What's new

Syrian Civil War (Graphic Photos/Vid Not Allowed)

The Nusayri cult exposed;




All Arabs and Muslims must be pleased about the recent victories in Northern Syria and the elimination of numerous Nusayri child-murderous.

I don't think they worship Bashar, but they do believe Ali is God. I don't understand why? Where there early Muslims who actually believed that? A lot of Alawi's say 'Ya Ali Maddid' or 'Ali Madad'. I pretty sure first means Ali provide support and second means Ali came to our support, right? Isn't that shirk? If you believe Ali was supposed to be Caliph doesn't mean you can say above following phrases. So the emphasis on Ali instead of Muhammad has to mean something. In my opinion it is that ancient Persians hated Umar Ibn Khattab because he led battle against Persia and they were able to develop theory that Ali opposed it. So I understand why Iranian's made such theory but non-Iranian Shia's doesn't make sense why they follow that ideology.

I can't see how Shia's make sense out of their madhab. If i was born a Shia and was the same person I am today i would leave it since it seems too cult like for me. I've done my share of research to try understand their beliefs but in the end I don't see any justification for their sect.
 
Last edited:
.
I don't think they worship Bashar, but they do believe Ali is God. I don't understand why? Where there early Muslims who actually believed that? A lot of Alawi's say 'Ya Ali Maddid' or 'Ali Madad'. I pretty sure first means Ali provide support and second means Ali came to our support, right? Isn't that shirk? If you believe Ali was supposed to be Caliph doesn't mean you can say above following phrases. So the emphasis on Ali instead of Muhammad has to mean something. In my opinion it is that ancient Persians hated Umar Ibn Khattab because he led battle against Persia and they were able to develop theory that Ali opposed it. So I understand why Iranian's made such theory but non-Iranian Shia's doesn't make sense why they follow that ideology.

Many of them do.

Evident by such videos below and many more.


It's a deviant cult.

Notice that Shia Twelver's are more focused about Ali ibn Abi Talib (ra) and Hussein ibn Ali (ra) than Prophet Muhammad (saws) and Allah (swt). This is evident by their slogans and when they are put in situations where their inner thoughts are exposed. Such as on the battlefield.

I don't think so because Ali ibn Abi Talib (ra) was instrumental in those conquests and many other revered figures by Shia's.

The Nusayri's are definitely a cult not much different from the Druze and the Qadianis (cult found in mostly Pakistan). At least from an Islamic viewpoint.

Did you watch some of the recent videos from the front in Idlib Province and Latakia Province? Almost all captured Assadists were Nusayris.

Without the full support of the Nusayris for the Al-Assad regime his regime would have fallen long ago and many thousands upon thousands of Syrians, Palestinians and others would have been saved.
 
.
Many of them do.

Evident by such videos below and many more.


It's a deviant cult.

Notice that Shia Twelver's are more focused about Ali ibn Abi Talib (ra) and Hussein ibn Ali (ra) than Prophet Muhammad (saws) and Allah (swt). This is evident by their slogans and when they are put in situations where their inner thoughts are exposed. Such as on the battlefield.

I don't think so because Ali ibn Abi Talib (ra) was instrumental in those conquests and many other revered figures by Shia's.

The Nusayri's are definitely a cult not much different from the Druze and the Qadianis (cult found in mostly Pakistan). At least from an Islamic viewpoint.

Did you watch some of the recent videos from the front in Idlib Province and Latakia Province? Almost all captured Assadists were Nusayris.

Without the full support of the Nusayris for the Al-Assad regime his regime would have fallen long ago and many thousands upon thousands of Syrians, Palestinians and others would have been saved.

Yes I notice that from Shia twelvers, and I did plenty of research to try understanding why they are that way. In the end I didn't see religious justification for their beliefs. I feel bad that many are born into the ideology,and they don't really care to study it(and realize it's cult like). For me Alawi's aren't problem but Iranian twelvers are ones sponsoring twelver Shiasm in Arab world to advance their interests. If you ask Iranian twelvers what their opinion was on conquest of Persia you won't get answer or you will get evasive response. To me that is root of their beliefs. Btw, Shia's believe all hadith/history mentioning that Ali and his sons did take part in conquests are false hadiths.

Idlib takeover was impressive to the whole world. If they take Latakia they will go south on the coast to Tartus and ambush regime forces from rear or east of Hama. If they take Hama I believe it will turn tide of conflict. Unless Iran or Hezbollah go full force with ground forces.
 
.
Yes I notice that from Shia twelvers, and I did plenty of research to try understanding why they are that way. In the end I didn't see religious justification for their beliefs. I feel bad that many are born into the ideology,and they don't really care to study it(and realize it's cult like). For me Alawi's aren't problem but Iranian twelvers are ones sponsoring twelver Shiasm in Arab world to advance their interests. If you ask Iranian twelvers what their opinion was on conquest of Persia you won't get answer or you will get evasive response. To me that is root of their beliefs. Btw, Shia's believe all hadith/history mentioning that Ali and his sons did take part in conquests are false hadiths.

Idlib takeover was impressive to the whole world. If they take Latakia they will go south on the coast to Tartus and ambush regime forces from rear or east of Hama. If they take Hama I believe it will turn tide of conflict. Unless Iran or Hezbollah go full force with ground forces.

I would have no problem with the Alawis/Nusayris (call them what you want) had 99,9% of them not been supporting the Al-Assad regime and all that follows with that. They also support the allies of Al-Assad and their visions for the Muslim and Arab world and the ME as a whole. We as Arabs and Muslims cannot support such visions because those visions and plans are out there to hurt us.

The Shia Twelver's (the Wilayat al-Faqih version) is a whole other story. I won't even bother to comment on that. I see them as mortal enemies.

Guardianship of the Islamic Jurists - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Exposed here below;


His loyal pets/puppets and their vision for the region;


May I recommend you to read the works/listen to the interviews of Sheikh Muhammad Al-Husseini. A Shia Lebanese (Twelver) cleric that is doing a marvelous job of exposing Iran vis-á-vis the Arab world. A former high-ranking Hezbollah member too which 1000 times bigger insight than what you can find out there on the internet from the average Joe.


I am sure that you already listened to his speech in Iraq;


Al-Assad's regime is getting weaker for each month regardless of the billions of dollars that the Mullah's and Russia (to a smaller extend nowadays due to their poor economic situation which is still 100 times better than that of the Mullah's) are wasting. The Al-Assad regime are on loaned time but the quicker the Syrians remove him the better.
 
