...
http://www.iwf.org/news/2435061/Saudi-Migrant-Workers-Subject-to-Abuse
https://www.state.gov/j/tip/rls/tiprpt/countries/2015/243521.htm
SA was a priority.
We wish this was a dream.
Q
Say you were the NUMBER 1 consumer of child trafficking.
Let's also say the area you live in is predominantly brown-skinned, black haired, and brown eyed.
How would you go about hiding the fact you have about a dozen child sex slaves procured from all around the world in your keeping?
Well, hiding their faces at all times at threat of punishment by beatings and stonings is a good way to hide them.
Here's my theory:
The reason hijabs are forced on women in the Middle East isn't due to any religious dogma of making sure women don't tempt men; that's just a cover story.
It's because if all the "women" weren't covered head-to-toe it would be plainly obvious that the majority of them are actually child sex slaves of every ethnicity.
That could explain why the Pakistani rape gangs in the UK have the mindset they do. They actually are just doing what is done casually in every country that forces hijabs on their women. They groom, brain-wash, and enslave young girls and maybe even boys for their own sexual deviancy, then hide it from the world with strict conditioning and a dress code with a death penalty.
The ultimate significance of Saudi Arabia might just be that they are the world's largest consumer of trafficked children.
With their strict rules, even the average Saudi probably has no clue how bad it is.
Thoughts?
It’s not so much hiding it from the rest of the world, but rather, dehumanizing their victims so the perp feels even more power over their helplessness. Also explains the requiring a chaperone everywhere they go… so they keep their mouths shut.
I agree, you frame it quite well.
They have the psychological conditioning down to a science.
It’s very very very worth the time to explore the history of Slavery in the Arab world.
From Joseph’s brothers selling him for 20 scheckels to the Ishmaelites to who was actually rounding up and selling African Slaves to the East India Trade Company to who was running, and still is running, open air markets in Libya.
Any religion that says it is OK to de-humanize those that think differently is not Compatible with the external world.
That’s that.
It's between "one thing leads to another" and "one thing permits another."
One form of slavery almost instantaneously permits another form of slavery.
When women aren't allowed the same freedoms as men, as in Saudi Arabia, they are slaves.
It doesn't take but a single generation before the slavemasters have fully explored their powers with wanton abandon.
Precisely.
People = Divine Miracles - Each & Every
Or
People = Meat to face rations, BioEthics, Cannon Fodder, Organ Harvesting, or more.
Every single day I am thankful we haven’t entered the Open Idea Market of it cloned humans should have the same rights we do.
A+ Quality post. Never thought of this angle with the body covering.
Causality is tricky. Are hijabs created for slavery, or did they simply create a condition for slavery to flourish? Either could be true, and either would perpetuate the other. It almost doesn't matter which came first.
Either way, what must be dealt with is that SA became a profitable and protected nexus for slavery and evil of all kinds, allowing it to flourish and expand. From that secure base it expanded in secret, capturing and corrupting politicians and business leaders everywhere. It wasn't the only nexus, but definitely one of the biggest and best secured.
It is a blessing that there was enough popular support within that culture and society to remove Al-Waleed before it was too late. It's wrong to say the culture is purely a front for evil, since we know that the same culture also allowed a correction, and for that habbening to happen.
I agree.
There are differing degrees of Islam as there are for every world religion.
They have the worst of it, though, because Islam has actively destroyed anything they disagree with. Which means, previous versions of the Quran that aren't the "right" version are done away with.
We have no good lead on which version of the Quran is closest to the original, if any.
It's been butchered so much, by so many hands, all leaving no record of the changes, and all with an internal agenda to control their adherents.
Trying to find the "real Islam" at this point is harder than finding the fabled "real socialism."
Every sect is destined to fade away as a building with no foundation.
You could say that about any religion. "Controlling adherents is the motivation" is a common attack against every organized religion. Getting pure truth is difficult; even Jesus stayed silent on that question; it may be impossible on the material earth.
I may do a post about it, but after reading a post and pdf about parasites, I think it's very possible that "these people are sick" refers to an actual parasite that leads to behavioural changes including sexual behavior, specifically pedophilia and homosexuality as a benefit to the parasite's reproductive cycle. Over time the changes in individual behavior lead to changes in society and politics. SA had conditions that allowed it to flourish unchecked.
Religion is always the excuse to get people to do what you want. It's never the core reason.
Every single war fought under the pretense of religious beliefs have all been about one thing, and one thing alone:
Land.
As long as you have land, everything else follows.
Religion has no borders, unlike nationality.
That makes it the ideal vehicle to topple an enemy nation, either by claiming the other religion is evil and must be eradicated or by infiltration, conversion, and buying/inheriting the land out from under them.
I think you can fill in the blanks from there.
Religion is always the scapegoat. It's always the ravenously greedy and pompous elite that are universally to blame. They make sure you never catch them with their hands dirty.
