posted on August 1, 2005 07:25:31 AM new
By Laith Abou-Ragheb
RIYADH (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia's King Fahd died on Monday and Crown Prince Abdullah was swiftly pronounced monarch of the world's largest oil exporter and a key U.S. ally.
A Saudi source said the kingdom's oil policy would not change. Diplomats said they expected no major shifts in foreign policy under King Abdullah, who is at least 80 and has run day-to-day affairs since a stroke debilitated Fahd in 1995.
"With deep sorrow and pain, the royal court... mourns the death of The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Fahd due to illness," said Information Minister Iyad bin Amin Madani, reading an official statement on state television.
Fahd, who was believed to be 83 and had been in poor health, had entered hospital on May 27 with acute pneumonia. A medical source said he died at around 6 a.m. local time (2300 EDT).
"The royal family members have acknowledged Crown Prince Abdullah as sovereign of the country ... after which the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques and ruler of Saudi Arabia King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz chose Prince Sultan as crown prince and the family members acknowledged that," the statement said.
Prince Sultan, like King Abdullah, was born in 1924.
U.S. crude oil jumped to $61 a barrel after Fahd's death. The Saudi source said Riyadh would adhere to its long-standing oil policy aimed at keeping global markets well supplied to stabilize prices.
"I am sure nothing will change regarding Saudi Arabia's oil policy," the source told Reuters.
The Saudi stock market, the largest Arab bourse, briefly suspended trading and was down almost 2 percent after reopening.
FUNERAL ON TUESDAY
A Saudi official said Fahd's funeral would take place on Tuesday to give time for foreign dignitaries to take part.
Ordinary Saudis said they were saddened, but not surprised, by Fahd's death. Over the past decade, the wheelchair-bound king's public appearances became increasingly rare. He chaired occasional cabinet meetings but barely spoke in public.
"I am very sad but this will happen to all of us," said government employee Saud Mohammed. "The king is now in God's hands."
In Cairo, an Arab League official said this week's Arab summit in Egypt would be postponed for a few days.
Abdullah, the fifth son of Saudi Arabia's founder King Abdul-Aziz to ascend the throne, is a cautious reformer who has overseen modest economic and political liberalization.
In the past two years, the kingdom has faced a violent al Qaeda campaign to end seven decades of the royal family's rule in Saudi Arabia, home to Islam's holiest shrines.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
No, I'm saying -- I'm merely -- I'm saying what I'm saying. I don't know why I'm always having people say, are you trying to say -- you know what you can do if you want to know what I'm saying is listen to what I'm saying. What I'm saying is what I said ...
posted on August 1, 2005 08:00:07 AM new
fenix - I believe you have a lot of knowledge about the Saudi's.
Do you know if this new King's faith is 'peaceful' muslim beliefs in the Quran/Koran or was he trained/educated under the teachings of Imam Ibn Abdul Wahib (Wahibism)?
posted on August 1, 2005 08:20:15 AM new
Abdullah is more liberal in his beliefs. He has effectively been the leader for the past few years and he is the one that ordered the investigation and siezures of millions of dollars in bank accounts of terror related organizations. He is actually the one that approved putting forth measures to open Saudi Arabia up to tourism (still very strict restrictions on women but nonetheless, something that has never existed before) and the man that has been leader thru their battles against AQ.
He's only about 3 years younger than Fahd and Sultan who is the new Crowned Prince is the same age so as long as you can keep these guys around you are dealing with men that avoided that extremist generation.
Also you have to remember that the extremeists want the family overthrown and so even if you have an odd member that has converted, he will not be allowed to ascend to power by the other family members.
Interesting side note.... Abdullah is rumored to have been the father of the Lebanese former Prime Minister that was assissinated by the Syrians.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
No, I'm saying -- I'm merely -- I'm saying what I'm saying. I don't know why I'm always having people say, are you trying to say -- you know what you can do if you want to know what I'm saying is listen to what I'm saying. What I'm saying is what I said ...
