CHAPTER I: Roots of the Current Fundamentalist Wahabi Opposition Movement

Introduction:

1- King Feisal managed to defeat trends of socialism, Nasserism, and nationalism amidst suitable regional and international conditions; as such trends posed a veritable threat to the KSA during the reign of King Saud. The alternative proposed and applied by King Feisal was Salafism coupled with coping with the modern age politically and technologically. Such policies led to the KSA financing, forming, and sponsoring all Wahabi calls, activists, movements, and institutions all over the Islamic world and within international organizations to keep close ties to Muslims in the West countries as well. The KSA sent many students to study abroad in universities of the West to modernize the Saudi society with education and technology to cope with progress in the world. Hence, a new Salafist generation emerged who embraced Wahabism that differed from the one adopted and represented by Wahabi scholars of the Saudi State and that coped with active, revolutionary sort of Salafism adopted by the terrorist MB group in Egypt and its international branches. This new generation used IT and all modern inventions and the language of the modern age to employ them to serve political aims, as we will detail later on.      

2- It was possible to postpone the collusion between the KSA and this 'modern' generation of Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalists; writings of that generation assert that they focus on the political education first of the citizens (1) – thus imitating techniques of the terrorist MB group – to form cadres slowly but steadily called scholars of the 'Islamic' awakening to shape the future for the next generations based on the fundamentalist principles. But external factors hastened the pace and date of such collusion with the KSA: the Gulf War, the Afghanistan War, and the relation of the KSA and the Sunnite fundamentalist regime in Sudan. Other factors include 1) the progress in telecommunications that removed barriers, borders, and distances, resulting in lessening of the Saudi State supervision and surveillance. This formed a type of awareness among Saudi citizens about the culture of human rights and made opposition figures inside the KSA easily contact international human rights activists, 2) accumulation of experience within generation who inherited the opposition vein from the Najd Brothers, Al-Saeed, and Al-Otaybi, learning useful lessons from them, especially that such former opposition movements occurred not very long ago; only decades ago within three generations of Saudis, and 3) the Salafist-secular conflict that used to emerge every now and then within the phases of the struggle of the fundamentalist opposition movements and the KSA.

3- We are not to forget the most important factor; this Wahabi opposition movement was much influenced by the terrorist MB group, established in Egypt by agents of King Abdul-Aziz, and its branches mushroomed like cancerous cells all over the Arab world. King Abdul-Aziz forbade the members of the terrorist MB group to ever enter into the KSA; yet, when the Egyptian President Gamal Abdel-Nasser quelled and oppressed this terrorist group in the 1950s and in the 1960s, many its members fled into the KSA, working there within the fields of education and the Wahabi call. The Saudi generation taught by the terrorist MB group members was influenced by the cunning, deceitful traits of the terrorist MB group members and their ambition to revolt and rule. Yet, the main threat to the Saudi royal family was the fact that this Saudi generation taught by the terrorist MB group members learned one vital notion: authority and power stem from Salafist Wahabi thought and those specializing in it and are NOT derived from the Saudi royal family members. This means that even the Saudi royal family members have to submit to Wahabi sharia laws and scholars, and not the vice-versa, and consequently, Wahabi scholars and preachers are entitled to control fully the external and internal Saudi policies, as in any theocracy. Thus, this Saudi generation resented the fact that the KSA allied itself to the USA and the West in general, as Wahabism contains the notion of re-establishing caliphate and dividing the planet Earth into two camps: camp of war against disbelieving infidels and camp of peace and Islam ruled by Wahabis. Hence, the Saudi opposition at that point aimed at stopping the Saudi royal family members from confiscating and controlling power, authority, and wealth. Of course, this is a nightmare for the Saudi royal family members, but it was the ambitious dream of this Saudi generation which was taught both Wahabi heritage and traditions inside the KSA and natural sciences in the West and its universities and lived there to see what human rights mean. Such generation returned to the KSA to find itself marginalized and excluded from Saudi decision-making circles confiscated and fully controlled by the Al-Saud royal family who appoint only those trust-worthy hypocrites and in-laws. Thus, those ambitious enough to dream of more room of political participation were deprived of it and found in the terrorist MB group members a room for self-expression.

4- We are to remember that King Abdul-Aziz taught Wahabism for the Najd Brothers to manipulate and use them to establish his kingdom, and this in itself made him face the contradiction between re-establishing kingdom of his forefathers within certain territories that he could never go beyond them and Wahabi notions of on-going incessant war all over Arabia and later on all over planet Earth to force human beings to convert into Wahabism under one Wahabi caliphate, a desire upon which the Najd Brothers insisted. Such a dispute led King Abdul-Aziz to enlist the help of GB to exterminate them within Iraqi-Saudi borders, and King Abdul-Aziz had to use his agents in Egypt to spread and propagate Wahabism in it – in the name of Salafism – and to establish the terrorist MB group to replace the Najd Brothers. With the passage of time, the terrorist MB group has posed a veritable danger and threat to the KSA inside its lands. King Feisal spread Wahabism all over the Arab world and the Islamic world and he managed to crush secular and Leftist trends all over the KSA. When Wahabism became the only force inside the KSA, Wahabi opposition movement of Juhayman Al-Otaybi emerged. When Wahabism/Salafism has lingered in the KSA until now and billions of $ have been spent by the KSA to spread and propagate Wahabism (as though the 'true' version of Islam) all over the world even inside Muslim minorities in the West countries, the revolution of telecommunications and constant contact with the West countries led to the emergence of a new Saudi generation impressed and influenced by the international MB terrorist organization; such generation aimed at using Wahabi sharia against the KSA  and its Wahabi scholars of Al-Sheikh family and to stop the Saudi royal family members from confiscating wealth, power, and authority.     

5- This widespread Salafist trend rose high enough inside and outside the KSA to the extent that tens of Wahabi opposition movements emerged and split out of it and even warred and disputed with one another intellectually, religiously, politically, and militarily. This is typical of the MB terrorist group, with its numerous secret and overt organizations and societies that specialize in the Wahabi/Salafist call, political activism, and military actions. Hence, we conclude that Wahabism as an ideology carries inside itself the factors of split and division, as any group of Wahabis would readily confiscate for itself the Wahabi sharia to declare others in power as illegitimate, unfit to rule, and infidels who would never apply Wahabi sharia. The KSA, which spread and propagated Wahabi ideology all over the planet, is the very first victim of Wahabism, and the KSA will remain as its victim as long as it embraces such ideology and prevents its being discussed and refuted, passing it as if it were the 'only true' form of Islam; a scandalous falsehood that is refuted easily and successfully by Quranists.  

6- We are writing this book in 2000 A.D., as the 20^th century ends and a new century comes along with new circumstances and conditions favorable to the learned Saudi generation who is in search of a place under the sun, and it has felt obliged to seek a chance within the opposition movements using and manipulating Wahabism. What are such new favorable circumstances and conditions?  

Factors, circumstances, and conditions that led to the emergence and development of the opposition movement that begot Bin Laden:

1- The Gulf War:

  Statement No. 3 issued by the London-based Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights says that the crisis of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait has revealed the veritable danger within the formation of the Saudi society and State, and all Saudi leaders of reform convened to discuss such a danger. The unknown author of the book titled ''The Earthquake of Al-Saud Family'', who was apparently an unknown leader inside the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, expressed the sentiments of the members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights regarding the First Gulf War; as Saudi media ignored the invasion of Kuwait for several days while the event was covered by the international media. Wahabi Sunnite fundamentalists of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights and other Saudi opposition movements were surprised to see that the KSA government and royal family sought the aid of the USA without military mobilizing of Saudi youths. Sunnite fundamentalists got news of Saudi contracts to buy arms and weapons from the USA, and they felt that the USA is the supreme ruler in the Middle East region, especially in the KSA, and the very first mission of the USA was to preserve and protect the Saudi royal family. Dr. Al-Masaary mentions in his book titled "The Decisive Proofs of the Illegitimacy of the KSA" that his views of the KSA have been influenced by the Gulf War; namely, he has cited among the many proofs of the illegitimacy of the KSA its deliberate weakening of the Saudi military, causing the country to be weak before its enemies, and its reliance on the enemies of Islam (i.e., the Americans) to defend the KSA. Al-Masaary issued a fatwa to prohibit reliance on infidels to defend Muslim countries against other Muslims, asserting that allying oneself to infidels makes one an infidel. Al-Masaary used in his above-mentioned book the report of the international institute of strategic studies in London, published in 1981-1982, to prove that Saudi military expenditure budget was more than 15 other countries combined and more than the military expenditure of 11 Islamic countries; the ratio of Saudi to American military expenditure was four to one. Al-Masaary has accused the Saudi royal family and high officials of corruption, taking bribes, and stealing public money of the KSA. Hence, we conclude then that the Gulf War was a decisive point in the relation between the Wahabi Sunnite fundamentalist trend and the Saudi regime, as collusion and confrontation were bound to occur; and the KSA had to adopt a new policy of fighting Wahabi fundamentalists inside and outside the KSA (2). Hence, the First and Second Gulf Wars helped shape the fundamentalist Wahabi opposition movements, as we will discuss later on in detail, and it is noteworthy that such Gulf War coincided with the sour harvest of the Saudi relations with Afghanistan.   

2- Afghanistan:

  The KSA readily and speedily helped the fundamentalist Wahabism in Afghanistan when it waged war against the communist regime that relied on the USSR. Encouraged by the USA, the KSA helped fundamentalists reach Afghanistan and mobilized them into military camps trained to fight fiercely. Such mission was undertaken by Bin Laden, who was to become later on an important icon of fundamentalist Wahabi opposition movements against the KSA. This indicates that the Saudi experience in Afghanistan greatly influenced the KSA and the fundamentalist Wahabi opposition movements inside it. The victory won by Arab militants and jihadists in Afghanistan gave momentum to all fundamentalist movements in the Islamic world, especially inside the KSA. Such jihadists returned to their countries having gained considerable organizational and military experience as well as acquired dangerous intellectual and religious notions. Arab regimes interfering in Afghanistan paid a heavy price for such meddling; the KSA was no exception. Unfortunately, victory won by such jihadists coincided with deteriorated relations between the KSA and Afghanistan; even Saudi media mentioned that the KSA agreed with Pakistan to stop fundamentalists reaching power in Kabul and how the KSA interfered in the disputes between Afghani factions, as some of these factions with secular vein received Saudi financial aid and hided their differences with the KSA. These factions purportedly trained Saudi expatriates to carry and use arms and weapons. On the other hand, fundamentalist opposition movements inside the KSA was looking forward to a new model, before confronting the Saudi State, that differed from the Saudi one and wished that victory in Afghanistan would reinforce Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalist movements inside the KSA militarily and intellectually (3). Al-Masaary mentions in the eighth chapter of "The Decisive Proofs of the Illegitimacy of the KSA" under the title ''The KSA and the Afghani Game'' that he has resented and criticized the KSA in its appointing itself as guardian of all Muslims and paid millions to win over fundamentalist Afghani factions to its side, though it persecutes fundamentalists inside the Saudi State. Al-Masaary has criticized the fact that some Afghani leaders submitted to the KSA; yet, he felt overjoyed when Saudi youths returned home from Afghanistan filled with new ideas of fighting and resisting the Saudi government and regime and its allies. This change of heart occurred despite millions paid by the KSA to the Afghani government (4).

