part 3
ßÊÇÈ The Wahabi Opposition Movements in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in the Twentieth Century
CHAPTER III: The Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice as a Sharia Frame of the Criticisms

في الخميس ٢٨ - مارس - ٢٠٢٤ ١٢:٠٠ صباحاً

CHAPTER III: The Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice as a Sharia Frame of the Criticisms leveled against the KSA by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights

 

 

Analysis of the methodology of condemnation of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights used against the KSA:

 

Introduction:

 

   We analyze in CHAPTER III the following: 1) how the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights used the ''Wahabi'' notion of ''the promotion of virtue and the prevention of vice'' as a ''Salafist'' sharia frame to oppose the KSA and the bases on which it has been established as a State, and 2) the methodology of condemnation used by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights to deny the right of the KSA to exist. This analysis covers three main aspects: A) the right of Hisbah adopted by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, B) the right of verifying accusations adopted by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights and its condemnation of the Saudi practices and rule, and C) the verbal rejection and disownment turning into the call and practice of violence.

 

A) The right of Hisbah:

 

1- We have tackled before how the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights claimed for itself to be deputized by God to monopolize Hisbah on the Saudi authorities and the Saudi citizens, as if it were the sole representative of Wahabi sharia. This includes naturally that it monopolizes as well the 'Wahabi' notion of ''the promotion of virtue and the prevention of vice'', without allowing anyone to do the same with its members. Such aims of Al-Masaary are not hidden; they are very clear in all his writings and books. This is concluded from the insistence of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights to talk in the name of sharia and declaring its enemies and intellectual foes (especially Saudi Wahabi scholars) as apostates and infidels who have forsaken sharia. Even in cases when the members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights would make mistakes and commit errors that derive condemnation and criticisms by others – especially within events of Dr. Saad Al-Faqeeh leaving it – such condemnation and criticisms by others would make members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights assert they own the absolute truth and consequently harshly attack and verbally abuse others, and even sometimes resort to dreadful slanders and spreading of rumors and sex scandals. Hence, members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights began to harbor extremist political visions and notion and to link them to sharia, as we discern from political analyses written by Al-Masaary, instead of using good advice and wisdom as ordered by the Quran. Thus, members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights had descended to such malicious revenge as to fabricate slanders and rumors without proofs instead of verifying and investigating the truth, and they had deserted their style of peaceful opposition to call outspokenly for outright violence and to incite vociferously all their supporters inside the KSA to commit acts of violence and terror.   

 

2- The fact that members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights want to monopolize the right to apply Hisbah made them move further away from the true Islamic sharia in the Quran that contradicts the notion of clergymen and theocracy and made them lose credibility as they committed sins of sexual slanders and spreading lies and falsehoods. They talked about their foes as if they were pure evil and deserve to fabricate rumors, lies, and falsehoods about them. This exaggeration made members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights forget that no human being and no regime is void of mistakes and errors, especially tyrannical regimes and rulers in the Third World where corruption spreads and there is lack of transparency, impeachment, and questioning; yet, this is not an excuse to reach an extreme of unjustified virulent attacks using lies, falsehoods, rumors, and fabrications by those who claim to represent sharia. 

 

3- We assert here that condemnation by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights of the Saudi government is based on the points of view of its members, and such points of view might be true or untrue. As long as the Saudi government does not respond as a defendant and ignores the accusations and writings of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights to clarify matters, our job here is confined to analyzing writings and accusations of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights while asserting that its members committed many errors to be deplored for sure. 

 

B) Verifying accusations:

 

1- Most of the accusations leveled by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights against the Saudi royal family members were serious as they put to question their honor and religiousness and not only their political performance. Such accusations entail decisive proofs; otherwise, the accusers would be foes of the Quranic sharia and man-made laws that prohibit sexual slander. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights must provide such proofs or to stop such unproved verbal abuse.  

 

2- Of course, many time at the beginning, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights was demanded by its supporters to provide proofs of its accusations that were not so many at first in July 1994, but Al-Masaary merely responded by asserting that he never would publish anything without verification, as we read in Publication No. 10: (… Many of our supporters asked us about verification of news provided by us … and we assert that we always verify any piece of news that reaches us before writing it, and even if our style of discourse is not that precise, we remind our readers that this is not even up to 1% from Saud media flagrant lies …). After Al-Masaary monopolized and fully controlled the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, he went into an extreme as far as rumors and slanders are concerned, and when asked about verifications and proofs, he wrote the following in Publication N. 145 in 1998: (… Ibn Baz and his likes demanded from us to provide documents and data as well as eye-witnesses to prove all information we provided about scandals of the Saudi family members, but would judges of Al-Saud family mafia believe us?! They would much rather surrender to Al-Saud in return for money …). Of course, this was not an acceptable excuse for not providing proofs; he should have provided them if he owned them or else never to repeat such type of accusations. Al-Masaary seemed to be eager anyway to tarnish reputations of persons with or without proofs, and he linked himself to sharia, which is worse unless he means his own fabricated sharia fashioned specially to serve his purposes. Since Al-Masaary controlled his sharia and his Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, no one obliged him to provide any type of proofs, but the editor-in-chief of the Saudi newspaper "Okaz" verbally abused Al-Masaary in his editorial describing him as an inveterate liar, and Al-Masaary sued him for slander in courts of Jeddah. We will trace below if the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights have stuck to its claim of verification as per Publication No. 10.

 

3- We offer the following remarks:

 

3/1: the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights corrected some names and pieces of news mentioned in its writings, as we read in Publications Nos. 36, 67 and 132. Chief among such news corrected later on was one about the disappearance of Prince Feisal, the son of King Fahd, as the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights claimed at first that he was involved in a murder, and it was transpired later that he was furious at his father over a certain dispute. Of course, we can never verify the authenticity of news provided by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, but we comment here that at least in some instances, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights would correct some, and not all, of its news, accusations, or names mentioned by mistake. 

3/2: The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights sometimes verified some pieces of news provided to it by using other sources, such as in the case when Al-Masaary in his book titled "The Decisive Proofs of the Illegitimacy of the KSA" used data of an annual report of the London-based Strategic Studies International Institute to prove that the Saudi military army spends too much money on buying arms despite its being a very weak military army (54). Al-Masaary asserts in his book and in Publication No. 43 that all numbers and data he mentions and his preciseness of translation could be easily verified when one gains access to such report as well as to the British documentary movie aired in 1995 about a British Minister offering sexual bribes by providing sex-workers to some Saudi princes, whose names are mentioned in Publication No. 43, among commissions in deals of weapons. This movie featured a short interview with Al-Masaary. In Publication No. 14 in 1994, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights mentioned that a female British author announced its forthcoming book about financial and sex scandals involving Saudi princes and some British executives who provided sex workers to them every night in a hotel in Jeddah, disguised as nurses. It is laughter-inducing that such news in Publications Nos. 14 and 43 were written in a manner that reminds us with Salafist method in writing down oral narratives of narrators from past eras and generations: "so-and-so said that so-and-so said that so-and-so said that the Prophet said that …etc."; this is indeed funny; as it is impossible to verify such series of dead narrators of the so-called hadiths fabricated by them or by others who use the names of dead people. In the case of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, news spread from living people in the same era without enough verification. It is funny that this Salafist method in writing down oral narratives of narrators is based on claims of the honesty, trustworthiness, and other personal traits of narrators, allowing no one the chance to criticize the text itself, and removing all non-Muslims from the series of narrators for merely being non-Muslims! It is as if all Muslim narrators can never be wrong! Al-Masaary in his books shows imitation of Salafist method of authenticating narrators: how come he declares all non-Wahabis as apostates and infidels and yet copies their news and remarks?! We judge the Al-Masaary as per his methodology; he ignores that sharia laws entail eye-witnesses or defendants' confessions, and that accusers without tangible proofs deserved to be flogged for slander.            

3/3: The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights in one case provided a formal Saudi document as proof to accuse some princes of smuggling weapons and arms, and this document was a letter from a high official in the Saudi Defense Ministry to a high official in an airport in Riyadh to allow the passing of a cargo of arms and weapons coming from the USA. Yet, when the letter is carefully read, we find no proof of smuggling; it is importation doe formally and publically between two countries and with the permission of the Saudi Defense Ministry. This shows that Al-Masaary was fishing for mistakes and mishaps even if he had to imagine them! 

3/4: The most serious accusations of sex scandals, homosexual practices, and sexual indiscretions or infidelities leveled by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights against the Saudi royal family members lacked any tangible proofs, though they must be proved and verified before spreading them in writing, and since the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights never had such proofs, it thus violated Quranic teachings despite the assertions of Al-Masaary that the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights represents sharia.

 

C) Verbal rejection turning into the call and practice of violence:

 

1- At first, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights resorted to verbal opposition and condemnation instead of committing violence, and this was asserted after the flight of Al-Masaary to London in statement No. 3 in 1994, so that change is introduced gradually in a civilized manner. 

 

2- When some members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights inside the KSA were arrested, Al-Masaary asserted peace to his supporters there and never to fight security men, especially when the two sheikhs, Al-Hawali and Al-Ouda, were arrested and some youth resorted to violence, as we read in an exceptional publication in 1994: (… the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights allows and endorses no acts of violence … some youths misunderstood our discourse and style of zeal and enthusiasm as a call for committing acts of violence while quoting the notion of changing vice by one's hands by sheer force. Policies of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights stick to changing by the word and not by the sword, and we urge zealous youth to practice self-restraint and not to physically attack Saudi security men and policemen…).

 

3- When the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights received a statement from some group called ''militias of faith'' that it threatened the Saudi authorities to release Al-Ouda and Al-Hawali before the end of five days, or else explosions of location linked with Western interests in the KSA would take place, Al-Masaary condemned such threat of using violence and insisted on the peaceful nature of his activities within the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, warning its supporters that this statement is forged by the Saudi central intelligence to tarnish the reputation of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights.   

 

4- The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights asserted its peaceful activities in Publication No. 35 in 1995 despite severe confrontation with the Saudi State, affirming that it dispels anger of the frustrated Saudi youths by engaging them in a peaceful opposition movement instead of resorting to violence. 

 

5- Once more, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights asserted its peaceful nature and actions in Publication No. 36 in 1995, as peaceful sits-in called for by it affirms the concept of cooperation in righteousness and piety to reject vice.

 

The responsibility of resorting to violence:

 

1- In order to be fair, peaceful stance that turned into incitation and threatening and then later on to acts of violence and explosions inside the KSA is the responsibility of both the KSA and Al-Masaary and his Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights. Once Al-Faqeeh left the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, Al-Masaary fully controlled it and used coarse lewd language and resorted to slanders and rumors to threat the KSA and to incite violence. Such verbal abuse reflects an ardent desire to destroy and wreak havoc in the KSA. Al-Masaary had but one weapon: a pen to distort, condemn, incite, slander, spread rumors, fabricate, lie, scandalize, mobilize, and expose. What would be the case if he happened to own WMD!  

 

2- The fault of the Saudi authorities was to torture scholars and persons incarcerated for political reasons. We personally assert that, as a former prisoner because of our free thinking and Quranism, the experience of being imprisoned is so painful that it never leaves the inner psyche of the thinker even after being released to live in peace; let alone those who have been tortured. Of course, Al-Masaary was once incarcerated and tortured in Saudi prisons, and he repeatedly said that he has a personal desire to wreak revenge on the KSA and its king, princes, scholars, policemen, and high officials. Hence, after the case of Al-Hudeif and the conflicts with Al-Faqeeh, Al-Masaary invoked Wahabi sharia notions to assert that the Saudi State is a vice that must be removed by force, as per Ibn Hanbal Sunnite Wahabi concepts.   

 

3- To incarcerate and torture someone because of his ideas and views is the worst crime committed by any country; a cultured person who owns nothing but his pen can never forget being tortured and losing his dignity by executioners of any regime, and his physical wounds might be healed, unlike the psychological ones that might drive him to take revenge and/or to be an extremist who would resort to inciting terror and violence in their books: this occurred to terrorist MB members and Salafists Sayed Qotb, Shukry Mustafa, and Omar Abdel-Rahman tortured in the 1960s in Egypt by high-rank officers like Safwat Al-Ruby and Hamza Al-Bassiouny. Likewise, Saud Al-Sherbein had tortured Al-Masaary in his prison cell, and this drove him gradually to incite violence, as a reaction to torture, in later stages of his wirings within the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights.

We give examples below.

 

1- Of course, peaceful condemnation was praiseworthy in the early stages of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, before the KSA put Al-Hudeif to death in Aug. 1995. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights mentioned in Publication No. 55 in 1995 that all Muslims must renounce and condemn the Saudi regime in their hearts so as not to support the unjust ones who commit crimes and justify them. In Publication No. 46, we read that such denunciation in one's heart is a religious duty as vices spread on the land.  

 

2- When Al-Hudeif was put to death, we find in Publication No. 61 that Al-Masaary incites acts of bloodshed and violence against the KSA for the first time, making the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights the sole body of condemnation of vice above all Saudi scholars, especially Ibn Baz, as we read in Publication No. 73 in 1995: (… Changing vice is not the mission of Ibn Baz and his fellow scholars as they have no power at all to undertake such a mission; any Muslim is required by sharia laws to change vice … with priority to political vice …). Here, we see that the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights stripped Saudi scholars from their role in condemning vice and made incitation and political activism against the Saudi State the first duty of a believer; that is, the Saudi State is a vice to be changed by force as per Sunnite Wahabi Ibn Hanbal doctrine notions and concepts.

 

3- Conflicts between Al-Masaary and Al-Faqeeh reached the point of no return, and Al-Faqeeh left the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights in March 1996, and explosions occurred in Riyadh, while Al-Masaary wrote in Publication No. 75 in 1995 that violence is the only way and the sole means to zealous, frustrated, and furious youths who found all gates shut before them. He asserted that the only solution to avoid violence is to regain social balance by setting free all political prisoners and to admit to the right of the nation to apply Hisbah to rulers. He insinuated that the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights must control Arabia and apply Hisbah as it considered itself the sole representative of both the nation and Wahabi Salafist sharia.   

 

4- Al-Masaary attacked harshly the Saudi government when it announced that four youths confessed to exploding a location of American marines as they were influenced and incited by writings of Al-Masaary and Bin Laden. In Publication No. 97, Al-Masaary accused one of the Saudi royal family members of planning the explosion and to extort confessions by torturing the four youths. In Publication No. 98, Al-Masaary cast doubts on such confessions and asserted their being severely tortured. In Publication No. 99, Al-Masaary wrote letters to high-rank Saudi scholars about the Riyadh explosion, considering it a sharia-based duty/jihad to change vice by force, making vice to mean the KSA itself. When the Saudi authorities announced that the four youths were put to death after confessing to have committed the Riyadh explosion, Al-Masaary in Publication No. 102 in 1996 attacked and criticized the American existence in Arabia and condemned putting to death of the four youths even without proper trial. He called all Islamic organizations to organize a protest march at the gates of the Saudi embassy in London, and it was planned and done actually on 16th of June, 1996, as mentioned by Al-Masaary in Publication No. 104. We conclude here that peaceful rejection and condemnation by words turned into incitation of violence and terror embodied by explosions in the KSA, while Al-Masaary, as an inciter of such terror, justifies violence using sharia of changing vice by force as per notions of Sunnite Ibn Hanbal Wahabism.   

 

Grounds on which Al-Masaary based his views of seeking to destroy the Saudi regime:

 

1- In Publications Nos. 131 to 138, in Dec. 1997, Al-Masaary serialized a research on ''sinning rulers", demonstrating his sharia-based views that prohibits letting sinners rule and necessitates their being dethroned by force, and he supported his views with many proofs, and then, he quoted views of some ancient scholars (e.g., Ibn Hazm and some Hanafi doctrine scholars) that tolerated the existence of sinning rulers, and he refutes such views while accusing their holders as troubled, hypocritical group who applied the Shiite principle of Taqiyya (i.e., expressing in public views contrary to one's real views). Al-Masaary wrote: (…Hanafi doctrine scholars asserted such erroneous views of tolerating sinning rulers/caliphs, as the Hanafi doctrine was the formal one adopted by the Abbasid caliphate and later sultanates under it as well as the Ottoman caliphate, and accordingly, most scholars drew nearer to caliphs and urged people to offer blind obedience to caliphs instead of questioning and correcting them however their sins, injustices, betrayal, and tyranny might be …). Hence, Al-Masaary contradicts himself when he said that the Ottoman empire a legitimate sharia-based caliphate while the very first KSA as  rebellious one against the Ottoman legitimacy and thus, he sees that the KSA lacked any legitimacy.  

 

2- The stance of Ibn Hanbal against the Abbasid caliphate goes against the above-mentioned views of the Ibn Hanbal doctrine Sunnite Wahabi scholar Al-Masaary; Ibn Hanbal was incarcerated and tortured because of his fiqh views and not political ones during the reign of the Abbasid caliph Al-Mutassim; yet, he remained loyal to the Abbasid caliphate, and no one can accuse him of applying Taqiyya as no one except God knows the innermost of people's hearts. Ibn Hanbal never participated in a revolt led by scholars at the time against the Abbasids under the motto of preventing vice and forcing virtue, despite the fact that most rebels were followers of his doctrine.  

 

3- Hence, Al-Masaary spared no intellectual weapon to call for the removal of toppling of the Saudi regime, ruled by 'sinners', as vice to be changed by force as per Wahabi notions. In Publication No. 173, Al-Masaary asserted that sharia courts is the only body to issue a ruling to dethrone or abdicate sinning, unjust rulers, and NOT Shura councils as they are secular bodies. If sinning rulers do not apply the sharia courts ruling, they must be fought to death as apostates even if most citizens would be killed in that military jihad or murdered for not participating in that jihad! (… If sharia courts do not exist, we cannot be sure if Sunna and Quran would be applied fully and correctly, and rulers in that case must be declared as apostates, and scholars' in such cases as these is to pressurize the masses and citizens to make sharia dominates indeed by establishing sharia courts with full judicial authority. If rulers adamantly refuse to establish sharia courts, they would be deifying themselves and rebelling against God's sharia and must be fought fiercely with all power and might until they e dethroned even if most people die as a result …). This means endless fighting until the two sides are killed off or annihilated! Of course, this is utter madness! 

 

4- Such incitation of terror and civil war by Al-Masaary is sheer madness, and he asserted in Publication no. 138 that the KSA is ruled by apostates who monopolize power and authority with no room for sharia to be applied, and this is apostasy. He saw that the only solution is to abdicate and dethrone sinning rulers by force as vice to be removed as per Wahabi religious duties by one of the two means:   (A) a military coup akin to surgical operation to remove cancerous cells, even if heroes of such coup failed, they would be martyrs, or (B) all citizens (i.e., scholars, security guards, policemen, etc.) must unite to dethrone Saudi rulers peacefully without bloodshed, however dangers faced might be. (… The rule of sinning kings and princes is illegal and against sharia laws as per most views of most people and scholars … those rejecting our view here are apostates who have forsaken Islam …). Here, Al-Masaary declares all those opposing his views as infidels or apostates, both his contemporaries and ancient scholars, and this asserts his biggest error and mistake of having the nerve to decide who are true Muslims and who are not; this is sinful self-deification. Shame on him!   

 

Types of items adopted by the KSA and condemned as sins and vices by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights:

 

Firstly: the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights criticized the KSA foreign policies:

 

Introduction:

 

  Political differences are natural even inside any given political party or the ruling party, and differences or disputes are bound to occur between the ruling party and the opposition parties. But when such opposition is a political and religious fundamentalist movement, instead of seeking political compromises, disputes are turned by fundamentalists into deep-seated hatred, violence, mutual accusations, and declaring others as apostates, even if the sole reference is one for both sides: Salafist Sunnite Ibn Hanbal doctrine-based Wahabism. Disputes of that type escalate until two options are left: either to obey rulers in power or to obey those opposition figures confiscating Wahabi sharia. Thus political disputes between the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights and the KSA grew deeper, especially in relation to internal and external policies of the KSA, as we analyze this in light of how such policies change as per the interests of the Saudi royal family and as per the influence of Sunnite Wahabi opposition fundamentalists.          

 

The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights condemned the Saudi foreign policies:

 

1- The views of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights regarding Saudi external policies are based on uniting the Islamic world in one caliphate facing the West, especially the USA, as we will tackle later on. Such outlook dominates over the vision of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights in its condemnation of the Saudi external policies. Within critical reading of writings of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, we notice the difference in the stance regarding the relation of the KSA with the USA and the communists as per the above-mentioned political creed of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights.

 

2- As regarding the USA, let us bear in mind the Gulf War that resulted in the military existence of the American bases in Arabia as the main reason behind forming the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights as an opposition movement. Naturally, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights condemned severely the American existence inside Saudi lands and American interference in Saudi policies, even if it led to something good, as in the case when the USA interfered to pressurize the KSA to set free all incarcerated scholars who supported the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights to defend human rights. More details are given below. In Publication No. 20, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights condemned the fact that the USA controlled all Saudi air fields during Clinton's visit to the KSA. In Publication No. 32, Al-Masaary condemned American interference to settle disputes among Saudi princes. In Publication No. 34, we find condemnation of American incitation of Saudi meddling in Yemen war, and of course, we find no praise at all to the American role in anything. In Publication No. 45, al-Masaary attacked severely the Saudi king, accusing him of kneeling to the USA and submitting to its will while tyrannizing over Saudi citizens. Al-Masaary condemns the USA for its silence regarding arrest waves of supporters of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights inside the KSA, as if the USA was responsible for their protection, as we read in Publication No. 11, Al-Masaary asserts that the USA ignored an imprisoned Saudi supporter who has the American nationality. The condemnation is repeated in Publication No. 15, with assertions that the USA should not work for its interests alone! Yet, another publication in 1994 about arresting Al-Ouda and Al-Hawali asserted that an American high-stature and high-rank delegation visited the Saudi king to urge him to adopt human rights and to set them free, and to apply reforms so as to avoid the fate of the Iranian Shah. Al-Masaary claimed that the king was furious and asserted he knew his country better than anyone. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights showed no praise at all at such American gesture, though it resulted in setting free some men and youths, including Louaï, the son of Dr. Al-Masaary, a fact celebrated by the Committee of Defending Legitimate without thanking the USA, while asserting in Publication No. 29 that such release was not a grant from the KSA done condescendingly, but rather, it was a preparation for introducing reforms on all levels, especially human rights. Al-Masaary never expressed gratitude to the USA for its role in setting such prisoners free!  

 

3- The same applies to the relation between the KSA and Israel; as the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights accused the Saudi princes of supporting and conspiring with Israel against members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate, against all Arab countries, and against the (Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalist MB-linked) Hamas movement in Gaza Strip. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, in Publication No. 12, accused Prince Bandar of being a traitor as he declared in a TV program that Hamas is a terrorist organization. In Publication No. 16, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights accused the KSA of cooperating with Israel to vanquish all Sunnite fundamentalist movements, as arrest waves of the members and supporters of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights commenced while coinciding with the KSA stopping its boycotting Israel. In Publication No. 28, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights accused Israel of infiltrating and controlling Saudi security apparatuses and Saudi airports that quell Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalists, as Saudi rapprochement with Israel coincided with arrest waves as we read in Publication No. 39 in 1995.  In another later publication, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights condemned and accused American companies working inside the KSA of being owned and controlled by Jewish Zionists.

4- The Saudi meddling in Yemen war to unite south and north Yemen by supporting Yemeni communists of south Yemen against authority in Sana'a. The Saudi political motive was to avoid border troubles in southern Saudi regions of Aseer, Najran, and Jizan. The KSA feared that Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalism would emerge to threaten its borders, while the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights saw that uniting Yemen serves its purposes as a step toward uniting all Arab and Islamic countries. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights felt that Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalist trend is rising in Sana'a and thought of the Yemen war as between communist infidels and believing Wahabi fundamentalists. Hence it attacked the KSA supporting communists in Yemen and harshly criticized Prince Sultan who controlled the Yemen file (55).

 

5- The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights condemned the KSA for its ever-changing and never-stable external policies, especially regarding Iraq and Iran, as per Publication No. 14 in 1994. Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights forgot two items: 1) the fact that all political relations of any given country change as per interests. Al-Masaary forgot the British motto: "The UK has no steady friends, but it has steady interests", and 2) the fact that the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights itself changes its stances as per conditions and circumstances using sharia laws as pretext, while the KSA change its policies as part of political acumen that, as it should be, has nothing to do with religion.

 

The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights condemned the Saudi internal policies:

Torture:

 

1- This is the worst accusation leveled at the KSA, and we tend to believe that such a crime indeed takes place as known of all prisons in the Arab, underdeveloped, and ''Islamic'' countries that incarcerate political prisoners; besides, human rights organizations assert that the KSA tortured incarcerated supporters of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights. This led the KSA to defend itself at some points, and to ignore the matter altogether at some other points when such accusations are leveled against the Saudi regime. 

 

2- Al-Masaary was tortured in a Saudi prison before his fleeing the KSA to London upon his release, and Liberty Organization issued a statement in London in Aug. 1993 to denounce the fact: (… Liberty got news from the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights that Dr. Al-Masaary is being tortured physically and psychologically for three months in his prison cell … he is being suspended by a rope for hours to be beaten severely, made to suffer sleep deprivation, and forced to solitary confinement in his cell … this means that he is being tortured was for the purpose of extorting a certain confession from him, and since he was arrested in May 1995, he was not allowed to contact a lawyer or a relative …). Another Liberty statement was issue about Dr. Ahmed al-Tuweijri who was arrested in Aug. 1993 and was severely and painfully tortured, and this was affirmed by Amnesty International and Al-Jazeera Al-Arabia magazine (56).

 

3- Within the writings of Al-Masaary, the fear of being tortured again is evident between the lines as he accused Prince Nayef, the Interior Minister, of inflicting such suffering on prisoners, as we read in Statement No. 39 titled ''How Al-Hudeif Died": (… sources mentioned that the martyr suffered torture as he refused to sign any confessions to please the Saudi security men … they plied his body and tied his head between his thighs and beat him severely with big cudgels … plying his body might have caused paralysis in his lower body as his backbone or neck was about to be broken … sources asserted that the Interior Minister ordered torture to be focused on his upper body that would feel the severe pain, and his head received the beatings until his neck  bled and he suffered brain hemorrhage and lost consciousness … fearing to be exposed, the Interior Minster ordered his neck to be cut off and announced hastily that he was put to death for his crimes … ). We personally tend to think that such details are not true; they were authored by Al-Masaary, as he was not an eye-witness and he never told his readers what 'sources' he had contacted. His aim was to expose and scandalize the KSA even by fabrications, and he succeeded in that. No human being can stand such torture for long as described by Al-Masaary.  

 

4- Al-Masaary went on fabricating unbelievable narratives about types of torture suffered by prisoners in Jeddah prison and in other cities. 

 

5- But we believe that he was right about his assertion about the fact that torture was never applied to incarcerated high-rank scholars and those descended from wealthy families who supported the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights.

 

6- Al-Masaary did not confine his exposing torture to his writings; he held a conference in London about torture and its victims in collaboration with Readers Organization, and he authored a chapter inside his book titled "Judging Rulers" to prove that torture is against sharia laws (57).

 

Confiscation of financial dues:

1- The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights denounced and condemns many instances of the Saudi regime adamant refusal to give financial dues to employees and workers in many companies and in the army, retired people, contractors, subcontractors, as well as students. Some complained in writing to Al-Masaary to embarrass the Saudi regime and to offer to provide information in return for help to get their financial dues. At one point, the Saudi government was running debts; it had to pay 850 million SR to just one company. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights asserted that debts of the private sector to the Saudi government reached the sum of 20 billion SR, and this caused the confiscation of financial dues for a while as there was no cash to pay salaries in many public sectors, especially hospitals.    

 

2- Foreign workers in the KSA suffered greatly from the above-mentioned conditions, as they were deprived for a long time from their low wages and measly stipends as they worked in cleaning and other similar menial jobs. Sometimes, some of them organized few demonstrations and went on strikes in Riyadh, Hael, Al-Ahsa, and Mecca. They were forced to resume their work and end every single strike, as we read about workers in King Khaled International Airport in Riyadh. In some cases, strikes turned into vandalism and acts of violence in Jeddah, Ta'if, and other cities. In few cases, some workers were deported to their countries without receiving their financial dues. In one case, a governor of a village forced a foreign worker to sign papers asserting that he had received his financial dues before his deportation, which was not true, and this worker revenged himself by stabbing this governor with a knife.   

 

Injustices done to foreign employees and workers:

 

1- Since it has become a recurrent phenomenon that foreign employees and workers lost their financial dues and suffered various injustices, human rights organizations had to write reports about it (58), as we read in the report of the USA Foreign Office report published in 1991 about human rights in the KSA. This report stressed the fact that foreign employees and workers suffered inequality and many injustices when compared to their Saudi counterparts, especially because of the enslavement-like sponsorship system (i.e., Al-Kafil).

 

2- The Committee of defending Legitimate Rights exposed and scandalized the KSA about the issue of injustices and crimes suffered by foreign employees and workers inside the Saudi State: (…The Committee of defending Legitimate Rights condemns and denounces the racism and xenophobia practiced by the Saudi regime against foreign employees and workers by leveling accusations against them without proofs and making them suffer within despicable working conditions and low wages, while receiving very bad treatment like slaves that made them lose their dignity, and the regime would confiscate their financial dues to boot …). In Publication No 24 in 1994, the Committee of defending Legitimate Rights denounced deportation of foreign employees and workers after arresting them without trial and without investigation, while they stay legally inside the KSA, and they were deported without receiving their financial dues (59).

 

3- We tend to believe that the Committee of defending Legitimate Rights provided true and authentic information and news about this topic as sources were provided to verify them. Indeed, most Arab workers and employees who resided for a while in the KSA bear witness to countless similar episodes of tyranny and injustice suffered by foreign employees and workers. This is inexcusable, as the KSA grew filthily rich from oil revenues; how come they deprive deported or staying foreign employees and workers from their financial dues, amidst news of affluence, extravagance, and luxuries enjoyed by the Saudi princes?! 

 

The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights condemned the deteriorated security level in the KSA:

 

Introduction:

 

   Philosophy of tyranny is usually based on torturing opposition figures as well as weak, silent ones to impose the awe of rulers or the State of oriental Arab rulers who think they own lands and souls of people. West democracies make the nation as the source of authorities, as in the case of the American administration and institutions whose members are elected, questioned, and can be renounced by the people. The USA employees in public service, including any American president, aim to serve the people and receive salaries from tax payers.  Such presidents are to be in service of people not to rule over them, and they cannot be harsh with them or else would lose his job. This reminds us with "It is by of grace from God that you were gentle with them. Had you been harsh, hardhearted, they would have dispersed from around you…" (3:159). American presidents eat and go to markets; this reminds us with "And they say, "What sort of messenger is this, who eats food, and walks in the marketplaces?" (25:7). Such Quranic phrases we use to explain how West democracies are not 'infidel'; rather, they are nearer to Islamic Quranic sharia. Yet, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights agrees with the Wahabi monarchies in declaring West countries as 'heretic' and their notion of democracy as 'apostasy' and against Salafist sharia of the Middle-Ages caliphates. Hence, according to such thought, creeds of tyrannies of Arab regimes are based. Security, services, facilities, wealth, power, and lands are for Arab rulers and not for people who must accept the very little granted condescendingly to them by such rulers who must be praised by the subjects all day long and all night long. Such is the cultural of tyrannical rule adopted by the Saudi kings and princes and advocated by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights that seeks to reach power in Arabia to restore an Ottoman-like Middle-Ages caliphate in the 21st century! That is why the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights condemns and denounces torture, deteriorated services and security, as well as confiscation of financial dues without mentioning that the roots of such injustices is Wahabism and its tyranny philosophy. Thus, Al-Masaary believes that tyrants can do whatever they like, despite the fact that he and many members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights live in London and enjoy West tolerance, freedoms, and democracy, but the hate to see such concepts applied in Arabia! Let us tackle the deteriorated security level in the KSA denounced by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights to slander the Saudi regime and tarnish the reputation of the KSA.      

 

Deteriorated security level:

 

1- In Publication No. 7 in 1997, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights asserted that it received messages and letters to confirm the deteriorated security level in the KSA: thefts, robberies, rapes, kidnapping of male and female children and teenagers, massacres in villages, and stolen cars in main cities especially the capital. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights superficially claimed that the causes of such deteriorated security level were the spread of poverty and that the Saudi government spreads corruption and immorality on purpose, while it occupies itself with political security and neglects general internal security. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights urged the citizens to learn self-defense. In Publication No. 11 in 1995, Al-Masaary mentioned that in one week in Al-Qassim region, tens of houses were robbed and several cases of rape, kidnapping, and murder occurred. In Publication No. 19, we read about a university teacher robbed and beaten severely in broad daylight. In Publication No. 20, we read about several robberies in airports. In Publication No. 21, we read about numerous cases of smuggling arms, weapons, and drugs, while cases of rape and murder have increased, crimes involving security men and policemen. In Publications Nos. 26 and 28, we read about women and young girls being kidnapped in Yathreb, Brida, and Jeddah. In Publication No. 29, we read about a crime every five minute in Jeddah: rape, kidnapping, murder, and robbery. In Publication No. 30, we read a sarcastic article about Al-Ahsa with rate crimes more than LA in the USA! In Publication No. 32, we read about crimes committed by policemen and about increasing crime rates in Mecca and Yathreb, including massacres! In Publication No. 35 in 1995, we read about Al-Saud royal family caring only for security of their own members and that of their cronies while ignoring general security in all villages and cities. Thefts reached to mosques, electricity cables, and the treasury of Interior Ministry. In Publication No. 36, we read about statistics crimes of one night in Riyadh: 31 stolen cars, 3 car accidents, 5 house robberies, 3 cases of stabbing, and 6 cases of shootings. In Publication No. 41, we read about 1200 cars stolen in Jeddah and Mecca during Ramadan. In Publication No. 42, we read about an attempt to kidnap female teachers in a school-bus in Ta'if and about robberies committed by gangs in Mecca and Ta'if. Further details are mentioned about drug dealers, pimps, and smugglers of arms and weapons working for Saudi princes, crimes involving corrupt policemen, and an incident of kidnapping young girls in Al-Qassim and asking for ransoms. Of course, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights blamed the Saudi State of all this as it busied itself with arresting fundamentalists (60).  

 

2- We feel bound to mention that such deterioration of security level is nothing in comparison to the state of affairs and daily life in Arabia before King Abdul-Aziz had united the regions under the name of the KSA. Bedouins lived off looting, raping, stealing, robberies, and raids as daily lifestyle, not deemed a crime or a source of disgrace. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights never gave Abdul-Aziz the credit for establishing security, even if security levels were lower later on, if we are to believe all that was written by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights about the KSA in the 1990s.   

 

3- If members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights were secular, they would have sarcastically asked about the application of Salafist Wahabi sharia. Why thieves did not have their hands cut off? Why the committee of the promotion of vice and the prevention of vice could not stop such crimes instead of meddling in the personal life and freedoms of Saudi citizens?! Thus, the KSA ignored the real Islamic sharia of preserving lives, possessions, and honor of people and providing them with security.

 

The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights condemned the deteriorated level of services:

 

1- Introduction for which we do not offer any apologies: It is funny to expect a tyrant who thinks he owns the lands and people on it to serve citizens deemed by him as cattle to be manipulated for his benefit. This is the mentality of the oriental tyrants, and hence, all services and facilities levels must be deteriorated. We remember that in one of our articles in the 1990s in Cairo, we have urged Egyptian citizens to leave the narrow Nile valley in Lower and Upper Egypt to live in Egyptian regions with scarce population like the North Coast of the Mediterranean Sea and the West Coast of the Red Sea. Arab conquerors made Egyptians leave the fertile green north coast cultivated by romans; Abbasid rulers left such areas to deteriorate in Egypt by many loot-seekers who no longer can serve Abbasid armies that were relying on Persians and Turks. President Mubarak paved and built cities for the affluent ones in Sinai coasts, while Cairene slums and poor villages lack rudimentary facilities. The same goes for the oil-rich KSA; the royal family members live in luxury, affluence, and extravagance, and could not spend much for facilities, while bathrooms of gold were built in Saudi royal family members' palaces. This reminds us of this Quranic verse about unjust towns: "How many a town have We destroyed while it was doing wrong? They lie in ruins; with stilled wells, and lofty mansions." (22:46). The signs of destroying towns or societies include the existence of a minority that monopolizes wealth and authority and live in spacious palaces, while the vast majority is oppressed with no facilities or decent living. Such societies will revolt against injustice one day and engage into destructive civil wars or would wait for destruction coming from outside, as the case in Saddam Hussein's Iraq. The following verse seems to address now Al-Saud royal family and all corrupt tyrannical Arab regimes: "Have they not journeyed in the land, and had minds to reason with, or ears to listen with? It is not the eyes that go blind, but it is the hearts, within the chests, that go blind." (22:47). We detail below how The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights condemned the deterioration of facilities, health care services, and education, as per its publications, as accusations leveled against the Saudi government.

 

Health care services:

 

   In Publication No. 18 in 1994, we read about economic recess and depression forced the Saudi Ministry of Health had to refer 25% of patients from public hospitals to private ones. In Publication No. 20, we read about a letter sent to the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights by a mother who suffered carelessness and reduced services in public hospitals. In Publication No. 21, we read about a preacher in Yathreb sermonizing about the bad healthcare in hospitals of the city, as the Ministry of health could not spend money on them in 1993 and 1994. In Publication No. 30, we read about how the Saudi State neglects hospitals as it busied itself with fighting and arresting fundamentalists and providing the citizens with football matches, and how prices of medicaments increased and hospitals could no longer perform their duties for lack of finances, tools, apparatuses, and lack of efficient medical personnel, as unsterilized tools transmitted infections from one patient to another. In Publication No. 40, we read about a hospital in Brida that collapsed, killing 42 persons under the rubble, and the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights accused the Saudi State of betrayal and negligence. In Publication No. 44, we read about the case of several deaths of born babies inside hospitals in many regions, plus the negligence leading to more deaths of patients inside a hospital in Al-Qassim.

 

Deterioration of education:

 

  In Publication No. 5 in 1994, we read about how King Fahd Stadium maintenance reached the total sum of 100 million SR, while the budget of maintenance of all Saudi schools reached the total sum of 95 million SR. In Publication No. 10, we read about reducing numbers of accepted students into schools and into universities; one faculty that used to accept 1000 students reduced the number to 220 students. In Publication No. 18, we read about stopping of the process of building new schools and classrooms in many regions, while more schools were demolished. In Publication No. 23, we read about details of how education deteriorated as the Ministry of education failed to build or to rent new buildings in 1993 and 1994 and failed to pay rents of buildings used as public schools, about 80% of total number of public schools, and that many Arab non-Saudi teachers were deported and fired without replacements, and in many cases, school textbooks were not available. In other schools, air-conditioners broke down and electricity cut-out increased, and no one had the means to provide maintenance for lack of budget-money. In other schools, no chairs or desks were available and students sat on the floor.     

 

Deterioration of electricity:

 

  The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights noticed since Publication No. 3 that Saudi media frequently notified citizens about stopping in water supply and electricity and urged them to lower their use and consumption of electricity. Ministry of Industry closed down many factories to reduce electrify consumption, saying that turbines of electricity could not work unless within 60% of their capacity because of lack of maintenance; the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights commented that this was a disgrace in an oil-rich country. In Publication No. 9 in 1994, we read that one-third of Riyadh dwellers living in blackouts for a whole month as the maintenance works were not done before. In Publication No. 19, we read that no new buildings were provided with electricity as turbines of electricity could not provide and cover that increased number of buildings. Many dwellers of several cities sent written complaints to the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights about frequent blackouts, and such complaints were published in Publication No. 43.        

 

Deterioration of other services:

 

   In Publication No. 13, we read about Abha Region Water Company that closed down because it did not receive its financial dues from the Saudi government for three years. In Publication No. 44, we read about Jeddah streets flooded with sewerage water as the sewerage system collapsed. In Publication No. 32, we read about complaints of many villages about bumpy unclean routes that lacked rest-houses and gas stations, whereas the farm owned by Prince Sultan had a route built specially for it in Al-Qassim. In Publications Nos. 9 and 33, we read about unclean city roads, even in Mecca, with accumulated mountains of garbage as there was no budget to hire workers to collect them. 

 

1- Other publications tackled how the Saudi government tried to gain more money to cover State budget deficits: by increasing taxes, car fines, bills of water and electricity, houses rents, obligatory donations, increased prices of goods, annulling subsidies, and merging schools. It was a familiar scene to see a poor man begging for money at gates of mosques carrying an electricity bill (61), and this led to car accidents, pollution of environment, and increased corruption rates (62).

 

2- The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights blamed the economic deterioration on the Saudi royal family members that live luxuriously in affluence and extravagance by stealing public money (63), and Al-Masaary analyzed all aspects of such deterioration and corruption.

 

 

The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights condemned the manners and behaviors of the Saudi royal family members:

 

Introduction:

 

  Some reduced performance might emerge in any of the economy and the services of a given country for a while, but the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights linked deterioration of all aspects in the KSA due to lack of budgets to the extravagance of the royal family members who specify for themselves countless sums from oil-revenues and public money via financial corruption. Al-Masaary used this argument to call for his right to apply Hisbah on the KSA rulers – a demand understandable within the Wahabi sharia of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights whose members could not accept Hisbah being applied to them – as the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights placed itself as the sole representative of sharia laws in a way we have explained above. This extremist view of Hisbah is a reaction to the fact that the Saudi royal family members felt they own the land and its wealth without citizens having the right to question them. Such is the Salafist views about rule that prevent the KSA to live as European monarchies where democracy, transparency, and human rights are applied, drawing them nearer to the Islamic notion of justice in the Quran. Let us tackle below the accusations leveled by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights against the Saudi royal family members, who never refuted such accusations, as part of the condemnation of Al-Masaary toward the KSA and his call to topple its regime.     

 

Money specified for the Saudi royal family members:

 

1- In Publication No. 3, we read that money specified annually for the Saudi royal family members reaches several billions SR, and the Ministry of Finance could not provide it unless by running debts. Each of the princes/sons of King Abdul-Aziz receives annually at least 100 million SR, while other relatives of the Saudi royal family receive one million SR.

 

2- In Publication No. 14, we read that once prince threatened the king to commit suicide if his annual allowance is not increased just as prince so-and-so, and Al-Masaary writes in that publication that the king ordered a sum  for him that would have been enough to provide a large village with water supply and electricity. 

 

3- In Publication No. 38, we read that the regime urges the citizens to lower consumption of almost everything, whereas the Saudi royal family members spend extravagantly to maintain their luxurious lifestyle without anyone daring to ask them to lower their expenditures, though they consume more than 7 billion $ annually, without having to pay for fees/bills of electricity, water, phones, etc.

 

Extravagance in expenditures of the Saudi royal family members:

 

1- In contrast to deteriorated level of facilities and services provided to suffering citizens all over the KSA, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights enumerates episodes of extravagance of the Saudi royal family members: such as building the spacious palace and farm of Prince Mashaal whose space is larger than that of the monarchy of Bahrain, as we read in Publication No. 24.

 

2- In the same Publication No. 24, we read details about possessions of Prince Khaled Ibn Sultan in the KSA, Egypt, and the USA, and about costs of his bodyguards.  

 

3- A spacious, luxurious palace was built for King Fahd with the total costs of 40 billion SR, apart from other palaces built specially for the king in different places by the Bin Laden Company.  

 

4- King Fahd granted Prince Abdul-Majeed, via royal decree, a piece of land whose space is 1 million square kilometers.

 

5- The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights estimated that annual costs of maintenance works inside the royal-family palaces built in the USA are 2.5 billion $.

 

6- Electricity bills – unpaid of course – of just one palace of the several  palaces of Prince Nayef in Jeddah was the total sum of 8 million SR, and Al-Masaary wondered about the electricity bills of his other palaces.

 

7- Prince Abdul-Aziz Ibn Fahd, the son of King Fahd, had a palace built for him in Riyadh in 1416 A.H. that cost more than 1 billion SR, and via royal decree, the palace was provided with every luxury that money could buy, including 80 phone lines for international and local calls.

 

8- The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights detailed the costs of the three-month journey of Prince Abdul-Aziz Ibn Fahd to Spain, France, and the USA, with a retinue of 100 persons, and each person received a weekly allowance of 5000 $.

 

9- The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights detailed the costs of the journey of Prince Sultan to Morocco for hunting and fishing, along with other princes and relatives, as each day expenditures reached the total sum of 5 million SR, and Al-Masaary mentioned that Prince Sultan dismissed and fired 90 employees from their posts so that there would be a budget enough to redecorate his private plan, with costs reaching tens of million SR within two-month works.

 

10- The Committee of Defending the Legitimate Rights detailed extravagance of the Saudi royal family members in holding conferences and sports events (64).

 

The Committee of Defending the Legitimate Rights accused Saudi princes of smuggling money abroad:

 

1- When King Fahd was admitted into the ICU in a big hospital, the Committee of Defending the Legitimate Rights accused Saudi princes of smuggling countless sums of money abroad in Sept. 1995. Surprisingly, many Saudi citizens smuggled large sums of money abroad. The Saudi State raised interest rates to be 14.5% for internal loans.   

 

2- In Publication No. 32 in 1995, we read that the International Money Transferals Center in Geneva asserted that countless sums of money were smuggled out of the KSA in just two months. Experts in the investment markets in both the USA and Europe asserted that Saudi princes are looking for chances to invest their money abroad. Strangely, the Saudi State issued a law to prevent the transferal of more than 50.000 SR at a time outside the KSA. Yet, the Saudi princes as usual managed to find ways to smuggle their money. We find that this piece of news provide by the Committee of Defending the Legitimate Rights is contradictory; how come the KSA wanted to stop transferals of money outside and allow the Saudi royal princes to smuggle their money?!   

 

3- In Publication No. 39 in 1995, we read that the money transferals abroad made by the Saudi royal family members reached the total sum of 9.5 billion $, and this indicated that the Saudi princes intend to flee when the time comes when any economic collapse would occur to ruin everything in the KSA. Understandingly, the KSA made the terrible mistake of imposing high fees on pilgrims entering Hejaz.  

 

Confiscation and appropriation of lands:

 

A) This crime is related to the Wahabi political creed of the Saudi royal family members that think that they own the lands conquered by the sword by King Abdul-Aziz. Lands in Arabia have come to have very great value in comparison to the times of King Abdul-Aziz; as modernization led to building more lands within urban planning and providing facilities, making investments in land very lucrative for persons in power, especially the royal family members and their cronies, regardless of the lands' original owners among Saudi citizens or tribes. Hence, the Committee of Defending the Legitimate Rights spoke about confiscation and appropriation of lands.

 

B) We mention briefly some details below from writings of the Committee of Defending the Legitimate Rights.

1- Al-Masaary asserted that high-rank officials of the royal diwan appropriated areas and pieces of lands around the Sacred Kaaba Mosque in Mecca, with each piece worth 40 million SR.  

2- Al-Masaary asserted that Prince Turki Ibn Fahd, King Fahd's son, appropriated a vast stretch of land south of Brida city that used to be owned by its rightful owners who had legal contracts to prove their rights.

3- In the same way, Prince Feisal Ibn Bandar confiscated a vast stretch of land in northern KSA, along with one of his brothers.

4- Prince Sultan Ibn Fahd confiscated a vast stretch of land whose space reached 12 million square kilometer south of Brida, and its rightful owners had legal contracts to prove their ownership of it.

5- Within royal decrees, all buildings on the highway Al-Qassim–Riyadh were demolished within 40 kilometers; as such location was appropriated by the king himself, while Prince Sultan confiscated another space of 40 square kilometers within the same area. 

6- Al-Huda region dwellers sent a written complaint to the Committee of Defending the Legitimate Rights as all their lands were appropriated despite their having legal contracts of ownership, and Al-Masaary asked them to send a copy of them and the file of the case to draw the attention of international media to help them.

7- Al-Masaary said that Prince Saud Ibn Abdul-Mohsen appropriated a piece of land that was the location of a foreign company.

8- Prince Sultan warned people of Hael that he wanted to have a piece of land to build a military base, but after confiscating it, he distributed it among his sons and daughters and cronies. Hence, the Committee of Defending the Legitimate Rights asserted that the princes occupied all lands in a sort of occupation and conquest against the will of citizens.

9- The Committee of Defending the Legitimate Rights focused on Prince Muhammad Ibn Fahd as he appropriated to himself a public park despite the protest of citizens in the area.

10- Prince Abdul-Aziz Ibn Fahd confiscated a stretch of land near Kuwait.

11- Prince Sultan confiscated to himself a vast stretch of land outside Mecca.

12- Princess Hessa Al-Faisal confiscated a piece of land southern in Ta'if. 

13-- Al-Huda region dwellers sent a second written complaint to the Committee of Defending the Legitimate Rights about their problem as Saudi princes prevented them from building anything there.

14- Prince Sultan appropriated the largest gas station in the route between Jeddah and Yathreb.

15- Prince Sultan appropriated a vast stretch of land with a space of 23 million square kilometers in a Shiite-populated area in Ta'if.

16- Prince Feisal Ibn Turki confiscated a large garden in Ta'if.

17- Prince Feisal Ibn Turki confiscated a stretch of land in northern Brida.

18- Al-Masaary protested against the confiscation of beautiful areas near tribal locations on the Res Sea coast by the Saudi royal family

19- Prince Ahmed Ibn Abdul-Aziz appropriated a large garden near a market in Ta'if.

20- Another prince appropriated a piece of land, 100.000 square meters in Yathreb, which was prepared for a project related to social solidarity and insurance.

21- Prince Sultan confiscated many large pieces of lands in Al-Ahsa region, which include streets, water canals, and farms, to annex them to his farm, named Sultana, and villagers there felt extremely worried that Prince Sultan might covet their lands one day.

22- Prince Sultan Ibn Nasser Ibn Abdul-Aziz appropriated a vast stretch of land in Mecca and demolished buildings in it.

23- Prince Feisal Ibn Muhammad Ibn Saud appropriated a public park that the KSA spent 10 million SR to make it for the dwellers of the region of Al-Baha.

24- Prince Abdul-Aziz Ibn Fahd appropriated a piece of land that cost 55 million SR in Yathreb.

 

C) Confiscation of lands had some side effects as we write below.

 

1- Rich tribesmen of Al-Qahtan tribe made a sit-in in a mosque to protest the appropriation of their lands

 

2- The agent of Prince Al-Waleed Ibn Abdul-Mohsen was shot by a landowner who was reluctant to give up his land to the prince. 

 

3- People of Al-Qassim region protested when the king granted their lands to Prince Youssef Ibn Saeed, and the response they received was that their legal contracts of ownership are without value as all the land of the KSA is owned by the Saudi royal family, and this means that such contracts signify temporary ownership, as the princes can re-gain such lands anytime they wish! Of course, such a response asserts the Middle-Ages caliphs' notion of owning the lands and people on them.

 Of course, there were countless other examples mentioned by Al-Masaary in his writings to denounce and condemn the Saudi royal family, to the extent that some supporters of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights told Al-Masaary in their letters that they grew sick of stories about confiscation of lands and money and they had enough of them (65).

 

D) Yet, an important aspect was overlooked by Al-Masaary about appropriation of lands; some stretches of lands were owned by no one in the first place and some dwellers or Bedouins lay their hands on it illegally and then wrote down contracts. When such lands acquired more value when buildings and facilities were established in them in several projects, princes thought they must appropriate them to themselves. We write this here as Al-Masaary did not write about such a possibility because of his prejudice and because the royal family members did not respond to such accusations. We do not defend the Saudi royal family members of course, but we assert the point to verify objectivity as much as possible.

 

Monopolizing areas and trades by the Saudi royal family members:

 

  The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights accused the princes of turning public parks and lands into private property by illegal appropriation as we have written above, and it accused them of monopolizing trades and areas by confiscation and never allowing others in them or in such trade activities. 

 

1- A message sent to Al-Masaary by protesters against the Saudi government mentioned that the Saudi authorities prohibited fishing for 9 months and allowed it for 3 months only, in order to make room for ships owned by princes' companies the chance to get bigger cargoes of fish and make the biggest profit. 

 

2- Al-Masaary mentions that Prince Saud Ibn Nayef monopolizes DHL Company for shipping and deliveries to serve his own companies and business, and most other international companies failed to break into such monopoly for ten years, to the extent that FedEx Company submitted a complain to the USA government, which phone-called King Fahd to seek a solution. King Fahd allowed FedEx to work inside the KSA undercover to serve businesses owned only by Prince Saud Ibn Nayef.    

 

3- Prince Muhammad Ibn Fahd monopolized a cellular phone company that made subscribers pay 10.000 SR and wait for their turn to get this service, and thus, he prevented Saudi citizens from gaining benefit and reductions that would have happened if other competitors were allowed in the KSA. 

 

4- Prince Sultan made a restricted zone for himself on a vast stretch of land and allowed no citizen to enter it to hunt animals. One of the prince's guards shot a citizen to his death when he trespassed this zone as a poacher, and at one point, the guards arrested some other citizens who entered this zone by mistake.

 

5- Prince Nayef made a restricted zone for himself on a vast stretch of land in northern Al-Qassim region (66).

 

Commissions received by the Saudi royal family members:

 

  The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights focused on accusations leveled against the Saudi royal family and their cronies who received commissions from the KSA deals with other countries, especially to but arms and weapons. We briefly mention some examples of such accusations below.

 

1- When news spread in London that Mark, the son of the Prime Minister Margret Thatcher, received a commission of 12 million Sterling within a project in Al-Baha region in the KSA, Al-Masaary said that this is legal despite the fact that Mark made use of his mother's position, and he asked: (… We wonder how much money the other Saudi side had received as a commission … How much Sultan had received in return for such a project? Military deals usually bring 45% commission distributed among the Saudi princes and their retinue and cronies … if Al-Baha project costs reached 70 billion Sterling, we can conclude then that the commission reached the total sum of 30 billion Sterling, and Sultan would not take farthing less than 10 billion Sterling …). 

 

2- Al-Masaary asserted that all profits of all projects of the Ministry of Defense are divided between Prince Sultan and Prince Abdul-Rahman and his sons.

 

3- Under the title "The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights Exposes the Biggest Scandal", Al-Masaary mentioned that he had a report prepared by a West country apparatus, asserting that the net profits of the king and princes Sultan, Khaled, and Bandar during the Gulf War reached 25 billion $.

 

4- The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights accused Prince Sultan, the Defense Minister, that he made use of his position to steal large sums of money, as he claimed that he spent hundreds of billions $ on the Saudi army, but what we see on the ground costs less that 5% of such sums, while Sultan received endless commissions from the West.

 

5- The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights mentioned that the sum of about half a billion SR was wasted to build one electricity station and one of those who built it stole 1.5 billion SR as commissions from France and Sweden.

 

6- Commissions are linked to corruption of course, as bribes and commissions were incessantly offered to princes to allow certain foreign companies to undertake certain missions or works inside the KSA.

 

7- Many pieces of news mentioned by the publications of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights were mentioned in Al-Jazeera Al-Arabia under the following titles "The KSA Takes Loans to Pay Commissions of .5 Billion $ Received by Defense Minister and his Sons" (67).

 

Misuse of power and manipulation of authority:

 

1- When the Saudi State in some cases confiscated the financial dues of many persons, some other trade was established based on such corruption and injustice, as some princes opened offices to buy debts of contractors due to the government within prices between 20% to 40% and to use their power and authority to gain more money, and the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights traced news of such offices in all its publications.  

 

2- Misuse of power and manipulation of authority included princes buying lands with prices much less than the real value of such lands and selling their lands for prices much more than their real value. In many instances, the king would grant lands to Prince Sultan and the Saudi government would buy such lands from him in return for more than 5 billion $ to build projects of petrochemicals. In many cases, the Saudi nationality was granted to non-Saudis in return for high exorbitant prices (68).

 

Accusations of committing crimes leveled at some Saudi princes:

 

  The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights wrote accusations without proofs or evidence leveled against some princes who are allegedly involved in drug dealing and weapons and arms trade as well as facilitating prostitution. Some other princes were accused of ordering the severe beatings or the murder of certain persons for no reason, and the criminals would not be punished of course (69). Having presented some of the accusations leveled against the KSA and Saudi rulers by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights that condemned and denounced the KSA and wanted to topple its regime and replace it by Al-Masaary as ruler, in the next chapter, we offer a critical reading of the views expressed by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights in its writings as we personally denounce and condemn its Al-Masaary sharia that contradicts the Quranic sharia of Islam.