Are you saying that all religion is bad? Or that religion is something that exists on its own legitimately, AND is abused as a pretext for aggression.
In recent years you could argue that economy has been used, even more than religion, to topple adversaries.
Religion is neither good nor bad.
It is an ideal hostage.
Like someone being nabbed by a bank robber who holds a gun to their head.
It's only there to stop people from shooting the bank robber.
The bank robber knows this, so a hostage is always a good idea.
A bad group infiltrates a good religion, makes their way to the control center, and then can do whatever they want because the public assumes what they have about the religion for years prior.
Eventually the rot takes hold, and the religion crumbles. That is, unless, the parasites at the top make sure enough of the original doctrine is intact -- all the stuff that makes the religion good and work.
Why do all the work yourself?
Instead, become a parasite, find the most lucrative and stable part of the host, and make sure not to kill the host as long as possible while reaping all the benefits.
Then, if you screw up and people start to turn against the religion, simply jump ship.
Find another, rinse and repeat.
Fair enough.
It's a tale as old as time.
Why do you think Jesus was so miffed with the Pharisees and not the Hebrew religion as a whole?
It's always the ones in charge that are to blame; and if not them, the ones paying them to be the face.
I don't think that there are any previous versions of the koran, there is only one which has not been altered since mohammed recited it.
I could be wrong here, I have worked in 4 middle east countries fixing their aircraft and this is what everyone there tells me.
There is no central repository of dogma in islam as there is in Christianity, there is only interpretations of the koran by individual mullahs and scribes.
Well I think the DS does everything in baby steps in order to comply --- masks lead to Hi-Jabs 😳
I think you're missing the point. The point of hijab (the covering) is, indeed, for modesty and "not to tempt men", according to the Quran. Thing is, different people and scholars have differing opinions on what's allowed to be show, which goes from just using long dresses (like the most liberal parts of Turkey), to complete covering by the burqa, with only that net allowing them to see (happens a lot in Iran).
The total covering is on a case by case basis, and, like one fren here says, is another medieval tactic of demoralization and submission of women, by denying them the opportunity to be seen as something other than property.
Though I totally see this (coupled with the mandate for women not to talk to men unless spoken to, under the penalty of beatings) being used as an excuse to hide trafficking rings.
I'm not really missing the point, just ignoring the obvious on my way to see if there are any other ways you can abuse such a system.
I understand fully how hajibs are "traditionally" forced on women.
I'm just presenting one of the additional, if not more alluring though depraved, aspects of the practice.
I see your point. Just thought of adding my interpretation.And if you, a normal person with patriotic christian values, could think of such a possibility, be certain that a bunch of goat molesters in the desert probably thought of it quite often in the past 1300 years.
You know, now that you mention it...
I can't think of a civilization before Islam that had such a rigid practice of bagging up all their female population like that.
I think you got a point there.
I worked in Oman in the 1970's, the women there did wear a token hijab, a flimsy bit of silk.
It was the same for their clothes, flimsy bits of silk and lace which showed a lot more than the women of the west wore at the time.
Needless to say if any of us contractors paid them any attention then great misfortune would befall us.
This is the root of the tradition of most weddings now a days, too. The Groomsmen were the only people allowed to be armed during a wedding ceremony. The Bride wears a veil as a lot of times they were never even seen before the ceremony and it prevented refusal of the “bride”. It also demonstrates the status of the bride as a slave. The Bride was also, usually, considered too old by the age of 13 or 14. White is the colour of sacrifice, and the bride was a “sacrifice”. The Bridesmaids were to be “given” as additional sacrifices to the attackers in lieu of the bride if the clan was attacked during the ceremony as was wont to happen with so few unarmed people. The bride is “given away” by a male family member, as transfer of ownership.
Etc., etc.
Needless to say, my wedding ceremony featured none of these traditions, and everyone there had an AMAZING time. The ceremony, after all, should be a joyous event without ridicule or humiliation.
Wow. It's unfathomable how awful people can be. :'(
Hmmm.... can you say bacha bazi?
Why do you say that, and are you thinking per capita, or total numbers? I think OPs argument is based on a per capita slavery situation.
We likely rank up there, but as for Saudi Arabi, it could be so widespread that it spills into the streets yet no one is the wiser.
Not really, I'm just looking at it skin deep.
If I were to go about hiding the fact I had a dozen child sex slaves and so did my neighbor and his neighbor as well, and all the sex slaves were procured from overseas, we'd have no choice but to hide them from the public. Hijabs get half the job done.
It may have started as a campaign to subjugate women through the teachings of Islam, but the convenience of being able to use that as an excuse in order to facilitate hiding a harem of children to diddle sure could promote its widespread acceptance among other like-minded degenerate pedophile world leaders.
Modern Islam wasn't always about the hijab.
Take a look at Iran in the 1970s:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5103795/Fascinating-photos-Iran-1979-revolution.html
Mohammad was a faggot