Saudi Arabia Should Be Our Job 1 In Terrorism

[Annie]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,184565,00.html

Saudi Cleric: Cartoon Publishers Should Be Tried

Saturday, February 11, 2006

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — Saudi Arabia's top cleric called on the world's Muslims to reject apologies for the "slanderous" caricatures of Islam's Prophet Mohammed and demanded the authors and publishers of the cartoons be tried and punished, Saudi newspapers reported Saturday.

Thousands of Muslims, meanwhile, took to the streets in London and several other European cities to protest the drawings that were first published in a Danish newspaper in September and recently reprinted in other European publications. One depicted the prophet with a turban shaped like a bomb with a burning fuse.

Denmark also announced it has temporarily withdrawn its ambassadors from Syria, Iran and Indonesia because their safety was at risk in the wake of the controversy.

Speaking to hundreds of faithful at his Friday sermon, Sheik Abdul Rahman al-Seedes, the imam of the Grand Mosque in Mecca, Saudi Arabia, called on the international community to enact laws that condemn insults against the prophet and holy sites.

"Where is the world with all its agencies and organizations? Is there only freedom of expression when it involves insults to Muslims? With one voice...we will reject the apology and demand a trial," Al Riyad, a Saudi daily newspaper, quoted al-Seedes as saying.

Al-Seedes said the cartoons "made a mockery" of the Islam and the Prophet and called them "slanderous."

A diverse crowd ranging from teenagers in jeans and T-shirts to women in head scarves gathered in Trafalgar Square in central London. Many carried placards reading "United Against Islamophobia."

"It was absolutely wrong to publish the cartoons," said Ihtisham Hibatullah, media director for the Muslim Association of Britain, one of the protest organizers.

But he said demonstrators also wanted to send the message that "the clash of civilizations is only promoted by fringe minorities. We see the future as one of dialogue between practices, cultures, faiths and ideologies."

Islam is interpreted to forbid any illustrations of Muhammad for fear they could lead to idolatry. No major British newspaper has reproduced the caricatures, and the country had seen only small demonstrations before Saturday.

Noisy but peaceful rallies also were held in Turkey, Indonesia, the Netherlands, Germany, France and elsewhere, although the Middle East was largely calm, a day after demonstrations by thousands of Muslim worshippers emerging from Friday prayers.

Protesters in the Turkish capital of Ankara stomped on Danish flags and shouted, "We will not forgive the ones who humiliated our prophet!"

Arab governments, Muslim clerics and newspaper columnists have been urging calm in past days, fearing that recent weeks of violence have only increased anti-Islamic sentiment in the West.

So far, eleven people have been killed in the protests — all during three days of riots this week in Afghanistan. A 12th person died in Nairobi Friday when he was hit by an ambulance rushing away a wounded person.

Denmark's embassy buildings in Syria, Iran and Indonesia had been targeted by angry mobs and the Foreign Ministry said it was withdrawing Danish ambassadors from all three countries.

The Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, which published the cartoons in September, has apologized for offending Muslims but stood by its decision to print the drawings, citing freedom of speech.

The newspaper's culture editor, Flemming Rose, who was in charge of the drawings, went on indefinite leave Thursday but many Muslims said that would do little to quell the uproar.

The paper has denied that Rose was ordered to go leave because he suggested reprinting Holocaust drawings solicited by an Iranian newspaper, setting off a dispute earlier this week with Jyllands-Posten's editor-in-chief.

"He was not forced out," said the paper's spokesman, Tage Clausen. "He's on vacation, that's all."

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan warned the controversy over the cartoons has created unprecedented tension between the Islamic and Christian world.

"For the sake of global peace and safeguarding of our commonly held values, I believe it has now become essential that the statesmen and politicians act with wisdom and commonsense," he said in a letter published in Turkish media and sent to U.N. member nations, the Organization of the Islamic Conference and NATO.

Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono reiterated that many Muslims consider the cartoons an insult to their faith, but he called on Muslims to forgive those who have sincerely apologized.

"Reprinting the cartoons in order to make a point about free speech is an act of senseless brinkmanship," he said in a commentary in the International Herald Tribune.

"It is also a disservice to democracy. It sends a conflicting message to the Muslim community: that in a democracy it is permissible to offend Islam. This message damages efforts to prove that democracy and Islam go together."

 

[manu1959]

"It is also a disservice to democracy. It sends a conflicting message to the Muslim community: that in a democracy it is permissible to offend Islam. This message damages efforts to prove that democracy and Islam go together."

freedom of speech is the foundation of a democracy......so it would appear they are correct the is no place for democracy in the islamic faith....

 

[Annie]

"It is also a disservice to democracy. It sends a conflicting message to the Muslim community: that in a democracy it is permissible to offend Islam. This message damages efforts to prove that democracy and Islam go together."

freedom of speach is the foundation of a democracy......so it owuld appear they are correct the is no place for democracy in the islamic faith....

The press in democracies offend the religious all the time. Why should Islam be special? Agree with you, Manu.