- Ann Coulter
[ edited by fenix03 on Aug 1, 2005 08:21 AM ]
posted on August 1, 2005 09:52:08 AM new
Thanks for your response, fenix....but what I was trying to get information on was this new kings religious background.
If you had any knowledge about whether or not he would have been raised as a child to the 'peaceful word' of the Quran or would he have been taught the more radical form of Wahibism?
It's been my understand that ALL Arabs in SA are taught the Wahibism form of religion....and that even in their schools here in America....that's what they're taught. Do you know if that's correct or not?
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on August 1, 2005 10:24:54 AM new
Wahabi is the "official" ideology of the Kingdom and therefor it is the one that is taught but the thing is that as with any religion there are extremeists factions and because they are the most vocal they get the most attention and can cast negative light upon the religion as a whole. Abdullah and all of the power holding family members are peaceful Islamics. You also have to remember that most of members of the House of Faud are products of at least some western schooling, have done much travel and have been raised to be part of the successful ruling of a nation and therefor they have as much schooling in business as they do in religion. They know the internal diplomatic neccessity of not alienating Wahabi leaders in order to keep internal peace in the Kingdom as well as the international diplomatic neccessity of keeping them on a short leash.
With some exception as would happen in any family the Saudi Royal Family is kind of the equivalent of the Kennedys. They are more liberal than the Kingdom that they rule.
I don't know if you have The Biography Channel but if you do, keep an eye out for a two hour program they have about Saudi Arabia. It's very interesting in that it shows a recent view from within the Kindom of changes going on politically, religiously and socially.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
No, I'm saying -- I'm merely -- I'm saying what I'm saying. I don't know why I'm always having people say, are you trying to say -- you know what you can do if you want to know what I'm saying is listen to what I'm saying. What I'm saying is what I said ...
posted on August 1, 2005 10:54:10 AM new
fenix - Thanks again...and yes I do get that channel...I'll watch for that program.
I guess what bothers me, fenix, and we've discussed it before...is that the Saudi family allows the continued preaching of Wahibism
and I believe that's the faith of 17 out of the 19 9-11 bombers....and binladen.
Now, I'm aware that SA threw his rear out of the country....and YET the House of Saud continues to allow this really radical and ultimate anti-American religion to be taught....and supports it being that way.
In my eyes....that only promotes more hatred and calls from these lunitics for 'the conversion' by force, by murders of American's....and that, naturally, doesn't sit well at all with me.
With so much of this 'war' being about and coming from these terrorists who come both from the muslim communities and from SA with it's support of Wahibism.....I am really coming to the position that we will be having a HUGE war of religion/terorism in the not too distant future.
Maybe you're correct in what the Saud family is trying to do. And I know we need the oil from the ME, so that gives us the incentive to 'make peace'.
SA has worked with the US for decades...providing more to the market. But if these bombings keep occuring like the recent ones in Britian....or start here on our soil....we're going to see an out-and-out war. And SA will side with the other radical muslims I'd bet.
posted on August 1, 2005 11:37:48 AM new
Linda - think of it this way. What do you would happen if an American president tried to outlaw Christianity in Amercia? The christian people would rise up and throw the man out of office lead by an extremeist individual that would probably rise to a position of extreme power.
If the Saudi government tried to outlaw Wahabism that nation would uprise against them, there undoutably would be more leadership assisination attempts and in a country that just now seeing it's first elections you would have vocal extreme Wahabi leaders rising up as well as creating even more extremists. It would be counter productive to their interests, and ours.
Saudi leadership is in an unenviable position. They have to find a balance between controlling the extreme sects while not appearing to be trying to interfere with a centuries old religion and the nations cultural traditions and to placate it's partners and friends on the world stage.
There are subtle changes, weternization is coming to the Kingdom in small doses and I think that there is a thought process that believes that those types of influences will help draw the countries youth away from the hardline old world teachings that tend to be the breading ground for terrorism.
