The world is becoming increasingly horrifying as Rulers promote the descent of their countries, cracking down on political dissent and religious expressions which don’t jibe with the Rulers’ repressive or otherwise authoritarian intolerance.
law professor Jonathan Turley, a new law in Saudi Arabia labels anyone a “terrorist” who “undermines” the ruling regime, such as through publicly criticizing the Rulers or calling for regime change, or “offending the nation’s reputation.”
Prof. Turley notes that there is little difference between the Saudi royal family and the government.
So really, it’s a personal thing with those Saudi Rulers.
But it isn’t all about undermining the regime. There is also these Rulers’ religious intolerance, in which a “terrorist” may also be anyone who criticizes Islam in some way, or who criticizes very which are based on Islamic law, such as those women’s independence.
Turley just a few months ago regarding calls by Muslim countries to institute international blasphemy laws, for which the Obama Administration has shown support.
Essentially, if international blasphemy laws go into effect, then someone outside of the country of those who feel “offended” can be arrested and detained, tried and jailed. Apparently, Obama is with .
In other words, if I say something about the Koran or Muhammad that might be misconstrued as “insulting to Islam,” would Obama have me arrested and renditioned off to one of those repressive regimes?
And given the fine line between the Saudi Rulers themselves and their religious-based intolerance of dissent and criticism, does that mean that someone in the U.S. who criticizes repressive Saudi policies can then be arrested and charged with violating Saudi anti-terrorism laws as well as the international “blasphemy” laws being proposed?
And what about people who criticize Israel?
Would I be arrested and renditioned off to Israel for torture under “anti-blasphemy” laws if I point out the widespread racism among Israelis? The racism in Israel? Or and policies which promote discrimination against Arabs, such as and ? Or the Israeli economic causing the same kind of chaos as their counterparts here in the U.S.?
Would such criticisms be perceived as “anti-Semitic”? Some people already do think that any criticism of Israel is “anti-Semitic” or anti-Jewish, and that if a Jew criticizes Israel (such as ), ignoramuses use the term, “self-hating Jew.” Go figure.
In other words, the ideas of “” and “tolerance” seem to be lost on Rulers and their minions, and many statists and collectivists now.
You see, from my own personal experiences, in my earlier years I was one of only two Jews in my class in school. I was subjected to various remarks by ignorant children of their ignorant parents, such as “The Jews killed Christ,” and so on. And I also heard the word “hebe” directed at me (but not the “,” I guess the younger kids hadn’t learned that from their ignorant parents just yet).
Now, those things didn’t really bother me that much, because I knew they were wrong and a bunch of jerks. But what was I going to do if I felt “offended,” have them arrested and jailed? Would the international blasphemy law apply to me, a Jew? Or would that only apply to Muslims?
And, regarding all this intolerance by obviously thin-skinned Rulers, whatever happened to “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me”? (Although now I’m .)
But one question I have is this: Are the Saudi Rulers so emotionally unstable that they just can’t bear to hear any criticism of them, their policies, or their religious views? That they feel compelled to have the “offender” physically abducted and thrown into a cage? (Or killed?)
And on the Saudi law considering someone to be a “terrorist” whose criticism “undermines” the regime, are they really saying to the world that they are literally terrified by someone who criticizes them or who notes how repressive their regime or their interpretations of Islam are? Really? They are “terrorized” by a critic?
The truth is, these authoritarian regimes are the ones who over whom they rule. When common folks are threatened with abduction, jail or worse by their Rulers and the Rulers’ armed enforcers, simply for saying the wrong thing, THAT is what is terrifying.
But just what kinds of people do they have over there being the Rulers anyway?
Actually, they’re the same kind of Rulers we have here in the U.S.
Of the two most recent U.S. Rulers, George W. Bush gave us the unconstitutional and draconian Patriot Act and other totalitarian post-9/11 laws and policies, while Barack Obama has been ruthlessly enforcing, and adding to them.
But with Obama, it is worse, as he has been cracking down not on “terrorists” but on government , on political , mainly opponents of the regime, as well as the reporting on these things. In other words, it is as though Obama is enforcing the very Saudi laws which consider those whose criticism of the government “undermines” the regime, or “offends the nation’s reputation” as “terrorists.”
