Friday, December 4, 2009

ஆன்மீகத் தலைவரின் ஹஜ் செய்தி பரஸ்பரம் அன்பும் ஐக்கியமும் நிலவ அழைப்பு







அருளாளனும் அன்புடையோனுமாகிய அல்லாஹ்வின் திருநமாம் போற்றி

ஹஜ்ஜூடைய காலம், ஆன்மீக வசந்தத்தின் பருவமாகும். உலகின் அடிவானத்தில் ஏகத்துவத்தில் ஒளிக் கீற்றுக்கள் பளிச்சிடுகின்ற காலம் ஆகும். அதன் கிரியைகளை ஒரு பரிசுத்தமான நீரூற்றுக்கு ஒப்பிடலாம். ஹஜ் செய்பவர் அதில தமது பாவங்களினதும அலட்சியத்pனதும் அசூசிகளைக் கழுவித் தூய்மையாக்கிக் கொள்ளவும் இறைவன் வழங்கிய இயல்புளின் ஜோதியை தன் இதயத்திலும் உள்ளுணர்வுகளிலும் மீளவைக்கவும் சந்தர்ப்பத்தை வழங்குகின்றது.

மீக்காத்தில் வைத்து தத்தமது பெருமையினதும் வேறுபாட்டினதும் ஆடைகளைக் களைந்து விட்டு அனைவருக்கும் பொதுவான வெள்ளை நிற இஹ்ராமை அணிவது உலக முஸ்லிம் உம்மத்தின் வேறுபாடுகள் அந்த தனித்துவத்தை எழுதியம்புகிறது. அத்துடன், உலகெங்கும் வாழுகின்ற முஸ்லிம்; மத்தியில் ஒற்றுமையும் பரஸ்பர அன்பும் நிலவ விடுக்கும் அழைப்பையும் பிரதிபலிக்கிது.

ஹஜ் அழைப்பு ஒரு புறத்தில் 'உங்கள் இறைவன் ஒரே இறைவன் தான். அவனுடனே சரணடையுங்கள், பணிவுடையோருக்கு நன் செய்தி சொல்லுங்கள் (ஹஜ்:34) என்பதாகும். மறுபறத்தில், 'புனித இறையில்லத்தை நாம் உள்ளுர்வாசிகளும், வெளியூர்வாசிகளுக்கும் சமமான நிலையில் முழு மனித சமுதாயத்துக்குமாக ஆக்கியிருக்கிறோம்.'(ஹஜ்:25) என்பதாகும். இந்த வகையில் கஃபாவானது, தவ்ஹீத் எனப்படும் ஏகத்துவத்தின் சின்னமாக இருப்பது போல் முஸ்லிம்கள் மத்தியில் ஐக்கியம், சகோதரத்துவம் மற்றும் சமத்துவம் என்பனவற்றுக்கான அழைப்பை பிரதிபலிக்கின்றது.

இறையில்லத்தை வலம் வந்து இறைத்தூதரைச் தரிசித்துச் செல்ல வேண்டுமென்ற ஆவல் பொங்க உலகின் நாலாபக்கங்களிலும் இருந்து வந்த இலட்சக் கணக்கான முஸ்லிம்கள் ஹஜ்ஜில் குழுமி உள்ளனர். இவர்கள் தம் மத்தியிலான சகோதர இணைப்புகளைப் பயன்படுத்திக் கொள்வதற்காக இந்த சந்தர்ப்பத்தைப் பயன்படுத்திக் கொள்ள வேண்டும். ஏனெனில் அது முஸ்லிம் சமுதாயம் எதிhநோக்கியுள்ள ஏராளமான வழிகளுக்கு ஒத்தடமாக அமையும்.




இஸ்லாமிய உலகின் மீது ஆவேசம் கொண்டுள்ள பல்வேறு சக்திகள் முன்னெப்போதையும் விட நிகழ்காலத்தில் முஸ்லிம்கள் மத்தியில் பரிவினையை ஏற்படுத்தும் நோக்கில் செயலாற்றுவதை பிரத்தியட்சமாக காண்கின்றோம், ஆகவே, முஸ்லிம் உம்மத் ஐக்கியத்தோடும் ஒத்துழைப்போடும் வாழவேண்டிய தேவை முன்னரை விட அதிகமாக உணரப்படுகின்றது.

இன்று, எதிரியின் இரத்தம் தோய் கைகள் முஸ்லி உலகின் பல பாங்களில் பகிரங்கமாகவே அடாவடித்தனத்தில் இறங்கியுள்ளன. பலஸ்தீன மக்கள் சியோனிச ஆக்கிரமிப்பில் நாளுக்கு நாள் சொல்லொண்ணாத் துன்பங்களை அனுபவிக்கின்றனர். மஸ்ஜிதுல் அக்ஸா பயங்கரமான ஓர் ஆபத்துக்கு தள்ளப்பட்டிருக்கிறது. காஸாவில் நடைபெற்ற சோகமயமான இன ஒழிப்புக்குப் பிறது மக்கள் மிகக் கொடுமையான அடக்குமுறையை அனுபவித்து வருகின்றனர். ஆக்கிரமிப்பாளரின் கால்களின் கீழ் சிக்குண்டுள்ள ஆப்கானிஸ்தானில் ஒவ்வொரு நாளும் புதயதொரு விபரீதம் நடக்கிறது. ஈராக்கில் உள்ள பாதுகாப்பற்ற சூழல் அம்மக்களது அமைதியான வாழ்வையும் நிம்மதியையும் பறித்துள்ளது. யெமனில் நடந்தேறுகின்ற சகோதரர்களையே அழிக்கும் நிகழ்வு புதிதாக இஸ்லாமிய உம்மத்தின் இதயத்தில் புதிய வழுவை ஏற்படுத்தியுள்ளது

கடந்த சில் ஆண்டுகளாக இராக், ஆப்கான்pஸ்தான், பாகிஸ்தான் போன்ற நாடுகளில் அரங்கேற்றப்படுகின்ற கலகங்கள், போர்கள், குண்டுவெடிப்புக்கள் பயங்கரவாத செயற்பாடுகள், குருட்டுத ;தனமான மனிதப்படுகொலைகள் எங்கு எவ்வாறு திட்டமிடப்படுகின்றன என்பதை உலகெங்கிலும் உள்ள முஸ்லிம்கள் சிந்திக்க வேண்டும். அமெரிக்கா தலைகையிலான மேற்கு நாடுகளின் படைகள் அதிகார பூர்வமாக சொந்த வீட்டில் நுழைவது போன்று இப்பிராந்தியத்தில் நுழைவதற்கு முன்னர் இத்தகைய துன்பங்களைக் காணவில்லையே அது ஏன்?
ஆக்கிரமிப்பாளர்களே ஒரு புறத்தில் மக்கள் எழுச்சிகளையும் உரிமைப் போராட்டங்களையும் பல்ஸ்தீன் லெபனான் போன்ற நாடுகளில் பயங்கரவாதம் என வர்ணிக்கின்றன, அதே வேளை, இப்பிராந்திய மக்கள் மத்தியில் இனவாத, பிரிவினைவாத பயங்கரவாத்ததைச் திட்டமிட்டு அரங்கேற்றுகின்றனர்.

