Strong criticism of America from the Saudi King

[Don Rizzle]

Saudi: US Iraq presence illegal
The Saudi monarch has made a forceful appeal for Arab unity, denouncing US policy in Iraq and the embargo imposed by western nations on the Palestinians.
At the Arab League summit in Riyadh, King Abdullah described the US presence in Iraq as an illegitimate occupation.

Correspondents say he is seeking to show a measure of independence from Saudi Arabia's ally, the United States.

Arab leaders are meeting to relaunch a plan for peace with Israel that they first endorsed five years ago.

The plan offers Israel normal relations with Arab states if it withdraws from land occupied in 1967, and accepts a Palestinian state.


 SAUDI MIDDLE EAST PLAN
Also known as Beirut Declaration
Adopted by Arab League in 2002
Calls for "full Israeli withdrawal from all the Arab territories occupied since June 1967"
Calls for Israel's "acceptance of an independent Palestinian State, with East Jerusalem as its capital"
All Arab states would establish "normal relations... with Israel" and "consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended"
Calls for a "just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem" 

Arab hard-liners have accused Riyadh of being ready to water down the "land for peace" deal to gain Israeli acceptance.

Israel's western allies have withheld recognition from a new Palestinian unity government, including members of the Islamist group Hamas which they consider a terrorist organisation.

Abhorrent

The Saudi monarch insisted said the "real blame" for Arab woes lay with squabbling Arab rulers, who could only prevent "foreign powers from drawing the region's future" if they united.

"In beloved Iraq, blood is flowing between brothers, in the shadow of an illegitimate foreign occupation, and abhorrent sectarianism threatens a civil war," said the king.

"In wounded Palestine, the mighty people suffer from oppression and occupation," he said.

"It has become vital that the oppressive blockade imposed on the Palestinians end as soon as possible so the peace process will get to move in an atmosphere without oppression."

"Our constant disagreements and rejection of unity have made the Arab nation lose confidence in our sincerity and lose hope."

Guarded welcome

Separately, Israel's Deputy Prime Minister Shimon Peres said it refused to accept the revived Arab peace plan as it stood and further discussions were needed.


"There is only one way to overcome our differences, and that is negotiation," Mr Peres told Israeli public radio. "It's impossible to say: you must take what we offer you as is."
Under the plan, Arab nations would recognise Israel if Israel withdrew from land occupied in the 1967 war, accepted a Palestinian state, and agreed a "just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem".

Israel rejected the 2002 plan outright after it was first proposed at an Arab summit in Beirut, but Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is now giving it a guarded welcome, albeit with reservations linked to the issue of refugees.

There are more than four million Palestinian refugees registered with the US, most of them descendants of people living in British-administered Palestine, before Israel was created in 1948.

Israel opposes allowing them to exercise any right to return to their original homes or land, because it could erase its current Jewish majority.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/middle_east/6505803.stm

Published: 2007/03/29 09:26:01 GMT
 

[Kassem]

all these arab leaders just did the whole summit because of the heat their feeling under their asses,from thier fuck ups and support for the usa  ,the fact is they all suck america dick when shit gets real,

[Don Rizzle]

i was quite suprised about the iraq criticism I really didn't expect the saudis to say that no matter what their domestic public opinion maybe

[J @ M @ L]

The Saudi monarch insisted said the "real blame" for Arab woes lay with squabbling Arab rulers, who could only prevent "foreign powers from drawing the region's future" if they united.

LOL... this tool should be the last to talk... but anyways, this certainly is a step in the right direction for the Middle East unless of course they're just talking out of their asses again and aren't really gonna do anything... or if we see Western measures trying to prevent any such unity (which has always been the case). Regardless, like Kassem said, these leaders are finally realizing how strong their populations' sentiments are in regards to these issues, but are probably gonna continue their Western dicksuckery in the future... one other factor is of course Iran. Iran is becoming a more dominant role player in the region, and Saudi Arabia can't have that... many Arabs are starting to look at Iran as fighting on the same side as them (their support for Hezbollah against Israel, their support for Palestine, etc), while these other dicksucking countries are laying back.