You have to remember though Wahabism is not a religious sect of terrorism, it's the fringe extremeists that are the problem, not belief as a whole.
Don't be fooled by the nationality of the 9/11 bombers. That was no coincidence. Bin Laden could have chosen people from a dozen different nationalities but he chose Saudis because he wanted to open rifts to destroy the relationship between the US and the Saudi's because Saudi Leadership chose American military support over his own forces.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
No, I'm saying -- I'm merely -- I'm saying what I'm saying. I don't know why I'm always having people say, are you trying to say -- you know what you can do if you want to know what I'm saying is listen to what I'm saying. What I'm saying is what I said ...
posted on August 1, 2005 12:22:40 PM new
I have not but my father spent 10 years there working at a hospital in Riyadh. I got interested in the country while he was there and stayed interested after he left. Now that they are starting to open things up to tourism I would like to go there at some point in time but the logistics might be a problem. Women cannot drive and must be escorted from the airport by a male family member or and employee. Still... some day...
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
No, I'm saying -- I'm merely -- I'm saying what I'm saying. I don't know why I'm always having people say, are you trying to say -- you know what you can do if you want to know what I'm saying is listen to what I'm saying. What I'm saying is what I said ...
posted on August 1, 2005 12:33:15 PM new
fenix, I recently saw a TV show, where two distant members of the royal family are opening rival high rise shopping areas in Saudi Arabia. They have to have separate entrance ramps and a special entrance and shopping floor for women because they are not allowed to drive or shop in the main area. Both will have huge areas for a reception area for weddings. This is the only chance the groom will ever get to see women without their head coverings.
I can just see mingo/CF living there. How long would she last?? First outburst and out with her tongue.
[ edited by etexbill on Aug 1, 2005 12:38 PM ]
posted on August 1, 2005 12:47:28 PM new
They also have seperate colleges for men and women but each have equal funding. About the only place where men and women work together is in hospitals but even this is an advancement when you consider that there was a time not so long ago when women could not even work.
They can rival any Park Avenue deb. when it comes to shopping though.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
No, I'm saying -- I'm merely -- I'm saying what I'm saying. I don't know why I'm always having people say, are you trying to say -- you know what you can do if you want to know what I'm saying is listen to what I'm saying. What I'm saying is what I said ...
posted on August 1, 2005 02:03:48 PM new
fenix - I personally don't think comparisons can be made between the US and SA in that manner.
Their government supports/allows that religion to be taught, in their schools, from an early age. It's FORCED up all students. And it's radical islam.
We all are aware that
there is NO forced religion in the US. And that people can choose which religion they want to practice....or choose none at all and our government supports no religion. Not like SA's forced/government sponsored schools.
I truly believe that American's are willing to accept islam as a 'religion of peace', just as they want us to - works well for their agenda and will continue burying their heads in the sand until the day it can't be denied anymore.
And as far as Wahibism goes....there are no 'peaceful' followers from what I've read....they're all radical extremists of islam. Reading about the Wahibi religion will open a few eyes I do believe.
---------
Just a little poll from a right-leaning news source.
As an American, how would you describe the Saudi government?
posted on August 1, 2005 02:41:25 PM new
Linda - I was not comparing religious doctrine I was trying to put you in the mindset of what would happen if the Saudi government tried to outlaw it's nations official religion.
I think that much too often Americans look at other countries and say "This is what I think that they should do because it's what is best for us." and because it's a picture on a map or name on a news report they forget that they are talking abut actions that directly affect the millions of people that line in that nation and could not care less what is best for the US, they care about what is right for them.
As for your opinion of the Saudi people, I doin't know what to tell you Linda, there are tens of thousands of westerners that live and work in the Kingdom every day and do it in peaceful cohabitation.