3- The relation between Sudan and the KSA:

   Al-Jazeera Al-Arabia Magazine published in May 1992 that 40 armed Afghans attacked the Saudi embassy in Kabul, on 12^th of May, 1992, and analysts considered such attack as proof of hatred and tensions between Afghanistan and the KSA. Meantime, the magazine tackled in the same page the Saudi support for John Garang, the leader of rebels in South Sudan who aimed at separating South Sudan from its North ruling Sunnite fundamentalist nationalist front in Khartoum. The magazine asserted that Zaki Badr, the former Egyptian Interior Minister at the time, who worked in the KSA as a consultant in the field of chasing fundamentalists, foes of the KSA, is chasing Sudanese Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalists inside the KSA. As per this issue of the magazine, the KSA undermined the Sudanese regime economically by banning Saudi investments there. The magazine asserted in a separate highlighted analysis that the Sudanese authorities found Saudi equipment, weapons, and arms within South Sudan territories regained by Khartoum. The magazine asserted that Saudi financial aid to Sudan came to a halt suddenly once Jaafar Nimeiry, president of Sudan, announced that he would apply sharia laws in Sudan. The same decision to stop Saudi financial aid to Sudan went on despite the successive Sudanese governments, even under Omar Al-Bashir, and the magazine gave reasons for it; the USA gave orders to the KSA to that effect, while Egyptian authorities urged the KSA to stop Saudi financial aid to Sudan. Another reason was chiefly that the KSA wanted to be the only force to apply sharia based on its Saudi model in the Islamic and Arab world, while rejecting any other models, especially the Sudanese one (5). We personally tend not to believe this final reason at all. We see that the Saudi experience in Sudan repeated the Saudi one in Afghanistan. North Sudan posed as a future threat to the KSA because of its geographic location near Arabia and the shared creed, culture, and tongue. Let us remember that Sudan witnessed the Khartoum conference held after the 1967 War and within it, Abdel-Nasser and King Feisal made peace with each other and formed an alliance. Nasserism was crushed gradually for the sake of Saudi Salafism and Wahabi ideology to make it expand in Egypt and all over the Arab and Islamic world. This had its influence over Sudan and Afghanistan, giving momentum to Sudanese Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalism, especially when Nimeiry announced in September 1982 laws the application of sharia to obey Saudis controlling Sudanese economy. Nimeiry had to submit to the KSA to seek protection while facing his Leftist, socialist, and communist foes in Sudan. The Saudi influence went on after Nimeiry stepped down after a coup and his successor used to work before within a Saudi Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalist organization whose mission was to spread Wahabism all over Africa. Sudanese Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalism reached power finally when Al-Bashir and Al-Turaby made a successful go in 1989 against a democratically elected government. Yet, the Sudanese Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalism was overambitious; it aimed to reach power and rule the KSA and Egypt. Al-Bashir posed a threat to the KSA and Egypt in this way, especially when the Egyptian Zaki Badr was appointed as we said above as a security consultant to the KSA. He was the sworn enemy and expert of Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalism in Egypt when he worked there as the Interior Minister and used his expertise in the KSA. Hence there were tensions in the Sudanese-Saudi relations that influenced the tensions between the Saudi government and the Saudi fundamentalist opposition movements, as the latter accused the former of punishing Sudan for applying Wahabi sharia. It was a chance to the opposition movements to undermine the KSA based on a falsehood.                  

4- The culture of human rights and its organizations:

   Nasser Al-Saeed was perhaps the very first Saudi man to preach the culture of human rights before its roots became rooted all-over the world after his death. The culture of human rights has become part of the human conscience especially in the West countries that control the politics of the world. When the USSR collapsed along with the European regimes relying on it, the culture of human rights was asserted; it became a tool used by the West, especially the USA, against its foes in, for instance, China, Iraq, and Egypt. It is noteworthy that the West countries, especially the USA, overlook violations of human rights within friendly regimes which are allies to the USA. Governments' making political use of the culture of human rights is regarded as an indicator of how the culture of human rights is part and parcel of international influence over world politics. This is accentuated by the UN and the international community that have made the culture of human rights as part of international laws; all countries all over the world had to sign on it even with reserve. This led to less control of centralized authorities over nations and individuals. Likewise, human rights organizations have now the moral and legal right to interfere to save persecuted ones or groups and to monitor especially women's rights, rights of minorities, human rights activists. The KSA as a Salafist traditional Wahabi regime based on monarchy and doctrinal basis seemed to offer a climate that made human rights activists seek to work inside it even if Saudi authorities were reluctant to help and to agree with that. The KSA never liked to allow human rights organizations to meddle in Saudi affairs, and the Wahabi opposition movements inside the KSA overlooked contacting human rights organizations; yet, such organization took the initiative to contact Saudi opposition figures. With the passage of time, Saudi opposition figures came to trust human rights organizations and to readily contact when the revolution of telecommunications and technological advances made contact so easy and made barriers between Saudi citizens and the outside world dissolve. But we are to remember that even the KSA sent students to learn abroad in the universities of the West even before advances in telecommunications were allowed inside the KSA. Hence, Wahabi opposition movements inside the KSA already had the chance of self-expression and alter on of holding close ties to the human rights organizations, whose role was important in influencing both the Saudi State and the Saudi opposition movements.      

 5- The Salafist-Secular conflict within the Saudi cultural elite:

    Salafist policies of King Feisal resulted in controlling and dwarfing of secular influence and trends inside the Saudi society and government. When Salafist trends inside the KSA, especially the terrorist MB group members, controlled education inside the Saudi State, Wahabi Salafist ideology and trends dominated all social spheres, strata, and classes; especially the influential powerful ones. This caused palpable changes in daily life and a tangible reality in Saudi life and its phenomena in schools, houses, social spheres, etc. aided by a Salafist heritage and traditions. Wahabi symbols and scholars regained their power and influence, whereas secular, liberal, socialist, nationalist, and Leftist trends were crushed; yet, some of the secular figures infiltrated into the Saudi government to make up for the loss of the interest of the masses and citizens, making money by serving the Saudi authorities and giving up their political ambitions and the willingness to change the Saudi society for the better. Thus, Salafist trends dominated almost all aspects in the Saudi society, whereas secular figures had to be content with governmental posts. This atmosphere of containing secular persons was encouraged by the readiness of the Saudi government under King Fahd to seek the aid of secular figures after the catastrophe of invasion of the Sacred Kaaba Mosque in 1979; the Saudi authorities doubted Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalists and never allowed them to assume high positions inside the government. Simultaneously, Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalists never sought to assume political or governmental positions and posts to vie with secular figures, as per the author of the book titled ''The Earthquake of Al-Saud Family'', who was apparently one of the pillars of Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalist opposition movements, as he asserts the contradiction between Salafist dominance in the Saudi society and the absence of Saudi Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalist opposition figures on the levels of media and governmental posts. Such state of affairs led to disputes and resentment later on the level of fundamentalist grassroots and to the desire to revolt which was stirred by the Gulf War (6). Naturally, the Salafist secular conflict accompanied the disputes between the opposition movements and the Saudi government. The secular figures seized the chance to ally thems3lves to the Saudi state to occupy more high positions inside the KSA instead of the Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalists. This was exemplified when the London-based Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights resented the fact that a Salafist sheikh who was the Saudi ambassador in London was replaced by a secular ambassador (7). Of course, Salafist trends consider secular ones as representatives of the West 'infidels'. It is noteworthy that Al-Masaary, who is a political asylee in London and lives in a secular society, mentions in his above-mentioned seminal book that one of the proofs of the illegitimacy of the Saudi State, in his opinion, is allying itself to the secular West countries, in the fifth chapter of his book (8).

The start of the fundamentalist Wahabi opposition movements:

Safar Al-Hawali, Salman Al-Ouda, and Abdul-Mohsen Al-Obeikan:

Before the Gulf War:

1- Before the Gulf War, the KSA witnessed only two important events that drew the attention of the Saudi society within the secular-Salafist conflict. 1) The first event that took the KSA by surprise was that Sheikh Saad Al-Ghamdy opposed modernity in one of his audiotaped sermons that spread all over the Saudi society; he mentions in that tape that modernity is a symbol of secularism, an enemy of Salafism. The widespread of this tape was considered at the time as an evidence of the deep infiltration of Salafism into the Saudi society. 2) The second event that shook the Saudi society to the core was the accusation leveled by one of the royal princes against Sheikh Dr. Aaidh Al-Qarni of being involved in a homosexual scandal, but the Saudi courts acquitted him later on, leading his fame and popularity to rise, an indicator that the Saudi society sympathized with Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalist scholars. 

2- Such sympathies were the fruit of education sector inside the KSA dominated by the terrorist MB group members and their likes; leaders and main figures of Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalism took great care not to collide with the Saudi State, as it grew wary of them after the terrorist operation of invasion of the Sacred Kaaba Mosque. The KSA awe, stature, and power were soaring high before the Gulf War, and its legitimacy has not been yet put to question at that point, as per the unknown author of the book titled ''The Earthquake of Al-Saud Family''. When the Gulf War broke out, many core changes occurred in the relation between the KSA and the Wahabi opposition movements. 

Within the First Gulf War (Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait):

1- The Gulf War came as a shock for both the KSA and the Saudi fundamentalist opposition movements. The KSA sought readily and speedily the help of the USA and made Saudi media justify this. More justification was made by making high-rank Wahabi scholars issue a fatwa based on the Salafist notion/motto of ''necessities allow prohibitions''. The fundamentalist Wahabi opposition movements rejected such fatwa as baseless and contradictory with sharia evidence to support it. They insisted that such fatwa is more dangerous than the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and the existence of American forces inside Arabia; this fatwa was sign of the imminent collapse of the formal religious institutions on which the KSA leaned to support its legitimacy and raison d'être. Hence, the leaders of Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalist opposition figures decided to replace the Saudi religious institutions in declaring Salafist Wahabi stances and views.        

2- Sheikh Safar Al-Hawali began to expose the American project in Arabia without blaming the Saudi formal religious institutions and their fatwas; he focused on refutation of the Saudi pretext of enlisting the help of the USA within two lectures in Jeddah and Riyadh in September 1990. Audiotapes of both lectures spread all over the Saudi society, to the embarrassment of the Saudi authorities and formal Wahabi scholars subservient to the KSA. Simultaneously, Sheikh Salman Al-Ouda delivered a lecture on reasons of collapse of countries, and its audiotape spread within the Saudi society, bearing fears and wishes of the present and the future.

3- Simultaneous with intellectual endeavors of both Al-Hawali and Al-Ouda, among other sheikhs, there were practical efforts that seemed random and superficial: such as the call for supporting Kuwaiti refugees, that never happened inside the KSA, the calls to warn against the aftermath of wars and its influence on societies. Such scattered efforts unified into a popular collective work, led by popular sheikhs like Abdul-Mohsen Al-Obeikan and Abdullah Ibn Jibreen, among others who called for a general assembly open for all inside a mosque in Riyadh, when in the first time in the history of the KSA the gathered men called for organized collective popular work. The gathered men had deputized Al-Obeikan to set the plan and a date for a second assembly similar to the first one.        

4- Prince Salman, ruler of Riyadh, tried to urge Al-Obeikan to cancel the next assembly, but Al-Obeikan adamantly refused. Ibn Baz interfered and convinced Al-Obeikan to hold the assembly inside the Saudi Fatwa House instead of the mosque in Riyadh and to confine attendees to a limited number of notable figures, and Prince Salman agreed to attend the assembly himself.    

5- Before the assembly took place, the famous Nov. 1990 demonstration of women occurred in Riyadh, as these women demanded their right to own and drive cars and vehicles. Needless to say, fundamentalists saw the events as a conspiracy made by secular persons and the Saudi State to distract fundamentalists and prevent them from holding their assembly. Yet, popular discontent and anger in the Saudi street made them hasten to hold the assembly within conditions stipulated by Prince Salman, who attended it and saw that less than 100 attendees gathered as he wished. Among the attendees was the unknown author of the book titled ''The Earthquake of Al-Saud Family''. 10000 persons gathered outside the Saudi Fatwa House, where the assembly was held, to support Al-Obeikan, who convinced the gathered men to go home. Prince Salman aborted demands of Al-Obeikan by reiterating the words of Ibn Baz who said that each work has a master, meaning Prince Salman who ruled Riyadh at the time and must manage everything.

6- Thus, the assembly failed, but it was the very first attempt to link fundamentalist students of sharia who oppose the KSA regime with the Salafist cultural elite and Salafist universities' teachers, who formed some sort of Wahabi technocrats, thus combining the high stature of technocrats and the ability to plan by the youths/students supported by the popular discontent. 