As for the Israel/Palestine resolution... everyone will now see if Israel really does want peace... they're not even being asked for much... get the fuck out of the illegally occupied territories so the Palestinians can have their own independent state.  The refugee problem will complicate things though.

[J @ M @ L]

JERUSALEM - Prime Minister Ehud Olmert hailed a new peace initiative from Arab states as representing a "revolutionary change" but repeated Israel's opposition to any return of Palestinian refugees in a series of newspaper interviews published Friday.

Olmert told the Haaretz daily that the peace plan announced at the Arab League summit in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, this week showed that many Arab states realized they "may have been wrong to think that Israel is the world's greatest problem." This, Olmert said, marked a "revolutionary change in outlook."

The Arab plan, spearheaded by Saudi Arabia, calls for full recognition of Israel by the Arab world in return for an Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 borders and a "just solution" for Palestinian refugees who lost their homes inside Israel in 1948 and 1949.

Israel rejects a full withdrawal, hoping to hang on to several settlement blocs in the
West Bank. It has also ruled out the possibility of a refugee return, because an influx of refugees and their millions of descendants would mean the end of Israel as a Jewish state.

In another interview published Friday in the English-language daily The Jerusalem Post, Olmert reiterated this opposition, calling a refugee return "out of the question."

"I'll never accept a solution that is based on their return to Israel, any number," Olmert said.

Olmert told the daily Yediot Ahronot that there is "a real chance that within five years Israel will be able to reach an inclusive peace deal with its enemies."

"Things are happening that haven't happened in the past, and they're ripening. We have to know how to take advantage of this opportunity," Olmert told the paper.


-----------------------------------

LOL @ Israel claiming to want peace and then wanting to hold on to illegal settlements in a Palestinian state.
This shit is mind-boggling... Israel won't allow Palestinian refugees to return to THEIR OWN HOMES... yet they promote and try to justify Jews storming the West Bank and grabbing whatever land they can. Fucking pieces of shit.

[King Tech Quadafi]

these fuckin pieces of scum, every single year, change their demands and make it more and more difficult.

what used to be the criteria for israeli peace 5 yrs ago, 3 yrs ago, 1 yr ago, is now something that requires negotiation

any body with any common sense or intelligence couldve recognized long ago, the israelis are not interested in peace and never have been

i mean, the palestinians have continously watered down their demands, while their suffering has increased. yet these scum pieces of shit still have the nerve....

[TraceOneInfinite Flat Earther 96']

all these arab leaders just did the whole summit because of the heat their feeling under their asses,from thier fuck ups and support for the usa  ,the fact is they all suck america dick when shit gets real,

I wish something could make you realize the implications of what you say and how you are making a mockery of Arabs.

You come on here with an "Arab World" signature like being Arab is what you take pride in.  Then you go and talk all kinds of shit on all the Arab leaders. 

Well, if Arabs are such great people that you have so much pride in them... then please tell me why don't consider one of their damn countries to be ran to your standards?

Don't you realize the implications of that?  All these Arab countries you think are pieces of shit, wouldn't that possibly lead a person to conclude that Arabs have continuously proven themselves to be incapable of government if what you keep sugggesting yourself is true?  And then at the same time you make a mockery of yourself and have a signature showing some great racial pride in Arabs?

You can't have it both ways.

You appear to me like other Arabs I know who talk shit on everyone and everything and don't realize they are implicating themselves and their people as they do it.  They sit around and wait for the Mehdi to come and idealize about the days of the Prophet and Sahaba.

Again, you can't have it both ways.  You can't talk all kinds of shit on the Ottoman Empire (like you did in previous posts) and then at the same time turn around and talk all kinds of shit on all the Arab leaders.  Because, then, the only conclusion I can come up with from listening to you is that Muslims ain't shit and they shouldn't be running any damn country.

If your such an Arab nationalist, then how come you don't see that these Arab governments are a reflection of you and your Arab nationalism and they fought against the Kalfiah of the Ottoman Turks in the name of Arab nationalism!