மத்திய கிழக்கு மற்றும் வட ஆபிரிக்க பிராந்தியம் என்பன ஒரு நூற்றாண்டுக்கு மேலாக பிரித்தானியா, பிரான்ஸ் போன்ற மேற்கு நாடுகளின் ஏகாத்திபத்திபத்தின் கீழும் பின்னர் அமெரிக்க ஆதிக்கத்தின் கீழும் அடிமைப்படுத்தப்பட்டு இழிவு படுத்தடுத்தப்பட்டன. அவற்றின் இயற்கை வளங்கள் சூறையாடப்பட்டன அவர்களது சுதந்திர உணர்வுகள் துவம்சம் செய்யப்பட்டன. அந்நிய ஆக்கிரமிப்பாளர்களின் பேராசைகளுக்கு இந்த சமுதாயங்கள் பணயமாகின.


எனினும் இந்த சமூகஙகளில் தோன்றிய எதிர்ப்பு; போராட்டங்களிம் இஸ்லாமிய எழுச்சியும் இந்நிலையைத் தொடரவிடாமல் உலகளாவிய ஏகாதியபத்தியங்களைத் தடுத்து நிறுத்தின. உயிர்த்தியாயம், இறைவனை அடைவதற்கான போராட்டம் முதலிய பரிமாணங்கள் இஸ்லாமிய போராட்ட வடிவங்களில் தோற்றம் பெற்றன. இவற்ளை எதிர்கொள்ளும் சக்தியற்ற ஆக்கிரமிப்பாளர்கள் வேறுவிதமான ஏமாற்று வித்தைகளைக் கைக் கொண்டு பழைய ஏகாதியபத்துக்குப் பதிலாக புதியதொரு வடிவில் தம் ஆக்கிரமிப்பைத் தொடர முனைந்தனர்.

இஸ்லாம் தலைகுனிய வேண்டும் என்பதற்கான ஏகாதிபத்தில் அரக்கன் தன் அத்தனை சத்திகளையும் களமிறக்கியுள்ளது. இராணுவப் பலம் முதற்கொண்டு, பகிரங்க ஆக்கிரமிப்பு, தீய பிரசார யுத்தம், பொய்களையும் வசந்திகளையுமே பரப்புகின்ற ஊடக நிறுவனங்கள், ஆக்கிரமிப்பு வழியமைக்கும் விதத்தில் குழுக்களை பலப்படுத்தி மோதவிடுவது, மனிதப் படுகொலைகளை அரங்கேற்றுவது போன்ற விநியோகமும் பிரசாரமும் இளைஞர்களது மனவுறுதி திட நம்பிக்கை, ஒழுக்கம் என்பனவற்றை அழித்தொழுத்தல் ஆக்கிரமிப்பை எதிர்கொள்ளும் இயக்கங்களுக்கு எதிரான அரசியல் ரீதியான நெருக்கடிகளைத் தோற்றுவிப்பது அதற்கு இன ரீதியான முரண்பாடுகளையும் பிரிவினைவாத அம்சங்களையும் சகோதரர்களுக்கிடையிலான முரண்பாடுகள் பகைமையாக மாற்றுவது என முடிந்த எல்லாவித உத்திகளையும் ஏகாதிபத்திபம் பிரயோகிக்கிறது.

ஏதிரிகள் விரும்புக்கின்றவாறான தப்பெண்ணம், தீய நோக்கு என்பவற்றுக்குப் பகரமாக முஸ்லிம் சமுதாயங்கள் மற்றும் குழுக்கள் மற்றும்; முஸ்லிம் இனங்கள் மத்தியில் பரஸ்பர அன்பு, நல்லெண்ணம், ஒத்துழைப்பு என்பன இடம்பிடிக்குமெனில், துஷ்ட எண்ணம் கொண்டோரின் திட்டங்களிலும் சதிகளிலும் பெரும்பான்மையானவை தோல்வியடைந்து விடும் முஸ்லிம் உம்மத்தைக் காவு கொள்ள நாளாந்தம் தீட்டுகின்ற திட்டங்கள் செயலிழந்து விடும். இந்த உயரிய நோக்கை அடைந்து கொள்வதற்காக மிகச் சிறந்த சந்தர்ப்பம் ஹஜ் ஆகும்.
முஸ்லிம்கள் தமது பொதுவான அடிப்படைகளை வழங்கும் குர்;ஆன் மற்றும் நபிவழியின் வழிநின்று பரஸ்பர ஒத்துழைப்பு நல்லிணக்கமும் கௌ;வதன் மூலம் பன்முகம் கொண்ட ஏகாதிபத்திய அரக்கணை வெல்ல முடியும். பெருந் தலைவர்கள் இமாம் கொமெய்னியின் அடியொற்றிப் போராடிய ஈரானிய சமுதாயம் இப் போரட்டத்தின் வெற்றிககு சிறந்த உதாரணமாக விளங்குகின்றனர். ஈரானில் அத்தகைய சக்திகள் தோல்வியையே கண்டன.

