FURTHER ON AL-QADHDHAFI LOYALTY DAY SPEECH

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP05-01559R000400440012-4
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 19, 2012
• Sequence Number: 12
• Publication Date: September 30, 1990
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

I .1 i
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/01/19 CIA-RD 05-01559R000400440012-4 44`
Libya
Further on Al-Qadhdhafi Loyalty Day Speech
LD0110183790 Tripoli Television Service in Arabic
1902 GMT 30 Sep 90
FBIS-NES-90-191
ARAB AFRICA 2 October 1990
EC To Send Emergency Supplies of Foodstuffs
NC0110202190 Cairo MENA in English 1950 GMT
1 Oct 90
[Text] Cairo, October 1 (MENA)-The European Com-
munity (EC) decided to give Egypt supplies of emergency
foodstuffs, including 34,000 tons of cereals, 1400 tons of
powder milk, 1440 tons of edible oil, 840 tons of ghee
and other items, worth around 1.2 million European
monetary units plus the usual food aid, said the accred-
ited EC mission to Egypt.
[Speech by Mu'ammar al-Qadhdhafi at Loyalty Day
celebrations in Surt-live]
[Excerpts] In the name of God. Brothers, I welcome our
guests who are here with us this evening representing
pan-Arab and progressive forces in the Arab homeland,
to hold a dialogue and honor us with their meeting here.
We greet the brother representatives of fraternal and
friendly foreign countries who came all the way here
from Tripoli. I greet you, brothers, who have been
honored on the occasion of the 20th anniversary and
who are being honored yet again today on the occasion of
the 21st anniversary of Loyalty Day, on 30 September.
[passage omitted]
This year's Loyalty Day coincides with the Prophet's
birthday anniversary, as well as the anniversary of his
death. Historical sources have confirmed that the
Prophet was born and died on the same day. The
anniversary of his birthday and his death are the same.
An initiative which demonstrates our civilized conscious-
ness and originality is the fact that it was we and only we
who thought of replacing the Hegira year by the year of the
anniversary of the Prophet's death, which has the greatest
significance and which has yet to be discovered by Muslims
throughout the world. [passage omitted]
With your permission, on the occasion of the Prophet's
birthday which coincides with Loyalty Day, 30 Sep-
tember this year, I would like to dwell a little bit more on
this birthday. There is no doubt about the sanctity of this
anniversary. I have, however, noticed that there is a great
number of Islamic rulers who will make addresses today,
paying respect to the festivities marking the Prophet's
holy birthday. We do not object to any Muslim's
marking or paying respect to this anniversary. Our
objection, however, and this is our right, is to mix
religion with economic, agricultural, industrial, labor,
institutional, and training affairs. I consider it to be
demagoguery and charlatanism to mix political positions
and religious belief. The greatest sabotage to religion is
to mix it with politics, particularly in this era today.
However, ignorant and shallow-minded people believe
this is to (?further) religion. This is not true. They only
think so because they are shallow-minded and ignorant.
If only we were all in agreement on the same principle for
all Muslims. Responsible people must be religiously
devout; responsible people must be pious and godly so as
to be God-fearing when making decisions. First, we are
not supposed to have rulers and subjects; we have
instead people's authority. The people govern them-
selves without a ruler.
We should not abandon the idea of people's republics for
the sake of some prayers, as is being propagated today,
such as: 0 God, please make our most pious our ruler,
please make him see wrong as wrong, and right as right.
Suppose he does not heed our prayers; it will mean that
tyrants will oppress us. It seems, indeed, that a positive
response to such prayers has been minimal so far, given
the number of tyrants who have oppressed the people.
People's fates should not be left to propaganda from
rostrums. People should be allowed to decide their own
fate. And this is God's will. God's caliph on earth is not
a ruler. Every man is a caliph; every human being is a
caliph; all citizens are caliphs.
"I am setting on the earth a caliph." [Koranic verse] He
did not say a ruler; he said a caliph. Every human being
is God's caliph on earth. However, they have altered it to
mean caliph-ruler, and the rest of mankind is merely a
herd of cattle. They are not also God's caliphs. He never
talked at all about rulers, presidents of republics, king-
doms, amirs, or anything like this. Those were not
mentioned at all in God's book. God talked in general
about human beings, trying to guide them to righteous-
ness before invoking his reward or punishment on the
day of the final judgement. [passage omitted] A prime
minister cannot rule in the name of God. A prime
minister can be criticized; he can be toppled and dem-
onstrations can be organized against him. He can be
tried. If he wears a religious robe and becomes a religious
ruler, how then can we try him? The president of any
country is a human being; he becomes president through
the ballot box or some other means. If he rules in the
name of God, he will be able to cut off heads in the name
of God. Heads will roll for him; heads will be his to cut
off because he rules in the name of God. He deals with
matters which have nothing to do with God. He deals
with roads, sewage, public works, supplies, politics, and
diplomacy; matters which can be right and can be wrong,
can be criticized, can be rejected, and can be changed.
Their program can be altered or rejected. How then, do
we allow someone to carry out a program through a
religious man.
Here lies the danger of people's ruling in the name of
God, that is, religious men. It is wrong that rulers should
govern in the name of God. Religion is education. We
welcome anyone who teaches us our religion. And we
reject anyone who rules us in the name of religion. The
latest farce which can be found in all this is the fact that
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/01/19: CIA-RDP05-01559R000400440012-4
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/01/19: CIA-RDP05-01559R000400440012-4
FBIS-NES-90-191
2 October 1990
our necks were cut in the name of religion by a Turkish
ruler who does not even know one word of Arabic, and
he cannot read the Koran. He only performs the prayers
for demagoguery and chalatanry; he performs them as an
act of courtesy. [passage omitted]
There should be no caliph after the Prophet's death. All
systems of government following the Prophet's death
were civilian ones. They were like presidents of repub-
lics. `Umar Bin al-Khattab [the second caliph], with all
our respect for him, was never a caliph according to all
the evidence. He was called the amir of the faithful,
namely, the president of the republic of the faithful, their
ruler, their king, or their amir. He was called the amir of
the faithful. He borrowed the word amir from the
Persians or the Byzantines. I think he borrowed it from
Persia. He was not called caliph; he was called amir of
the faithful; the noun amir was derived from the verb
'amara, which means: he who can issue orders, he who
has the authority to perform legislative and executive
duties. [passage omitted]
Well, the Saudi monarch has invited in the Americans.
The Muslim people are against such a decision. How can
they stand against it when he is the custodian of the two
holy mosques, God's messenger's caliph, and rules you
in the name of God? This cannot be allowed. When we
said you should not link Mecca and Medina to politics
they said: no, this is wrong. So who is right today? Saudi
Arabia is a sovereign state. It was afraid to be attacked,
so it invited in Christians and Jews. There is no doubt
about this. It is known throughout the world that the
U.S. forces are composed of Christians and Jews. Mecca
is part of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Therefore,
Mecca is under the protection of Christians and Jews.
I have no quarrel with King Fahd. He came to me and
told me the story. I asked him: How is it that you are
doing this? He said: I am afraid so I am calling upon the
devil for help. You said it yourself. You said: I would
make my country communist to fight America. Iraq is
much stronger than his country. He said Iraq is stronger
than we are; I am afraid, so I will call upon the devil for
help. You said yourself that you will ally yourself with
the devil-this was said, to me anyway. He said: You
repeated it yourself; you said that you will ally yourself
with the devil to defend your country. He said: I am
allying myself with the devil. There is no difference
between us, despite the propaganda campaign to the
contrary. We have repeated such assertions and will
repeat them whenever we meet with King Fahd or our
brothers in Saudi Arabia.
To link politics to religion, however, is a very serious
matter. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a state; it was
afraid of another country so it called for the help of a
third friendly country. It is very normal as far as inter-
national law and politics are concerned. Saudi Arabia is
not the first or the last country to enlist the help of
foreign troops to defend itself. There are French forces in
Chad, Senegal, the Central African Republic, Gabon,
Togo, and the Ivory Coast. All these neighboring African
countries have French troops to help them. U.S. forces
are in Turkey, the Philippines, Greece, Germany, and
Italy. Soviet forces are in Afghanistan and elsewhere.
Saudi Arabia is not the first country to enlist the help of
foreign forces, and will not be the last. However, putting
the holy places under the control of a given political
regime will make them follow the development of such a
political regime and its events.
It is illogical and unacceptable that Mecca should be
protected by Christians or Jews, or the Americans, or the
French, and so on. It is not a political matter that Saudi
Arabia should seek help from another country. My posi-
tion regarding this issue is clear. Saudi Arabia is an
independent state and can seek the help of another state.
This is the responsibility of the Arab people in the Arab
Peninsula. The people there may agree with the rulers to
seek the help of foreign forces rather than face Iraq. That is
their business. However, the matter arises regarding when
religious sites and the ruling regime are linked to politics;
this engenders a distortion of that religion. Mecca has been
desecrated. There is nobody who would like to go to Mecca
to perform the pilgrimage or the minor pilgramage at all. It
is impossible. We just cannot perform our pilgrimage and
minor pilgrimage as long as U.S., French, Danish, and
Canadian forces are present there.
We should consider this as a religious edict pronounced
by a Muslim, and not by a ruler or a politician or a
revolutionary. This is an religious edict for all Muslims
pronounced on this very day. It is impossible, illogical,
and unacceptable that our God would blame us if we
refuse to perform pilgrimage and minor pilgrimage
under the spears of the United States.
This does not mean that I am against Saudi Arabia's
seeking help from foreign forces. That is a matter for
Saudi rulers and for the Arab people there. They could be
right or could be forced to have taken the measures that
they did. Even if yourselves were attacked by a stronger
enemy, you might ask me to find any forces to defend
you. It would, however, have been better if the United
States, despised as it may be by us, had sought the
services of the Arab League, the Islamic states, the
Islamic Conference Organization and their forces. This
would have been better. But necessity made the Saudis
face the fact that they were facing tanks against them;
there was no force that would repel the Iraqis except the
West, the United States and its friends. They were
worried about oil, and these forces were ready to come to
the area immediately. This is another issue.
As a result of this, however, Mecca has come under U.S.
protection for the time being. It is wrong to link Mecca
with a political regime. When Abu Dhabi brought U.S.
and other forces to the area, people did not view this in
a religious context. They did not say that as Muslims we
do not accept this measure. They probably wondered
why Abu Dhabi brought in foreign forces and why it
became protected by them. They might have said that
Abu Dhabi was right. But when the U.S. forces
descended on Saudi Arabia, the whole Islamic nation
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/01/19: CIA-RDP05-01559R000400440012-4
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/01/19: CIA-RDP05-01559R000400440012-4
16 ARAB AFRICA
rose in uproar. Not because they looked at the matter in
a political and military context and that there was a
country about to attack Saudi Arabia and it was afraid of
an attack, therefore it sought help from friendly forces.
This is all normal. Muslims perceived the whole issue as
follows: Why is Mecca protected by U.S. forces? This
begs the following question: Why link Mecca to a polit-
ical regime? Mecca and Medina should be separate from
any political regime. Political regimes are independent.
They are free to side with the West and East, enter into
political alliances. These factors exist the world over,
and everybody is seeking their own interests. I do not
dispute the Saudi decision to seek help from foreign
states. This matter concerns it alone.
The problem is the linking of Mecca with a political
regime. Not necessarily Saudi Arabia. Let us suppose
that Mecca exists in Egypt, or in Libya, and Libya has
asked for the help of foreign forces. This would mean
that Mecca was under the protection of those foreign
forces. By foreign forces, I mean in particular Christian
or Jewish forces. This is unacceptable to Muslims.