I don't see any difference between you and any of these Arab nationalist leaders.

Please, I really wish you realized the implications of what you suggest by your critisism.  I propose that the Ottoman Empire should have been supported by the Ummah, and that if you don't support them, and you instead support Arab nationalist, then you have no right to sit around and talk shit on all these Arab governments because they are only a reflection of YOU!

[Don Rizzle]

^^^no one is beyond criticism!

[J @ M @ L]

Infinite, he gave his opinion (and I think made a good point) and you just went off on a shitload of tangents, spilling your heart out, without making much sense.

[I TO DA GEEZY]

This, Olmert said, marked a "revolutionary change in outlook."

This might be a "revolutionary change" only in the mind of someone who chooses to disregard historical facts. There were several attempts to reach accommodation on behalf of Arab leaders throughout the 70 and 80's (including PLO initiatives providing mutual recognition), attempts that were in accordance with the very broad international consensus (a 2 state settlement). Israel, with U.S support, did nothing but reject these offers. In fact,  it would be a "revolutionary change in outlook" had the political establishment in Israel given up its expansion plans.

[Kassem]

all these arab leaders just did the whole summit because of the heat their feeling under their asses,from thier fuck ups and support for the usa  ,the fact is they all suck america dick when shit gets real,

I wish something could make you realize the implications of what you say and how you are making a mockery of Arabs.

You come on here with an "Arab World" signature like being Arab is what you take pride in.  Then you go and talk all kinds of shit on all the Arab leaders. 

Well, if Arabs are such great people that you have so much pride in them... then please tell me why don't consider one of their damn countries to be ran to your standards?

Don't you realize the implications of that?  All these Arab countries you think are pieces of shit, wouldn't that possibly lead a person to conclude that Arabs have continuously proven themselves to be incapable of government if what you keep sugggesting yourself is true?  And then at the same time you make a mockery of yourself and have a signature showing some great racial pride in Arabs?

You can't have it both ways.

You appear to me like other Arabs I know who talk shit on everyone and everything and don't realize they are implicating themselves and their people as they do it.  They sit around and wait for the Mehdi to come and idealize about the days of the Prophet and Sahaba.

Again, you can't have it both ways.  You can't talk all kinds of shit on the Ottoman Empire (like you did in previous posts) and then at the same time turn around and talk all kinds of shit on all the Arab leaders.  Because, then, the only conclusion I can come up with from listening to you is that Muslims ain't shit and they shouldn't be running any damn country.

If your such an Arab nationalist, then how come you don't see that these Arab governments are a reflection of you and your Arab nationalism and they fought against the Kalfiah of the Ottoman Turks in the name of Arab nationalism!

I don't see any difference between you and any of these Arab nationalist leaders.

Please, I really wish you realized the implications of what you suggest by your critisism.  I propose that the Ottoman Empire should have been supported by the Ummah, and that if you don't support them, and you instead support Arab nationalist, then you have no right to sit around and talk shit on all these Arab governments because they are only a reflection of YOU!

1.Non of any Arab leaders today are in any way representing the true idea of Arab Nationalism,they just have it in thier charters about arab unity ,to cool off and decrease the popularity and power of the NASSERITES.
2.I never said a country can't be ruled by Muslims ,and in whatever Ideal goverment i would want to live under would in no way be secular or Liberal ,and the main parts of the law would be covered by Sharia,still i won't ban alchol or hashish in the country ,just beacuse its pointless in this time ,and having a ban on anything just increases people intrest in that thing,will i force the hijab on any one ,NO ,cus living 18 years in kuwait these bans just don't work ,i have been into vieled beiduon girls (the one u can say are least influenced by western values) ,so the piont is all these veils ,bans on alchol ,forcing people to go to pray ,justmakes allah look like some kind of torturer.
3.lets talk about arab leaders
Saudi royal family---well saudi royal family took power by a religious movement so in no way can they be called arab nationalist
mubark---this guy doesn't need any essays on him,he is simply fucked
Assad--the guy idea of arab nationalism is to have a fight with the iraqi leaders for pity differences.
Saddam---same stuff invade kuwait
4.so u think am waiting for al mahdi,so ur idea of doing something positive is going to the uae and trying learn arabic ,i waisted so much time waiting for all mahdi,that am graduating with an engineering degree aged 20.
5.well the ottamon empire,the cared so much about other races of muslims that they created situations
   ---their goverment main language was turkish ,so this excludes any other race.
  ---most areas of study in instanbul and in turkish ,so when they started lagging off ,guess wat happens dark ages.
6.the closest thing we can get to islamic nationalism is a state similar to the europe thing.