After the Second Gulf War (liberation of Kuwait and bombardment of Iraq):

1- We are to remember that when the Second Gulf War was about to break out, Saudi Sunnite Wahabi opposition fundamentalists took care to stop their activities so as not to allow anyone to accuse them of weakening  the internal front. This lasted until the war ended. This launched a new phase of initiatives that began with the speeches and lectured delivered by opposition sheikhs and scholars.  

2- Coalition against Iraq at the time won victory and Saudi media invested the matter for the sake of the KSA to support the Saudi decision to enlist the help of the USA. Thus, Saudi opposition fundamentalists felt that the Saudi media distort their image as if they were troublemakers to be quelled soon enough.

3- Meanwhile, opposition fundamentalists seized the chance of the end of the Gulf War to take the initiative to submit a letter of demands: a pivotal point in the history of Wahabi fundamentalist opposition movements that we will tackle below.

Letter of demands: the very first positive step taken by the fundamentalist opposition movements (conditions and preparations, criticism and analysis, and influence):

1- Since King Abdul-Aziz crushed the opposition of the Najd Brothers, the motto of ''sheikhs know best'' was the order of daily life in the KSA; it means that the rulers and/or scholars were experts and know-all persons and no one dares to question them, unless within written messages sent secretly and discreetly via Ibn Baz, or one would tell Ibn Baz to remove vice himself. The Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalists wanted eagerly to bypass this tradition and send their letter of demands directly to the Saudi ruling authorities in public.   

2- At first, Sheikh Abdulla Al-Tuweijri made the first attempt; he wrote the letter of demands signed by about 200 judges, landowners, scholars, and university teachers to send it to the royal family. Among those signed was the unknown author of the book titled ''The Earthquake of Al-Saud Family''. Sadly, this letter of demands was not ever published or made known to the nation, and it was overlooked by the royal family which grew wary of those who signed it and ordered close watch over them.

3- Once the very first attempt failed, fundamentalists met to discuss the best way to send a letter of demand urging comprehensive reforms discussed in public by all Saudis. They felt the urge to write a short letter that includes everything in one page in a simple language understood by everyone and using sharia terminology. The letter must address the Saudi nation as well as rulers. The letter must have room for signatures of high-rank scholars. The one who phrased the letter of demands was the unknown author of the book titled ''The Earthquake of Al-Saud Family'', and the letter was supposed to be distributed among all Saudis at the same time it reached royal family members. This was the very first challenge to the idea of secretly and discreetly offering complaints. Yet, secrecy in writing and distributing the letter during the lunar Hijri month of Ramadan was needed so as not to abort the project. A timelines was proposed and maintained to collect signatures. The letter of demands was submitted to King Fahd in the lunar Hijri month of Shawwal 1411 A.H.   

4- Many Riyadh scholars signed the letter, including Al-Obeikan, Al-Tuweirji, and In Jibreen, and one of them carried the letter to make other scholars sign it in Mecca, Yathreb, the eastern region, Al-Ahsa, and the south region, and then returned to Riyadh   

5- 400 signatures were collected and photocopies and then the committee of the letter of demands received endorsement of Ibn Baz, who wrote in a page and a half his support for the demands and advised rulers to take the letter into recommendation and to refer it to high-rank scholars to study the demands and see to their achievement. Ibn Otheimein cautiously wrote another supportive endorsement letter.  

6- The London-based Al-Jazeera Al-Arabia Magazine published an edited version of the letter of demands before it reached King Fahd, signed by 40 cultural elite members. This urged the committee of the letter of demands to hasten their pace and to submit the letter to King Fahd in the lunar Hijri month of Shawwal, with an original copy sent to him plus a copy to Ibn Baz, and copies to other sheikhs and princes. All copies carried 400 signatures, with a note that briefed the contents of the letter of demands.  

7- Sheikhs including Al-Obeikan, Ibn Jibreen, and Al-Tuweijri submitted the letter to the royal divan in Jeddah and received a receipt of it, and other copies were sent to other princes and notables, in the name of the Shawwal Document. 

8- The second step undertaken by the unknown author of the book titled ''The Earthquake of Al-Saud Family'' was to distribute the letter of demand inside and outside the KSA within two weeks once King Fahd and princes and other notables and scholars received it.

9- The unknown author of the book titled ''The Earthquake of Al-Saud Family'' says in this book that King Fahd and the princes were astounded and shocked not only by the content of the letter of demands but also by the huge number of signatures collected from all over the KSA regions without Saudi central intelligence and Saudi authorities knowing anything about it and even about Ibn Baz endorsing the letter. They were shocked further to know that the letter spread all over the KSA by volunteers who distributed in in shops, mosques, hoses, etc. and no security guards managed to stop that effort, until the letter of demands reached outside the KSA to international media. The letter of demands was much talked of by the BBC in London and even a Chinese communist newspaper in Peking commented that this letter of demands smashed the Marxian motto or statement of ''religion is the opium of the masses'', as in the Saudi letter of demands, people made religion as a motivator to mobile the masses to demand justice and reform on all levels by religious scholars who became pioneers of a cultural, intellectual revolt and renaissance. The Saudi authorities tried hard to make some signatories revoke their stances and apologize. Three men apologized secretly out of fear of the angry masses. Saudi citizens talked about the letter of demands for a long time thrilled by it.         

10- The Saudi government referred the letter to high-rank scholars subservient to the Saudi authorities who issued a statement to condemn the public distribution of the letter of demands, as advice must be done in secret and discreetly to rulers as per traditions. Yet, fundamentalists of the opposition movements were happy and content as this statement was a kind of acknowledgment of their existence and of the influence of their Wahabi fundamentalist opposition full-fledged movement by addressing the citizens and raise their political awareness by this unprecedented experience.  Here, we copy the letter of demands below and then we comment upon it.

   (… Peace of God be upon ruler of the Land and custodian of the Sacred Mosque … The Saudi state is distinguished by its declaration of applying the Islamic sharia, and its scholars give pieces of advice to rulers as ordained by God … in such critical times, everyone realizes the need for change and reform the current conditions that brought fearful ordeals and bad times. Hence, we demand our rulers to reform certain aspects as per the list below:

• Establishing a Shura Council to discuss external and internal affairs with members of experts in all fields with high moral and ethical standards, who will be independent and will not be influenced by any other body while undertaking their missions.
• Submission and phrasing of all regulations, laws, and systems related to economy, politics, administration, etc. as per Islamic sharia laws and annulling all laws that contradict sharia, and this effort must be done within a committee of sharia scholars with deep knowledge and all powers.
• Upright nature, devotion, and high moralistic level as well as expertise must be required from all specialists in all fields in governmental high officials inside and outside the KSA; when proved otherwise, such persons must be fired because of jeopardizing Saudi interests and reputation.
• Justice and equality must be applied to all Saudi citizens in rights and duties without nepotism, and manipulation of power and corruption must be punished as they are violations of rights that might lead to destruction of societies as we know from Sunna and hadiths.
• Seriousness in supervision of responsible officials and holding them accountable for all their actions, while firing corrupt ones who misuse their posts or take bribes or failed to perform their missions.
• Applying justice within all social categories and classes, especially by reducing taxes and fees and to lessen State expenditure and resources sapped because of affluence and extravagance, as State expenditure must be prioritized to cover the basic needs first. Moreover, monopoly must be removed as well as illegal appropriation of lands. Banks must be purified from usury to apply Islamic sharia banking.
• The KSA needs to establish a strong army equipped with state-of-the-art developed weapons to defend the country without resorting to foreigners.
• Saudi media must be rebuilt as per new policies to serve Islam and the Saudi citizens to raise their culture, awareness, and moralistic aspect, while removing anything that contradicts such regulations and aims as per sharia laws.
• External policies of the KSA must reflect interests of the Saudi citizens in accordance with sharia laws and Saudi embassies must reflect this trend.
• Development of all Islamic / religious institutions inside the KSA to make it independent and perform their missions to the fullest.
• Unification of all courts and judicial system bodies to make justice for all within independent bodies to execute court rulings.
• Rights of Saudi citizens and society must be guaranteed while removing all obstacles preventing such guarantees so as to ensure and preserve human dignity in accordance to sharia laws. …).

We analyze below the letter and we assess its influence at the time.

1- The letter of demands did not specify how the Shura Council members will be chosen or elected and who will appoint them: the king or the fundamentalists who thought of themselves as guardians of the nations. The latter choice was their aim as will be shown later on.

2- To use sharia laws as a measure stick to all other regulations and laws entails that the traditional Salafist scholars will be in a dilemma; they must use innovative, creative thinking and NOT traditions centuries-old views of ancient scholars to deal with complicated affairs of economy and politics to aim for the general good of the Saudi society. This did not happen so far during the reign of all Saudi kings. The only innovative, creative thinking was done by the opposition figure Nasser Al-Saeed who was a peaceful moderate opposition leader killed by the KSA and no Wahabi scholars would apply his ideas because he was not a Wahabi man.   

3- How the people who signed the letter of demands expected corrupt royal family members to punish corrupt officials who received bribery?! They kept secret of the matter of distributing of the letter of demands among Saudi citizens out of fear of being punished or imprisoned! How they would expect rulers to fire their relatives and in-laws?! Such a demand might entail submitting the Saudi government to opposition fundamentalists; this was impossible in the Salafist political thought. No one at this point in the 1990s could suddenly imitate the West secular ways of separating executive, legislative, and judicial authorities within freedom of thought and political action and man-made laws; as fundamentalists considered western laws as disbelief in Islam and their sharia was ancient scholars' views and books unfit for the 20^th century.    

4- The same last point applies to the demand to make all citizens equal; this was unrealistic as no one can force royal family members to apply such equality to make them on equal footing with peasants and employees. The matter entails realistic mechanism that would never be within the royal family members. This shows that opposition fundamentalists raised unrealistic mottoes to reach power and authority by sheer deceit. 

5- The same objection applies to the other demands (9) because changing radically the State mechanisms entails either to convince the king or to force him to introduce such changes by sheer power that exceeds his. 

6- In fact, King Fahd declared his being convinced and issued three royal decrees in March 1992 tacking writing a constitution, establishing the Shura Council, and regions' special laws. It was a modest start of constitutional and political reform of a ruler who had full power to legislate and execute alone without reference to the Saudi citizens.  

The letter of demands influenced King Fahd in his initiative of political reform:

1- In 1952 A.D. (1343 A.H.), King Abdul-Aziz established a Shura (i.e., consultation) Council with branches in Mecca, Yathreb, Jeddah, Ta'if, and other cities, but it dwindled gradually until it was abolished when the Saudi cabinet was formed in 1952 as well, until the three royal decrees issued by King Fahd in 1992.

2- King Fahd reacted to the letter of demands by establishing a new system for the Shura council that aimed at widening the base of decision making and giving more powers to supervisory sub-councils to monitor revenues and expenditures of the State and how its money is used and to submit annual report to the cabinet. The Shura council would introduce new system (the royal decree avoided the usage of words like 'law' and 'legislation') and would express views on all State policies, annual reports, development plans, concessions, international agreements, laws, etc. The Shura Council will include 60 experts and specialists chosen personally by the king, and each member will be over 30 years of age and will not combine his membership with any governmental posts. The Shura Council would be held for four years that will be renewable.      

3- The regional systems would be giving more powers to governors and rulers of regions to include citizens of the region to participate as members of local councils to discuss issues related to their cities, within 40 articles of law.

