Sheik yer'sandal in Soddy Barbaria

Who says there is no fun in Islam?

Brit Meets Saudi Prince Al-Waleed

Hugh Fitzgerald

At least the division within Arab countries is now being noticed. But what is still verboten is the subject of rich, lightly-populated Arab sheikdoms, and the poverty of the Arabs — and Muslims — in Egypt, the rest of North Africa (excluding LIbya if it manages to start selling oil again), Yemen, and in Syria, and even Iraq. There is no discussion of what the fabulously rich members of the Umma ought to do to support other members of the Umma, outside their own countries. But it’s clear from the tepid response to appeals to give aid to Syrians that the West is fed up having to shell out still more billions, while the rich Arabs, in such places as Qatar, with trillions to split among fewer than 200,00 Qataris, are not contributing, or contributing so little compared to what they could be doing.

The article, at Al Arabiya, here.

When articles about this appear in the West, written by Westerners, they are overheard in the Arab and Muslim lands. And that’s good. It would  not take much to rouse fury among poorer Arabs and Muslims against the rich Arabs and Muslims. Why should people in Pakistan not resent the waddling emirs of the Gulf who, after all, are members of the same ‘Umma and should be willing to share that wealth with fellow Muslimjs? That’s part of  what belonging to that ‘Umma is suppposed to mean. But the rich Arabs are not going to share more than a very tiny bit. And they have no intention of letting this world-wide caliphate business, or even the idea of  a single Arab state, go anywhere, for it would mean having to share that wealth.

Eventually the poorer Arabs are going to catch on..

One thought on “Sheik yer'sandal in Soddy Barbaria”

Comments are closed.