[TraceOneInfinite Flat Earther 96']

1.Non of any Arab leaders today are in any way representing the true idea of Arab Nationalism,they just have it in thier charters about arab unity ,to cool off and decrease the popularity and power of the NASSERITES.
2.I never said a country can't be ruled by Muslims ,and in whatever Ideal goverment i would want to live under would in no way be secular or Liberal ,and the main parts of the law would be covered by Sharia,still i won't ban alchol or hashish in the country ,just beacuse its pointless in this time ,and having a ban on anything just increases people intrest in that thing,will i force the hijab on any one ,NO ,cus living 18 years in kuwait these bans just don't work ,i have been into vieled beiduon girls (the one u can say are least influenced by western values) ,so the piont is all these veils ,bans on alchol ,forcing people to go to pray ,justmakes allah look like some kind of torturer.
3.lets talk about arab leaders
Saudi royal family---well saudi royal family took power by a religious movement so in no way can they be called arab nationalist
mubark---this guy doesn't need any essays on him,he is simply fucked
Assad--the guy idea of arab nationalism is to have a fight with the iraqi leaders for pity differences.
Saddam---same stuff invade kuwait
4.so u think am waiting for al mahdi,so ur idea of doing something positive is going to the uae and trying learn arabic ,i waisted so much time waiting for all mahdi,that am graduating with an engineering degree aged 20.
5.well the ottamon empire,the cared so much about other races of muslims that they created situations
   ---their goverment main language was turkish ,so this excludes any other race.
  ---most areas of study in instanbul and in turkish ,so when they started lagging off ,guess wat happens dark ages.
6.the closest thing we can get to islamic nationalism is a state similar to the europe thing.

Going to school and getting a degree from a Western University is not a political solution.  Every Muslim in the world could go to an American University and get a degree and it would only make them think more likely to support America's expanded influence in the world.

I guess you did offer one suggestion in your post that suprised me.  I guess I know what you are now, your a Gamel Nasser Arab nationalist supporter.  Well, you and people like you have only been a great tool for British intelligence officers like T.E. Lawrence.  He wrote in his diaires that the direct aim of the British was to support the Arab nationalist movement like the one Sharif Hussien (Hashemite leader who wanted an Arab state and wanted to be "King of the Arabs") was leading, because T.E. Lawrence believed that the Arabs were less capable of government than the Turks, and that if Arab nationalism was successful than that would create a breakup of the Islamic bloc, and the defeat and dismantle of the Ottoman Empire, and the region would remain a tissue of jealous principalities incapable of political cohesion.

So congratulations for being a product of excellent British intelligence and manipulation.

[Kassem]

I didn't say i blindly follow a NASSER's idea. I got respect for him ,as much as i got respect for Hassan Al-Banna(Muslim Brotherhood Founder---that led to modern islamic thought,Hamas,al zawahiri),i read both thier books.Wat i find flawed in the the Khalifat thing,are the following
1)well the common language would be arabic ,would the other races just drop their languages.
2)1st off all the islamic sects well have to reconle
3)wat wud the non-muslims be in the picture,2nd rate citizens.numbering more than 22 million in the arabic world alone
4///how will we chose the khalifa ,and wat is a khalifa.shias would want ahl al bayit(Prophet reliatives) to rule ,making everyone elese 2nd class citizens.
5///the khalifa would destroy the image of islam ,as his word would be taken as islam .good and bad ,his mistakes would be taken as islam.just like the pope ,but the pope  doesn't have to worry about the dirtness of politics.


well the lawrence part a few beiduins got scamed, no fucking deal.

