Saudi Arabia Equates Atheism and Terrorism


Saudi Arabia, whose ruling family includes some princes who support and fund terrorism around the world, has passed a new anti-terrorism policy that defines atheism itself, along with nearly all dissent from that country’s leadership, as terrorism. The new definition of terrorism includes:

Calls for atheist thought in any form, or calling into question the fundamentals of the Islamic religion on which this country is based;

Anyone who disregards their loyalty to the country’s rulers;

Anyone who aids [terrorist] organisations, 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;

Those who seek to shake the social fabric or national cohesion, or anyone who harms the unity or stability of the kingdom by any means;

Attends conferences, seminars, or meetings inside or outside [the kingdom] targeting the security of society, or sowing discord in society;

Incites or make countries, committees, or international organisations antagonistic to the kingdom.

Welcome to totalitarianism. But don’t expect to see much of a reaction to this from the State Department because they won’t want to offend our “allies.”

Comments

  1. busterggi says

    Heck, I expect the SCOTUS to declare Saudi Arabia a US citizen just so they can ‘free $peech’ to US politicians in the open instead of under the table.

  2. Alverant says

    A template for what we can expect the next time a Republican gets into the White House.

  3. sinned34 says

    A template for what we can expect the next time a Republican gets into the White House.

    With one big exception: it’ll only count when the Republicans are in power. When the Democrats are in power, all those activities (except for atheism) are the ways patriots act to restore freedom under a tyrannical government.

  4. says

    “Anyone who aids [terrorist] organisations, 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;”

    Implying that, according to the House of Saud, expressing interest in a group like the Humanist Society, or “Like”-ing an atheist group on Facebook, is sufficient legal reason to execute someone for treason. The American Talibangelicals will no doubt cheer, at least until Christians start get arrested and executed for treason.

  5. felidae says

    Would anybody pay attention to these goatfuckers if they didn’t have any oil–absent hydrocarbons the Saudis would be as irrelevant as Ethiopia

  6. scienceavenger says

    @5 That’s the best argument for developing alternative fuels that could have appeal to conservatives. Don’t want Obama bowing to any more Saudi kings? Go Solar.

  7. anubisprime says

    To be fair, to the theist mind set there is nothing more terrifying then atheism.

  8. says

    “Calls for atheist thought in any form, or calling into question the fundamentals of the Islamic religion on which this country is based;”

    I maintain an atheist blog. But since I don’t live in Saudi Arabia I… Hold on a sec…

    “Anyone who aids [terrorist]…currents [of thought]… either inside or outside the kingdom;”

    Shit. Under Saudi law I’m a terrorist. And so is everyone here.

  9. says

    Come to think of it, with the clause about anyone who calls into question the fundamentals of Islam… did they just effectively declare all non-Muslims to be terrorists? After all, just by being a non-Muslim you are calling Islam into question.

  10. colnago80 says

    Re flelidae @ #6

    Since only about 3% of the electricity produced in the US uses oil burning power plants, solar energy (or wind energy or nuclear energy) will have virtually no effect on oil consumption.

  11. anubisprime says

    somnus @ 8

    did they just effectively declare all non-Muslims to be terrorists?

    It would seem so, and by extension every Christian who maintains that jeebus is the only way and the light.

    Nothing becomes so ridiculous as a theist that pretends great piousness and zealousness in their faith and tries to stifle any further dissent or debate on their delusion by incoherent claims and hysterical pledges.

    Truly pathetic…but fear and ignorance does that without difficulty, especially in matters religious.

    It is almost like the spirit of the Crusades are still with us, or rather the hatred and suspicion that fermented the fatuous paranoia in the first place.

  12. freehand says

    One more thing on which the Tea Party and the Saudi Muslims can agree. (Along with the fundamental need for a theocracy, science hates God, it’s the woman’s fault, and shut up, that’s why).

  13. says

    Come to think of it, with the clause about anyone who calls into question the fundamentals of Islam… did they just effectively declare all non-Muslims to be terrorists?

    The paradym of Islam is that Islam is the absolute truth and we infidels either have not been properly educated to understand the truth or we are puposely being contrary in denying said truth. The idea that Islam might be incorrect is beyond the muhammaden’s imagining.

    Oops, just bought me a death sentence for telling the truth.