Lets be honest - people fear what they do not know and do not understand and most people know little and understand even less about the Kingdom.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
No, I'm saying -- I'm merely -- I'm saying what I'm saying. I don't know why I'm always having people say, are you trying to say -- you know what you can do if you want to know what I'm saying is listen to what I'm saying. What I'm saying is what I said ...
posted on August 1, 2005 02:45:32 PM new
Linda posts...Just a little poll from a right-leaning news source. As an American, how would you describe the Saudi government? Crucial, well-meaning ally to the U.S. 5% Duplicitous supporter of terrorism 87%
Linda....
I would like to see how Arabs would describe the administration of George Bush and how they would describe you after reading your ignorant comments here.
posted on August 1, 2005 03:39:05 PM new
I believe I already know what would happen, fenix. The Saud family would be executed on the spot. Imo, the majority of Saudi's are very much anti-American....anti-the west's ways.
But there can be no denial about the religious training they are giving their young people....that further creates this divide/hatred we see coming from them towards our way of life.
And I know there are about 35,000 American's who live in SA, because one individual or one spouse works there....that doesn't mean they don't live in a 'protected' community....and that hasn't stopped the US warnings for them to return home each and everytime there a possible threat to their lives there either. It's not the safest place for American's to live....as Iraqi contractors have found out too. Not too long ago a head of an American was found in SA.
I have NO expectations that the Saudi's care one little bit about what WE want.....but I do care that American's need to wake up and see that these terrorist acts ARE coming from people who are muslims....and that includes the islams in SA too.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Aug 1, 2005 03:47 PM ]
"In times of fear, any explanation is considered the right explanation. However, if a war against extremist ideologies is to be fought, it's only right that reason can't be suspended in the quest to fight that ideology."
"Wahhabism" is never used by members of this group. It is used only by their detractors. Salafism is preferred.
posted on August 1, 2005 04:01:09 PM new
helen you once again show your lack of character, imo.
You absolutely BLAST Christians....claim to be an atheist....but just like most hard-core liberals...you'll defend the religions that teach these terrorists who attack innocent people...every time.
You are the model, imo, for why Ann Coulter has made these statements. You helen....not fenix.
"Indeed, an attack on America by fanatical Muslims had finally provided liberals with a religion they could respect."
"Liberals hate America, they hate 'flag-wavers', they hate abortion opponents, they hate all religions except Islam (post 9/11). Even terrorists don't hate America like liberals do."
Imo, that fits you to a tee, helen...both of them.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on August 1, 2005 04:17:12 PM new
Linda, the RELIGION is NOT teaching terrorism. In saying that, I'm not defending a religion or the terrorists.
Please ask yourself,
What is motivating terrorists to become suicide bombers?
Do you believe that they can be just as patriotic to their country as you are to yours?
Do you believe that they have the right to chose their religious beliefs and their form of government just as you do?
And finally, do you believe that they would be less likely to take such drastic and horrific actions if we would stay the hell out of their country and leave them alone?
posted on August 2, 2005 05:53:11 AM new
Ignoring the HATRED & MURDERS embraced by Bush's buds, the Saudis, ain'y gonna make it just "go away..."
WAKE UP!