 

[5stringJeff]

I've been saying this since 9/12/2001. Saudi Arabia is not an ally, a friend, or a sympathetic neutral. Saudi Arabia is an enemy, plain and simple.

 

[dilloduck]

Pretty touchy situation. If we stop propping the Sauds, the radical clerics will be running that peninsula in a heartbeat. I really think it's a pick your poison situation there right now and I for one am glad that the Bush family has a good enough relationship with them to keep the status quo for now because the next step will only be worse.

 

[Mariner]

I never thought I'd agree with you wholeheartedly on anything, but I do on this one. We have to address our problems with Saudi Arabia.

Our number one problem with them is that we need them desperately. They're our dealer. They have the oil we need, and, because we pay them for it, they have the $$ to finance our deficit-spending ways. The kingdom earns our trust by its willingness to hold down the price of oil at strategic moments. Therefore we are forced to be very hushed in our criticism of them, and nice to their citizens. Isn't it strange how all those bin Laden relatives were allowed to sneak home after 9/11, and how few Saudi citizens are in Guantanamo?

Saudi Wahabbism is the source of Al Qaeda's ideology, yet we've let them off the hook in terms of investigating militant Wahabbism within their own country. When's the last time we've heard of a major investigation into Saudi terrorist training camps or Islamist idea factories?

As DilloDuck says, we're in a real bind in terms of how to deal with them. If an election were held there tomorrow, we know who would win: Osama bin Laden.

Our first step should be to close the SUV loopholes, impose a gas tax that raises the cost to $3 per gallon (at which point the biodiesel I run my car on goes down to $2.65 and becomes economical for truck fleets). We should balance our budget so we're paying our own way in the world rather than depending on nice foreigners to finance our lifestyles. We have to acknowledge the geopolitical consequences of our love of oil and deficit spending. Bush seems to have taken a baby step in this direction recently, which I'm glad of.

Mariner.

 

[dilloduck]

I never thought I'd agree with you wholeheartedly on anything, but I do on this one. We have to address our problems with Saudi Arabia.

Our number one problem with them is that we need them desperately. They're our dealer. They have the oil we need, and, because we pay them for it, they have the $$ to finance our deficit-spending ways. The kingdom earns our trust by its willingness to hold down the price of oil at strategic moments. Therefore we are forced to be very hushed in our criticism of them, and nice to their citizens. Isn't it strange how all those bin Laden relatives were allowed to sneak home after 9/11, and how few Saudi citizens are in Guantanamo?

Saudi Wahabbism is the source of Al Qaeda's ideology, yet we've let them off the hook in terms of investigating militant Wahabbism within their own country. When's the last time we've heard of a major investigation into Saudi terrorist training camps or Islamist idea factories?

As DilloDuck says, we're in a real bind in terms of how to deal with them. If an election were held there tomorrow, we know who would win: Osama bin Laden.

Our first step should be to close the SUV loopholes, impose a gas tax that raises the cost to $3 per gallon (at which point the biodiesel I run my car on goes down to $2.65 and becomes economical for truck fleets). We should balance our budget so we're paying our own way in the world rather than depending on nice foreigners to finance our lifestyles. We have to acknowledge the geopolitical consequences of our love of oil and deficit spending. Bush seems to have taken a baby step in this direction recently, which I'm glad of.

Mariner.

oooooooooo Tax Americans---that outta get them Wahibs :rotflmao:

 

[5stringJeff]

I never thought I'd agree with you wholeheartedly on anything, but I do on this one. We have to address our problems with Saudi Arabia.

Woo-hoo!

Our first step should be to close the SUV loopholes, impose a gas tax that raises the cost to $3 per gallon (at which point the biodiesel I run my car on goes down to $2.65 and becomes economical for truck fleets). We should balance our budget so we're paying our own way in the world rather than depending on nice foreigners to finance our lifestyles. We have to acknowledge the geopolitical consequences of our love of oil and deficit spending. Bush seems to have taken a baby step in this direction recently, which I'm glad of.

1. The "SUV loopholes" will take care of themselves as the price of gas rises.

2. Gas is going to be $3.00 a gallon this summer anyway. Besides, half the cost of gas is already taxes. I understand the economic implications of taxing an undesirable behavior in order to discourage it, but this particular step will be unnecessary in about 4 months.

3. Yeah, we should have a more balanced federal budget. Let's start by reforming SS, reducing all of the benefits the federal government pays out, eleiminating federal government programs (or Deptartments, in DoE's case), and cutting tax rates, which will raise tax receipts. Thankfully, Bush is starting to do something about this piece.

In general, though, I think that the free market will determine how long our reliance on oil will last, not higher taxes (or green tax credits).

 

[Mariner]

a certain perspective on the Saudi royal family--the numerous princes and princesses (I think there are 10,000 in all) who attend college in Boston. They double park their BMWs and Maseratis outside nightclubs and throw cash around. They don't have a very good reputation locally, though I'm sure plenty of them are fine people in the daylight.

It certainly does seem that resource wealth destroys a country.

Mariner.