4- We give here examples of articles of the very first Saudi constitution formed under the auspices of King Fahd: Article No. 1 asserts that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a sovereign Arab and Islamic State whose constitution is the Quran and Sunna and its language is Arabic and its capital is Riyadh. Article No. 6 asserts that the citizens will swear fealty to kings based on the Quran and Sunna to obey him for better or worse, in prosperity and adversity. Article No. 8 asserts that the KSA rule is based on justice, Shura, and quality based on Islamic sharia laws. Article No. 26 asserts that the KSA protects human rights as per Islamic sharia laws. Articles of Part V tackle duties and rights of citizens in education, healthcare, employment, social solidarity, etc. Part VI tackles authorities of the KSA in 28 articles, as the king is the sole reference in all legislative, executive, and judiciary authorities and that the judicial authority is independent and applies Islamic sharia laws (10). Of course, this reform tried to cope with Salafist demands as would suit the dominant culture in Arabia. Yet, the Shura council remained a gathering of the affluent retinue who would not disobey the king; just as retinue of Moses' Pharaoh mentioned in the Quran, and its members had nothing to do with citizens. But it was a good first step in reform in the 1990s. 

5- The fundamentalist opposition movement should have made use of the King Fahd reforms to cooperate with the Saudi state to base such reforms as the base of other future reforms to turn decisions into realities. Yet, this did not happen; facing reality and daily life entailed innovative, creative thinking in religious notions to cope with modern age. Such thinking was impossible by Salafists / Wahabis who are tied to bottomless and shoreless ocean of hadiths, fatwas, traditions, ancient teachings and views, etc. especially of Ibn Abdul-Wahab and Ibn Taymiyya. Reforms would entail radical changes in the popular culture and mentality to make people accept reforms. The mentality of the masses in the KSA has been imbibed with Salafist and Wahabi ideology; the ordinary citizen would consider any innovative, creative thinking in religious notions as apostasy. The fundamentalist opposition movement opted for the easier and less successful choice: raising mottoes and banners to declare others /rulers as 'less' Wahabi or faithful in order to make political gains. Thus, the fundamentalist opposition movements went on from the letter of demands to the memo of advice to the emergence of the Committee of defending Legitimate Rights and its disputes with the KSA.        

The Wahabi fundamentalist opposition movements and issuing the memo of advice:

Before issuing the memo of advice:

Intellectual attack on the Saudi state by ''the grand tank'' in Riyadh:

1- Once King Fahd issued his royal decrees as a response to the letter of demands, the fundamentalist opposition movement ignored the royal decrees and developed their style and methodology of opposition in a way to attract the masses to convince them that the fundamentalist opposition movement figures would be an alternative to the royal family ruling the KSA. The unknown author of the book titled ''The Earthquake of the Al-Saud Family'' admits that the letter of demands was an important factor of the change strategy; the fundamentalist opposition movements began to care, as a priority, for conveying their message of reform to the masses by all means and to crush the barrier between the fundamentalist opposition movements and the Saudi people via using audiotapes to spread ideas. The first of these audiotapes was nicknamed ''the grand tank'' in Riyadh. 

2- This audiotape contains questions about if the KSA applies sharia indeed or not, and it contains messages to the ruling regime, scholars, the army, policemen, etc., and such messages have been phrased in a way to embarrass the KSA and its men. Copies of the audiotape spread fast and secretly all over the KSA and shook every Saudi region. Real religious scholars are no longer the ones appointed by the KSA but they are deemed as such by their deeds, words, and knowledge. The willingness and ability to change vice are no longer confined to rulers, but to all citizens.  

3- When the first audiotape spread and achieved success, it was followed by a second one talking about a comparison between what the KSA s and how it should be as a theocracy, in terms of media, the military, politics, economy, judicial system, etc. The unknown author of the book titled ''The Earthquake of the Al-Saud Family'' asserts that this tape raised the awareness of citizens concerning the difference between raised mottoes and banners and practical application of Islamic sharia laws.

4- After the second and last audiotape, a ''university committee for reform and advice'' was formed, and within one year, it submitted its memo of advice.

Memo of advice:

1- The fundamentalist opposition movements created a suitable climate at the time that would accept any surprise, and such movements made good use of surprises to serve their interests, as we conclude from our reading of the events leading to the memo of advice.   

2- In the lunar Hijri month of Rajab 1412 A.H., a group of youths sent a letter to Ibn Baz urging him not to support Madrid conference of peace, deemed by them as a betrayal toward Islam. As copies of the letter spread, Ibn Baz had to postpone giving his opinion about the conference, and the Saudi Ministry of Waqfs (i.e., religious endowments) that controlled mosques, ordered preachers not to tackle Madrid conference. One preacher did not abide by this order and talked about it 'neutrally' in the sermon in the mosque of the hostel of Saud University teachers. Discussions following the sermon led to attacking the conference.     

3- Riyadh authorities sent for this preacher and reproached him for talking about this topic in his sermon. This preacher in his next sermon attacked the Saudi police that spied on citizens and people admired his sermon. The preacher got fired and was replaced by a new one. People attending Friday congregational prayers at this mosque got angry and channeled their ire toward Saud University teachers and formed a committee to contact the Riyadh authorities. As usual, audiotapes spread talking about this subject. Prince Salman, ruler of Riyadh, refused to meet the formed committee, and so did King Fahd, and the committee had nothing else but to meet routinely once a month with Ibn Baz       

4- After meeting with Ibn Baz, the committee members widened the scope of their mission; they demanded that the monthly meeting with Ibn Baz would be turned into discussions of Saudi affairs. Ibn Baz asked the committee to write to him a memorandum about all issue to be discussed. A memo was written, revised, and phrased by the unknown author of the book titled ''The Earthquake of Al-Saud Family'' as well as sheikhs Safar Al-Hawali, Ibn Jibreen, and Al-Ouda. This was the memo of advice, submitted to Ibn Baz via a delegation of scholars and university teachers. Three weeks later, a Paris-based newspaper published the memo of advice, causing the high-rank Saudi scholars to attack the memo of advice and to accuse its authors of slander and bad intentions toward the KSA. The memo of advice was photocopied and spread all over the KSA after such propaganda, and additional letters of Ibn Baz and King Fahd were enclosed with it.   

5- The memo of advice included ten parts that tackle Salafist views on the role of scholars in daily life and public life, secular Saudi laws that contradict Wahabi sharia, the urge to reform the judicial system and to make it independent from the Ministry of Interior, human rights violated in the KSA, role of scholars to monitor human rights, economic affairs of the Saudi state and how public money is spent and invested in banks of usury, social injustices and racial discrimination, the conditions of the Saudi military and strategies of reliance on 'infidels' in the West, the spread of nepotism and corruption, red tape and bureaucracy problems, low status of the Saudi media performance and its usage as a tool to spread lewdness and moral degeneration, and finally the KSA external policies that aid enemies of Islam and fight Wahabi preachers.    

6- Authors of the memo of advice claimed that they defined problems and proposed solutions to corruption spread in all sectors of life in the KSA. In fact, the memo contained nothing but Wahabi preaching and it offered no realistic solutions to any problems; it never contained any numbers and statistics or documents and plans related to any social or economic problem. This distribution of the memo all over Arabia was seen as a reply to the attack of scholars on it and on its authors, and the memo had been signed by several opposition scholars like Ibn Jibreen and Al-Masaary.     

7- The unknown author of the book titled ''The Earthquake of Al-Saud Family'' ignored the reform project proposed by King Fahd in March 1992, as he claimed that the items of the letter of demands were never applied and that the royal family ignored the memo of advice. This was taken as an indication of the falsehood that the Saudi rulers apply sharia and stick to it: (…If the Saudi regime was truthful, it would have used sharia to apply reform offered by the memo of advice and the letter of demands …) (11). This means that the Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalist opposition movement of this committee considered itself as representative of sharia and its views express it. It considered that those who oppose such committee had opposed Islam! This committee considered that it has summarized Wahabi sharia in the memo of advice, as if such a paper written within few days contained the magical solution of all social, political, and economic ailments inside the KSA. 

The establishment of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights and the stance of the Saudi government toward it:

1- As the KSA regime ignored the memo of advice even when it spread all over the country, the Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalist opposition movement of this committee began to monitor (as if using Hisbah notion) all deeds and words of rulers and the government to see if reforms would be applied or not. This means that the committee made itself a body above the nation, citizens, and the rulers. Soon enough, this small committee expanded and had new members, and it renamed itself the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights. This committee allowed no one to criticize and monitor its activities; as if the committee became a minute theocracy of Wahabi scholars raising a false banner or motto of ''helping the wronged ones who suffer injustices''. The following quotes are from the book titled ''The Earthquake of the Al-Saud Family''. (… People can differentiate between what pertains to sharia and what does not in the KSA … We do not need endorsement by rulers to apply sharia laws in Arabia … It is a popular demand to remove all sorts of injustice done to Saudi citizens, and we can cooperate together to achieve this end … All countries around the globe embrace human rights, and even the USA made 1993 A.D. as the year of human rights … and the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights carry the same banner to embarrass the Saudi regime and to excel and outdo the West … As the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights has rooted itself to sharia laws as well as human rights …). We conclude then that the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights aimed to use banners and mottoes to deceive both the West countries and the Saudis citizens; its real motive was to practice Hisbah (inquisition) with both ruled and rulers in the KSA.    

2- Once members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights declared its launch as it emerged as a full-fledged opposition movement, one sheikh of its members was insulted and arrested. Other members held many meetings indoors inside their houses to phrase the founding document of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights. Many scholars and sheikhs signed this document including Abdullah Al-Masaary, Al-Tuweijri, and Ibn Jibreen, and choose the name of the committee. 

3- The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights issued Statement No. 1 to declare its emergence on 3^rd of May 1993. This statement was distributed among all news agencies, and it contained phones numbers of founding members. The BBC phones Abdullah Al-Masaary, the secretary of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, and knowing no English, he passed the phone to his son, Dr. Muhammad Abdullah Al-Masaary, who studied nuclear physics and speaks perfect, flawless English. In the next day, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights chose Dr. Al-Masaary as its spokesman with international media (12). Thus, Dr. Al-Masaary began to rise into fame and became the no. 1 man in the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, the author of most of its publications and statements, and the author of several books vehemently attacking Al-Saud family. 

4- Prince Salman sent for 6 members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights to come to him in Riyadh, and they signed before him a paper testifying that they founded the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights. The high-rank scholars subservient to the KSA issued a statement on 13^th of May, 1993, to condemn the establishment of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, as religious courts do their mission properly all over the Saudi cities. The second reason was that no one was to found any entity without prior written permission of the king, and scholars unanimously asserted that the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights members must be punished.  

5- Of course, the statement of these scholars was a warning to the quelling and oppression of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights members, who got fired out of their posts and those among them who owned law firms and lawyers' offices or any other business lost their property. Two days later, Sheikh Abdullah Al-Masaary and his son, Dr. M. Al-Masaary, received two men from the American embassy in the KSA. Al-Masaary, the son, met with several journalists of the international media, and the Saudi authorities advised him to stop, but he did not. Hence, he got arrested on 15^th of May, 1993. 30 university teachers formed a delegation to intercede on his behalf to be set free; they met Prince Salman along with a delegation from Al-Qassim scholars, and then met with Ibn Baz. Meanwhile, Sheikh Ibn Jibreen declared his quitting the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights on 25^th of May, 1993, and the Saudi authorities confiscated the property of Al-Ouda and Safar Al-Hawali in Jeddah.   

6- The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights issued its Statement No. 2 on 25^th of May, 1993, to assert that its members are free thinkers who care for application of sharia and speak in its name using evidence and proofs from it to support their views. They asserted that even if they were wrong in their views, nobody had the right to punish them; sharia views must be refuted with other counter-views. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights asserted that it defends people suffering injustices, and that no country is totally free from a certain level of injustice. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights asserted that it is not a judicial body or a political party and sought no political ends; it sought only to apply sharia and human rights within a frame of Islam, not based on the Western model. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights members asserted that they care for the unity of aims and not to cause any trouble or revolts in the Saudi society; they work to deliver pieces of advice only in a peaceful manner under the Sunnite doctrine (i.e., Wahabism), and the Saudi authorities should stop arresting the members.  

7- When the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights changed its tone into peaceful protest and advice, its supporters financed and helped it secretly as some arrested members were not released and their case was followed within the international media. This coincided with a human-rights conference held in Vienna in June 1993. Liberty organization adopted the case of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights in its struggle against the KSA, but it had no sufficient information about human rights inside the KSA. That was why Al-Masaary and other members, including the unknown author of the book titled ''The Earthquake of Al-Saud Family'' wrote a report on restrictions on freedom of expression and holding of meetings and the monopoly of power, wealth, and authority by the Saudi royal family members. The report was audiotaped by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights. This was the basis of another report by international bodies about freedom of expression and other civil liberties inside the KSA.    

8- An arrest wave followed, and among the incarcerated ones were Al-Masaary, Saad Al-Faqeeh, Ahmed Al-Tuweijri as well as the unknown author of the book titled ''The Earthquake of Al-Saud Family''. Hyman rights organizations, especially Liberty, tackled the topic of such arrest wave. When policemen interrogated them, they confessed to have written and audiotaped several lectures aiming for the general good and peaceful call to apply sharia. All arrested men were released in September 1993. Months later, Dr. Al-Masaary fled to London in 1994, thus the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights began is new phase of opposition from abroad. 

9- Of course, the Saudi authorities did not confine the struggle against the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights and other fundamentalists by security measures and arrests; King Fahd reinforced the powers given to the Shura Council and gave more powers to high-rank scholars subservient to the KSA within a panel headed by Ibn Baz. King Fahd created the Ministry of Islamic Affairs and the Ministry of Pilgrimage and appointed 210 members of 13 regional councils covering 13 Saudi regions to raise the level of administration and development (13). The formal address of the KSA directed itself to respond to questions posed by human rights organizations, attacking the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights as an illegal entity.

The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights moved to London and struggled against the KSA:

1- Once Al-Masaary released from Saudi prisons, he was smuggled to Yemen and then he went to London, followed by Saad Al-Faqeeh. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights began its fierce intellectual war of ideas against the KSA and attack on the Saudi royal family within the arena of European capitals, international media, and international news agencies.  

2- Such intellectual war of ideas began with publications and statements issued by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, starting with Statement No. 3 on 20^th of April, 1994, with news of basing their activities in London from now on.  

3- Of course, statements and publications of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights carried its stances and views on Saudi affairs, especially measures to quell, oppress, and terrorize the members by incarceration.  Statements and publications addressed members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights inside the KSA and gave them orders, urging the KSA to release the arrested members. Of course, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights denounced and condemned the Saudi authorities and attracted supporters inside and outside the KSA.

4- Statements and publications would carry a main title related to the main topic tackled; for instance, Statement No. 5 was titled ''A Poet Still Persecuted and Imprisoned'', while Statement No. 9 was titled ''The Saudi Role in Yemen: Will the Nation Revolt?". Since Statement No. 36, titles began to be unified under the words ''Rights Forum'', as Al-Masaary published statements online under that name.  

5- Apart from statements, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights issued separate publications from London that were never published before in the KSA, and Publication No. 1 was issued on 29^th of May, 1994, and the last one was No. 44 on 28 of April, 1994.

6- After a halt, Al-Masaary began to issue more publications; as No. 45 was issued on 26^th of April, 1995, and weekly he published them on Tuesdays until Publication No. 158 on 15^th of Nov., 2000. Al-Masaary made publications tackle many political issues in the KSA and the Arab world under the title ''You Have the Right to Know'', and statements would brief what publications would explain in detail. Of course, news banned in the KSA was tackled in statements and publications, as well as orders to members inside the KSA like famous sits-in arranged by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights to defy the Saudi authorities. 

7- In many instances, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights had received articles and protests of Saudi citizens as well as banned news and rumors that found its way to the statements and publications. Al-Masaary would write his views on Arab issues and affairs like in Palestine and Sudan as well as the UN. Al-Masaary would later on collect his views in a book form published online, with a focus to attack virulently the KSA as well as all Arab regimes in the last years of the 20^th century. 

8- Apart from statements and publications, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights issued special letters under the title ''Letters and Orders'' when circumstances entail a certain discourse of a defined course of action. For example, in April, 1994, we find the special title ''Open Letter to All Scholars, Students, and Thinkers'' and in Sept., 1994, we find the special title ''Scholars Address the Nation and assert their Demands''.

9- The internet, facsimile, phones, and other means of communications allowed room for ongoing contact between the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights and its supporters outside and inside the KSA and to spread all statements, letters, and orders. This way, Saudi citizens sent easily their complaints and protests against the KSA to the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights. This made room for huge anti-KSA propaganda and against the royal family as well. This way, sits-in were arranged inside the KSA and the ultraconservative Saudi society was exposed and was made open via all written items issued by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights that entered every house, human rights organizations, and West media. All such written items are now available on the internet under the title of ''Rights Forum'', on the following link: http://www.cdlr.saudia.co.uk/forumdisplay

10- The two leaders of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights disputed with each other, until March 1996 when Al-Masaary received and leveled mutual criticisms with Saad Al-Faqeeh. Each leader, and men under each of them, caused disputes to escalate for one year and a half, over financial and managerial issues as well as intellectual and political differences. The main difference was that Al-Masaary wanted to change the KSA by force and armed jihad and calling for military rebellions, whereas Saad Al-Faqeeh was similar to the terrorist MB group in their hypocrisy, flattery, and dealing realistically with the Saudi royal family and government.  

11- Saad Al-Faqeeh and his men left the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights which was headed solely by Al-Masaary now, as each leader, and his men, accused each other of being spies, traitors, and agents of the West. Al-Faqeeh formed another group called the Islamic Movement for Reform, and spread its ideas using a new radio station, whereas Al-Masaary went on writing books, statements, and publications (14).

12- Al-Masaary went on writing books, statements, and publications online in London, and he became the only spokesman and representative of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights until now as we write this book (2000 A.D.) according to Publication No. 151, and he launched a new website: http//www.cdlr.net

13- All writings issued by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights and news about it in international media and human rights organizations will enable us here to trace the features of the struggle between the KSA and the (Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalist) Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights in the 1990s.

The Saudi means of fighting the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights:

  The Saudi government formed a supreme committee, headed by Prince Nayef, in June 1994, to follow the activities of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, with the results detailed below.

Arrest waves:

1- Unprecedented big arrest waves against fundamentalist opposition figures occurred in the KSA at the time, and the Saudi authorities in some cases re-arrested released ones, especially relatives of Al-Masaary and those who aided him to flee to London as well as persecuting the family members of Al-Faqeeh, and names of people arrested were mentioned in Statement No. 15 of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, whereas a Saudi statement issued in 1994 mentions names of 110 persons incarcerated in Saudi prisons. 

2- It is noteworthy that the Saudi authorities used to have justifications by scholars to persecute and prosecute members and supporters of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights. Ibn Jibreen who left it and returned to the government issued a statement in 1994 criticizing the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights and urging citizens never to read its writings. The same warnings were uttered and written by Ibn Otheimein. The Saudi Ministry of Interior issued a statement in 1996 to warn others against a deterring punishment in case of distributing writings of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights. Publication No. 123 in 1997 written by Al-Masaary tackled the arrest of people accused of owning and distrusting writings of Al-Masaary or contacting him, and mentioned the arrest of fundamentalist Sunnite Wahabi opposition leaders Sheikh Al-Ouda, Safar Al-Hawali, and Yahiya Al-Yahiya and denaturalized Bin Laden. 

3- Minister of Interior, Prince Nayef, asked for the view of Ibn Baz about lectures of Al-Ouda and Al-Hawali; he urged Ibn Baz to offer sharia justification to persecute and arrest both men. Ibn Baz sent a letter to him saying: (… Reading all lectures and sermons of both sheikhs, and after many discussions, we urge the authorities to ask them to repent and to prevent them from preaching ever again to any sort of gatherings …). A year later, in Sept. 1994, the statement of Interior Ministry came as follows: (… The Interior Ministry suspended and arrested both Al-Ouda and Al-Hawali and 108 off their followers to preserve internal security in the KSA…). Of course, the statement did not mention anything about trying them; only it referred to setting them free after interrogations and urging them to sign papers to promise never to repeat their 'crime'.

4- A huge campaign organized by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights inside the KSA against Saudi authorities because of eh arrest of the two sheikhs (17), and this campaign reverberated inside and outside the KSA, as human rights organizations and Amnesty International attacked the KSA in their reports because of the secretive suffering and fear spread within Saudi citizens who were forced to remain silent, with the motto of "stop the secrecy: stop the suffering". According to such reports, the arrested ones were not accused of anything and remained incarcerated from 1994 to 1999 without fair trial. Minister of Interior declared that they were arrested after one year of many attempts to make them repent from extremist stances and views as well as activism that threaten the unity of Muslims inside the KSA, and that they will be released very soon as they stopped their criticisms of the KSA (18). Publication No. 70 in 1995 by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights mentioned that the KSA promised London not to harm the incarcerated ones as well as not to harm Saudi opposition figures in London, but the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights accused the Saudi king of attempting to assassinate Al-Masaary and of trying to buy back certain members. 

Denaturalization of Bin Laden:

1- Saudi authorities denaturalized Bin Laden in April 1994 as he is the leader of Sunnite Wahabi terrorist groups in Afghanistan and because of his connection with and support of opposition movements inside the KSA. Bin Laden had refused to obey orders of the KSA about not to invest his money in Sudan. Minister of Interior issued a statement about Bin Laden: (… His irresponsible acts caused much harm to the KSA and its relations with Sudan and he never obeyed orders given to him, and we denaturalized him as per article No. 29 of the statute of Saudi nationality …). The family of Bin Laden disowned him at the time, and it was rumored that he lived in Sudan under the protection of its president Omar Al-Bashir (19).

2- Peter Arnett of the CNN interviewed Bin Laden in March 1997, and Bin Laden criticized the Saudi government that submits to the USA and he protested the incarceration of Saudi opposition fundamentalists, and this was the reason he refused orders to come back to the KSA and lived for 5 years in Sudan before going back to Afghanistan.   

3- On the other hand, Publication No. 2 of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights mentioned that Bin Laden was prevented from ever entering the KSA again, in fact, and in Publication No. 3 asserted that the KSA trained an assassination group to get rid of Bin Laden, while in Publication No. 124 in 1997 asserted that Bin Laden, in his interview with Hamid Mir, opposed and criticized both the USA and the KSA and urged jihad against them both. Al-Masaary asserted in his writings that he defends and supports Bin Laden and would never cut relations with him. 

Other measures to fight the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights:

 The Saudi authorities did not confine its measures to arrest waves and denaturalization; they confronted the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights many times in London, as we detail below.

Electronic confrontations:

  The Saudi authorities attempted many times to hack emails of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights and to discover bodies contacting it in London and studies the means to stop channels of communications with the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, and when that was revealed to be impossible, they watched closely all outgoing and received calls and faxes. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights urged its supporters to contact it within the safe online means, while the KSA managed to control the facsimile of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights to send untrue documents, causing confusion to fundamentalists. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights had to assert that it did not send such false documents and information (20).

Media confrontations:

1- Many measures were taken within the Saudi media, just as Ibn Jibreen who issued a statement against the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights in 1994 and so did Ibn Otheimein in the same year. Other scholars talked against the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights in the Riyadh newspaper in 1995 (21).