Last edited:
.
Syrian rebels fight army near Assad heartland

By REUTER$

AMMAN - Islamist rebels and Syrian army troops on Thursday were engaged in heavy fighting in Syria's northwestern Latakia province in areas close to President Bashar Assad's ancestral home, the army and rebels said.

CONTINUED: http://www.jpost.com/Breaking-News/S...artland-400779

...........

@500

I'm your father. :pop: :D
 
.
I would have no problem with the Alawis/Nusayris (call them what you want) had 99,9% of them not been supporting the Al-Assad regime and all that follows with that. They also support the allies of Al-Assad and their visions for the Muslim and Arab world and the ME as a whole. We as Arabs and Muslims cannot support such visions because those visions and plans are out there to hurt us.

The Shia Twelver's (the Wilayat al-Faqih version) is a whole other story. I won't even bother to comment on that. I see them as mortal enemies.

Guardianship of the Islamic Jurists - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Exposed here below;


His loyal pets/puppets and their vision for the region;


May I recommend you to read the works/listen to the interviews of Sheikh Muhammad Al-Husseini. A Shia Lebanese (Twelver) cleric that is doing a marvelous job of exposing Iran vis-á-vis the Arab world. A former high-ranking Hezbollah member too which 1000 times bigger insight than what you can find out there on the internet from the average Joe.


I am sure that you already listened to his speech in Iraq;


Al-Assad's regime is getting weaker for each month regardless of the billions of dollars that the Mullah's and Russia (to a smaller extend nowadays due to their poor economic situation which is still 100 times better than that of the Mullah's) are wasting. The Al-Assad regime are on loaned time but the quicker the Syrians remove him the better.
We don't reconize the self proclaimed shia traitors

The Wahhabis are getting desperate that's why they look into the dirty water and hope to find some fish

That's why they support any one who claimed to be shia lebanese or iraqi and they start to support them in order to create division between shia but they failed misrabely
 
.
We don't reconize the self proclaimed shia traitors

The Wahhabis are getting desperate that's why they look into the dirty water and hope to find some fish

That's why they support any one who claimed to be shia lebanese or iraqi and they start to support them in order to create division between shia but they failed misrabely

He is a Shia Twelver and moreover from a well-known Sadah family unlike most self-proclaimed Sadah families in Mullahstan. For instance your beloved "Sayyid" Khomenei was of Hindu/Kashmiri origin and a recent convert to Islam.

Muhammad al-Husseini is a former high-ranking member of Hezbollah too that knows the realities on the ground 1000 times better than all users here put together.

There is nothing called "Wahhabi". That's just a codeword that some of you Shia Twelvers use against the 350 million Sunni Arabs and over 1.2 billion Sunni Muslims worldwide. People from Mauritania to Indonesia have by large the same views about your likes.

He is speaking the truth. You are just crying because he exposed your Mullah "Gods" in Qom and Tehran. I wonder who is the traitor here? An "Arab" that tries to act more Iranian than the Iranian themselves and who supports a project of Mullahstan that is aimed at the destruction of the Arab world and people or those who stand up against this evil bravely?

There is already enormous division. In Iraq alone there are 1000's of Shia groups with conflicting interests and they have fought against each other many times and currently they are fighting for power too. Let alone political groups, "holy" clerics fighting for power etc.
Southern Iraq still looks like a Sub-Saharan African country despite flooding in oil and gas and despite having peace largely for 10+ years. Now Basrawis want autonomy so they can become another Qatar.:lol:

You need to see a doctor and return to the fold. Most Shia Arabs do not love or like Iran or their Mullah's. Wake up and stop kissing their behind unless you are an Iranian posing as an Arab here.

@Falcon29 this above is a perfect example of a typical brainwashed "Wilayat al-Faqih" supporter. Then people ask us to live in peace with such likes.
 
Last edited:
.
Syrian rebels fight army near Assad heartland

By REUTER$

AMMAN - Islamist rebels and Syrian army troops on Thursday were engaged in heavy fighting in Syria's northwestern Latakia province in areas close to President Bashar Assad's ancestral home, the army and rebels said.

CONTINUED: http://www.jpost.com/Breaking-News/S...artland-400779

...........

@500

I'm your father. :pop: :D
Rebels fight in Latakia province for over 3 years. But lame journos and Hazzy the kid discovered it only now. :coffee:

In fact rebels are being slowly pushed out. In 2012 rebels controlled Haffah, less than 20 km from Latakia city, now their foreground is Salma, 35 km from Latakia city. Just recently loyalists took Durin next to Salma.
 
.
Rebels fight in Latakia province for over 3 years. But lame journos and Hazzy the kid discovered it only now. :coffee:

In fact rebels are being slowly pushed out. In 2012 rebels controlled Haffah, less than 20 km from Latakia city, now their foreground is Salma, 35 km from Latakia city. Just recently loyalists took Durin next to Salma.

So now that I side with rebel I made you praise loyalists. I like the power I have. :-) :pop:
 
.
@2800

There is nothing called "Wahhabi". It's the Hanbali figh which only around 33,3% of KSA's population follows if not less. Concentrated in Najd mainly. Anyway Hanbalis exist all over the Arab and Islamic world and they are Sunni Muslims. There is almost no difference between Sunni Muslims of the Shafi'i, Hanbali, Maliki and Hanafi madahib.

Fact of the matter is that Iranians and hostile Shia's consider everyone that is against their holy cows (the Mullah's and their demonic Wilayat al-Faqih) rules for "Wahhabis". This means 95% of all the 350 million Sunni Arabs and 1.2 billion Sunnis.

You posting Western propaganda nonsense that is false and has nothing to do with the topic at hand is your own problem. This is a tiny shop in a city with many shops and even major shopping centers that are used by the millions of locals and the millions of pilgrims alike. Personally though I don't want it but I don't want fast food either but unfortunately people buy it all over the world.

Also handbags from whatever firm/designer has nothing to do with Islam last time I checked nor are handbags banned in Islam.

Your Indian holy cow has invented his genealogy linking him to Arabs and in particular Ahl al-Bayt like many other Farsi "Sadah families". He could barely speak any Arabic too!

Allow me to post this @Irfan Baloch to expose Al-Assad's crimes against humanity and his backers.

Chemical attack (sarin) used on Syrian people. Almost 2000 Syrians, mainly women and children died in that attack back in August 2013!


Horrible, horrible video but the truth must be told.

@Dr.Thrax @Antaréss @Falcon29 and other Arabic speakers.

Please watch this excellent video from this great Syrian sheikh.

