Our good friends and noble partners Saudi Arabia – to whose living kings we bow and for whose dead kings we lower our national flag as a mark of respect – is about to crucify Ali Mohammed al-Nimr, who was arrested as a 17-year-old child in 2012 and has been languishing in a Saudi jail ever since. Apparently, the boy’s uncle, Nimr Baqer al-Nimr, is a reformist Shi’ite cleric who has criticised the government, and the nephew is corrupted by association. And the just punishment, according to the Qur’an, for those who infect others with their corruption “is none but that they be killed or crucified”, which is a barbarous, not to say extremist punishment, which, as we know, is nothing to do with Islam.
Uncle Nimr was sentenced to crucifixion in 2012 for speaking out against the Saudi royal family. His denunciations amounted to pleas for liberty, democracy, the eradication of corruption and an end to discrimination against minorities. He has never fired a bullet or exhorted his followers to rise up in violent revolution: his only ammunition is words. It is a Shi’a/Sunni-Wahabbi spat, and King Salman, like King Abdullah before him, has a Sunni-Wahhabi-Islamic/ist divine vocation to wage jihad against minority Shi’ite heretics for the greater glory of Allah.
When one is accused of “breaking allegiance to the King” or “disrupting national unity”, counter-allegations of sedition, corruption, terrorism or Zionism swiftly (and conveniently) follow. And one is then (conveniently) found guilty of one or more of these offences, each of which carries the particularly harsh sentence of crucifixion, which, in the Saudi variation, appears to consist of being (mercifully) beheaded, followed by the public draping of one’s corpse over a cross of wood and being left to rot. If you happen to be related to to the seditious terrorist, that’s terribly bad luck.
Ali Mohammed al-Nimr is 20 or 21 years old now. He, too, has been sentenced to be crucified – which, as we know, is nothing to do with Islam – having (conveniently) been found guilty of “breaking allegiance to the King” as a child. He got caught up in all that ‘Arab Spring’ euphoria, and the Saudi authorities discovered (conveniently) lots of weapons at the boy’s house, which no-one appears to know anything about. He has apparently (not to say conveniently) confessed to his crimes, and so retributive crucifixion – which is nothing to do with Islam – must follow.
The human rights organisation Reprieve say there is evidence that Ali al-Nimr was tortured and his confession obtained by coercive means. He has been denied access to lawyers. His family has appealed, but (conveniently) the case was heard in a secret court and (even more conveniently) dismissed. And so the boy must be crucified, which, as we know, is nothing to do with Islam.
Read the rest here...