முப்பது ஆண்டுகளாகத் திட்டிய சதித் திட்டங்கள் இராணுவச் சதி மூலம் ஆட்சிக் கவிழ்ப்பு முயற்சி எட்டு ஆண்டுகால திணிக்கப்பட்ட யுத்தம், பொருளாதராத் தடை, உடைமைகள் கபளீகரம், உளவியல் ரீதியான போர் ஊடகப் படையெடுப்பு, முதற் கொண்டு அறிவு, விஞ்ஞானத் துறைகளில் அபிவிருத்திக்கு தடையேற்படுத்தல், அணுசக்தி ஆய்வை ஈரானிய நிபுணர்கள் மெற்கொள்வதை எதிர்ப்பது, அண்மையில் நடந்து முடிந்த தேர்தலின் போது அடிப்பட்டமான அரங்கேற்றிய ஆத்திரமூட்டல்களும் தலையீடுகளும் என அத்தனை செயற்பாடுகளும் எதிரிகளுக்கு தோல்வியையும் குழப்பத்தையும் 'ஷைத்தானின் சதிகள் எப்போதும் பலவீனமானவை' (அந்நிஸ76) என்ற திருமறைவசனத்தை மீண்டும் ஒரு முறை ஈரானிய மக்களின் கண்முன் யதார்த்தபூர்வமாகத் காட்டியது.



உலகின் ஏனைய பகுதிகளிலும் கூட ஈமானிய உறுதியொடு பேராதிக்க சக்திகளுக்கு எதிரான மக்கள் மேற்கொண்ட எழுச்சிப் போராட்டங்களும் மக்களுக்கும் வெற்றியையும் எதிரிக்கு ஏமாற்றத்தையும் தோல்வியையுமே தந்தன. கடந்த மூன்று வருடங்களுக்குள் நடாந்த லெபனான் மக்களது 33 நாள் வெற்றியும் காஸா மக்களின் பொறுமையான போராட்ட வெற்றியும் இந்த உண்மையை நிரூபிக்கும் உயிர்வாழும் சான்றுகளாகும்.
பொதுவாக ஹஜ் பாக்கியத்தை அடைந்த எல்லா ஹாஜிகளுக்ம் குறிப்பாக இந்த தெய்வீக நிகழ்வில் பங்கேற்றுள்ள இஸ்லாமிய நாடுகளின் பிரசாரகர்கள் குத்பா நிகழ்த்துனர்கள் இரண்டு ஹரம்களினதும் குத்பா இமாம்கள் எல்லோருக்கும் நான் வழங்குகின்ற உறுதியான ஆலோசனை இது தான், தயவு செய்து நீங்கள் உங்களத நிகழ்காலம் பணியை சரியாக இணங்காண வேண்டும். உங்கள் மக்களுக்கு இஸ்லாத்தின் எதிரிகளின் சதித்திட்டங்களை விளக்கிக் காட்ட வேண்டும். முஸ்லிம்களை பரஸ்பர அன்பு மற்றும் ஒற்றுமையின் பால் அழையுஙகள். முஸ்லிம்கள் மத்தியில் அவநம்பிக்கையை, அதிருப்தியை ஏற்படுத்தும் எந்த விடயத்தையும் தவிர்ந்து கொள்ளுங்கள். எல்லாவித் எதிர்ப்பு அலைகளையும் உணர்வுகளையும இஸ்லாமிய சமுதாயத்தின் எதிரிகளுக்கு எதிரானதாக குறிப்பாக அமெரிகக்hவுக்கும் சியோனிஸத்துக்கும் எதிரானதாக நெறிப்படுத்துங்கள் இதன் மூலமாக, முஷ்ரிக்கீன்களிலும் இருந்து விலகி நிற்கும் பிரகரணடத்தை உண்மைப்படுத்த முனையுங்கள்.

இறைவனின் வழிகாட்டல், அங்கீகாரம், உத்தி, அருள் என்பனவற்றை உங்களுக்கும் எனக்கும் தரவேண்டுமென பிரார்த்திக்கிறேன்.

வஸ்ஸலாமு அலைக்கும்

செய்யது அலீ ஹூஸைனி காமெனெயீ
03 துல் ஹஜ் 1430

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Who Is a Jew?


Who Is a Jew? By Gilad AtzmonOctober 06. 2009 "Information Clearing House" -- The question of "who is a Jew?" has been debated in Israel since it attained statehood. In the Jewish state the authorities, Rabbis and the media would dig into one’s bloodline with no shame whatsoever. For the Israelis and orthodox Jews, Jewishness is obviously a blood related concept. However, Jewishness and blood concerns are becoming a subject of a growing debate in the UK. In the last few days The Daily Telegraph and The Guardian are trying to decide whether Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a ‘self hating Jew’ or just an ordinary antisemite. Like the Israeli Rabbis they both dig into his bloodline.
Ahmadinejad is revealed to have a ‘Jewish past’ said the Daily Telegraph on Saturday. According to the paper, a photograph of the Iranian president holding up his identity card during elections in March 2008 “clearly” suggests that his family had Jewish roots. The Telegraph even found the ‘experts’ who suggested that “Mr Ahmadinejad's track record for hate-filled attacks on Jews could be an overcompensation to hide his past.” Needless to say that Ahmadinejad has never come on record with a single anti-Jewish ‘hate- filled’ attack as the Telegraph suggests. He is indeed extremely critical of the Jewish state and its raison d'etre. He is also highly critical of the crude and manipulative mobilisation of the holocaust at the expense of the Palestinian people.One may wonder how come a Western media outlet happens to selectively engage with issues to do with the racial or ethnic origin of the Iranian president. At the end of the day, digging into peoples ethnic past and family bloodline is not a common practice you expect from the Western press. It is something you tend to leave for racists, Nazis and Rabbis. For one reason or another, no one in the so called free press tried to dwell on the close ties between multi billion swindler Bernie Maddof and his tribe. The Free Press saved itself also from dealing with Wolfowitz’s ethnicity, in spite of the fact that the Zionist war he brought on us has cost 1.5 million lives by now. If you wonder how it is that the Western free media is reverting to ‘pathology’ in order to deal with a Muslim president, the answer is simple not to say trivial:The so called ‘liberal West’ is yet to find the answers to President Ahmadinejad within the realm of reason. It lacks the argumentative capacity to address Ahmadinejad. Instead, it insists to spin banal racially orientated ideas that cannot hold water, "By making anti-Israeli statements” says The Daily Telegraph, “he is trying to shed any suspicions about his Jewish connections.” The truth of the matter is clear. Ahmadinejad has already managed to re-direct a floodlight of reasoning and skepticism just to enlighten our darkest corner of hypocrisy. He somehow manages to remind us all what thinking is all about. It is pretty much impossible to deny the fact that Ahmadinejad’s take on the holocaust and Israel is coherent, consistent and valid. He seems to have three main issues with the narrative:1. Around sixty Million died in WWII, the vast majority of them were innocent civilians. How is it, asks Ahmadinejad, that we insist to concentrate on the particularity of the suffering of one ‘very’ specific group of people i.e. the Jews?2. The Iranian president rightly maintains that this historical chapter must be historically examined. This would mean as well that every event in the past should be subject to scrutiny, elaboration and revision. “If we allow ourselves to question God and the Prophets, we may as well allow ourselves to question the holocaust.”3. Regardless of the truthfulness of the holocaust, it is not a trivial fact that the suffering of the Jews in Europe had nothing to do with the Palestinian people. Hence, there is no reason for the Palestinians to pay for crimes committed by others. If some Western Leaders feel guilty for crimes committed against the Jews by their ancestors, which they seem to claim, they better allocate some land for the Jews within their territories rather than expect the Palestinians to keep upholding the Zionist murderous burden.As much as it is obviously clear that the above points raised by Ahmadinejad are totally valid, it is also painfully transparent that the West lacks the means to address those issues. Instead we seem to revert to supremacy and pseudo scientific discourse dwelling on blood, pathology and lame psychoanalysis. As embarrassing as it may seem, in just three moves Ahmadinejad manages to expose the current deceptive Western mode of discussion. He, in fact identifies the holocaust as the core of our hypocritical stand, a tendency that has managed to shatter our ethical judgment. The holocaust was there to divert the attention from the colossal crimes committed by the allies: Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Dresden are just brief examples of institutionalised genocide at the hands of the English Speaking Empire. The holocaust has successfully matured into a new religion. Yet, it lacks theology. It doesn’t allow any form of criticism or reformism. It is in fact an anti-Western religion inspired by hate and vengeance. It is dark, it is blind and it lacks mercy and compassion. It is a faith that declares an assault on any form of doubt. It is a crude brutal belief system that stands in opposition to the notions of liberty and goodness. As if this is not enough, those who subscribe to this religion are complicit in an ongoing assault against grace and peace. As things stand at the moment, The British media is yet to decide whether Ahmadinejad is a ‘Jew rebel’ or just a ‘Meshugena Goy’. The Guardian was very quick to publish its own take on the subject refuting the Telegraph’s account. However, one thing is clear, neither the Guardian nor the Telegraph or any other so called ‘free media’ outlets are free enough to address the questions raised by Ahmadinejad. 1. Why only the Jews? 2. Why do you all say NO to scrutinizing the past? 3. Why do the Palestinians have to pay the price? Instead of engaging in these crucial elementary questions. The British main papers succumb to racially orientated bloodline digging.Rather than following the banal Zionist query ‘who is a Jew?’ I suggest that we take the discourse one step further and ask a very simple question: What Jewishness stands for?

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Saudi Arabia, Wahhabism and the Spread of Sunni Theofascism











Saudi Arabia, Wahhabism and the Spread of Sunni Theofascism



by Ambassador Curtin Winsor, Jr.




Curtin Winsor, Jr. is a former US ambassador to Costa Rica (1983-1985). He was Special Emissary to the Middle East at the outset of the Reagan administration. He is chairman and owner of the American Chemical Services Company of Marmet, WV and serves on the boards of several public policy organizations, including the William H. Donner Foundation, the Atlas Foundation for Economic Research, the Media Research Center and the Hudson Institute.




The United States has largely eliminated the infrastructure and operational leadership of Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda terrorist network over the past five years. However, its ideological offspring continue to proliferate across the globe.




American efforts to combat this contagion are hamstrung by the fact that its ideological and financial epicenter is Saudi Arabia, where an ostensibly pro-Western royal family governs through a centuries-old alliance with the fanatical Wahhabi Islamic sect. In addition to indoctrinating its own citizens with this extremist creed, the Saudi government has lavishly financed the propagation of Wahhabism throughout the world, sweeping away moderate interpretations of Islam even within the borders of the United States itself.
The Bush administration has done little to halt this ideological onslaught beyond quietly (and unsuccessfully) urging the Saudi royal family to desist. This lack of resolve is rooted in American dependence on Saudi oil production, fears of instability in the kingdom, wishful thinking about democracy promotion as an antidote to religious extremism, and preoccupation with confronting Iran.
Background
Wahhabism is derived from the teachings of Muhammad ibn abd al-Wahhab, an eighteenth century religious zealot from the Arabian interior. Like most Sunni Islamic fundamentalist movements, the Wahhabis advocated the fusion of state power and religion through the reestablishment of the Caliphate, the form of government adopted by the Prophet Muhammad's successors during the age of Muslim expansion. What sets Wahhabism apart from other Sunni Islamist movements is its historical obsession with purging Sufis, Shiites, and other Muslims who do not conform to its twisted interpretation of Islamic scripture.
Jannat al-Baqi" hspace=3 src="http://www.mideastmonitor.org/images/as_0705_1.jpg" width=300 align=right border=0>In 1744, Ibn Abd al-Wahhab forged an historic alliance with the Al-Saud clan and sanctified its drive to vanquish its rivals. In return, the Al-Saud supported campaigns by Wahhabi zealots to cleanse the land of "unbelievers." In 1801, Saudi-Wahhabi warriors crossed into present day Iraq and sacked the Shiite holy city of Karbala, killing over 4,000 people. After the Saudis conquered Mecca and Medina in the 1920s, they destroyed such "idolatrous" shrines as the Jannat al-Baqi cemetary, where four of the twelve Shiite imams were buried (on the grounds that grave markers are bida'a, or objectionable innovations).
In return for endorsing the royal family's authority in political, security, and economic spheres after the establishment of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in 1932, Wahhabi clerics were granted control over state religious and educational institutions and allowed to enforce their rigid interpretation of sharia (Islamic law).
Wahhabism was largely confined to the Arabian peninsula until the 1960s, when the Saudi monarchy gave refuge to radical members of the Muslim Brotherhood fleeing persecution in Nasser's Egypt. A cross-fertilization of sorts occurred between the atavistic but isolated Wahhabi creed of the Saudi religious establishment and the Salafi jihadist teachings of Sayyid Qutb, who denounced secular Arab rulers as unbelievers and legitimate targets of holy war (jihad). "It was the synthesis of the twain-Wahhabi social and cultural conservatism, and Qutbist political radicalism- that produced the militant variety of Wahhabist political Islam that eventually (produced) al-Qaeda."[1]
The terms Islamofascism and theofascism have been frequently misused by Westerners to refer to virtually all forms of radical Islamism, but they are fitting appellations for Wahhabism today.[2] The sect's rejection of individual liberties, disparagement and reduction of women's rights and status,[3] disregard for the intrinsic value of human life, and encouragement of violence against unbelievers, are unparalleled among Islamic fundamentalist movements.
Former CIA Director R. James Woolsey has used the term "Sunni theocratic totalitarianism,"[4] a term that highlights both the movement's "will to power" over the most minute aspects of Muslim daily life and its global ambitions. He also notes that its adherents do not raise the banner of Islam in pursuit of specific national, political, or territorial gains. Al-Qaeda's second in command, Ayman al-Zawahiri has sharply rebuked the Palestinian Islamist group Hamas[5] and Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood for participating in national elections.[6]
During the 1970s, Wahhabi clerics encouraged the spread of this revolutionary and atavistic ideological synthesis into Saudi universities and mosques, because it was seen as a barrier to the threat of cultural Westernization and spread of corruption that accompanied the 1970s oil boom. Consequently, the royal family and their religious establishment looked for a cause with which to deflect the growing zealotry from Wahhabist theofascism, a danger highlighted by the seizure of the Grand Mosque at Mecca by heavily armed Islamic Studies students in 1979. The diversion that the royal family seized upon was the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
The Saudis financed a large-scale program of assistance to the Afghan mujahideen, in coordination with the Pakistan's Inter Service Intelligence agency (ISI) and the CIA, while funding radicalized madrassas to disseminate neo-Wahhabi ideology and literature in the sprawling Afghan refugee camps of Pakistan. They also dispatched thousands of volunteer jihadis from Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries to fight alongside the mujahideen.
These so-called "Arab Afghans" dispersed to far-flung areas of the world after the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1988. They pursued further victories against "unbelievers" in the name of Islam, and they were accompanied by militant Wahhabi preachers. These elements would form the backbone of al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda was initially headquartered in Sudan, but returned to Afghanistan in 1996, following the seizure of Kabul by the Taliban. This was a new Afghan force, recruited in Wahhabi madrassas and, trained by the Pakistanis. Its goal was the establishment of a model Wahhabi state in Afghanistan.
The Saudi royal family revoked bin Laden's Saudi citizenship (in response to heavy American pressure), but did little to interfere with Wahhabi "charities" in the Kingdom and abroad.. These entities raised money for al-Qaeda, while the religious onslaught of Wahhabism continued to receive government sponsorship and funding. Osama bin Laden is widely believed to have reached an agreement with Prince Turki al-Faisal, then-chief of Saudi National Security and Intelligence in the mid 1990s, whereby al-Qaeda would not target the Kingdom, and the Kingdom would not interfere with al-Qaeda's fundraising or seek bin Laden's extradition.[7] In fact, Al-Qaeda abstained completely from attacks on Saudi targets within the Kingdom prior to 9/11.
Terrorist attacks and clashes between Saudi police and Islamist militants have erupted erupting periodically since May 2003, after the Saudi Government began cracking down on underground cells in the Kingdom (under pressure from Washington). However, it appears that most Al-Qaeda-affiliated terrorist groups still respect this quid pro quo Hundreds of members of the Saudi royal family jet around the world without fear of assassination. The country's vulnerable petroleum industry has only once been targeted by terrorists, and then in a less that serious manner. In return, and notwithstanding its limited cooperation with Washington in restricting terrorist financing, the Saudi monarchy has maintained its commitment to propagating Wahhabism at home and abroad, providing the terrorist underground with a growing flood of eager recruits.
Wahhabi Indoctrination
"Man . . . requires proper instruction and a fortunate nature, and then of all animals he becomes the most divine and most civilized; but if he be insufficiently or ill educated, he is the most savage of earthly creatures."Plato
