. That isn't the same as saying atheists are responsible.

[beam me up scottie]

81. Says the person who proudly supports the pope even though he calls gays 'disordered'.

The same pope who uses his vast wealth and influence to deny reproductive rights to women, human rights to lgbt people and justice to victims of pedophile priests.

Liberal at heart, eh?

If you say so.

[elias49]

60. You have a habit of misunderstanding people.

Is it purposeful?

[Behind the Aegis]

66. I didn't misunderstand either of you.

[beam me up scottie]

80. What else am I supposed to do with those extra millions I have laying around?

[RedCappedBandit]

54. Not true Islam, of course. nt

[Orsino]

64. How many Christians will nod in agreement...

...without realizing that "calling into question the fundamental tenets of Islam" could apply as easily to Christian advocacy?

Or replace Christianity with any faith or lack thereof. This is what the establishment of state religions does.

[KittyWampus]

67. Well, atheism isn't like your skin color. You can just change your belief… it's a choice >>>

A great many DU'ers have uttered those exact words about religious/non religious beliefs in the last week or so.

That said, why is Saudi Arabia our ally? The Royals use the USA as its scapegoat so they can divert attention away from themselves.

[Lars39]

68. A-theism is the human default. Religion is taught.

[wavesofeuphoria]

69. If atheism is a religion, then barefoot is a shoe.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

70. That comparison is disingenuous and idiotic.

What you have there is a sufficient justification for *insulting* atheism being *legal*.

It's also, mutatis mutandis sufficient justification for insulting religion being legal.

To justify not merely *legalising* insulting a viewpoint but actually doing it, that viewpoint has to be wrong. So in this respect, there is no parallel between insulting atheism and insulting religion - the evidence shows that there is not a benevolent supreme being, and hence exercising your right to insult atheism is misguided, while exercising your right to insult religion is not. But the law and the state should not take that into account. The obvious parallel is that insulting religion is like voting for a Democrat, while insulting atheism is like voting for a Republican - both should be entirely legitimate and equal in the eyes of the state, everyone should be allowed to make their own choice, but one is right and one is wrong.

Secondly, and more importantly, of course, there is no parallel whatsoever between *insulting* a viewpoint and *criminalising* it.

[LadyHawkAZ]

76. Apologists, please tell me again why I need to respect this...? n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

82. They postponed the second public flogging of Raif Badawi today because he has not recovered from the

50 lashes he received in public last Friday for being critical of the clergy. Please notice some people on DU also think being critical of religion is somehow wrong, so perhaps they do not agree with the extremity of the punishment, they do believe there has been an actual offense.

Dubai (AFP) - Saudi Arabia on Friday postponed the next round of flogging for a blogger sentenced to 1,000 lashes for insulting Islam because his wounds from last week's beating have not yet healed, his wife said.
http://news.yahoo.com/saudi-postpones-flogging-blogger-medical-grounds-002430173.html