3

From themillenniumreport.com:

Kingship is accursed in our Islamic Religion, in the Holy Qur’aan, because it is an imposed authority of One Person and his Family members to suppress the people and silence any other voice “of opposition” to the king’s despotic and completely dictatorial rules. So kings are denounced in the Holy Qur’aan in this verse: “Kings, when they enter a country, despoil it, and make the noblest of its people the meanest. Thus do they behave.” (27-34)

Nevertheless, the Saudi Family ignores this Qur’aanic verse, and alleges falsely that they are the strongest believers in the Holy Qur’aan, while in interim; they issue their strict orders to prohibit such Qur’aanic verses from being recited on the radio’s or the TVs. At the same time, such verses are strictly forbidden by them to appear written on any journal, because their recitation or printing does affect their Seat of Majesty!

The same claim appears also in this google group. Is it true that Saudi Arabia censors the verse (27:34) of the Quran?

  • 4
    Looking at your two links, my guess is that the Saudi rulers disapprove of attempts to call their legitimacy into question (not unique to Saudi Arabia) and approve of those encourage loyalty to actual rulers (again not unique to Saudi Arabia). So this verse is not censored (it is published in standard editions of the Koran in Saudi Arabia) but somebody who wants to quote it in the way suggested in your two links - both of which are primarily defamatory claims about the ancestry of the royal family - may be seen as subversive. – Henry May 7 '17 at 19:23
  • 3
    Incidentally, the quotation you think may be censored are the words of the Queen of Sheba talking to King Solomon rather than the words of God. Failing to give the Koranic attribution may also be something seen as a possible indicator of undesirable use of the text – Henry May 7 '17 at 19:25
  • @Henry "the quotation you think may be censored are the words of the Queen of Sheba" Yes, I know. That's why I added a link to the verse so. And there are many other texts in Islam that pretty much outright disavow monarchy. Obviously, Saudis don't like to talk much about them. And Saudi clerics allow the monarchy because the monarchy lets them impose their version of Sharia. If the monarchy tried to do something about it, they will get assassinated like king Foysal. Even their bodyguards might kill them. There is checks and balances among the clerics and the royal family. – Mohammad Sakib Arifin May 8 '17 at 7:43
  • This is moving off the topic of censorship, but since 1986 the Saudi monarchs have had the title "Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques" rather than "King of Saudi Arabia". The claim that assassination might be part of political checks and balances is precisely the sort of thing used to legitimate censorship and other controls: in England, Pope Pius V's 1570 bull Regnans in Excelsis saying something similar led to 200 years of penal laws against Roman Catholics – Henry May 8 '17 at 7:57
  • 1
    It seems fairly obvious from the link that the verses are describing what kings do when they invade another country, not to their own country. So why would then Saudis censor them? And as a practical matter, how could they do so? – jamesqf Jul 30 '17 at 18:25

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .