Inside Mecca

[mikhail]

Huh?
If you mean why I support Saudi Arabia, I think they are right in their decision of keeping Mecca closed.

I just mean the thing of only muslims can be there.

 

[Shayah]

The Saudi embassy in Washington has never allowed a non-Muslim to enter :shock:

Freedom of religion in Saudi Arabia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Gardener]

The Saudi embassy in Washington has never allowed a non-Muslim to enter :shock:

Freedom of religion in Saudi Arabia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But they are justified in dong so, Shayah, because Washington is sacred ground to them and as everybody knows -- we are unclean by virtue of our regrettable lack of Muslimness.

 

[Arcana XV]

The Saudi embassy in Washington has never allowed a non-Muslim to enter :shock:

Freedom of religion in Saudi Arabia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think you either totally misunderstood what the wiki article actually says or you read too fast, Shayah. Regarding the Saudi Arabian embassy in Washington, this is what it says:

The Saudi embassy in Washington is a living example of religious apartheid. In its 50 years, there has not been a single non-Sunni Muslim diplomat in the embassy.

There's enough to criticize about that ****ed up country, let's not make things up.

 

[Gardener]

The Saudi embassy in Washington is a living example of religious apartheid. In its 50 years, there has not been a single non-Sunni Muslim diplomat in the embassy.

Which sound even more restrictive. A person not only needs to be a Muslim who is a diplomat, but a Suni Muslim to boot.

 

[Arcana XV]

Which sound even more restrictive. A person not only needs to be a Muslim who is a diplomat, but a Suni Muslim to boot.

That has nothing to do with what Shayah claimed, tho. Who they allow to become a diplomat has nothing to do with who they allow inside the embassy.

 

[Gardener]

That has nothing to do with what Shayah claimed, tho. Who they allow to become a diplomat has nothing to do with who they allow inside the embassy.

She said no non muslim had ever entered.

If they only allow people to enter who qualify under all of the the following restrictions: A) a diplomat, B) a muslim and C) a Suni, then they ARE excluding all non muslims. They are even excludng some of the Muslims.

 

[Arcana XV]

She said no non muslim had ever entered.

If they only allow people to enter who qualify under all of the the following restrictions: A) a diplomat, B) a muslim and C) a Suni, then they ARE excluding all non muslims. They are even excludng some of the Muslims.

Okay, I'm gonna try one more time.

The Wiki entry does NOT say that no non-Muslim has ever been allowed to enter the embassy. Please read what it actually says. It says that no non-Sunni Muslim has ever been allowed to become a diplomat and represent Saudi Arabia. I mean seriously, think about this. How many American politicians, Senators, Presidents have been invited to the embassy over the years? Are you really going to believe that not a single non-Muslim American government representative has ever been allowed in? Not only that, but countless people enter the embassy every day to request visas to travel to Saudi Arabia.

Seriously, come on now.

 

[digsbe]

In order to be a Saudi citizen doesn't one need to be a Muslim? That action is what scares me. I believe that the KSA claims the Koran as their constitution, but from my limited knowledge of the book I don't think it calls for nations to set up Muslim only citizenship. It is true that the KSA is a bigoted, discriminatory, and oppressive theocratic monarchial regime. But I still understand their reason for closing off Mecca and respect that decision. However, there are far worse things going on that barring of a religiously sacred city from those who don't share their faith.

 

[Gardener]

Okay, I'm gonna try one more time.

The Wiki entry does NOT say that no non-Muslim has ever been allowed to enter the embassy. Please read what it actually says. It says that no non-Sunni Muslim has ever been allowed to become a diplomat and represent Saudi Arabia. I mean seriously, think about this. How many American politicians, Senators, Presidents have been invited to the embassy over the years? Are you really going to believe that not a single non-Muslim American government representative has ever been allowed in? Not only that, but countless people enter the embassy every day to request visas to travel to Saudi Arabia.

Seriously, come on now.

Here is the actual passage expanded a bit:

. The Wahhabi sect does not tolerate other religious or ideological beliefs, Muslim or not. Religious symbols by Muslims, Christians, Jewish and other believers are all banned. The Saudi embassy in Washington is a living example of religious apartheid. In its 50 years, there has not been a single non-Sunni Muslim diplomat in the embassy.

You insist that this mean that the Saudia have never made a Shia a diplomat, but I interpret it as it is actually written, and within the context of the Wahabbi sect not tolerating any other religion or idological belief. It's not that they are just refusing to make a Shia a diplomat (which they aren't), but refusing to allow those who follow different religions or ideologies into the embassy.

 

[Arcana XV]

I give up.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

Which sound even more restrictive. A person not only needs to be a Muslim who is a diplomat, but a Suni Muslim to boot.

You need to think about what you're saying before you say it.

The entire point of an embassy is to promote communications and good relations. If the President were to send someone from the State Department to visit the Saudi embassy, and the Saudi embassy barred entry based on the religious affiliation of the State employee, that would cause an international incident.

Furthermore, from the Saudi embassy's home page:

CONSULAR AND TRAVEL SERVICES

Diplomatic and Official Visa

Requirements:

1. Passport should have a validity of at least six (6) months.
2. One (1) recent passport size color photograph with a white background. Photograph(s) must be full-face shots in which the applicant is facing the camera directly. Side or angled-views are NOT accepted. Guidelines for accepted photograph for Visa.
3. A complete application form filled-out with black ink or printed. Application forms may be downloaded from our website The Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia Homepage. Write e-mail address on the application.
4. A cover letter from the U.S. Department of State or the concerned Embassy specifying the applicant’s name, title, position, purpose and length of trip and the number of entries requested.
5. Copy of itinerary with detailed flight information at the time of entering and exiting the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Diplomatic and Official Visa

Why is there no restriction listed for religious affiliation? Oh, that's right, because they don't tell foreign diplomats they can't enter based on religious affiliation. Because that would be STUPID. Just like believing that would be STUPID.

Furthermore:

Carmi Times
Posted Jun 23, 2010 @ 01:19 PM
Dahlgren, Ill. —


Kaela Kiefer of Dahlgren and Seth Wilson of Sesser represented SouthEastern Illinois Electric Cooperative, Inc. in Washington, D.C., during the annual "Youth to Washington" Tour June 11-18.

This event, sponsored by the electric and telephone cooperatives of Illinois, began 51 years ago to introduce rural youths to our democratic form of government and cooperatives.

The students met with U.S. Rep. Jerry Costello and were among 66 rural Illinois youth leaders selected for the trip. The Illinois students joined 1,496 young leaders from across the country. In addition to the Capitol, they also visited Arlington National Cemetery, the Washington National Cathedral, several Smithsonian Museums, the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, the World War II Memorial, the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia, the National Archives, the Newseum and a number of other historical sites.

Dahlgren student goes to Washington - Carmi, IL - The Carmi Times

I hope you're ready to stop acting like an idiot.

 

[Degreez]

But they are justified in dong so, Shayah, because Washington is sacred ground to them and as everybody knows -- we are unclean by virtue of our regrettable lack of Muslimness.

Except the Saudi embassy is considered Saudi property and under their jurisdiction. Just like US embassies abroad.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

You need to think about what you're saying before you say it.

The entire point of an embassy is to promote communications and good relations. If the President were to send someone from the State Department to visit the Saudi embassy, and the Saudi embassy barred entry based on the religious affiliation of the State employee, that would cause an international incident.

Furthermore, from the Saudi embassy's home page:



Why is there no restriction listed for religious affiliation? Oh, that's right, because they don't tell foreign diplomats they can't enter based on religious affiliation. Because that would be STUPID. Just like believing that would be STUPID.

Furthermore:



I hope you're ready to stop acting like an idiot.

Moderator's Warning:

You are now thread banned from this thread.

 

[Apocalypse]

Yet it is not international law and has no legal effects on Saudi Arabia. You were incorrect in your assertion that Saudi Arabia was violating international law because the UDHR is not international law. I corrected your assertion and if you cannot understand something so simple, you may need to just move on.

Actually I've realized that, I've stated later on that it is a violation of human rights.
I don't think there's a room for disagreement here about that.

Incorrect:
United Nations Human Rights Website - Treaty Bodies Database - Document - General Comments -

From the declaration itself:

Article 13
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.

According to the CIA World Factbook, the population of Saudi Arabia is 100% Muslims (95% Sunni, 5% Shia). Therefore, your conclusion is wrong.

Is there a law that states that only Muslims can be granted citizenship in the country?

It's analogous to this situation where people's movement is restricted based upon their religion. Even if I were to make a thread on it, we all know you wouldn't participate in it.

Absolutely false, the west bank barriers restrict anyone who lives in the West Bank, be it a Christian, Muslim, Arab or whatever.
And yes if you'd open a thread about it I'll participate in it.

I gave my support earlier in the argument by proving that freedom of movement is reserved for citizens of a State (or those that are lawfully residing in that State). That you cannot understand that is laughable.

But that's not true.
The universal declaration of human rights is a universal declaration of, wait for it, human rights.
Therefore when it states that, and I quote, "Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.", it really means to everyone.
This is a human right, not a citizen right.

