We should bring democracy into Saudi Arabia

1. "Attacking my opponents case:My opponent's only argument is saying people like the way they are....."The format laid out by the instigator and agreed to by the contender (implied by him accepting this debate) was that R1 is acceptance, R2 is arguments, and R3&4 are for rebuttals. My opponent has violated this layout by including rebuttals in R2. The voters should keep this in mind when voting on conduct.2. "but that is easily refuted saying that: Protesters have held a demonstration against the repressive regime of Al Saud in Tarout Island of Saudi Arabia.Saudi Sunnis, Shias want to replace monarchy with democracy: Analyst. ""On Thursday evening there was a demonstration in the city of Qatif (Al-Qatif) in the Eastern region of Saudi Arabia. The protesters participating in the demonstration in Al-Qatif showed several interesting posters and banners. One of these banners showed the written words "The people want the fall of the House of Saud" and meanwhile there are also several videos of the protest in the Saudi Arabian city of Qatif (Al-Qatif) in the eastern region of Saudi Arabia with its totalitarian dictatorship online at YouTube and other video platforms."Our primary goal is the overthrow of the House of Saud, the clearing of the land of their filth, and the establishment of a new democratically elected government," say the activists of this demonstration against the House of Saud.The mass media of the Western community of values R03;R03;follow the strict line to ignore these peaceful protests for basic human rights and democracy in Saudi Arabia" I will note that my opponent plagiarised these quotes form the following sources:http://www.syrianews.cc...http://www.presstv.com... While PressTV appears to be a run of the mill media outlet,my opponents second source, syrianews.cc, is a poorly disguised blogsite masquerading as a reputable news source. It is run by ardent supporters of the Syrian rebels, if not by the rebels themselves. All of this information can be gleaned just by reading the website home page.To give the voter a sense of this website used as a source by my opponent, here is a headline:Obama’s Death Squads Strike Syria, Again: 9 Killed, 30 Seriously Wounded in Attack on School Buses and School"Obamas Death Squad" refers to a separate rebel faction whom they accuse of receiving aid from America. They identify the victims as martyrs. The voters should keep these things in mind when voting on sources.3.THE SENSITIVE SAUDIS: THEY WANT DEMOCRACY FOR EVERYONE ELSE I do not know what my opponent is trying to do with this title he plagiarised from this American tabloid, but it seems to say that Saudis don't want democracy. Fancy that.http://spectator.org...My opponent goes on to cite an opinion piece plagiarised from this Anti-Saudi blog (which Identifies KSA'a major problems as women's rights, Islam, minarets, Oil Power, and shifting sand) in an attempt to illustrate the supposed underhanded nature of Saudi politics.http://www.cdhr.info...I have two points of criticism. First, the source has an obvious, outspoken bias (equivalent being using an Anti-American hate site as a source for America's foreign policies) that ruins their credibility. Second, this is an opinion piece, illustrating the opinion of an American novelist. Hardly applicable to the feelings of the general Saudi population.4. I would like to point out here that my opponent has cited protests of Shia minorities (the videos were of shia, not sunnis, and how I know that would be a topic for another discussion. Here I'm appealing to ethos in saying that I lived among those people for years, speak their language, and know how to identify different ethnic/religious groups.) in two eastern cities of Saudi Arabia. He then uses these protests to state that the Saudi People hate their government. This is the equivalent of filming a white supremacist protest in Wyoming then using that footage to convince other nations that "The American People" want blacks out of the country. The fallacy is obvious.5. "Contention 1: Utilitarism.More plagiarism from this source:http://www.pewglobal.org...Since the beginning of the Arab Spring, analysts, policymakers, and pundits have debated whether democracy will actually take root in the Middle East. Even in nations such as Egypt and Tunisia where autocrats have been ousted, there is still considerable uncertainty and anxiety about what kinds of political systems will replace them. One thing, however, is clear: People in Arab nations want democracy, and they don"t just support a vague notion of democracy " they want to live in a country that has specific rights and institutions.At the Pew Global Attitudes Project, our surveys have consistently found considerable support for democracy in Arab nations and our most recent poll again finds a strong desire for democracy in countries such as Egypt, Tunisia, Lebanon, and Jordan. Big majorities in these countries say democracy is the best type of government. In Egypt for example, two-thirds believe democracy is preferable to any other kind of government, WHILE 70% WANT A DEMOCRACY. "Not only did my opponent plagiarise here, but he added his own numbers into this quote.Here my opponent is basically saying that most of the Arab Nations want democracy. I will not argue that Egypt, Tunisia, Syria, Libya, Iraq, Yemen, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman, and other Arab nations don't want democracy. I argue that One of the Arab nations does not want democracy. I am arguing that Saudi Arabia is the exception to the generalization made in this unsourced quote. 6. "Historically speaking, what is now happening is without precedent in the Arab world. For the first time, Arab authoritarian regimes have been toppled, and others are threatened, by mass demonstrations calling for freedom and democracy. Previously, Arab regimes changed through military coups and other sorts of putsches, never through popular revolutions.Yet, while most Arab regimes now appear threatened, only two authoritarian rulers " Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali in Tunisia and Hosni Mubarak in Egypt " have been actually deposed so far. Theirs were relatively "soft" autocracies. Much more oppressive and ruthless rulers " Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi in Libya, Bashar Assad in Syria, and Ali Abdullah Saleh in Yemen " though seriously threatened, have proven far more resilient (up to now) in suppressing popular opposition. Even in tiny Bahrain, the Sunni minority has, for now, succeeded in maintaining its rule over the Shia majority, albeit with military help from neighboring Sunni-led countries." This clause illustrates that my opponent is simply copying and pasting anything he can find that talks about democracy and the Middle East. Not only does this not relate to the topic (should we bring democracy into Saudi Arabia), but he didn't even bother to check the accuracy of this excerpt. Qaddafi has bean dead for years[1].Conclusions: My opponent fails to illustrate why we should bring democracy into Saudi Arabia. As stated before BOP is on my opponent since he wished to alter what is already established.I encourage my opponent to stop randomly copying and pasting without checking for accuracy, reliability, or relevance. I also advise my opponent to properly cite his sources rather that resorting to plagiarism.Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk...;