 
Last edited:
.
It has been Qatar, Turkey, NATO arming Libyans even while Gaddafi was in power. Then NATO put a no fly zone and bombed Libya killing scores of civilians and destroying its infrastructure. But that doesn't seem to bother you. What bothers you is Iran supposedly arming people in Libya (and you provide zero evidence to back up your claim). Your world is upside down and full of hypocrisy. All these guys armed anti Gaddafi factions in the spirit of 'spreading democracy', but as soon as Gaddafi was overthrown, they left Libya to the vultures. But Iran is somehow to blame for that. They don't care if Libya turns into Somalia as long as they got what they wanted. The same story will repeat itself in Syria. They just want Assad out, then you can all fight amongst yourselves for all eternity. And nobody will care. Not the politicians and not the media, just like they stopped caring about Libya. You think Obama/Cameron/Hollande/Netanyahu care about Syrians and whether or not they live under democracy?:omghaha:. First Obama, GCC and co. arm IS and similar radicals to the teeth, then they arm 'moderate' JAN and FSA. Then they sit back and watch you massacre each other, all the while posturing to the world that they are fighting IS. But you're totally cool with that as long as they send you new javelins and TOWs every now and then, and as always, Iran is enemy #1. Do you think that after Assad is gone, IS and JAN will lay down their arms and adopt democracy?

You say Iran 'wants to see Sunnis dying anywhere and everywhere', so it arms Sunnis in Libya through Sunni Sudan:crazy::crazy:? Meanwhile GCC, NATO, Israel supported Sunni IS is massacring Christians, Sunnis and Shia all over the place but again your main concern is Iran. Even if they wanted 'the region to be in chaos to form their empire', they don't have nearly enough resources and manpower to do it. You forgot that their economy is under sanctions? Man your local wahhabi cleric really did a number on you. I understand your enmity towards Iran for supporting Assad, but the illogical and ignorant nature of your post speaks for itself. Speaking of Assad, while you post regularly about him killing civilians, What do you think about what KSA is doing in Yemen? What about their role in Bahrain and Egypt? I know the Iranians are not choir boys but that propaganda picture was pure lies. They should put a picture of King Salman and a bloodstained maps of Yemen and Bahrain.
They armed a side who was toppling a dictator. Here Iran is arming a side purely to fuel war. NATO didn't target civilians on purpose, and they destroyed military infrastructure. Assad destroying Syria and purposely targeting civilians doesn't seem to bother you.
Where did I make the claim that any of those leaders cared about Syrians? You're just making up words now.
The sunni sudanese government massacres Sunnis too, just fyi, there's this region called Darfur.
Get your head out of your *** and look at things from a non-retarded-idiot point of view, please.

Rebels fight in Latakia province for over 3 years. But lame journos and Hazzy the kid discovered it only now. :coffee:

In fact rebels are being slowly pushed out. In 2012 rebels controlled Haffah, less than 20 km from Latakia city, now their foreground is Salma, 35 km from Latakia city. Just recently loyalists took Durin next to Salma.
Rebels were being pushed out due to a shaky supply route and poor organization. They're now back on the offensive. And regime retook Durin for only 6 hours and then lost it again.
 
.
So now that I side with rebel I made you praise loyalists. I like the power I have. :-) :pop:
I merely post the facts.

Rebels were being pushed out due to a shaky supply route and poor organization. They're now back on the offensive. And regime retook Durin for only 6 hours and then lost it again.
No, Durin is still in loy hands.
 
.
I merely post the facts.


No, Durin is still in loy hands.

It does not matter in the wider picture. It will fall in the hands of the Syrian opposition eventually. In the end Al-Assad will be toppled. There is no way back today. He had his chance years ago but blew it. Let him tarnish his name and that of his family further. It's a shame that this cannot happen without him killing Syrians in the thousands in the process and destroying Syria further.

@Dr.Thrax

The Sudanese regime is a unreliable regime that switches sides whenever it pleases them. Their role outside of Sudan is more or less irrelevant and it's a sanctioned regime.

They are basically your annoying type of "friend" that always bothers you with nonsense and who tries to milk you for even the most ridiculous favors. That's the Sudanese regime for you.
 
.
@2800

There is nothing called "Wahhabi". It's the Hanbali figh which only around 33,3% of KSA's population follows if not less. Concentrated in Najd mainly. Anyway Hanbalis exist all over the Arab and Islamic world and they are Sunni Muslims. There is almost no difference between Sunni Muslims of the Shafi'i, Hanbali, Maliki and Hanafi madahib.

Fact of the matter is that Iranians and hostile Shia's consider everyone that is against their holy cows (the Mullah's and their demonic Wilayat al-Faqih) rules for "Wahhabis". This means 95% of all the 350 million Sunni Arabs and 1.2 billion Sunnis.

You posting Western propaganda nonsense that is false and has nothing to do with the topic at hand is your own problem. This is a tiny shop in a city with many shops and even major shopping centers that are used by the millions of locals and the millions of pilgrims alike. Personally though I don't want it but I don't want fast food either but unfortunately people buy it all over the world.

Also handbags from whatever firm/designer has nothing to do with Islam last time I checked nor are handbags banned in Islam.

Your Indian holy cow has invented his genealogy linking him to Arabs and in particular Ahl al-Bayt like many other Farsi "Sadah families". He could barely speak any Arabic too!

Chemical attack (sarin) used on Syrian people. Almost 2000 Syrians, mainly women and children died in that attack back in August 2013!
Too much nonsense. Chemical attack was done by FSA and Turkey to convince US to invade Syria.

Here is a brief history of Saudi Wahhabism.

Today 80% of Suadis, 20% of Egyptians (Salafi and wahhabi), 15% of Qataris, 15% of Kuwaitis, 30% of Jordanis, 5% of Iraqis, 15% of Palestinians (salafi and wahhabi), 15% of Tunisians (salafi and wahhabi) and 10-15% of Pakistanis are wahhabis.



Saudi Wahhabism and Conspiracies

Brief History of the Saudi Wahhabism and Conspiracies

The-Saudi-Arabia-Conspiracy-31.jpg


The rise of extremism in the form of the Wahhabi movement during the twentieth century could not have taken place without the huge investments made by the Al-Saud family in conjunction with the American in the name of democracy, freedom and human rights to destroy Arab nationalism, socialism, secularism, and of course Islam.

Haytham A. K. Radwan

While Islam as a faith is the main religion in 48 countries, and Muslims around the globe are rapidly growing, Saudi Islam is the main sectarian movement in Saudi Arabia, and its influence is also rapidly growing. Acting as the protector of Islam through its own form of Islam, while it remains an American client state through its location, petrodollar’s cheque book, and American diplomatic and military protection, it could be argued that among the major influential players, Saudi Arabia’s policies, its own form of Islam, and its relations with the US, undoubtedly constitute one of the most serious threats to the security of the world today.