  14. lorn says

    The story of Saudi Arabia might best be characterized as the dance and death-grip between two organizations of losers, the house of Saud and the Wahabbists. All the other schools of Islam had rejected the Sauds and all the other potential political backers had rejected the Wahabbists. Both were losers, both were getting their butts kicks, then, because there was nowhere left to go, they stuck together … then, on the verge of ultimate failure, they found oil (a huge butt load of oil) under the wastelands they lived on. It was the start of beautiful friendship.

    Wahabbists are typical of authoritarian religions, just a bit extreme and uncompromising. Like most religions they claim to hold a special understanding of the truth. They are just a bit less subtle in demanding that everyone see it their way or die. They would naturally see atheism as something they can’t debate or compromise with. The good news is that historically they are much more violent with coreligionists.

    The house of Saud is your typical band of authoritarian losers who made it big. Behind the opulence and grandeur their entire gambit consists of a mix of bribery and violence.

  15. D. C. Sessions says

    Shit. Under Saudi law I’m a terrorist. And so is everyone here.

    And under bipartisan American doctrine, laws against terrorism (and support of it) have extraterritorial jurisdiction.

    There’s a reason I never fly on routes that might land in those kingdoms. Better hope that the Saudis don’t ever develop (or buy) drones …

  16. laurentweppe says

    The story of Saudi Arabia might best be characterized as the dance and death-grip between two organizations of losers, the house of Saud and the Wahabbists

    The Ulemas who lord over the wahabbist sect are the cadet branch of the House of Saud. Salafism is, quite literally, the Southern Baptist Convention of Islam

  17. Albert Bakker says

    It is a rather strong sign of weakness, an act desperation. I would suspect the US State Dept be among those who are alarmed by this signal, though perhaps not out of any concern with human rights, but for the political stability of the kingdom and the adverse consequences of the ultimately inevitable collapse of this royal terrorist organization.

  18. dingojack says

    Hmmm …. just a thought experiment:
    “The paradigm of Islam Christianity is that Islam Christianity is the absolute truth and we infidels those pagans either have not been properly educated to understand the truth or we they are purposely being contrary in denying said truth. The idea that Islam Christianity might be incorrect is beyond the muhammaden’s Bishops’ imagining.”
    Yep, the Fundies will be Fundies. (but ours are too toothless to issue a fatwa Bull [such as ‘Regnans in Excelsis’]).
    :) Dingo
    ———–
    I cleaned up some spelling errors for you, Kamaka.

  19. says

    “Since only about 3% of the electricity produced in the US uses oil burning power plants, solar energy (or wind energy or nuclear energy) will have virtually no effect on oil consumption.”

    ‘Tis true. Otoh, an awful of the 1%ers’ dollahz are dependent upon oil (admittedly, much of it comes from other countries) so keeping oligarchs or outright dictatorships in place (at least those who will play ball with the U.S. StateNSA Dept.) is very much in their interest. That it’s never worked in the long term is a lesson that they obviously haven’t learned.

  20. says

    BTW, whenever I hear that some group of “freedom fighters” or moderates have tossed out (or slaughtered wholesale) the “bad guys” I think to myself, “How long before they ARE the bad guys”. It’s not usually a long wait.

  21. says

    @18;

    If only the U.S. DoS had the interests of anyone but their patrons at heart. They have demonstrated, repeatedly that they do not give fuck #1 about anyone outside of those that they are TOLD to give a fuck about.

  22. D. C. Sessions says

    For those with any innocence left, please consider this: the NSA has been tapping the phones of European heads of state. What are the chances that they haven’t bothered to spy a lot more closely to many, many members of the House of Saud.

    Now, what would happen if some of that material fell into the hands of Al Jazeera? And yet it hasn’t. What are the chances that it ever will?

  23. Albert Bakker says

    @22 – That’s also a fairly common trait in said circles from my observation, not at all unique to the US. It is only that the US-Saudi relationship is a very special one indeed.

  24. says

    @24:

    Yes. And I think that has more to do with U.S. military power and our support of the Saudi regime guaranteeing the safety of their cash flow, some part of which winds up in the hands of U.S. companies.

  25. lancifer says

    I have two sister’s in law that live in Saudi Arabia. My wife and I had planned on visiting them later this year on the way back from visiting the rest of her family in Ethiopia.

    Maybe that’s not such a good idea.

  26. dingojack says

    Lance- What is the political situation in Ethiopia (and Saudi Arabia) like? Would your wife (and yourself of course) be in real danger?
    Dingo

Leave a Reply