I am asserting that linking religions and politics and
mixing them is a very grave and objectionable thing, and it
must be resisted. This is the greatest corruption. The
person in power should use politics, and the word politics
is totally at odds with religion. Etymologically, politics
means acting surreptitiously, traitorously, insidiously, and
resorting to taming and appeasing so as to attain some-
thing, and religion does not have these things. Would it be
reasonable to associate religion and trickery in hypocrisy?
Diplomacy means hypocrisy. How can one speak of reli-
gious diplomacy, or mix religion and diplomacy? This
would mean mixing religion and hypocrisy.
Thus, we are witnessing attempts to introduce demog-
ogy. Demogogy and charlatanism are reaching their peak
nowadays, most certainly, with politicians vying with
each other these days to present themselves as rulers of
the Islamic nation, and this is not proper. Power today is
diplomatic, military, political, economic, technological
rule, related to energy; with economic power, exploita-
tion of earth and space, and relations between the forces
in conflict on earth bearing no relation to religion.
We do not prevent anyone's dealing with these matters
to act according to religion. We must solely give him an
Islamic education. We must not set up an Islamic party
to rule people, which considers people outside it as
infidels. This is the charlatanism that starts to appear
nowadays, saying that whoever engages in charlatanism
belongs to the new religion, and he who does not enter
charlatanism is an infidel. This is a heretical innovation.
Any neologism introduced to religion is a heretical
innovation, and any such an innovation is wrong, and
anyone doing wrong will go to hell. [passage omitted]
FBIS-NES-90-191
2 October 1990
Yemeni Minister Arrives With Salih Message
LD0110173790 Rabat MAP in English 1310 GMT
I Oct 90
[Text] Rabat, Oct 1 (MAP) -Yemeni Minister of Elec-
tricity and Hydraulics `Abd-al-Wahab Mahmud [title as
received] arrived Sunday [30 September] afternoon in
Rabat with a message from President `Ali `Abdallah
Salih of Yemen to King Hassan II.
In an arrival statement, the Yemeni official said the
message was part of the underway consultations on the
situation in the Gulf and the moves of certain Arab
countries, such as Morocco in the first rank, to find a
peaceful settlement to the Gulf crisis in an Arab frame-
work. The visit is also part of the consolidation of
cooperation between Yemen and Morocco, the Yemeni
minister said.
Al-Bashir Announces `Tranquillity Period'
AB0110171490 Paris AFP in English 2317 GMT
30 Sep 90
[Excerpt] New York, United Nations, Sept 30 (AFP]-
Sudanese head of state `Umar Ahmed al-Bashir Sunday [30
September] announced a "tranquility period" in his war-
wracked African country to allow for vaccination of children.
Brigadier General al-Bashir, who was speaking at a
UNICEF World Summit for Children here, said the period
of tranquility in the disputed zones would last till the end of
the year. "If the rebels respond," he said, "then we are ready
to declare a permanent ceasefire and continue negotiations
to achieve peace." [passage omitted]
Underground Declares `Right' To Oust Al-Bashir
JN0110194690 AI-Shariqah AL-KHALIJ in Arabic
28 Sep 90 p 17
[Text] London-"AL-KHALIJ": A previously underground
group of Sudanese leaders has decided to go public and work
for the restoration of legitimacy and democracy to the
country. The group called on members of the Armed Forces
to join the ranks of Operation "I Am the Sudan," dedicated
to the deposition of the Lieutenant General `Umar Hasan
al-Bashir regime, which seized power on behalf of the
National Islamic Front.
Following several meetings and contacts with political party
leaders within the national democratic grouping encom-
passing all Sudanese opposition forces, the group said in a
statement it will use its right as a legitimate leadership to
verthrow the al-Bashir Government. Gen Fathi Ahmad,
he commander in chief deposed by the al-Bashir-led coup,
signed the statement on behalf of the group.
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/01/19: CIA-RDP05-01559R000400440012-4