Indeed, since the eighteenth century, and in conjunction with the Wahhabi religious establishment, Saudi Arabia became the centre for a new brand of religious imperialism based on sectarian movements. For nearly a century, the kingdom’s religious fervour kept the oil-rich country in the Western political camp. Today, the existence of radical Islamic groups is in part a legacy of the Saudi form of Islam, not Islam itself, and the Saudi-US alliance, and of political decisions made to address a different set of security concerns which helped no one accept the US projects.

While Islam itself as a faith is not a threat to international security, it is Saudi Islam that is a threat. Indeed, it is fair to say that the problems within the Muslim world today rise not from Islam itself, but from the Saudi form of Islam, Muslim religious leaders who are relying on Saudi support, and their own interpretations of the Quran. It is also fair to say that questions pertaining to why Americans see Islam as a threat to world stability is because of the American failures to distinguish between Islam as a faith and Saudi Islam. In the US, Islam has been perceived as a threat to its civilization. However, while Americans knew that Islam itself is not a threat to their civilization, the majority of American politicians, journalists, and ideologists have ignored the truth that the threat is coming from Saudi Islam. This is seen as a tactic to avoid any damage to the relations with the House of Saud in order to keep economic and political interests alive.

As a result, the Saudi-US relationship and the Saudi Wahhabi expansionist policy not only transform Muslim world politics, but also world politics. Saudaisation movements may expand into broader struggle throughout the Arab and Muslim nations and beyond. In some parts of the Muslim world, steps toward Saudaisation have already begun while the US is turning a blind eye to the Saudi rulers. At the same time, the US is also busy trying to convince the world that their policies towards Saudi Arabia is about promoting democracy and protecting human rights.

OilSaudi.jpg

Apart from the obvious results of such a conflict, such as loss of power in some Muslim countries, it would impact on the behaviour of other Western and non-Western states which could use the conflict for more ideological and tactical reasons. So, because religion has no borders, it could become global religious and sectarian conflicts.

It is possible we are already seeing the war in Afghanistan, in Pakistan, in Iraq, in Lebanon, in Gaza, in Yemen and of course, the non-stoppable Wahhabi-American pressure on Syria.

Why? This is because Wahhabism itself is nothing more than an extension of Western imperialism. This short paper shed light on the roots and origin of the Saudi Wahhabism.

The Roots of Wahhabism:

Although the origin of the Saudis’ current expansionist and extremist policy dates back to the religious and military alliance with the Wahhabi establishment, it was actually the British who initially provided the Saudis with the ideas of Wahhabism and made them its leaders for their own purposes to destroy the Muslim Ottoman Empire.[1] Indeed, the intricate details of this intriguing British conspiracy are to be found in the memoirs of its master spy, titled “Confessions of a British Spy” (For details see Sindi 2004). [2]In his memories, the British spy “Hempher” who was one of many spies sent by London to the Arabian Peninsula in order to destabilize the Ottoman Empire has stated:

“In the Hijri year, the Minister of Colonies sent me to Egypt, Iraq, Hejaz and Istanbul to act as a spy and to obtain information necessary and sufficient for the breaking up of Muslims. The Ministry appointed nine more people, full of agility and courage, for the same mission and at the same time. In addition to the money, information and maps we would need, we were given a list containing names of statesmen, scholars, and chiefs of tribes. I can never forget! When I said farewell to the secretary, he said, the future of our State is dependent on your success. Therefore you should exert your utmost energy”. (Nabhani, see also confession of a British spy). [3]

As a result, a small Bedouin army was established with the help of British undercover spies. In time, this army grew into a major menace that eventually terrorized the entire Arabian Peninsula up to Damascus, and caused one of the worst Fitnah (violent civil strife) in the history of Islam.[4] In the process, this army was able to viciously conquer most of the Arabian Peninsula to create the first Saudi-Wahhabi State.[5]

After the death of Muhammad ibn Saud, his son, Abd al-Aziz, became Ad Diriyah’s new emir who captured Riyadh in 1773. By 1781, the al-Saud family’s territory extended outward from Ad Diriyah, located in the Arabian Peninsula’s central region of Najd, about one hundred miles in every direction. In 1788, Saud, son of Abd al-Aziz, was declared heir apparent. He led his Wahhabi warriors on more raids.[6] To fight what they considered Muslim “polytheists” and “heretics”, the Saudis-Wahhabis shocked the entire Muslim world when in 1802, invaded Iraq’s Shiite majority, sacked Karbala, where Hussein, the grandson of the prophet Muhammad and the leading Shiite martyr is buried, and also demolished the massive golden dome and intricate glazed tiles above Hussein Bin Ali’s tomb, a holy shrine to Shiite Muslims. In the same year, the Saudi-Wahhabi warriors committed another atrocity in Taif, just outside Mecca. Again in 1810 they ruthlessly killed many innocent people across the Arabian Peninsula. They raided and pillaged many pilgrimage caravans and sever major cities in Hejaz including the two holiest cities of Makah and Medina.

In Makah they turned away pilgrims, and in Medina they attacked and desecrated Prophet Mohammad’s Mosque, opened his grave, and sold and distributed its valuable relics and expensive jewels.[7]The Saudi-Wahhabi crimes angered the ottomans.


In 1818, an Egyptian army destroyed the Saudis-Wahhabis army and razed their capital to the ground. The Wahhabi Imam Abdullah al-Saud and two of his followers were sent to Istanbul in chains where they were publicly beheaded. The rest of the Saudi-Wahhabi clan was held in captivity in Cairo. The destruction of the Saudi-Wahhabi warrior’s alliance did not last long. It was soon revived with the help of British colonialist.[8]

Accordingly, when Britain colonized Bahrain in 1820 and to expand its colonization in the area, the Wahhabi House of Saud sought British protection through Wahhabi Imams.[9] As a result, the British sent Colonel Lewis Pelly in 1865 to Riyadh to establish an official British treaty with the Wahhabi House.[10] Between 1871 and 1876, power changed hand seven times and the Wahhabis led more raids. This marked the end of the second Saudi state. This period however, kept the Wahhabi movement alive, ready to influence Muslims again in the twentieth century—and in the twenty-first.[11]

The twentieth century’s Saudi Arabia comprises the third period of Wahhabis political power. It has changed Saudi Arabia dramatically and the Saudi-Wahhabi’s kingdom has changed the century significantly. The first interval began in 1902, when Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud captured Riyadh and proceeded to re-establish a Wahhabi Kingdom. In 1904, Abd al-Aziz captured Anaiza, an oasis near Hail. In 1913, he captured Al Hasa Province, but had no idea that he had just acquired a quarter of the world’s oil.[12]