It is estimated that well over one-third of Saudi Arabia's public school curriculum is devoted to Wahhabi teachings. Passages from Saudi textbooks quoted in the American media after 9/11 generated much controversy. One textbook, for example, informed ninth grade students that Judgment Day will not come "until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them," while another stated that it is "compulsory" for Muslims "to consider the infidels their enemy."[8] Embarrassed by the revelations, the Saudi government purported to launch a comprehensive review of its educational curricula and pledged that all such references would be removed. Last year, however, Freedom House published an exhaustive report on the new curriculum, concluding that it "continues to propagate an ideology of hate toward the 'unbeliever,' which include Christians, Jews, Shiites, Sufis, Sunni Muslims who do not follow Wahhabi doctrine, Hindus, atheists and others."[9]
Some analysts dismiss the relevance of this indoctrination on the grounds that "conforming to an ultra-conservative, anti-pluralistic faith does not necessarily make you a violent individual,"[10] but this reasoning is fallacious. If only one percent of the 5 million Saudi students exposed to these teachings resort to violence, this would produce 50,000 jihadis.[11] Not surprisingly, bin Laden himself denounced foreign interference in Saudi school curricula in an April 2006 audiotape.
Moreover, these teachings are reinforced by Wahhabi clerics in Saudi Arabia, who advocate jihad against enemies of "true" Islam - outside the kingdom." Incitement to violence against Shiites is particularly common. In December 2006, a high-ranking cleric close to the Saudi royal family, Abdul Rahman al-Barak, denounced Shiites as an "evil sect . . . more dangerous than Jews and Christians."[12]
In November of 2004, twenty-six clerics, most of whom held positions as lecturers of Islamic studies at various Saudi state-funded universities, issued a call for jihad against American forces in Iraq. Two Saudi officials denounced the fatwa in interviews with the Western media, but no retraction was made in Arabic to local media outlets. Months later, a Saudi dissident group released a videotape showing the Chief Justice of Saudi Arabia's Supreme Judicial Council, Saleh bin Muhammad al-Luhaidan, advising young Saudis at a government mosque on how to infiltrate Iraq and fight US troops, as well as assuring them that Saudi security forces would not punish them after their return.[13] While Luhaidan publicly retracted his statements, videotapes of prominent Saudi clerics exhorting the public to wage jihad in Iraq and elsewhere continue to surface.[14]
Exporting Hatred
While Saudi citizens remain the vanguard of Islamic theofascism around the world, the growth potential for this ideology lies outside the Kingdom. The Saudis have spent at least $87 billion propagating Wahhabism abroad during the past two decades,[15] and the scale of financing is believed to have increased in the past two years as oil prices have skyrocketed. The bulk of this funding goes to the construction and operating expenses of mosques, madrassas, and other religious institutions that preach Wahhabism. It also supports the training of imams; domination of mass media and publishing outlets; distribution of Wahhabi textbooks and other literature; and endowments to universities (in exchange for influence over the appointment of Islamic scholars). By comparison, the Communist Party of the USSR and its Comintern spent just over $7 billion propagating its ideology worldwide between 1921 and 1991.[16]
The lack of a formal ecclesiastical hierarchy within Sunni Islam renders traditional religious institutions weak in the face of well-funded Wahhabi missionary activities. Most Sunni Muslims look to their local imams for religious guidance. In poor countries, these imams and local leaders often find it difficult to resist the siren song of small amounts of Saudi aid that accompany Wahhabist missionaries in poor. Moderate imams do not have a comparable source of financial patronage with which to combat its spread.[17]
Important fronts in this campaign are in south and southeast Asia, where the majority of the world's Muslims live. In Pakistan, Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia and southern Thailand, Wahhabis have co-opted (or replaced) village and neighborhood imams, and there is a fresh stream of converts returning from stays as guest workers in Saudi Arabia. The children of poor converts are often taken to Saudi Arabia for "education" and many are returned as cannon fodder for use by Wahhabi terrorist fronts.[18] In India, efforts are underway to capture a portion that country's huge Muslim minority as well as the Untouchable Caste.
Wahhabism has made less headway in the former Soviet Republics of Central Asia, despite the fact that decades of Communist rule had weakened their traditional Islamic institutions. Several successor governments, especially the Uzbekis, have cracked down harshly on militant Islamist groups, while encouraging educational systems in the Hanafi tradition that promote tolerant and peaceful Islam. Africa is also a critical area of Wahhabi expansion, as it offers a multitude of "failed states" and communal cleavages ripe for exploitation, most notably in the Sudan and Nigeria.[19]
In all of these areas, the central dynamic is the same - it is the overwhelming wealth of Saudi Arabia that enables the Wahhabi sect to proselytize on a global scale, not the intrinsic appeal of its teachings. Throughout the world, moderates echo the assessment of Somali journalist Bashir Gothar, who writes that his country's tolerant Sufi-infused Islamic culture has been: "swept aside by a new brand of Islam that is being pushed down the throat of our people - Wahhabism. Anywhere one looks, one finds that alien, perverted version of Islam."[20]
Wahhabism in the West
Wahhabi proselytizing is not limited to the Islamic world. The Saudis have financed the growth of thousands of Wahhabi mosques, madrassas, and other religious institutions in Western countries that have fast-growing Muslim minorities during the past three decades.[21] Wahhabi penetration is deepest in the social welfare states of Western Europe, where chronically high unemployment has created large pools of able-bodied young Muslim men who have "become permanent wards of the state at the cost of their basic human dignity."[22] This is a perfect storm of alienation and idleness, ripe for terrorist recruitment. The perpetrators of the 2005 London subway attacks were native-born Britons of Pakistani descent, recruited locally and trained in the use of explosives during visits to Pakistan. The Dutch Moroccan who murdered Dutch filmmaker Theodor Van Gogh in 2004 (for producing a film critical of Islam) was also a product of Wahhabi indoctrination.
The Wahhabis have had less traction in the United States, which lacks the masses of unassimilated young people that exist in Europe. US welfare laws no longer allow able-bodied young men to have indefinite periods of government subsidized unemployment and immigrants (both Muslim and non-Muslim) tend to find a more stable niche in American society.
Nevertheless, Wahhabi penetration of US mainstream Islamic institutions is substantial. A 2005 Freedom House Report examined over 200 books and other publications distributed in 15 prominent Saudi-funded American mosques. One such publication, bearing the imprint of the Saudi embassy and distributed by the King Fahd Mosque in Los Angeles, contained the following injunctions for Muslims living in America:
Be dissociated from the infidels, hate them for their religion, leave them, never rely on them for support, do not admire them, and always oppose them in every way according to Islamic law.[W]hoever helps unbelievers against Muslims, regardless of what type of support he lends to them, he is an unbeliever himself.Never greet the Christian or Jew first. Never congratulate the infidel on his holiday. Never befriend an infidel unless it is to convert him. Never imitate the infidel. Never work for an infidel. Do not wear a graduation gown because this imitates the infidel.[23]
Although Saudi-funded religious institutions have been careful not to incite or explicitly endorse violence since 9/11, they unapologetically promote distrust toward non-Muslims and self-segregation. In effect, they are trying to reproduce in America the kind of social conditions that have fueled radicalization and terrorist recruitment in Europe.