2- The Saudi authorities hired some journalists and newspapers in the Arab world and in the West to verbally abuse and to criticize the Committee of Defending Legitimate. A secular Arab writer verbally abused in his articles under the title ''War against the KSA'' both the Saudi formal religious institution and scholars and the Committee of Defending Legitimate. He wrote that both are in one trench of backwardness and that the opposition movement was born out of the Salafist bodies anyway. This secular writer called the Saudi cultural elite to ally themselves with the KSA against all Salafists and Wahabis. In an article of his titled ''Stupidity of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights'', this secular writer vehemently attacked it as it manipulates the oppressed Saudi citizens and misuses their dreams and that it attacks the West and its values despite their London residence. He attacked Al-Masaary in another article as he dreams of rule, power, and authority and thus he poses as more extremist than Wahabis inside the KSA and its formal religious institution. He accused Al-Masaary of masterminding some terrorist operations in Riyadh. In another article, he incited the Saudi authorities against formal religious institution, calling for more curbing and restricting it and to make all centralized power in the hands of the State. In another article, this secular writer attacked a newspaper called ''Al-Moslemoon'' (i.e., the Muslims) as it propagates extremism and fanaticism turning the lives of people into veritable hell with its fatwas. This secular writer virulently attacked Ibn Baz because of his erroneous views and fatwas and called the Saudi authorities to fire him because Ibn Baz could not cope with the modern age and because Ibn Baz attacked The French writer and philosopher converted to Islam Roger Garaudy, and he praised the Saudi ambassador in the UK. He attacked Al-Masaary in a series of articles and refuted his book ''The Decisive Proofs of the Illegitimacy of the KSA". In another article, this secular journalist called the Saudi royal family to desert Salafist Wahabi ideology and to ally themselves to secular elite members (22).

Salafist confrontations:

   The above-mentioned secular writer perhaps represented a wing of the Saudi authorities; as measures have been taken later on to marginalize some Salafist bodies. Such measures were mocked by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights and to deride the fact that in 1994, the Saudi authorities established the Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs, headed by the Defense Minister Prince Sultan (23). Of course, scholars loyal to the KSA were employed to attack the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, especially Ibn Baz.  

Economic confrontations:

 Such aspect was done via controlling charity and donations so as not to allow the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights to receive any money from inside the KSA. Hence, Al-Masaary attacked what he called stopping and preventing charity, especially in the pilgrimage season, to make the royal family fully control charity work inside the KSA (24). However, such measures did not stop money donations to the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights; as bank accounts numbers of it are written on the website.

Political confrontations:

A) The KSA urged the UK to deport Dr. Al-Masaary:

1- Al-Masaary became a source of annoyance to the KSA because of his close relations with human rights organizations and international media in the West, especially that the USA in 1994 criticized harshly the violations of human rights in the KSA and Saudi officials would have to defend the Saudi stances before human rights organizations that get their information from the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights. Hence, the KSA urged the UK to expatriate Al-Masaary from London, as we conclude this from declarations of Prince Nayef in 1994, as he warned against renegade fundamentalist campaigning against the KSA in London to jeopardize British-Saudi relations. In the 1994 publications of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, Al-Masaary mentioned that media banned the news about the refusal of the British Interior Ministry to make Al-Masaary a political asylee in the UK as the Saudi authorities pressurized the UK to the extent of freeing all contracts between the KSA and the UK, a threat that forced the British side to postpone granting political asylum to Al-Masaary.     

2- In March 1995 A British court refused a request of the British government to deport Al-Masaary to Yemen. In 1996, the British authorities ordered Al-Masaary to move to the Dominican Islands, because the Saudi ambassador in London threatened that the KSA would cut all economic ties with the UK and to make deals with other European countries if the British side insisted on granting political asylum to Al-Masaary, and the latter resorted to British courts that forced the British government not to deport him. Eventually, the British Ministry of Interior refused to grant political asylum to Al-Masaary but gave him a renewable 4-year period to stay in London.  The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights mentioned in its statements and publications that this was deemed a victory celebrated by its members (25).

B) The KSA went on with its reform policies:

1- Apart from confrontations against the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights and its supporters inside and outside the KSA, King Fahd went on with reform policies and reinforced the Shura Council whose first session was on 3^rd of Jan., 1994, to discuss Islamic, social, and healthcare issues and to decide to form eight committees. King Fahd in 1994 made radical changes in ministries and appointed 10 men below the age of 50 who got their degrees in the USA as ministers whose expertise in their specialties was the criterion to choose them.      

2- King Fahd admitted twice in May 1994 in Yathreb and King Saud University that mistakes have been committed in the previous reform projects (26) and that more reforms were underway to surmount admitted past mistakes.

The means of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights to confront and struggle against the KSA:

1- If the KSA had power, authority, and hegemony, and the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights had none of that, it had a more powerful tool; the power of the written word in an age that respects freedom of expression and human rights. Means of confrontations adopted by the KSA against the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights did not affect Al-Masaary much; he gained control of the struggle against the KSA for a long time until other members left the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights after long disputes with him, and we are not sure if such disputes were caused by the KSA or not. In sum, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights still stands as we write this book now (in 2000 A.D.) and continues to oppose the KSA and never ceased to find chances to attack and condemn the Saudi regime, even during pilgrimage season, as we read in Publication No. 45 in 1995.

2- We detail below the means of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights to confront and struggle against the KSA

Means of modern technology:

1- Statement No. 22 tackled Sheikh Abdul-Aziz Qassim (we personally believe that he was the unknown author of the book titled ''The Earthquake of Al-Saud Family'') in Oct. 1994 because he participated in an excellent manner in the intellectual endeavors of reform and how to apply sharia by his special writings within the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, despite the fact that he never preached from any pulpit or used audiotapes to reach thousands of people.

2- The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights used mainly facsimile and urged its supporters inside the KSA to use it in the Statement No. 26 in 1995 to receive orders and to exchange information.

3- Within the Publication No. 3, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights sent to its supporters inside the KSA a new way to contact it via phones without making such international calls appear in phone bills by using certain cards, and Publication No. 6 asserted the success of such means to keep the identities of supporters secret in the KSA so as not to allow authorities to persecute them. Hence, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights received incessant phone calls and faxes with useful information all the time. 

4- The KSA tried in vain to intercept and interrupt such calls and communications, and when the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights announced it will launch a satellite channel, the Saudi authorities confiscated satellite dishes from all over the KSA within one month (27).

Means of poetry:

1- Supporters of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights inside the KSA used to compose poems for political purposes of condemnation and attack of the KSA and to express wishes for introducing reform, and many poets were incarcerated. Poetry retains its power and widespread in Arabia, unlike the case in other Arab countries. Such long and short poems were called ''the awakening verse'' and names of many poets of it were known and other poets remained anonymous.  

2- It is noteworthy that supporters of the KSA used the same method and composed poems whose poets were anonymous to condemn, deride, and attack Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalists of the opposition movements, and the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights considered such poems to be fabricated by the Saudi police and central intelligence.   

3- Al-Samir was a poet persecuted by the Saudi authorities because of his poems supportive of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights and deriding the royal family and the Saudi regime, and he had to flee the KSA and to send his poems home. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights took pride in him and in his poems, especially the ones deriding Saudi princes (28).

Means of Salafist ideology:

1- Naturally, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights used Sunnite Wahabi Salafism as the main tool to wage intellectual wars against the KSA to refute views of formal Saudi scholars, subservient to the Saudi State regarding the opposition and to invoke God's wrath within prayers against the KSA in the writings of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights.   

2- Indeed, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights had outdone formal Saudi scholars in tackling Salafist thought an ideology and using it to refute Saudi claims and scholars' views on all issues to embarrass them as ignoramuses and to embarrass the Saudi State itself. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights had written such refutations as open letters addressed to the Saudi nation. Discourse and style of such open letters used all skills of experienced preachers who appealed to the emotional side of Wahabis, especially talking about Hell and Paradise and the fate of scholars who forsook Islam for the sake of money they received from the KSA. 

3- Supplications and prayers to invoke God's wrath on the KSA was an effective propaganda used in the writings of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, as such method indicated its siding with the oppressed and the weak citizens who have nothing but to pray to invoke God's wrath against the oppressive unjust authority. Thus, such a method embarrassed the KSA, as a Salafism- and Wahabism-based theocracy, and its Wahabi scholars who control all mosques, as the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights urged its supporters inside the KSA to supplicate God in all mosques, especially on Fridays. The very first call for a sit-in of invocation and supplication after Friday congregational prayers is written in Publication No. 35 titled ''On Statement of the Sit-In'', referring to Statement No. 24 to form a sit-in to make groups of people recite the Quran and supplicate to God to end the tyranny of the KSA during the fasting month of Ramadan, and the last lines of that call are as follows: (… The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights knew that this request of forming this sit-in received much support by a large number of people, and many people now supplicate and invoke God to wreak revenge on the unjust, corrupt persons and to come to the aid of the incarcerated preachers and other persecuted persons …) (29).

4- Writings of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights interpreted ordeals and sufferings of Saudi authority men as divine retribution caused by supplication of the weak and the oppressed ones; as in the case when Prince Nayef was depressed and received psychological treatment, and the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights asserted that its supplications would be enough to crush 50 men as Nayef, and such words frightened Saudi policeman, as per the claims of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights.

5- Another event to support the view of divine retribution caused by supplications of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights was the policeman Saud Al-Sherbein, who persecuted and tortured Saudi fundamentalists in prisons including Al-Masaary himself before he fled to London, as he fell ill and suffered psychological disturbances. This policeman feared divine retribution and he had to visit all his victims to ask their pardon as he confessed he was executing orders of Saudi authorities. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights wrote his story and commented that his excuses and apologies are not deemed acceptable as no mortal should obey other mortals by disobeying God. Later on, this policeman was paralyzed and parts of his body got burned because of a car accident, and he had to undergo four surgical operations. Of course, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights expressed joy because of that and declared its intention to go on supplicating and invoking God's wrath on the KSA.

6- The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights traced all news of misfortunes, ordeals, ailments, accidents, and catastrophes happened to Saudi policemen and interpreted them as divine retribution. Even some scholars declared their repentance while weeping before congregations in mosques. Even the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights interpreted illness of King Fahd as a result of supplicating and invoking God's wrath on the KSA (30). Of course, Wahabi mentality of the masses in the KSA believed such claims of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights who used this tool to terrorize its foes inside the KSA.

Sufi visions and dreams:

1- It is laughter-inducing to mention that the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights used another weapon in the intellectual and propaganda war against the KSA; the weapon used by Sufis, the sworn enemies of Salafists, which are Sufi dreams and visions. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights considered dreams of its members as predictions to bring glad tidings. The weapon of supplicating God and invoking His wrath against the KSA was used during arrest waves as the Saudi State showed its might as an unjust authority, whereas when conditions calmed down and were considered stable as all arrested ones were set free, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights longed still for another victory to achieve its goal of making the KSA collapse one day. Such a goal was far-fetched in terms of a realistic look in the late 1990s, and the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights resorted to Sufi visions and dreams to achieve it in the imagination and to address its supporters with words raising their hopes. Al-Masaary in his latest writings wrote heavily about visions and dreams, because he inwardly lost hopes of destroying the KSA when princes of the royal family disputed with one another. He would interpret the so-called visions and dreams as a harbinger of his victory over the KSA that will collapse and he would establish his own State instead in Arabia.     

2- The so-called Sufi visions and dreams began to appear in the writings of Al-Masaary when the influence of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights weakened inside the KSA in 1997 when King Fahd declared his political reforms in the ruling system and established the Shura Council and celebrated the passage of one year of its sessions. 

3- Hence, 1997 witnessed writing heavily about visions and dreams of the members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights. In Publication No. 125, a vision was written about Abdel-Karim Qassim, the Iraqi political leader, defeating Napoleon, and Al-Masaary interpreted this as a sign that Prince Sultan would be defeated and the KSA royal family will fled Arabia because of a coup d'état. In Publication No. 124, a vision was written about Saudi policemen burning their papers and documents, and Al-Masaary interpreted this as a prediction that the Saudi State will collapse soon. In Publication No. 126, a vision was written about a Saudi man presenting himself to European presidents in English as the very first president in Arabia, and Al-Masaary interpreted this as a sign that the KSA would be declared a republic one day and Islamic democracy will be applied in a caliphate. In Publication No. 126, another vision was written about the Saudi green flag as it fell down and turned black and then hoisted again with Islamic testimony written on it in white, and Al-Masaary interpreted this as a sign that the Saudi royal family would lose power and rule and a real Islamic State will be established in Arabia.