Not surprisingly, after his return from Al Hasa, the British helped ibn Saud with the establishments of the Ikhwan (Muslim Brotherhood), an army of fierce religious warriors. The Ikhwan looked for the opportunity to fight non-Wahhabi Muslims—and non-Muslims as well—and they took Abd al Aziz as their leader. The Ikhwan movement began to emerge among the Bedouin. They abandoned their traditional way of life in the desert and moved to an agricultural settlement. By moving to agricultural settlement, the Ikhwan intended to take up a new way of life to enforce a rigid Islamic orthodoxy.[13]

To achieve his goals, on December 26, 1915, Abd al Aziz signed treaty with Sir Percy Cox, Britain’s political agent in the Arab Gulf. The British praised Abd al-Aziz as the greatest Arab man,[14] and recognised his [Abd al- Aziz] sovereignty over Najd and Al-Hasa (central and eastern Arabia), while Abd al-Aziz promised the British that he would not have any dealing with any other country without the British approval and supplies.[15] In addition, the British praised Abd al-Aziz despite his unattractive traits such as public beheading, amputations and floggings. The advisor of Abd al-Aziz for more over 30 years, Harry St John Philby, had described him as ‘the greatest Arab since the Prophet Muhammad’. Philby was sent to Arabia by the British government to assist Abd al-Aziz, perhaps to play kingmaker, in 1917.[16]

Indeed, when in 1915, there were more than 200 hujar in and around Najd and nearly 100,000 Ikhwan waiting to fight, the British supplied Abd al-Aziz with weapons and money. The word hijra (hujar) was related to the term for the Prophet’s emigration from Mecca to Medina in 622. This period ended in 1934, with the declaration of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia under the leadership of Abd al-Aziz Ibn Saud.

Since then, Abd al-Aziz declared the relationship between oil and religion. Indeed, after establishing his British-made Wahhabi State, the Wahhabi king and imam Abd al-Aziz became an autocratic dictator who named the whole country after his own family, calling it the Kingdom of “Saudi” Arabia.[17] Since then the House of Saud has allocated a significant amount of oil revenues to building Islamic schools and mosques throughout the Muslim world,[18]which eventually has inspired radical Islam.[19] At that time however, Abd al-Aziz had various goals: he wanted to take Hail from the Al Rashid’ clan, to extend his control into the northern deserts (Syria), and to take over the Hejaz and the Persian Gulf coast. While Cox openly encouraged Abd al-Aziz to attack al-Rasheed’s clans to divert them from helping the Ottomans he prevented him from taking over much of the Gulf coast, where they [the British] had established protectorates.[20] They also opposed Abd al Aziz’s efforts to extend his influence beyond the Jordanian, Syrian, and Iraqi deserts because of their own imperial interests. But Abd al-Aziz continued his mission, and after he began the siege of Hail, the city surrendered to the Saudi’s warriors. In 1922, the Ikhwan warriors attacked Amman, the capital of Trans-Jordan. This caused problem with the British because, unlike Mecca and Medina, Hail had no religious significance. However, Abd al-Aziz apologised to the British. The British asked him to draw borders between his kingdom and Jordan, Iraq, and Kuwait.[21]



Today, although a few Wahhabi religious leaders have tried to “distant” themselves from the House of Saud’s brutality and anti-Islamic policies in a vain attempt to save Wahhabism’s image from further deterioration, most of the top Wahhabi religious leaders are still firmly behind the House of Saud. In fact, most Wahhabi leaders have openly supported the House of Saud’s unpopular domestic and foreign policies. Indeed, in the Arab nations, the rise of extremism in the form of the Wahhabi movement during the twentieth century could not have taken place without the huge investments made by the Al-Saud family in conjunction with the American in the name of democracy, freedom and human rights to destroy Arab nationalism, socialism, secularism, and of course Islam. This has intensified since the discovery of oil in the 1930s, reached its peak during World War II, and the Cold War, and took more extreme directions since the establishment of the Iranian Islamic Republic in 1979, and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the same year.


References:

[1] – Abdullah-M, S 2004, ‘Britain and the Rise of Wahhabism and the House of Saud’, Kana’an Bulletin, vol. IV, no. 361, pp. 1-9.

[2] -Sindi, A-M 2004, ‘Britain and the Rise of Wahhabism and the House of Saud’, Kana’n bulletin, vol. IV, no. 361.

[3] -Nabhani, Y Khulasat-ul Kalam, Dar-ul-kitab-is-sufi (the House of Sufi book), Cairo, Egypt, see also Confession of a British Spy and British Enmity Against Islam, available at

[4] Weston, M 2008, Prophets and Princes: Saudi Arabia from Muhammad to the Present, Wiley &Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey.

[5] -Sindi, A-M 2004, ‘Britain and the Rise of Wahhabism and the House of Saud’, Kana’n bulletin, vol. IV, no. 361.

[6] Weston, M 2008a, Prophets and Princes: Saudi Arabia from Muhammad to the Present, Wiley &Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey.

[7] Ibid; Sindi, A-M 2004, ‘Britain and the Rise of Wahhabism and the House of Saud’, Kana’n bulletin, vol. IV, no. 361.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Weston, M 2008, Prophets and Princes: Saudi Arabia from Muhammad to the Present, Wiley &Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey; Troeller, G 1976, the Birth of Saudi Arabia: Britain and the Rise of the House of Saud, Frank Cass, London.

[10] Lacey, R 1981, the Kingdom: Arabia and the House of Saud, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York.

[11] Weston, M 2008, Prophets and Princes: Saudi Arabia from Muhammad to the Present, Wiley &Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Ibid.

[14] Aburish, SK 1994, A Brutal Friendship: the West and the Arab Elite,first edn, St. Martin’s Press, New York.

[15] Weston, M 2008, Prophets and Princes: Saudi Arabia from Muhammad to the Present, Wiley &Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey.

[16] Aburish, SK 1994, A Brutal Friendship: the West and the Arab Elite, first edn, St. Martin’s Press, New York.

[17] Sindi, A-M 2004, ‘Britain and the Rise of Wahhabism and the House of Saud’, Kana’n bulletin, vol. IV, no. 361.

[18] Long, D 1979, The Wilson Quarterly (1976), vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 83-91.

[19] Redissi, H 2008, ‘The Refutation of Wahhabism in Arabic Sources, 1745-1932′, in Kingdom without Borders: Saudi Arabia’s Political, Religious and Media Frontiers, ed. A-R M, Hurst, London, pp. 157-177.

