We should bring democracy into Saudi Arabia

Well my opponent says that i have violated some rule. First off, There is no rule in debate saying that in FORM. That is not what this debate is about. It is about attacking and making a case. And second of all my opponent said i do plagiarism but first off have you been to a really debate tournament. I guess thats a know with the knowledge he gave me. That is what you are suppose to do in debate. Find evidence and print it out. So you attacking my whole argument saying " Ohh he plagiarized OMG his arguments don't count" But no, that is what you are supposed to do in REAL DEBATE. My opponent also said that my evidence is poorly disguised but first off, PressTV is like CNN but in Arabia. Its basically saying that CNN is poor disguised. Exactly so his refute to my argument is invalid because Press TV is like CNN but in Arabia. And my opponent also said that the headline for my evidence is 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. But i am sorry i don't think it said that: What is says is that: Saudi Sunnis, Shias want to replace monarchy with democracy: Analyst. Protesters have held a demonstration against the repressive regime of Al Saud in Tarout Island of Saudi Arabia. And you could even check that out ON THE WEBSITE. I think my opponents eyes must be checked by a doctor. Ahh and my opponent also said that Saudis don't want democracy. Fancy that. http://spectator.org...... Wow i must read that sight again because what is says is that the royal in Arabis will shoot people if they protest and that will stop protests in Arabia. BUT, what I'm saying is that the people want a democracy. My opponent really needs to read the evidence one more time. And my opponent also said: 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. But first NO evidence is bias. Press TV is a company just like CNN but in Arbia how could you say that is bias. Also Thes are oppoinons from people.. AHH THAT WHERE HE CONDRADICTS HIMSELF BECUASE HE AGREES THAT THESE OPINIONS ARE FROM PEOPLE RIGHT? SO THE PEOPEL DO WANT DEMOCRACY! SO THAT POINT ON HIS SIDE CONCEDS. Ha and my opponent forth point says: Oh i lived with people there in the east so i know everything about arabia.. Uhh Arabia does not want a democracy. I know this because i lived there for 1 day. And i know the language there because ouse google translate: That is how i interpret this argument. And first of all the eastern states where he lived for 1 day has protest. I think he is lying about living there and if i fancy giver me some evidence that you lived there. My opponents attacked my case but burn hat argument. He has not even been to a debate tournament so i have been to one and that means that in debate you have to print out evidence and bring it to debate. That is debate showing evidence and crushing your opponent case. Sorry but my opponents attacks to my argument fails to stand. Also my oponened said that Qaddafi has bean dead for years. But HA, EVEN THOUGH HE IS DEAD HIS LEGACY STILL LIVES AND HIS THOUGHT AND OPNIONS ARE STILL SPREAD AROUND THE PEOPLE. So his argument concedes utterly. And advide to my opponent: Think before you type.