Walking Up to World War III

There is quiet in the air about the next move in the Middle East but it is a very ominous quiet. Aside from Secretary of State Colin Powell mumbling that Iran is circumventing the desires of the international community by pursuing nuclear weapons, the verbal cascade that precipitated the Iraq war is missing. There is no doubt that the US will soon attempt to destroy Iran’s electric nuclear plants. It obviously believes that the action will be taken lightly because the Iranians have seen what was done to Fallujah and also must know that the US could easily enough send a small nuclear armed cruise missile into Tehran at the behest of Israel.

Should that event occur, a serious miscalculation would have been made. Russia cannot continue to sit by and let these events happen. They have a vested interest in Iran and have already equipped the Iranians with the Sunburn missile. Iran has threatened to bomb Israel’s nuclear facilities at Dimona in the event of an attack on their sovereignty. Iran is a nation of near 80 million people and, should a stupid pre-emptive attack take place, it would certainly endanger all American forces in the region.

Perhaps Emperor Bush doesn’t care about the loss of American lives in order to protect a sacred Israel, but you can bet the US military does. Therefore, it is sincerely hoped that the military gives this war-loving pompous man a clear and concise picture of the consequences about his grandiose war plans. Of course, most people know that he believes that he is in direct contact with God and hence his course of action is always right.

Incidentally, his state of mind about God-given messages should tell everyone that he is at war with the Muslim world and nothing will sway him from his need to assuage his emotional need to destroy the Muslim infidels and most likely be the cause of World War III.

Joe • United States, published 25 November 2004

Zubaidah

This has reference to Mohammad Al-Rasheed’s letter “Zubaidah” (Nov. 21). It is a surprise to me that Arab News would publish comments born purely of prejudice and stereotyping such as “Al-Gaseem, as I like to spell it, never had visitors of any kind for a simple reason: They killed all who ventured there.”

For Rasheed’s and your readers’ information, over the years, Al-Qaseem (as I like to spell it) has been visited by many renowned travelers. Westerners and Easterners, including Arabs — both Muslim and Christian such as Amin Reehani — and non-Arab Muslim travelers have written positively about Qaseem. The travel diaries of Western travelers concerning Qaseem were in line with what they had written about other regions of Arabia. I challenge Rasheed to mention the name of any traveler who was killed in Qaseem.

I have the following comments regarding some of the incorrect information brought up by Rasheed:

• There are two main historical Haj routes from Iraq, which served also pilgrims from Persia and other eastern Islamic nations — the Basra and Kufa roads. The Basra route was the most famous in the first two centuries of Islamic power. However, after the city of Baghdad was built, the Kufa road became the great Haj road. The Basra road, which passes through the heart of Qaseem, continued over the years to serve pilgrims from the south of Iraq and Persia. This road has many large birkas (water ponds) and distance marks (miles) that still exist and can be visited. The Kufa (Baghdad) Haj road is mostly outside the administrative borders of Qaseem.

• Rasheed mentioned that “Al-Abbassa, the real sister of Haroun who was infamous for lots of things chronicled ably by Al-Bustani in his novel with the same name.” The novel was written by Shakeeb Arsalan and not Al-Bustani. The basis for this novel was some stories about her from the historical book “Al-Aghani” by Abi Al-Faraj Al-Asfahani.

Finally, Rasheed wrote “Most of your expat readers have visited this famous darb and so have I many times.” I wonder how he can generalize about most of your expat readers having visited this road? And judging by his prejudice and narrow-mindedness, I tend to believe that he has never left his hometown.

Ibrahim Al-Yahya • Buraydah, published 25 November 2004

Zubaidah - 2

As someone who lives in Unayzah, I agree with Mohammad Al-Rasheed that there is nothing like Zubaidah Well in these parts as claimed in the article “Unayzah — Paris of Najd” (Nov. 18). However, I must point out that Rasheed, while correcting others, was totally wrong when he wrote that Unayzah and the other cities never had visitors because the people killed all who ventured there. That was grossly unfair.

Visitors have been coming to Unayzah and leaving it in as good health as when they came as proven by the flattering accounts they have given of the place. It was a Western visitor, a French traveler, who described it as the “Paris of Najd,”, the name it is known by to many people. An Englishman, Capt. Shakespear, who visited it in the 1330s AH gave an account of the luxurious life style of Unayzah’s businessmen and called it a great city. There are many other written accounts of the city given by unbiased visitors that attest to the city’s great past.

I wish Rasheed should read books about Saudi cities and their history written by Western authors before passing sweeping judgments about those cities.

Abdulaziz A. Al-Khamees •Unayzah, published 25 November 2004

A Legal Column

As a longtime reader of Arab News, I would like to make a suggestion which I feel would appeal to a large section of your readers: There should be a weekly column dedicated to legal issues, dealing in detail with all matters of interest to citizens and expatriates. The scope of possible subjects is very wide. It could provide accurate information on laws and regulations regarding visas — the types of visas issued; the procedures for obtaining and processing family, dependent, visiting and other types of visas; the documentation required for them and so on with every detail. Other subjects might be legal aspects of business promotion, the formalities of starting a business, investment, partnership etc. This way Arab News would play a leading role in promoting the Kingdom on a large scale as a country with high business potential. As we all understand from media reports, there is much capital waiting to be invested in the Kingdom by both citizens and foreigners. Such articles will give these potential investors the solid information they need to decide whether they should put their money into the Saudi economy.

Baquar Ali Khan • Dammam, published 25 November 2004

US Churches

This refers to the story “US Churches Take Stand Against Israeli Occupation” (Nov. 20) which reported that several American churches, spearheaded by the Presbyterian Church, have decided to take a stand against the Israeli occupation of Palestine by proposing a divestment of holdings by multinational corporations doing business with Israel. Hurray for the Presbyterian Church!

I am not a Presbyterian but I am a person who recognizes that companies are benefiting from the fighting and wars going in other countries. I am a business major and know that money talks. There is no other way to make these companies listen. Of course, there will be backlash. Nothing has ever been done in the history of mankind that was worth the while without backlash. People are making money and they don’t want to stop. They are going to raise all kinds of arguments. But if it’s any encouragement, there are many of us who support organizations that expose companies supporting these wars. Maybe you should post a list of these companies on the Internet to add more pressure. I will surely sell stock in a company if I know that this is where the money is coming from. We, as citizens of the world, need to take responsibility for how our money comes into our pockets. Otherwise we are just as guilty of the crimes. We cannot “wash our hands” of the blood that is being shed for our profit.

Patty Lorenzo • United States, published 25 November 2004

US Churches - 2

It was great to read of the decision by the Presbyterian Church to translate its convictions into action. Those who took the initiative to take so serious a decision, which surely will have serious repercussions, deserve our gratitude. We know from everyday experience that it is difficult for today’s “men of religion” to go against the wishes of “men of money and power.” The Presbyterian Church is taking on mighty forces when it chooses to stand for justice and fairness, which, in this case happens to be the side of Palestinians.

This is not to say that the Palestinian actions in the five-decade long conflict have always been blame-free. They have shed innocent bloodshed. They have killed Israeli women and children. This has been used by men and women with mighty weapons, mighty words and mighty media to paint them as monsters who deserve no justice. What they want the world to forget is that it was not violence by Palestinians that started the Middle East’s problem — but violence against them. They are not occupying Israel; Israel is occupying Palestine. Israel is killing Palestinians every day — one or two, four or five, 10 or 15 — every day. They are doing it from the safety of their tank turrets, F-16 cockpits or artillery barricades. Those they kill — men, women or children — are branded “terrorists.” The man who orders it has been anointed in advance as the “man of peace.”

When the Palestinians — who see their brothers and sisters killed, whose homes are demolished and whose olive groves are leveled and who are forced to live in a prison with every one of their freedoms are restricted — react they become terrorists. There is no one in the world who has not seen the injustice of this. But very few have had the courage to say it loud. Thank you, the Presbyterian Church, for saying it loud.

Abdul Rahman • Riyadh, published 25 November 2004

US Churches - 3

There is reason behind the call for divestment. Just as the end of apartheid in South Africa was assisted by the worldwide call for corporate and national divestment in that country, we must stand firm for the moral principles of humanity and retract our support for the genocide of non-Israeli people. Divestment may not end the stalemate in the Palestinian-Israeli war, but it is a necessary step. The importance of the step is demonstrated by the urgent and immediate response to the action.

Ivan Murillo • United States, published 25 November 2004