[20] Aburish, SK 1994, A Brutal Friendship: the West and the Arab Elite,first edn, St. Martin’s Press, New York.

[21] Weston, M 2008, Prophets and Princes: Saudi Arabia from Muhammad to the Present, Wiley &Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey.


Saudi regime has ruined 90% of Islamic historical sites in Mecca and Medina:


Saudis say No to the Prophet Muhammad, Yes to Paris Hilton

Omid Safi | Nov 26, 2012 | Comments (138)

featuring…. Paris Hilton.


Here was Paris Hilton’s excited tweet:

Loving my beautiful new store that just opened at Mecca Mall in Saudi Arabia!
Paris Hilton

So this is what it has come to. The so-called “Guardians of the two sanctuaries” bulldoze Islamic history, tear down the houses associated with the Prophet and his family, and in its place put up shopping malls by vapid symbols of the most crass capitalistic materialism the world has to offer. No wonder many are talking about the transformation of Mecca into another Las Vegas.

Yes, the Saudis have bulldozed:



mecca_nightmare_las_vegas.jpg




*An Ottoman Fortress overlooking and protecting Mecca, plus a whole mountain, was removed to put down the monstrosity known as the Mecca Royal Clock-Tower, aka “Big Ben on crack.”

*The house the Prophet was born in, currently a library, is under consideration for destruction.

Wahhabi_modernization_of_Mecca_khadija_house_destroyed_1.jpg





*The house of the Prophet’s wife, Khadija, who is referred to by Muslims as the “Mother of the Faithful” was recently torn down, and in its place a row of toilets were established.

*Old Ottoman and Abbasid columns will likely be torn down to make room for a 680 million dollar expansion of the Great Mosque.



baqi.gif





*The old historic cemeteries of Jannat al-Baqi, containing the remains of the descendants of the Prophet, have been bulldozed, and nothing but a dirt mound remains of the former shrines there.

Sami Angawi, the director of the Hajj Research Center which is trying to preserve what’s left of the Islamic heritage of Saudi Arabia says of the Saudi state:

“They are turning the holy sanctuary into a machine, a city which has no identity, no heritage, no culture and no natural environment. They've even taken away the mountains.”

Often the excuse is used that with the global increase in the number of Muslims coming to Mecca, these expansions are necessary to accommodate these pilgrims. However, there is no reason why the hotels for the pilgrims couldn’t be put outside the historical center of Mecca, thus preserving the monuments.



FRHI_Makkah_Royal_Clock_Tower_suite.jpg





Furthermore, in place of these historical monuments, many of which hold a sacred significance to all Muslims outside of the Wahhabi sect, the Saudi state is building five star hotels that cost as much as $7,000 a night. In other words, these policies are not only bulldozing the history of Islam, they are also subverting the radical egalitarian teachings of Islam most beautifully symbolized in the rich and poor standing shoulder to shoulder wearing simple unadorned clothing in the House of the One God. Now the poor teeming masses are below, and the ultra-rich can reside in their 5-star suites looking down at the Ka’ba. Lastly, these absurd towers even displace the very symbolism and centrality of the Ka’ba.



1-2_Walking_to_Kaba_300.jpg





La hawla wa la quwwata illa bi Allah.

"They paved Paradise,
Put up a parking lot."


The Saudis make a great deal of their honorific as the “Caretaker of the two Noble Sanctuaries” in Mecca and Medina. One has to wonder about a kind of Care that says no to the legacy of Muhammad, bulldozes it, and invites Paris Hilton in its place. These shrines, these historical sites, indeed Mecca and Medina, do not belong to the Saudi state. They are treasures belonging to the worldwide Muslim population, indeed the whole of humanity (as the Prophet was sent as a Mercy to all the Universes). If the Saudis insist on calling themselves the caretakers of the two sanctuaries, their first task should be in fact to take care of them--and not bulldoze them. If they can not or will do not so, then someone else has to step up to provide care for these historical and sacred heritages of humanity.

The Prophet Muhammad once said that Islam began in this world as a stranger, and it will someday return as a stranger.

In looking at the uber-Capitalist, history-bulldozing practice of the Saudi/Wahhabi state, one cannot help but cry at the strange kind of Islam that now rules over the House of God and the home of the Prophet.

I can't post the link please search the title on google find the website and read the comments.

 
Last edited:
.
Too much nonsense. Chemical attack was done by FSA and Turkey to convince US to invade Syria.

Here is a brief history of Saudi Wahhabism.

Today 80% of Suadis, 20% of Egyptians (Salafi and wahhabi), 15% of Qataris, 15% off Kuwaitis, 30% of Jordanis, 5% of Iraqis, 15% of Palestinians (salafi and wahhabi), 15% of Tunisians (salafi and wahhabi) and 10-15% of Pakistanis are wahhabis.


Saudi Wahhabism and Conspiracies

Brief History of the Saudi Wahhabism and Conspiracies

The-Saudi-Arabia-Conspiracy-31.jpg


The rise of extremism in the form of the Wahhabi movement during the twentieth century could not have taken place without the huge investments made by the Al-Saud family in conjunction with the American in the name of democracy, freedom and human rights to destroy Arab nationalism, socialism, secularism, and of course Islam.

Haytham A. K. Radwan

While Islam as a faith is the main religion in 48 countries, and Muslims around the globe are rapidly growing, Saudi Islam is the main sectarian movement in Saudi Arabia, and its influence is also rapidly growing. Acting as the protector of Islam through its own form of Islam, while it remains an American client state through its location, petrodollar’s cheque book, and American diplomatic and military protection, it could be argued that among the major influential players, Saudi Arabia’s policies, its own form of Islam, and its relations with the US, undoubtedly constitute one of the most serious threats to the security of the world today.

Indeed, since the eighteenth century, and in conjunction with the Wahhabi religious establishment, Saudi Arabia became the centre for a new brand of religious imperialism based on sectarian movements. For nearly a century, the kingdom’s religious fervour kept the oil-rich country in the Western political camp. Today, the existence of radical Islamic groups is in part a legacy of the Saudi form of Islam, not Islam itself, and the Saudi-US alliance, and of political decisions made to address a different set of security concerns which helped no one accept the US projects.