Just look at what’s happened to , Edward Snowden, James Rosen, and Michael Hastings, to name just a few victims of the State’s criminality.
One wonders if it will soon be a crime to point out that Obama continued to promise that if you like your doctor and your health plan you can keep them while he knew throughout the whole time that that was . Will commentators soon be thrown in jail for reporting on that?
And what about other agents of the U.S. regime in Washington?
What kind of leaders in “intelligence” and “national security” do we really have now? What kind of “intelligence” chief blatantly commits before congressional committee, but gets away with it?
And a security “” who says “” (all Americans’ private information, albeit criminally), and who likes to have a modeled after the Enterprise bridge on Star Trek?
If I say they’re nuts, will I be charged with “terrorism” merely for expressing my opinion of these people?
So, in my view, all this spying and snooping ”national security” or terrorism. If our government were serious about wanting to prevent terrorism, the bureaucrats would foreigners overseas, which they have been doing for and .
No, it’s really about , , a better ability to get rid of the regime’s critics, dissidents, and potential political opponents. This is really what the “If You See Something, Say Something” stasi campaign is all about. What the spies and snoopers are doing really isn’t that much different from what from Monty Python are doing. In my opinion, government bureaucrats just get off on prying into the private lives of the commoners. Like it’s a predacious power trip.
Related to all this is the social activists’ federal Common Core program for government schools. Common Core is turning out to be very NSA-like, and very totalitarian indeed, with government tracking of every aspect of kids’ private lives, from cradle to career.
educational expert Mary Black of , some intrusions the feds want to inflict include placing bracelets on the kids and the use of “facial expression cameras,” to electronically track the kids’ emotional reactions to things. And the feds are also getting the school bureaucrats to ask the kids about their parents’ voting habits, whether they are divorced, and other very intrusive things. Black described the feds’ desire to have this data as “insatiable.” Much like the national security cowboy who says “collect it all.”
So Common Core’s purpose is not to track kids’ educational and academic lives, but to track their private lives, their attitudes, emotions and views.
And pediatrician Karen Effrem of , the real agenda of Common Core is not just “cradle to career,” but “lifelong,” a “womb-to-tomb dossier on kids and families.”
After all, we need to know when someone might have the potential of becoming a future to the regime, someone whose future criticisms of government bureaucrats might be characterized as “terrorist” actions.
But will such a government dossier of everybody’s private life include one’s religious views, too?
Common Core’s inherent intimidation of non-government-approved views seems like a very communist-like, version of the kind of religion-based authoritarian stifling of individualism and critical thinking that characterizes those other totalitarian regimes overseas. A theocratically ideological form of ignorance-indoctrination pedagogy.
So given that Obama and his minions have been carrying out the extraordinary rendition policies of Bush — having “suspects” taken off to foreign countries for interrogation and torture — is that what they might very well be doing to someone who is accused of committing “blasphemy” and not just accused of being a terrorist?
Opponents of Common Core may very well be considered “blasphemers” in the same way that the global warmists’ challengers have been considered “deniers.” Some climate fanatics actually believe the “deniers” should be jailed or executed.
And add to the Common Core dossiers all the other private medical information being seized as part of ObamaCare that federal bureaucrats can access now.
And what about the internment camps that SCOTUS Justice Antonin Scalia could very well be in the works as a further bureaucrat over-reaction to whatever the next crisis might be?
Now, now, now, all you skeptics out there. We know the U.S. military (, that is) for internment camps. It’s not debatable.
The truth is, there is something wrong with Rulers (and their minions and supporters) who are so thin-skinned that they can’t tolerate hearing opposition to their policies, or are so offended when their religious figures are mocked or satirized, that they must criminally abduct, jail or murder the “offender.”
Human beings have a right to criticize the Rulers, and a right to criticize various tenets of various religions, especially when such tenets or policies go against common civility and morality. When Rulers inflict repressive policies against the people, it , whether regarding Saudi Arabia, Israel or the U.S. or elsewhere.