4- In Publication No. 129, a supporter of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights wrote that dreams and visions published by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights had a positive influence on its supporters inside the KSA and asked for more of them, as such visions cause fright to the Saudi royal family and their henchmen, beneficiaries, and high officials. A member of the royal family insisted that the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights had gone bankrupt and resorted to imagination to make up for its loss of supporters and lack of victories. Such words are not of a frightened prince, but one that mocked and derided his weak foes. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights responded to such mockery by another vision: Al-Masaary opens a mosque that was used to be owned by Al-Saud family, interpreted as usual as the sign of the end of the KSA regime and Saudi rule. In Publication No. 135, a vision was written about a group of people reciting the Quranic Chapter 48 titled "victory", and some other men trying in vain to stop them. As usual, this was taken as a sign predicting the victory of Al-Masaary over the Saudi royal family.  In 1998, within Publication no. 140, a vision was written about the Saudi government arresting a group of men within prison cells who saw an elephant made of wood and one companion of Prophet Muhammad and a wedding being prepared as Al-Masaary checking the cells. This wooden elephant was interpreted as Prince Sultan the hypocrite who was used to hearing words of hypocrites around him, and that the victory of Al-Masaary over the Saudi royal family was drawing nearer. In Publication No. 141, an apocalyptic vision of Doomsday was written and people were frightened except Al-Masaary who addressed Prophet Muhammad by asserting to him that his Sunna will be applied in Arabia by him. As usual, this was interpreted as a caliphate that would be established in Arabia and ruled by Al-Masaary as caliph.

5- As for 1999, it seemed that members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights remained awake and suffered insomnia for a whole year; no dreams or visions were ever published that year!

6- Yet, in 2000, members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights fell asleep blissfully again! In Publication No. 157, in May 2000, a vision was written about Omar Ibn Al-Khattab, a former caliph of the first century A.H., returning from the dead to rule and reform Arabia! This vision had details that filled two pages, reflecting that members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights despaired and felt that their hopes to destroy the KSA ruling regime were dashed. Another vision written in Publication No. 152 about Abraham and Moses facing Pharaoh of Egypt, and as usual, the interpretation was written to the effect that Al-Saud royal family members are like tyrannical pharaohs and that Saudis wait for a hero to defeat such tyrants soon enough.   

Persuasion and intimidation of security policemen:

1- Among the goals of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights were to neutralize and undermine the power of the KSA not only by moral weapon of supplication and invocation of God's wrath on the Saudi policemen, but also its members threatened Saudi policemen who arrest, persecute, and torture prisoners by terrorist actions. At one point, Abdullah Al-Hudeif, a supporter of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, threw nitric acid over the policeman Saud Al-Sherbein (31).

2- Apart from terrorizing, threatening, and intimidation of policemen, members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights tried to persuade them to repent and leave their jobs under the KSA government. In many statements in 1994, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights addressed security national guards, policeman, and army officers that their mission was to defend the nation and not to restrict and persecute peaceful reformists and not to commit crimes of arresting people inside mosques, and that they were to beware the oppressed ones' supplications to God to punish the unjust ones, as such acts of policemen were prohibited as per sharia laws, as mentioned in Statement No. 15. About the successful sit-in in the Saudi city of Brida, Statement No. 32 expressed gratitude for the sympathetic stance of some security men and policemen who also expressed their being fed up with their jobs in quelling and oppressing the innocent. In another statement, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights mentioned that security men expressed their ire because of having to arrest sheikh Al-Ouda, while other security men were happy to practice transgressions, oppression, and torturing prisoners. Writings of the members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights tried to use religious notions to appeal to such security men to stop their transgressions and to make use of their state of discontent and worry. This led the Saudi authorities to make sure that loyalty of security men in all security apparatuses was fully with the KSA (32).

Persuasion of Arabian tribes:

1- Because most security men belong to Arabian tribes, members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights emotionally appealed to the tribesmen and tribal leaders, as inner power of Arabia, in Statement No. 14, to persuade them to express discontent with and hate toward the KSA authorities that arrested callers of reform among Wahabi fundamentalists. In Statement No. 26, members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights reminded the Saudi nation that those incarcerated behind bars and closed prison gates were the best group of religious scholars, university teachers, free thinkers, and notable persons who belong to the best and biggest tribes.    

2- Because of such persistence in appealing to tribesmen, some tribal leaders would intercede to urge the authorities to release their men, and in most cases, policemen refused such intercessions. But in many instances, the Saudi authorities had to postpone arresting some other men to avoid tribal demonstrations of protest.

3- Members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights published a daring secret interview between Prince Bandar and some foreigners, as he talked about chastising some tribes. Such interview invoked the wrath of many tribes and King Fahd himself had to visit such tribes to convince them that this interview was a lie and a falsehood and to appease their anger (33).

4- Apart from persuasion and appealing to tribes, members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights incited Saudi citizens against the Saudi state itself using Salafist notions and discourse, especially when arrest waves increased, as per Statements Nos. 24 and 26, when Al-Masaary wrote that all citizens must fight for the sake of incarcerated brethren and that they should no longer live in fear and disgrace, as rights are taken by force and not granted as gifts by tyrants.

5- Sometimes, members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights would use words to appeal to the nationalistic sentiments of Saudis; for instance, in Publication no. 41, about Prince Pindar and his being interviewed by foreigners, Al-Masaary wrote that this is high-treason against the tribes, as the royal family allied itself to 'infidel' foreigners against Muslim tribesmen and that it was a disgrace to allow the Saudi royal family to control fates of tribes and to punish tribesmen. Thus, members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights forced themselves as spokespersons on behalf of the nation; this was a mere ploy in the struggle for power. 

The measure of success of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights:

   Members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights could not manage to convince security men, policemen, and other powerful high officials and army men to join the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights and the same applies to most tribesmen who ignored members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights below. The reason was of course that interests of such social categories were in joining forces with the KSA. Later on, members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights disputed with one another as we have written before and failed to achieve any decisive victory over the KSA so far; yet, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights achieved some scattered results as we detail below.

Raising political awareness:

1- The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights managed to raise the political awareness of Saudis in general by presenting other views on all issues and topics instead of one unilateral view of the State that dominated for decades, especially that the king purportedly owned lands and people over them and knows best as per the dominant motto ''sheikhs know best''.

2- Some citizens created such political awareness when they cooperated with the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights by spreading and distributing its writings inside the KSA and contacting it to provide information and news; thus, that made statements and publications as important historical documents of the KSA in the 1990s.

3- Thus, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights helped in changing the mentality of Saudi citizens and their views regarding the Saudi authorities; sanctity, awe, and fear vanished, as they were replaced with criticism, fearless self-expression, and awareness of citizenry rights and human rights, as Saudi citizens read all writings of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights online or in print that exposed and scandalized the royal family members and the corrupt, unjust men loyal to them (34).

Attracting supporters to the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights:

1- Such political awareness raised by the members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights made it attract more supporters in the late 1990s inside the KSA among the cultural elite especially Saudi ambassadors to many countries and to the UN, who claimed in a letter to Ibn Baz that they have documents that would incriminate the KSA regime. This led the KSA to check and watch over all its embassies and documents.   

2- Many Saudi diplomats declared their being dissidents who oppose the KSA and sought political asylum in the UK as they were influenced by views expressed by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights

The success of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights in spreading anti-KSA propaganda:

   The emergence of such dissidents caused hot debates all over the West media and Arab media about conditions and circumstances inside the KSA; Muslims of the UK made a sit-in before the Saudi embassy in London to protest against the arrest waves inside the KSA. This means that the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights had successfully invested such arrest waves in its anti-KSA propaganda. The fail attempts of King Fahd to urge the UK to deport Al-Masaary made Arab and British people sympathize with him and some invited him to deliver a speech in the House of Commons about Saudi State and its conditions and circumstances. Human rights organizations in Arab countries and in the West launched huge anti-KSA campaigns and spread information conveyed to them via the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights (35).

Planting dormant agents of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights inside Saudi apparatuses:

1- Some Saudi high officials did not declare their support of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights because they wanted to retain their posts to help members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights to infiltrate into the Saudi government and security apparatuses, allowing them to gain useful information to be published, as the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights took pride in its secret agents as per Statement No. 29 in all Saudi governmental bodies and institutions, who also distribute writings and audiotapes of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights among Saudi citizens inside the KSA. 

2- King Fahd held a secret meeting with certain princes; yet, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights knew of it and published details of it. When the KSA forged false statements and claimed they pertain to the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, Al-Masaary wrote in Publication No. 28 that this falsehood was scandalous and brought no effect whatsoever, as its members infiltrated all apparatuses of King Fahd, and they knew all measures and steps he would take against them. When Prince Bandar met secretly with Israeli Mossad men and American CIA men inside the Saudi embassy in London without the attendance of the Saudi ambassador himself, the members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights received full audio registration of such secret meeting and exposed how the prince verbally abused tribesmen inside the KSA, and such leaked verbal abuse caused negative influence and repercussions inside the KSA (36).

3- Such level of infiltration could be explained by disputes and conflicts among the Saudi royal family members and the involvement of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights within such conflicts, as its members never attacked Crown Prince Abdullah but attacked   harshly Princes Sultan, Bandar, Nayef, and Salman as well as sons of King Fahd. When Prince Abdullah retrieved his full power and authority since April 1998, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights attacked him harshly, instead of inciting him against his brothers and family members as before, using lewd inappropriate words of verbal abuse (37).

Sits-in of protest swept over the KSA:

1- We remember that the Najd Brothers used to be powerful enough to hold opposition conferences that were transformed later on into armed rebellion and military revolts. Decades later, no one dared to hold public meetings to voice opposition views, until Sunnite Wahabi fundamentalism appeared and the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights emerged. Sits-in and demonstration of protest swept over the KSA and the Saudi authorities faced this with incessant arrest waves, but sits-in increased inside and around mosques, a new phenomenon that never occurred before even by the Najd Brothers. But of course, all protesters stuck to peaceful nature of their actions and never sought to use violence against security men or policemen.      

2- Calls to form sits-in began in 1415 A.H. in mosques in Riyadh, Jeddah, Brida, and Hael, and the very first one was formed under the banner "The Right of the Saudi Nation to Put their Rulers to Question".  The Saudi authorities issued false statements as if by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights to announce that the sit-in was cancelled, but members of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights refuted such cancellation.

3- Some statements of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights asserted the success of sits-in in Jeddah, Hael, Riyadh, Al-Jouf, Al-Ahsa, Abha, Al-Baha, and Brida, as imams of mosques there managed to gather thousands of men and hundreds of women, while praising the neutral stance of security men in most cases, as per Statements Nos. 27, 28, 30, and 33.   

4- Ibn Baz and other high-rank scholars subservient to the KSA issued a statement to attack harshly the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights and its sits-in. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights announced in Publication No. 44 the postponement of one of the sits-in to another day to be set later on, and this indicated the influence of the conflict and dispute between Dr. Al-Masaary and Dr. Al-Faqeeh (38).

5- It is noteworthy that sits-in lessened in number because of arrest waves done by the Saudi authorities, and the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights published four exceptional publication about arrest waves and urged the release of prisoners and had to postpone many planned sits-in in 1994 A.D. / 1415 A.H.

6- Despite the success of the KSA to stop sits-in, but such success was not achieved because of the endeavors of the Saudi State, but because of the influence of the conflict and dispute between Dr. Al-Masaary and Dr. Al-Faqeeh. Sits-in were cancelled and opposition had to be confined to media and internet from London. 

7- The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, with its writings and audiotapes, greatly influenced media of the West regarding criticism of the KSA and its internal policies. To prove it, we will quote below an excerpt expressing the view and assessment of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights of its activities and the reactions of the KSA, from the Publication No. 44 in 1995:

  (… Title: You Have the Right to Know: the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights and the Saudi State within this year. This week, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights celebrates its first year of activities from London, as it achieved many of its projects, while the Saudi regime achieved its own project. It is important and interesting to enumerate things done by both sides and how challenges were faced in order to assess achievements, gains, and losses and to predict the future based on the past and present and the pace of history and laws of social change. This year, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights managed to smuggle its leaders out of the Saudi State despite tight security measures and strict supervision on them, and these leaders established their headquarter in London. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights managed to make good use of technology to receive and distribute information with its supporters inside the Saudi State and to show the stances of the nation as opposed to formal stances of the Saudi State in many situations and events especially regarding Yemen. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights managed to give information to international media about all small and big events and occurrences inside the Saudi State, like the crisis of stampedes during pilgrimage season, proving that the Saudi regime specializes in reactions and not in doing actions. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights managed as well to invest most of such events and occurrences to serve its reform project; and this applies to anti-committee events like the refusal to grant Dr. Al-Masaary political asylum. Achievements of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights include political and economic report about the Saudi State and the documentary about events occurred in Brida. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights managed as well to stir and incite the Saudi citizens on time and to send them legitimate orders of its leaders, resulting in the successful sits-in in Brida. Leaders of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights contacted West media and provided information about the reality of the Saudi State and the credibility of the reform endeavors of the leaders in London. The greatest gain of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights was moral victory and not a material gain on the level of the nation and the level of defeating the Saudi regime; awareness of the Saudi citizens is raised and they participate positively in the reform projects with zeal. As for the Saudi regime, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights defeated it within two aspects: 1) exposing the illegitimacy of the ruling regime before all the masses, and 2) making the West countries cast doubts on the stability of the Saudi State for the next years.  The Saudi regime throughout the last year has lived in constant unrest and instability, dealing with events and sits-in with slow reactions of someone who does not understand the background of anything. Many big crises occurred successively to paralyze the Saudi regime, especially when the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights declared its resuming of its activities in London. The Saudi regime was at loss about how Dr. Al-Masaary fled to the UK despite tight security measures. The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights sent its faxes and telephones numbers to its supporters in inside the Saudi State, keeping constant excellent contact, while the Saudi rulers tried to in vain to stop such communications. When the Saudi regime was embarrassed by the crisis of stampede during the pilgrimage season, its reaction has been a scandalous one. Meanwhile, the Saudi regime got involved in the Yemeni war in a stupid manner and with big losses amounted to more than three billion $, apart from political and moral losses. Later on, the Saudi regime quelled the nation and the citizens who called for reform, arresting them as well as scholars and put them to prisons. The Saudi regime appeared before the Islamic world and the Western world as a tyrannical force that violated human rights and oppressed peaceful preachers and scholars who call for reform and as an unstable regime suffering unrest. The Saudi regime is in a dilemma: it cannot release the incarcerated men so as not to be morally defeated and it cannot keep them in prison cells as this will give more momentum to the opposition movements and fuel ire of the masses. The other scandal of the Saudi regime was the economic crisis and the Saudi budget; the regime had to impose more taxes and fees despite claims of strong economy; in fact, it is about to collapse as per newspapers in the West. Bovine stupidity of the Saudi regime appeared in its reaction to the existence of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights in London; it pressurized the British side in secret and in public, and this brought free media coverage and publicity for the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights. The backward, regressive Saudi regime was naïve enough to ask the British side to stop the anti-Al-Saud propaganda done by the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights against, especially after the scandal of Muhammad Ibn Fahd with the British Minister Jonathan Atkins; the Saudi princes thought that governments of the world controlled their media with iron grip as the case inside the Saudi State. The worst crisis of the Saudi regime this year was escalating disputes among Saudi princes as their conflicting interests vary, whereas King Fahd and his close family are weak and cannot plan or take decisions individually. This failure of a regime resorted to mean and base methods like forgery of documents and fabricating rumors about the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights as well as bribing and buying other men and even assassination of some other men, but every failure brought the next for the naïve Saudi regime. Such were the 'achievements' of the Saudi State in this year, and if such ways would go on, we predict that more crises, ordeals, scandals, unrest, and upheavals would occur with more disputes among princes and economic failure until the regime would collapse. Of course, in such cases, the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights will develop into an influential driving force in all events, and we implore God to punish the unjust …).

A commentary:

1- Events of the following years did not match predictions of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights; as its two main leaders, Al-Masaary and Al-Faqeeh, disputed with each other and the latter left it for the former. The Saudi regime won victory over the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights later on. Writings of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights showed between the lines signs of failure regarding mobilizing the Saudi citizens to win them to its side against the regime. Frustration is clearly shown between the lines of the writings of publications sent to the Saudi citizens to incite them against the Saudi authorities (39). To prove this, let us quote an excerpt from Publication No. 29 in Jan. 1995: (… O people of Arabia! If religious zeal did not stir inside all of you, what shall we do? If manhood, jealousy, honor, and dignity did not stir you to revolt, what shall we do? Did all of you lose religious zeal, manhood, jealousy, honor, and dignity? What shame and what disgrace! Were such calamites that befell you not enough to wake you up?! When will you revolt?! O people of Arabia! Asian and African people revolted and gained independence by toil and blood and by refusing and facing tyranny and injustice. It is a shame that free people of great ancestry like Arabs in Arabia would be submissive and less honorable! Until when such indifference would last?! No Saudi prince care for people's opinions about anything! O free people of Arabia! Drive away all doubt and sloth! Revolt and join the caravan of reform to save yourselves …). 

2- The Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights realized the impossibility of attracting all the Saudi citizens in the struggle against the Saudi regime, analyzing this according to its viewpoint in Publication no. 31 in Jan., 1995, from which we quote this excerpt: (… Our calamity is not confined to this collapsing regime, but mainly to its influence in crushing trust in oneself among citizens who admit falsely that no rulers would be fit to rule Arabia after the removal of Al-Saud family. The cultural elite members would ask us: who would be the alternative?! Such a question reflects that Al-Saud family managed for the last 50 years to crush leadership vein inside citizens; as if leaders must come from the Al-Saud family exclusively. Detractors of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights never realize that Al-Saud family will never allow the existence of any independent body or institution inside the Saudi State, even charity organizations or social ones, and this ruling family never allow any gatherings, even familial ones within occasions of celebrations, and this shows how the Al-Saud family never leave room for citizens to lead or govern or control affairs …).

Footnotes:

1- "The Earthquake of Al-Saud Family", authored by one of the leaders of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, page 5, http://www.miraserve.com/books/b3.htm

2-"The Earthquake of Al-Saud Family", pages 6:7 and 10.

Al-Masaary (Dr. Muhammad Abdullah), "Decisive Proofs of the Illegitimacy of the KSA", 4^th edition, 1999A.D./ 1420 A.H., London, pages: 81, 85, 86, 87, 97, 141, and 150:152.

Publications of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights: Statement No. 3, on 20^th of Apr. 1994.

Al-Jazeera Al-Arabia newspaper, 16^th May, 1992, pages 5 and 6.

3- Al-Jazeera Al-Arabia newspaper, 16^th May, 1992, pages 2 and 4.

4- Al-Masaary, ditto, pages 67:71.

5- Al-Jazeera Al-Arabia newspaper, 16^th May, 1992, pages 9 and 36:37.

6- "The Earthquake of Al-Saud Family", pages 5 and 6.

7- Al-Jazeera Al-Jadida newspaper, No. 6, March 1974, page 10.

8- Al-Masaary, ditto, pages 26:32.

9-"The Earthquake of Al-Saud Family", pages 6:16.

10- Annual Report of Ibn Khaldoun Center of 1992 and 1994 on the civil society and democratic transition, and republished by Dar Souad Al-Sabah, pages 194:225.

A report titled "Egypt and the World", published by Al-Mahroussa Center for Publishing and Distribution, 1^st edition, 1994, Cairo.

11-"The Earthquake of Al-Saud Family", pages 16:22

12-"The Earthquake of Al-Saud Family", pages 22:24

13-"The Earthquake of Al-Saud Family", pages 24:27

14- Annual Report of Ibn Khaldoun Center of 1993 on the civil society and democratic transition, pages 161:163.

15- Annual Report of Ibn Khaldoun Center of 1996 on the civil society and democratic transition, page 300.

Statements of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, Nos. 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20, 22, and 25, and publications of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, No. 3.

16- Annual Report of Ibn Khaldoun Center of 1994 on the civil society and democratic transition, pages 166 and 167, and of 1996, page 297.

17- Statements of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, Nos. 17, 18, and 19.

18- Saudi Arabia: Secrecy and Fear: www.amnesty.org & www.amnesty-arabic.org/arabia/text/secretstate-mde23-10-11-b.htm

19- Annual Report of Ibn Khaldoun Center of 1994 on the civil society and democratic transition, page 164.

Al-Jazeera Al-Arabia newspaper, 16^th May, 1992, pages 9 and 36:17.

20- Publications of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, Nos. 2, 42, and 43.

21- Publications of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, Nos. 16 and 43.

Annual Report of Ibn Khaldoun Center of 1994 on the civil society and democratic transition, page 163.

22- Abdel-Majeed (Muhammad), "In the Beginning was the Pen", undated, Cairo, pages 7, 13, and 15, 19, 89, 248, 291, 390, 405, 475, 485, 606, 669, 691, and 697.

Read the publication No. 48 of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, which tackles about a Syrian editor-in-chief of a newspaper who commissioned an Egyptian journalist to ghostwrite a book attacking the Committee.

23- Publications of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, Nos. 17 and 33

Annual Report of Ibn Khaldoun Center of 1994 on the civil society and democratic transition, page 163.

24- Publications of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, Nos. 7, 8, 10, 30, 33, 34, and 46.

25- Annual Report of Ibn Khaldoun Center on the civil society and democratic transition, of 1994 pages 163 and 170, of 1995 pages 155 and 185, and of 1997 page 84.

Publications of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, Nos. 24, 82, and 84.

26- Annual Report of Ibn Khaldoun Center on the civil society and democratic transition, of 1994 pages 162 and of 1995 pages 155 and 160:164.

Publication No. 1of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights

27- Publication No. 6 of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights.

Annual Report of Ibn Khaldoun Center on the civil society and democratic transition, of 1994, pages 162 and 165.

28- Publications of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, Nos. 12, 17, 30, and 41.

29- Publication No. 35 of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights.

30- Statements Nos. 22 and 24 and publications No. 5, 9, 10, 22, 27, 35, and 43 of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights.

31- Statement Nos. 18, 38, and 39, and publication No. 6 of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights.

32- Publications of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, Nos. 6, 39, 40, and 41.

33- The exceptional publication No. 1 and the ordinary ones Nos. 2 and 44 of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights.

34- Publications of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, Nos. 36, 39, and 43, to name but a few examples.

35- Publications of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, Nos. 3, 4, 6, 10, 16, 32, and 46.

Annual Report of Ibn Khaldoun Center on the civil society and democratic transition, of 1994, page 170.

Al-Jazeera Al-Arabia newspaper, ditto, page 26.

36- Publications of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, Nos. 1, 16, 26, 28, and 41.

37- Publications of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, Nos. 46, 60, 67, 74, 77, 82, 83, and 150.

Al-Masaary, ditto, page 7

Al-Jazeera Al-Arabia newspaper, ditto, page 34

Annual Report of Ibn Khaldoun Center on the civil society and democratic transition, of 1998, pages 301:303.

38- Statements of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, Nos. 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 33, and 34, as well as exceptional publications Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 and ordinary ones Nos. 46 and 47.

39- Publications of the Committee of Defending Legitimate Rights, Nos. 18, 19, 30, 31, and 33.