While Islam itself as a faith is not a threat to international security, it is Saudi Islam that is a threat. Indeed, it is fair to say that the problems within the Muslim world today rise not from Islam itself, but from the Saudi form of Islam, Muslim religious leaders who are relying on Saudi support, and their own interpretations of the Quran. It is also fair to say that questions pertaining to why Americans see Islam as a threat to world stability is because of the American failures to distinguish between Islam as a faith and Saudi Islam. In the US, Islam has been perceived as a threat to its civilization. However, while Americans knew that Islam itself is not a threat to their civilization, the majority of American politicians, journalists, and ideologists have ignored the truth that the threat is coming from Saudi Islam. This is seen as a tactic to avoid any damage to the relations with the House of Saud in order to keep economic and political interests alive.

As a result, the Saudi-US relationship and the Saudi Wahhabi expansionist policy not only transform Muslim world politics, but also world politics. Saudaisation movements may expand into broader struggle throughout the Arab and Muslim nations and beyond. In some parts of the Muslim world, steps toward Saudaisation have already begun while the US is turning a blind eye to the Saudi rulers. At the same time, the US is also busy trying to convince the world that their policies towards Saudi Arabia is about promoting democracy and protecting human rights.

OilSaudi.jpg

Apart from the obvious results of such a conflict, such as loss of power in some Muslim countries, it would impact on the behaviour of other Western and non-Western states which could use the conflict for more ideological and tactical reasons. So, because religion has no borders, it could become global religious and sectarian conflicts.

It is possible we are already seeing the war in Afghanistan, in Pakistan, in Iraq, in Lebanon, in Gaza, in Yemen and of course, the non-stoppable Wahhabi-American pressure on Syria.

Why? This is because Wahhabism itself is nothing more than an extension of Western imperialism. This short paper shed light on the roots and origin of the Saudi Wahhabism.

The Roots of Wahhabism:

Although the origin of the Saudis’ current expansionist and extremist policy dates back to the religious and military alliance with the Wahhabi establishment, it was actually the British who initially provided the Saudis with the ideas of Wahhabism and made them its leaders for their own purposes to destroy the Muslim Ottoman Empire.[1] Indeed, the intricate details of this intriguing British conspiracy are to be found in the memoirs of its master spy, titled “Confessions of a British Spy” (For details see Sindi 2004). [2]In his memories, the British spy “Hempher” who was one of many spies sent by London to the Arabian Peninsula in order to destabilize the Ottoman Empire has stated:

“In the Hijri year, the Minister of Colonies sent me to Egypt, Iraq, Hejaz and Istanbul to act as a spy and to obtain information necessary and sufficient for the breaking up of Muslims. The Ministry appointed nine more people, full of agility and courage, for the same mission and at the same time. In addition to the money, information and maps we would need, we were given a list containing names of statesmen, scholars, and chiefs of tribes. I can never forget! When I said farewell to the secretary, he said, the future of our State is dependent on your success. Therefore you should exert your utmost energy”. (Nabhani, see also confession of a British spy). [3]

As a result, a small Bedouin army was established with the help of British undercover spies. In time, this army grew into a major menace that eventually terrorized the entire Arabian Peninsula up to Damascus, and caused one of the worst Fitnah (violent civil strife) in the history of Islam.[4] In the process, this army was able to viciously conquer most of the Arabian Peninsula to create the first Saudi-Wahhabi State.[5]

After the death of Muhammad ibn Saud, his son, Abd al-Aziz, became Ad Diriyah’s new emir who captured Riyadh in 1773. By 1781, the al-Saud family’s territory extended outward from Ad Diriyah, located in the Arabian Peninsula’s central region of Najd, about one hundred miles in every direction. In 1788, Saud, son of Abd al-Aziz, was declared heir apparent. He led his Wahhabi warriors on more raids.[6] To fight what they considered Muslim “polytheists” and “heretics”, the Saudis-Wahhabis shocked the entire Muslim world when in 1802, invaded Iraq’s Shiite majority, sacked Karbala, where Hussein, the grandson of the prophet Muhammad and the leading Shiite martyr is buried, and also demolished the massive golden dome and intricate glazed tiles above Hussein Bin Ali’s tomb, a holy shrine to Shiite Muslims. In the same year, the Saudi-Wahhabi warriors committed another atrocity in Taif, just outside Mecca. Again in 1810 they ruthlessly killed many innocent people across the Arabian Peninsula. They raided and pillaged many pilgrimage caravans and sever major cities in Hejaz including the two holiest cities of Makah and Medina.

In Makah they turned away pilgrims, and in Medina they attacked and desecrated Prophet Mohammad’s Mosque, opened his grave, and sold and distributed its valuable relics and expensive jewels.[7]The Saudi-Wahhabi crimes angered the ottomans.

In 1818, an Egyptian army destroyed the Saudis-Wahhabis army and razed their capital to the ground. The Wahhabi Imam Abdullah al-Saud and two of his followers were sent to Istanbul in chains where they were publicly beheaded. The rest of the Saudi-Wahhabi clan was held in captivity in Cairo. The destruction of the Saudi-Wahhabi warrior’s alliance did not last long. It was soon revived with the help of British colonialist.[8]

Accordingly, when Britain colonized Bahrain in 1820 and to expand its colonization in the area, the Wahhabi House of Saud sought British protection through Wahhabi Imams.[9] As a result, the British sent Colonel Lewis Pelly in 1865 to Riyadh to establish an official British treaty with the Wahhabi House.[10] Between 1871 and 1876, power changed hand seven times and the Wahhabis led more raids. This marked the end of the second Saudi state. This period however, kept the Wahhabi movement alive, ready to influence Muslims again in the twentieth century—and in the twenty-first.[11]

The twentieth century’s Saudi Arabia comprises the third period of Wahhabis political power. It has changed Saudi Arabia dramatically and the Saudi-Wahhabi’s kingdom has changed the century significantly. The first interval began in 1902, when Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud captured Riyadh and proceeded to re-establish a Wahhabi Kingdom. In 1904, Abd al-Aziz captured Anaiza, an oasis near Hail. In 1913, he captured Al Hasa Province, but had no idea that he had just acquired a quarter of the world’s oil.[12]

Not surprisingly, after his return from Al Hasa, the British helped ibn Saud with the establishments of the Ikhwan (Muslim Brotherhood), an army of fierce religious warriors. The Ikhwan looked for the opportunity to fight non-Wahhabi Muslims—and non-Muslims as well—and they took Abd al Aziz as their leader. The Ikhwan movement began to emerge among the Bedouin. They abandoned their traditional way of life in the desert and moved to an agricultural settlement. By moving to agricultural settlement, the Ikhwan intended to take up a new way of life to enforce a rigid Islamic orthodoxy.[13]

