>Saudi Arabia >An Islamic Theo-monarchy under Wahhabi Salafism. >A totalitarian state where all dissent is stifled >Ruled by two families: The Sauds (the secular force) and the al-Wahhabs (the religious force). >Both families made a pact in 1744 to support each other to maintain power. >Increases it's power by funding Salafist Islam world wide. >Funded ISIS until ISIS declared war on Saudi Arabia and tried to commit an attack on the Hajj. >Pretty much everyone, Muslim or otherwise hate them if they're not Salafi.
>There seems to be a lot of discontent. >Figures range from 40% to 23% of people actually being Wahhabi, meaning the people who actually support Wahhabism/Salafism is likely in the minority >Hard to know because saying "fuck Wahhabism" gets you beheaded. >A large amount of Muslims refuse to wear Islamic dress inside the home and only wear it not to get arrested when outside, usually wearing Western clothes inside their homes. >Underground sports clubs exist, most of the police know about them but ignore them because, well, fuck it. >Apps have been developed that allow people to track the Religious police patrols and avoid them, so they can walk with their partners or play music and shit. >Most supermarkets place all the ingredients for beer in one isle. >Even the Crown Prince wants to moderate religion in the KSA >King Salman is an old man who'll die soon.
>Everyone outside the Gulf States hate them. >Iran hates them because Sunnis >The levant hate them because of ISIS and their stranglehold on power in the Islamic World. >The West only does business with them because they have Oil and money. >Muslims tend to hate Saudi Arabia for its hardline stance and blame it for radicalising it's young people and for terrorism (of whom the majority of victims are Muslim from Muslim countries)
>Oil is a finite resource
How long do you think the Saudis have before the whole thing ends up in a revolution, French Style?
>How long do you think the Saudis have before the whole thing ends up in a revolution, French Style? This would be interesting maybe if the driving force behind islamic terrorism ceases to exist islam would have a chance to have its reformation into an actual religion of peace like christianity and kikeism
You mean move into politics and try and enforce their beliefs with secular law. That's basically what Christianity does anyway now. Look at Russia, that's the future of "christianity".
Camden Carter
Not nearly as interesting a movement as yours. Flush that shit, please.
Austin Bell
The new salmons gonna make things good. I anticipate a reform of Islam to a more moderate image on the world stage. Also he's building a futuristic city
Mason White
>Underground sports clubs exist, most of the police know about them but ignore them because, well, fuck it. >Apps have been developed that allow people to track the Religious police patrols and avoid them, so they can walk with their partners or play music and shit. maybe humanity will one day be free from all its stupid shackles someone else put on them
Joshua Martinez
I'm going to say that until a realistic solution is put forward by the US that won't cause mass economic collapse, via true partnership and true apologies to all Middle Eastern countries not named Israel and the admittance of complicity in the last 70 years of absolute ridiculousness in Israel situation....then never.
Matthew Hughes
>Free from shackles >literally has a Deus Vult flag of Christian theocrats
Wyatt Carter
Saudi Arabia is actually another occupied Holy Land like Jerusalem except Arabs are way too fucking dumb to realize it
Jason Cruz
>I'm going to say that until a realistic solution is put forward by the US that won't cause mass economic collapse, via true partnership and true apologies to all Middle Eastern countries not named Israel and the admittance of complicity in the last 70 years of absolute ridiculousness in Israel situation....then never.
It's going to happen regardless of America's involvement. The USA is cucked by the Saudi State and the collapse will happen even if the Americans don't like it.
Parker Ramirez
>literally being unable to read
Jordan Jenkins
Also unless some form of mutual destruction of Abrahamic religions, and acceptance of morality because it's simply the right thing to do then there will never be Revolution French style. While Islamic countries have taken Napoleonic code and islamified it, until all sides meet and put the fossils in a museum there won't be true irradication of terrorism in our world.
I know all of the things I'm asking are to extreme but so is the idea of secular Islam. And yeah Jews thinking the goy is their slave, no thanks. Christianity in essence is a stump of it's true self. Just axe it to get rid of the other two at this point.
Ryan Reed
>taking meme flags serious t. newfag
Adrian Sullivan
This simply isn't true. We could collapse your entire existence by going purely internal for our energy resources. It is better to leave current mechanism going atm than lose our one check to being utterly stuck with our Jewish problem.
Cooper Ramirez
Haha I knew there was a reason I kept you on my sublist. Still this is actually a decent thread.
Ryder James
>and acceptance of morality because it's simply the right thing to do
Based on what?
Let's face it, life is a zero sum game; in order for you to win others need to lose; religion is a handicap that most people willingly take but morality sure as hell isn't an intuitive way of succeeding in life.
I know most people here will just strawman this, but what the wealth of human experience backs up what i am saying.
Kevin Moore
Life may be a zero sum game but you either accept religions in their current unacceptable forms or you do away with them and do the right thing because it's the right thing to do. Or just go all out fuck it and whoever wins wins.
In 1791,Louis Michel le Peletier de Saint-Fargeaupresented a new criminal code to the national Constituent Assembly.[7]He explained that it outlawed only “true crimes”, and not “phony offenses created by superstition, feudalism, the tax system, and [royal] despotism”.[8]He did not list the crimes "created by superstition". The new penal code did not mention blasphemy, heresy, sacrilege, witchcraft or homosexuality, which led to these former offences being swiftly decriminalized. In 1810, anew criminal codewas issued under Napoleon. As with thePenal Code of 1791, it did not contain provisions against religious crimes.
--
The preliminary article of the Code established certain important provisions regarding therule of law. Laws could be applied only if they had been duly promulgated, and then only if they had been published officially (including provisions for publishing delays, given the means of communication available at the time). Thus, no secret laws were authorized. It prohibitedex post factolaws (i.e. laws that apply to events that occurred before their introduction). The code also prohibited judges from refusing justice on grounds of insufficiency of the law, thereby encouraging them to interpret the law. On the other hand, it prohibited judges from passing general judgments of a legislative value (see above).
With regard to family, the Code established the supremacy of the man over the wife and children, which was the general legal situation in Europe at the time.[5]A woman was given fewer rights than a minor. Divorce by mutual consent was abolished in 1804.
Lots of other things that our society is based on today that has no basis in religion.