Saudi-funded religious institutions, such as the American Muslim Council (AMC), have long been treated as representatives of the American Muslim community by the US government. Abdurahman Almoudi, the founder of the AMC, was a frequent visitor to White House under the Clinton and Bush administrations despite having publicly proclaimed support for the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas (he is now in jail for having illegally accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Libyan government).
High level political access has enabled such groups to penetrate the American prison system. The US Bureau of Prisons has relied on chaplain endorsements from the so-called Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences (GSISS), a Saudi-funded organization.[24] The most egregious example of this penetration is the case of Imam Deen Umar, the Administrative Chaplain for the State of New York Department of Corrections. Umar, an American convert who made two visits to Saudi Arabia and studied at the GSISS, and the men he hired as chaplains, had exclusive access to the 13,000 Muslims in the New York prison system. According to then FBI Assistant Director for Counterterrorism John S. Pistole, Umar was found to have "denied prisoners access to mainstream imams and materials" and "sought to incite prisoners against America, preaching that the 9/11 hijackers should be remembered as martyrs and heroes."[25]
While there is little evidence that al-Qaeda has recruited inside the American prison system, it is noteworthy that José Padilla (arrested in 2002 in connection with an al-Qaeda plot to detonate a radioactive "dirty bomb" in the United States) first embraced radical Islam while in prison, as did Richard Reid (the so-called "shoe bomber" arrested in 2001) in the UK and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in Jordan.
The American Muslim Armed Forces and Veterans Affairs Council (a branch of the AMC), along with the Saudi-funded Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), secured the right to select, train and certify all Muslim chaplains for the US Armed Forces.[26] It has been reported that Saudi Arabia provided more than 100 US Armed Forces personnel with free trips to Mecca as an opportunity to make their hajj.[27] Almoudi arranged for the Saudi-controlled Institute of Islamic and Arabic Sciences (IIAS) to train "American soldiers and civilians to provide spiritual guidance when paid Muslim chaplains aren't available." The Wall Street Journal also reported that there were signs that: "the school . . . disseminates the intolerant and anti-Western strain of Islam espoused by the [Saudi] Kingdom's religious establishment."[28]
While the Saudi ambassador in Washington said last year that his government was undertaking a "very intense review" of all missionary activities in the United States,[29] it is clear that the Saudis are concerned primarily with avoiding bad publicity, not abandoning their drive to dominate Islamic institutions in America.
Causes of American Inaction
The Bush administration has been reluctant to put serious pressure on the Saudis to stop propagating Wahhabism, despite the enormous threat to American security posed by Sunni theofascism. There are several reasons for this..
The first is American dependence on the kingdom's abundant oil reserves, which enable to the Saudis to maintain roughly 3 million b/d in spare production capacity. This spare capacity has been called the "energy equivalent of nuclear weapons," because it puts the Saudis in a unique position to compensate for disruptions in supplies from other producers and discourage price gouging - a service provided to the United States (and other industrialized nations) in exchange for protection.[30] However, the argument that a firm public stance against Saudi propagation of religious hatred might lead the kingdom to retaliate economically is spurious. Saudi Arabia's use of the oil weapon would alienate the entire industrialized world, while threatening the relative economic prosperity that preserves stability in the kingdom.
Some politicians and writers have voiced concern that pushing the Saudi royal family to curtail the Wahhabis could lead to terrorist attacks on the country's vulnerable petroleum infrastructure or lead to the collapse of the monarchy, which would produce an even worse outcome - a Saudi state controlled exclusively by religious fanatics. While these are serious risks, it must be borne in mind that most Wahhabi radicals view the monarchy (and its oil fields) as a golden goose. It is only by disguising Saudi Arabia as a 'friendly nation' that they have been able to go as far as they have in spreading their atavistic perversion of Islam.
Such concerns reveal a tendency to imagine or spin the Saudi royal family as fundamentally pro-Western. Prince Bandar bin Sultan, who served as ambassador to the United States from 1983 to 2005, has played an important role in masking Saudi - Wahhabi realities. His personal charm, Washington Post journalist David Ignatius writes, "many American leaders and even presidents to forget that he represented a secretive, repressive Muslim kingdom that survived because it had made a pact with 'puritanical' Wahhabi clerics who despised America."[31]
Bandar was also instrumental in the growth of what Daniel Pipes has called a "culture of corruption" that renders the executive branch of the American government "incapable of dealing with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in the farsighted and disinterested manner that US foreign policy requires." Pipes points to a "revolving door syndrome" afflicting senior diplomats and policymakers who deal with the Saudis in their official capacities.[32] Very often, they have enjoyed lucrative post-government careers working as consultants for Saudi businessmen and companies, or running Saudi-financed nongovernmental organizations. "If the reputation then builds that the Saudis take care of friends when they leave office," Bandar once reportedly told a close associate: "you'd be surprised how much better friends you have who are just coming into office."[33]
Unable or unwilling to combat the spread of Sunni theofascism at its main source (Saudi Arabia), the Bush administration launched a democracy promotion campaign intended to eradicate political conditions receptive to its global spread. However, rather than building stable and less oppressive systems resistant to religious extremism in Afghanistan and Iraq, the accumulating shortfalls of American intervention in both countries have made them magnets for jihadist recruitment.
The Question of Iran
The Bush Administration's reluctance to challenge the Saudis after 9/11 initially encountered impassioned objections from conservative and liberal commentators alike, but the outrage has tapered off as attention has became increasingly focused on Shiite Iran and its nuclear weapons program. In the view of the administration, the Iranian threat to American national security not only supercedes the threat of Sunni theofascism, but supercedes it to such a degree that a more accommodating policy toward Saudi Arabia is warranted. However, while the prospect of militant Shiite clerics in possession of nuclear weapons is understandably disconcerting to many Americans, the Iranian threat is mitigated by several important factors.
For all of the shrill and unsettling words of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, his government's foreign policy is driven more by Iranian nationalism than Shiite Islamism (this is evident, for example, in Tehran's support for the predominantly Christian nation of Armenia in its dispute with Shiite Azerbaijan). This is not surprising, as Iran (known as Persia prior to the twentieth century) has existed in one form or another since biblical times, while it embraced Shiite Islam just 500 years ago. While Ahmadinejad exploits Iranian nationalism to win public support in his confrontation with the West, it can easily turn against him if he were to embark on a global adventure. Wahhabi clerics may support the Saudi royal family as a necessary evil in order to protect their global proselytizing mission, but they recognize no Saudi Arabian "nation" whose interests take precedence over their agenda. Such is not the case in Iran.