 

[Shayah]

The Saudi embassy in Washington has never allowed a non-Muslim to enter :shock:

The Saudi embassy in Washington is a living example of religious apartheid. In its 50 years, there has not been a single non-Sunni Muslim diplomat in the embassy.

Freedom of religion in Saudi Arabia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Correction.... there has never been a non-Sunni diplomat in the Saudi embassy.

Diplomats send paper-airplane-messages through an open window?

wtf?

 

[Degreez]

Actually I've realized that, I've stated later on that it is a violation of human rights.
I don't think there's a room for disagreement here about that.

From the declaration itself:

OK, then following your logic I should be able to go anywhere I want in the world with no restrictions. Even if the property is private property, it is my inalienable right to have freedom of movement wherever I want. If I want to start climbing the pyramids of Giza and Egypt stops me, they have violated my human rights. If a Palestinian wants to go to Jerusalem (even if he is a terrorist), and Israel stops them, then Israel has breached that person's human right to freedom of movement. When you want to come back to reality, you will find the world does not work like that. Since you failed to comprehend this last time, maybe I should post it again:
United Nations Human Rights Website - Treaty Bodies Database - Document - General Comments -

4. Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State enjoys, within that territory, the right to move freely and to choose his or her place of residence. In principle, citizens of a State are always lawfully within the territory of that State. The question whether an alien is “lawfully” within the territory of a State is a matter governed by domestic law, which may subject the entry of an alien to the territory of a State to restrictions, provided they are in compliance with the State's international obligations.

Is there a law that states that only Muslims can be granted citizenship in the country?

No. It is near impossible to become a naturalized citizen of Saudi Arabia.

Absolutely false, the west bank barriers restrict anyone who lives in the West Bank, be it a Christian, Muslim, Arab or whatever.

So anyone who is not a Jew. Therefore, their movement is restricted because of their religion.

And yes if you'd open a thread about it I'll participate in it.

Laughable.

But that's not true.
The universal declaration of human rights is a universal declaration of, wait for it, human rights.
Therefore when it states that, and I quote, "Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.", it really means to everyone.
This is a human right, not a citizen right.

Except the UN has clarified the meaning of freedom of movement, which I posted above.

 

[Degreez]

Correction.... there has never been a non-Sunni diplomat in the Saudi embassy.

Diplomats send paper-airplane-messages through an open window?

wtf?

There's this thing... I dunno if you've heard of it... but it's called the postal service.

There's also this other thing... on the Internets... called e-mail.

:roll:

 

[Shayah]

There's this thing... I dunno if you've heard of it... but it's called the postal service.

There's also this other thing... on the Internets... called e-mail.

:roll:

Then why have a glitzy Saudi embassy when a PO Box and a cellphone in a tent will suffice?

Pretty crappy way to conduct modern diplomacy.

 

[Degreez]

Then why have a glitzy Saudi embassy when a PO Box and a cellphone in a tent will suffice?

Pretty crappy way to conduct modern diplomacy.

Hmm.. I dunno... maybe for Saudi nationals who are abroad...?

:roll:

 

[Shayah]

Hmm.. I dunno... maybe for Saudi nationals who are abroad...?

:roll:

Hmm.. I dunno... maybe for Sunni Saudi nationals" who are abroad...?

Fixed it for ya :thumbs:

 

[Degreez]

Hmm.. I dunno... maybe for Sunni Saudi nationals" who are abroad...?

Fixed it for ya :thumbs:

Except that there are one and a half million Shia Saudi nationals.

Nice try though.

 

[Shayah]

Except that there are one and a half million Shia Saudi nationals.

Nice try though.

Thick as a brick. Pay attention. Never has a non-Sunni Muslim ever been in the US Saudi embassy.

Back of the bus for the one and a half million Shia Saudi nationals.

Is that simple enough for ya?

 

[Degreez]

Thick as a brick. Pay attention. Never has a non-Sunni Muslim ever been in the US Saudi embassy.

Back of the bus for the one and a half million Shia Saudi nationals.

Is that simple enough for ya?

Are you seriously spouting the exact same thing you got refuted for just one page ago?

A non-Sunni Muslim DIPLOMAT has never entered the US Saudi embassy (which is technically under KSA jurisdiction).

Apparently you have no idea what the difference between a diplomat and a national is.

 

[kaya'08]

It's a discrimination based on religion, and hence is a violation of the universal declaration of human rights and the freedom of movement.

What makes you think any religion care about human rights? That is a secularist ideal.