To achieve his goals, on December 26, 1915, Abd al Aziz signed treaty with Sir Percy Cox, Britain’s political agent in the Arab Gulf. The British praised Abd al-Aziz as the greatest Arab man,[14] and recognised his [Abd al- Aziz] sovereignty over Najd and Al-Hasa (central and eastern Arabia), while Abd al-Aziz promised the British that he would not have any dealing with any other country without the British approval and supplies.[15] In addition, the British praised Abd al-Aziz despite his unattractive traits such as public beheading, amputations and floggings. The advisor of Abd al-Aziz for more over 30 years, Harry St John Philby, had described him as ‘the greatest Arab since the Prophet Muhammad’. Philby was sent to Arabia by the British government to assist Abd al-Aziz, perhaps to play kingmaker, in 1917.[16]

Indeed, when in 1915, there were more than 200 hujar in and around Najd and nearly 100,000 Ikhwan waiting to fight, the British supplied Abd al-Aziz with weapons and money. The word hijra (hujar) was related to the term for the Prophet’s emigration from Mecca to Medina in 622. This period ended in 1934, with the declaration of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia under the leadership of Abd al-Aziz Ibn Saud.

Since then, Abd al-Aziz declared the relationship between oil and religion. Indeed, after establishing his British-made Wahhabi State, the Wahhabi king and imam Abd al-Aziz became an autocratic dictator who named the whole country after his own family, calling it the Kingdom of “Saudi” Arabia.[17] Since then the House of Saud has allocated a significant amount of oil revenues to building Islamic schools and mosques throughout the Muslim world,[18]which eventually has inspired radical Islam.[19] At that time however, Abd al-Aziz had various goals: he wanted to take Hail from the Al Rashid’ clan, to extend his control into the northern deserts (Syria), and to take over the Hejaz and the Persian Gulf coast. While Cox openly encouraged Abd al-Aziz to attack al-Rasheed’s clans to divert them from helping the Ottomans he prevented him from taking over much of the Gulf coast, where they [the British] had established protectorates.[20] They also opposed Abd al Aziz’s efforts to extend his influence beyond the Jordanian, Syrian, and Iraqi deserts because of their own imperial interests. But Abd al-Aziz continued his mission, and after he began the siege of Hail, the city surrendered to the Saudi’s warriors. In 1922, the Ikhwan warriors attacked Amman, the capital of Trans-Jordan. This caused problem with the British because, unlike Mecca and Medina, Hail had no religious significance. However, Abd al-Aziz apologised to the British. The British asked him to draw borders between his kingdom and Jordan, Iraq, and Kuwait.[21]



Today, although a few Wahhabi religious leaders have tried to “distant” themselves from the House of Saud’s brutality and anti-Islamic policies in a vain attempt to save Wahhabism’s image from further deterioration, most of the top Wahhabi religious leaders are still firmly behind the House of Saud. In fact, most Wahhabi leaders have openly supported the House of Saud’s unpopular domestic and foreign policies. Indeed, in the Arab nations, the rise of extremism in the form of the Wahhabi movement during the twentieth century could not have taken place without the huge investments made by the Al-Saud family in conjunction with the American in the name of democracy, freedom and human rights to destroy Arab nationalism, socialism, secularism, and of course Islam. This has intensified since the discovery of oil in the 1930s, reached its peak during World War II, and the Cold War, and took more extreme directions since the establishment of the Iranian Islamic Republic in 1979, and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the same year.


References:

[1] – Abdullah-M, S 2004, ‘Britain and the Rise of Wahhabism and the House of Saud’, Kana’an Bulletin, vol. IV, no. 361, pp. 1-9.

[2] -Sindi, A-M 2004, ‘Britain and the Rise of Wahhabism and the House of Saud’, Kana’n bulletin, vol. IV, no. 361.

[3] -Nabhani, Y Khulasat-ul Kalam, Dar-ul-kitab-is-sufi (the House of Sufi book), Cairo, Egypt, see also Confession of a British Spy and British Enmity Against Islam, available at

[4] Weston, M 2008, Prophets and Princes: Saudi Arabia from Muhammad to the Present, Wiley &Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey.

[5] -Sindi, A-M 2004, ‘Britain and the Rise of Wahhabism and the House of Saud’, Kana’n bulletin, vol. IV, no. 361.

[6] Weston, M 2008a, Prophets and Princes: Saudi Arabia from Muhammad to the Present, Wiley &Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey.

[7] Ibid; Sindi, A-M 2004, ‘Britain and the Rise of Wahhabism and the House of Saud’, Kana’n bulletin, vol. IV, no. 361.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Weston, M 2008, Prophets and Princes: Saudi Arabia from Muhammad to the Present, Wiley &Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey; Troeller, G 1976, the Birth of Saudi Arabia: Britain and the Rise of the House of Saud, Frank Cass, London.

[10] Lacey, R 1981, the Kingdom: Arabia and the House of Saud, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York.

[11] Weston, M 2008, Prophets and Princes: Saudi Arabia from Muhammad to the Present, Wiley &Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Ibid.

[14] Aburish, SK 1994, A Brutal Friendship: the West and the Arab Elite,first edn, St. Martin’s Press, New York.

[15] Weston, M 2008, Prophets and Princes: Saudi Arabia from Muhammad to the Present, Wiley &Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey.

[16] Aburish, SK 1994, A Brutal Friendship: the West and the Arab Elite, first edn, St. Martin’s Press, New York.

[17] Sindi, A-M 2004, ‘Britain and the Rise of Wahhabism and the House of Saud’, Kana’n bulletin, vol. IV, no. 361.

[18] Long, D 1979, The Wilson Quarterly (1976), vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 83-91.

[19] Redissi, H 2008, ‘The Refutation of Wahhabism in Arabic Sources, 1745-1932′, in Kingdom without Borders: Saudi Arabia’s Political, Religious and Media Frontiers, ed. A-R M, Hurst, London, pp. 157-177.

[20] Aburish, SK 1994, A Brutal Friendship: the West and the Arab Elite,first edn, St. Martin’s Press, New York.

[21] Weston, M 2008, Prophets and Princes: Saudi Arabia from Muhammad to the Present, Wiley &Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey.

The well-known and independent facts that I wrote are nonsense while your propaganda nonsense, talk of Jews, freemasons and made up statistics and percentages is the sole truth?:crazy:
Once again you are derailing the thread and going off-topic. There is nothing called "Wahhabi" and nobody calls themselves that. As I wrote to you already then it's a word that Shias and non-Muslims use to insult Sunni Muslims and especially Sunni Muslim Arabs with.

No the chemical (sarin) attack in August 2013 was committed by the Syrian regime. This has already been concluded. Watch the video.
 
Last edited:
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom