Egypt’s Al Ahram reports:
The Arab Network for Human Rights Information (ANHRI) on Saturday condemned Saudi Arabia’s decision to grantasylum to Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, Tunisia’s overthrown president, in a statement entitled “Tunisia’s deposed dictator receives hospitality from Saudi Arabia’s dictator”.
The announcement said that Ben Ali should be tried in front of a Tunisian court for the crimes he committed against the Tunisian people during his 23 years in office.
The statement called Ben Ali the ‘Arab Pinochet’, in reference to Chili’s ex-president and added that Saudi Arabia’s decision to take in Ben Ali after he was refused entry to many countries including France — an outspoken supporter of the 74-year-old leader – indicated to what lengths Arab dictators would go to support each other.
The ANHRI warned that Saudi Arabia is becoming a “refuge for dictators” since it had, in the past, received Uganda’s Idi Amin and Pakistan’s Nawaz Sharif.
There will be a time that the Bush clan will ask for entry in Saudi Arabia. I would be pleased, because justice is an important factor of life. The ‘Arab Pinochet’ would not exist without the US activities. Pinochet was an US creation, let’s not forget.
Disunity among the Ummah is very dangerous and it may provide a murderous opportunity for the adversaries to add fuel to the fire.
After all, Ahmedinejad had not been a corrupt, incompetent or an immoral ruler. He has scored more than pass mark (I will give him a Merit Pass) There is no hard evidence to prove that last year’s election was a farce.
Try to go back to the earliest time of Islamic history when Khalifa Uthman ibn Affan (ra) was assassinated and when Ali ibn Abi Talib (ra) assumed the leadership of the nation of Islam.
The cunning Muawiyah and his group wanted the culprits, who planned and executed the assassination to be caught and punished as soon as possible, but Ali (ra) wanted to concentrate on the peace, unity and administration of the Ummah, but his adversaries were stubborn and had a political axe to grind. This led to the weakening and disintegration of the Nation of Islam. Did Islam gain by this sort of rationalistic freedom?
This is exactly what may happen in Iran if the followers of Mousavi pursued their selfishness and greed for political power. They may play into the hands of the enemies of Iran who have been waiting for a pretext and an opportunity to destabilize the nation and in the process help the ambitions of the greatest enemies of Islam
For the sake of saving the millions of innocent people of a Muslim nation, at times we have to forgive and forget the shortcomings of our leaders and rulers rather than trying to change the regime, create massive anarchy ( look at Afghanistan) by getting help from insincere and manipulating Non-Muslim world powers.
Iraq is right in front of our eyes. Tens of thousands of People like me hated Saddam Hussein and went to the extent of morally co-operating with his opponents and dissidents in seeking help to punish and execute Saddam and overthrow his administration (Remember Dr. Ahmed Chalabi and gang). What were the consequences?
But right now the same people feel the foolishness, naivety and immaturity of such political thinking and wish if only Saddam had remained in power and we could have saved the deaths of about 1.2 million Iraqis and about 400,000 people becoming refugees, over 600,000 widows and about 500,000 orphans and the nation going to the dogs. Who was responsible for this tragedy?
Case Two: Afghanistan: Islam was trying hard to destroy group loyalty and tribalism, but the people of Afghan gave importance to their tribes: Pushtu, Hazar, Tajik, Uzbeks, Turkmen, Kyrgyzs etc, and their leaders like Burhanuddin, Ahmed Mashod, Hikmatyar and others could have reconciled for the sake of the unity of the nation and Ummah but ego and greed for political power corrupted them and brought horrendous bloodshed, devastation and sufferings to the millions of innocent people and brought a shame to Islam in the world.