[Kassem]

so wat political statement do u want me to do ,just say it dude and if well help my people muslims and arabs i will do it,should i blow myself up or go on a hunger strike infront of the white house.and getting degree and building my nation(any arab country),won't contribute in my land.

[TraceOneInfinite Flat Earther 96']

I didn't say i blindly follow a NASSER's idea. I got respect for him ,as much as i got respect for Hassan Al-Banna(Muslim Brotherhood Founder---that led to modern islamic thought,Hamas,al zawahiri),i read both thier books.

^^ Well, this is one of the first incidents when you haven't talked shit on an Arab leader or movement, so I guess this is a start.

Wat i find flawed in the the Khalifat thing,are the following

1)well the common language would be arabic ,would the other races just drop their languages.
2)1st off all the islamic sects well have to reconle
3)wat wud the non-muslims be in the picture,2nd rate citizens.numbering more than 22 million in the arabic world alone
4///how will we chose the khalifa ,and wat is a khalifa.shias would want ahl al bayit(Prophet reliatives) to rule ,making everyone elese 2nd class citizens.
5///the khalifa would destroy the image of islam ,as his word would be taken as islam .good and bad ,his mistakes would be taken as islam.just like the pope ,but the pope  doesn't have to worry about the dirtness of politics.

1.  The Kalifah of the Ottoman Empire existed for some 5 centuries and language was never an issue.  People are always going to be encouraged to speak Arabic because it's in the Qu'ran, but the Kalifah existed without the need for forcing one language over all others.  That stupid rumor about the Turks trying to make Turkish the official language in the last few years of the Empire has been blown way out of proportion, and was probably just some propaganda some Jews and Brits entered into the minds of the Arabs they manipulated.

2.  The Ottoman Empire was very pluralistic in their viewpoints, in fact the unorthodox practices of Sufism even had a large popularity throughout the Empire.  Great Sufi poets, thinkers, and scholars like Jalladin Rumi lived found prominence inside the Empire, he was living in Konya.  The only dissapointing thing would be that during the time of the Ottoman Empire there were great clashes with the rival Saffavid Shia's, and this is regretable.

3.  The Qu'ran recognizes other religions and Prophets and whether it was Umar or later Salahudin ruling over Christians and Jews in Jerusalam and Syria, or the Islamic Kalifate in Spain, or the Ottoman Empire, Muslims were ruling over vast territories of land inhabited by non-Muslims, and these non-Muslims were afforded legitimacy and rights granted to them in the Qu'ran, and Jews for example often were fleeing persecution at the hands of Christians to live under an Islamic Kalifah and experience a golden age of art and science.  These religious minority groups were also given the right to rule according to their own religious texts inside their own towns and cities.

4.  I was referring to the past Kalfah's.  As far as today, there isn't really enough political stability to declare a Kalfah, unless he is underground somewhere, or a part of some grassroots movement, although some places like Nigeria still give tribute to a man reffered to as Sultan in a similar way as a Kalifah, also Iran has a religious hierarchy of Shia' leadership that represents many Muslims throughout the world.

5.  So you would rather have the Ummah divided up into jealous principalities, incapable of political cohesion, most of which have abandoned Islam for nationalism anyway, as is the case today?   Are they putting a great face on Islam?

well the lawrence part a few beiduins got scamed, no fucking deal.

So it's no big deal that the Kalifah fell and now Muslims don't have any state representation to defend themselves and America can go into Iraq, Afganistan, and anywhere else and murder 1 million people and occupy as much territory as they like and rape the women, and so on and so on.  If America wanted to occupy Mekkah right now nobody could stop them.  Had the Kalifah stayed in existence all the oil wealth of the of the 20th century would have stayed in Islamic lands, not to mention Palestine would have remained protected.

So you say no big deal?