"Among the key findings of the report:
(read the FULL REPORT from FREEDOM HOUSE via the PDF link at bottom)
· Various Saudi government publications gathered for this study, most of which are in Arabic, assert that it is a religious obligation for Muslims to hate Christians and Jews and warn against imitating, befriending, or helping them in any way, or taking part in their festivities and celebrations;
· The documents promote contempt for the United States because it is ruled by legislated civil law rather than by totalitarian Wahhabi-style Islamic law. They condemn democracy as un-Islamic;
· The documents stress that when Muslims are in the lands of the unbelievers, they must behave as if on a mission behind enemy lines. Either they are there to acquire new knowledge and make money to be later employed in the jihad against the infidels, or they are there to proselytize the infidels until at least some convert to Islam. Any other reason for lingering among the unbelievers in their lands is illegitimate, and unless a Muslim leaves as quickly as possible, he or she is not a true Muslim and so too must be condemned. For example, a document in the collection for the “Immigrant Muslim” bears the words “Greetings from the Cultural Attache in Washington, D.C.” of the Embassy of Saudi Arabia, and is published by the government of Saudi Arabia. In an authoritative religious voice, it gives detailed instructions on how to “hate” the Christian and Jew: Never greet them first. Never congratulate the infidel on his holiday. Never imitate the infidel. Do not become a naturalized citizen of the United States. Do not wear a graduation gown because this imitates the infidel;
· One insidious aspect of the Saudi propaganda examined is its aim to replace traditional and moderate interpretations of Islam with extremist Wahhabism, the officially-established religion of Saudi Arabia. In these documents, other Muslims, especially those who advocate tolerance, are condemned as infidels. The opening fatwa in one Saudi embassy-distributed book, published by the Saudi Air Force, responds to a question about a Muslim preacher in a European mosque who taught that it is not right to condemn Jews and Christians as infidels. The Saudi state cleric’s reply rebukes the Muslim cleric: “He who casts doubts about their infidelity leaves no doubt about his.” Since, under Saudi law, “apostates” from Islam can be sentenced to death, this is an implied death threat against the tolerant Muslim imam, as well as an incitement to vigilante violence;
· Sufi and Shiite Muslims are viciously condemned;
· For a Muslim who fails to uphold the Saudi Wahhabi sect’s sexual mores (i.e. through homosexual activity or heterosexual activity outside of marriage), the edicts published by the Saudi government’s Ministry of Islamic Affairs, and found in American mosques advise, “it would be lawful for Muslims to spill his blood and to take his money;”
· Regarding those who convert out of Islam, the Saudi Ministry of Islamic Affairs explicitly asserts, they “should be killed;”
· Saudi textbooks and other publications in the collection, propagate a Nazi-like hatred for Jews, treat the forged Protocols of the Elders of Zion as historical fact, and avow that the Muslim’s duty is to eliminate the state of Israel;
· Regarding women, the Saudi publications instruct that they should be veiled, segregated from men and barred from certain employment and roles;
The report states: “While the government of Saudi Arabia claims to be ‘updating’ or reforming its textbooks and study materials within the Kingdom, its publications propagating an ideology of hatred remain plentiful in some prominent American mosques and Islamic centers, and continue to be a principal resource available to students of Islam within the United States."
posted on August 2, 2005 11:23:50 AM new
"What is motivating terrorists to become suicide bombers?"
Could be something like this from the Koran, according to a paper from Temple University:
"The Koran makes it very clear that suicide is forbidden: 4:29. But it states several times that the martyr can expect an afterlife in paradise: they are "alive" (3:169), and have a blessed afterlife: 3:170-174,22:58. One man's "suicide bombers," then, are another's "martyrs."
posted on August 2, 2005 01:47:41 PM new
Suicide is forbben by the Koran although Matrydon is forgiven but even the words of Mohammad state that there are people who kill in the name of Islam and go to hell. And when he was asked why, he said, "Because they weren’t fighting truly for the sake of God."
Most recents issue fatwa from islamic leaders:
"Islam strictly condemns religious extremism and the use of violence against innocent lives,"
"Number 1: All acts of terrorism targeting civilians are 'haram' - forbidden - in Islam.
Second: It is 'haram' for a Muslim to cooperate or associate with any individual or group that is involved in any act of terrorism or violence.
Number 3: It is the duty of Muslims to cooperate with law enforcement authorities to protect the lives of all civilians."
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
No, I'm saying -- I'm merely -- I'm saying what I'm saying. I don't know why I'm always having people say, are you trying to say -- you know what you can do if you want to know what I'm saying is listen to what I'm saying. What I'm saying is what I said ...
- Ann Coulter
[ edited by fenix03 on Aug 2, 2005 02:06 PM ]
posted on August 2, 2005 02:57:29 PM new
And then there are other cleric's and muslim leaders who find a way, in THEIR minds, to get around that passage too.
They have more excuses for why that passage doesn't apply to their own actions/suicide bombers - terrorism, killing others....than Mother Goose has stories.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