Furthermore, Shiite Islamism does not exhibit theofascist tendencies. Radical clerics in Iran have been responsible for horrendous abuses of power, but they do not regard non-Shiite Muslims as "unbelievers" who must be systematically purged - and even if they did, the fact that Shiites comprise only 10-15% of the world's Muslims would make such a project impractical. Even within the Shiite world, there is no prospect of a Wahhabi-style Iranian takeover of religious discourse because unlike the Sunnis, Shiite Islam is rigidly hierarchical. Iraqi and Lebanese Shiites gladly accept Iranian financial and military support, but they are fiercely loyal to their own clerical establishments.
An even greater fallacy is the widespread belief in Washington that a strong relationship with Saudi Arabia is an asset in confronting Iran. On the contrary, coddling the Saudis makes it more difficult for the United States to deal with Iran. The Bush administration's refusal to hold Saudi leaders accountable for their incitement of Wahhabi jihadists (who have murdered far more Shiites than Americans, mostly in Iraq and Pakistan) is a source of deep resentment in the Shiite world. It is no surprise that the only two major public demonstrations against Al-Qaeda in the Islamic world after the 9/11 attacks were both organized by Shiites (in Tehran and Karachi, Pakistan).
It is interesting to note that the recent escalation of US - Iranian tensions has made the Saudis less accommodating about Iraq than ever before. Reports that the Saudi Government is threatening to openly fund and arm Sunni insurgent groups if American forces withdraw from Iraq are a case in point.[34] In effect, the Saudis are signaling to the Bush administration that they will thwart any American plan to cede control of Iraq to its Shiite-dominated, democratically-elected government, while signaling to the Sunni insurgents in Iraq that they can reject American efforts to broker a political settlement and not be left to face the consequences alone.
Iran has no history of direct aggression against its neighbors, and unlike Saddam's Sunni-dominated Iraq, they have never used weapons of mass destruction during invasions of neighbors or against their own people. The strongest argument for this approach lies with the extent that Iran craves recognition of its actual status as the historically authentic nation state in the Middle East. Iran has long aspired to be and probably will be the region's predominant Islamic regional power.
The Road Ahead
Washington will eventually have to face the reality that derailing Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons (and, more broadly, its emergence as the predominant Islamic regional power) may be impossible over the long-term, and possible in the short term only at the expense of fatally undermining efforts to contain the spread of Sunni theofascism. The United States would do better to find a mutually acceptable means of working with this reality, rather sustaining a deadlocked confrontation by conditioning its willingness to normalize relations with Tehran on the abandonment of its nuclear aspirations. US - Iranian engagement will greatly enhance American leverage over the Saudis, as well as check the threat of Sunni theofascist terrorism in Iraq and, to a lesser extent, Afghanistan. Saudi officials have urged the Bush administration not to talk with Iran because they know that a reduction in US - Iranian tensions will draw more attention to their unbridled export of Wahhabism.
Reducing American dependence on Saudi oil must also be part of any comprehensive strategy for addressing the threat of Sunni theofascism. Although President Bush has expressed commitment to developing alternative energy sources, the surplus production capacity of the Saudis enables them to lower prices as necessary to ensure that this will not be cost effective for a long time. Barring radical breakthroughs in fuel technologies, an optimistic forecast would have bio fuels (ethanol, synthetic diesel and bio oil) making up to 30% of US petroleum equivalent needs by 2030.[35] For the short to medium term future, only conservation can significantly alter American petroleum dependency.
In addition, countering the theofascist threat will require the same kind of comprehensive strategy used to combat the spread of Communism during the twentieth century. While the First Amendment undoubtedly protects the right of individuals to inveigh against pluralism, individual freedoms, and other Western norms, there is nothing in the constitution that protects the right of foreign governments or nationals to disseminate this message on American soil. As for the rest of the world, poor Muslim countries (many of them dependent on Saudi economic aid or remittances from workers in the Arab Gulf) cannot be expected to demand that Riyadh rein in Wahhabi missionaries - they are looking to Washington to apply pressure.
Without the billions of dollars in Saudi funds, the ideological, political, and psychological edifice of Wahhabi theofascism will begin to crumble, particularly if a concerted effort is made by the Bush administration to promote moderate Islamic institutions (a recent study by the RAND Corporation offers some insightful recommendations).[36] Ultimately, the devil is not in the details - it is the administration's broad lack of resolve in confronting the threat of theofascism, not the lack of viable methods of combating it, that imperils American security.
Notes [1] See Mohammed Ayoob, "Political Islam: Image and Reality," World Policy Journal, Vol. 11, No. 3, Fall 2004. [2] Fascism is "a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victim-hood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion." See Robert Paxton, The Anatomy of Fascism (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2004), p. 218. [3] Saudi police 'stopped' fire rescue, BBC, 15 March 2002. Wahhabi religious police (mutaween) prevented Saudi schoolgirls from fleeing a burning school because they were not properly veiled, leaving fifteen of them to die inside in 2002, an outrage equaled only by the Taliban's rein of terror against women in Afghanistan. [4] R. James Woolsey, "The Elephant in The Middle East Living Room: Watching Wahhabis," The National Review, 14 December 2005. [5] Zawahiri declared in a December 2006 videotape, "How could they not demand an Islamic constitution before entering these elections? Are they not an Islamic movement?" See: "Al Qaeda Warns U.S. on Fighting in Muslim Lands," The New York Times, 21 December 2006. [6] Zawahiri accused it of being "duped, provoked and used" by the United States after it participated in the 2005 legislative elections. See "Al-Qaida's No. 2 leader praises U.S. hints of troop reduction in Iraq," The Associated Press, 6 January 2006. [7] In his 2003 book, Why America Slept, Gerald Posner cites two unidentified senior Bush administration officials as saying that captured Al-Qaeda leader Abu Zubaydah revealed details of a Saudi-Pakistani-Bin Laden triangle. See Gerald Posner, Why America Slept: The Failure to Prevent 9/11, (New York: Random House, 2003). [8] "Inside the Kingdom," Time, 7 September 2003. [9] Nina Shea, Saudi Arabia's Curriculum of Intolerance, Freedom House, 2006. [10] John Esposito, quoted in Gary Leupp, On Terrorism, Methodism, Saudi 'Wahhabism' and the Censored 9-11 Report, Counterpunch, 8 August 2003. [11] Ali al-Ahmed of the Washington Institute for Gulf Affairs makes this point. See Saudi Arabia's Curriculum of Intolerance, CBN.org, 14 June 2006. [12] "Top Saudi cleric issues religious edict declaring Shiites to be infidels," Associated Press, 29 December 2006. [13] More Evidence of Saudi Double Talk?, MSNBC, 26 April 2005. [14] In an April 2006 lecture, Saudi cleric Nasser bin Suleiman al-Omar cautioned his audience not to "get involved in things that are not jihad . . . [and] divert the strife and calamity into the lands of the Muslims, instead of aiming them directly at the enemies." He continued, saying that: "there are places where jihad is proper - in Afghanistan, Palestine, Iraq, Chechnya, Kashmir, and the Philippines." See Saudi Cleric Nasser bin Suleiman Al-'Omar: 'America is Now Disappearing From the Hearts Within America Itself . . . MEMRI Special Dispatch #1154, 4 May 2006. [15] Alex Alexiev, "Terrorism: Growing Wahhabi Influence in the United States", Testimony before the US Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Homeland Security, 26 June 2003. [16] Author interview with Evgueni Novokov, Ph.D., former colonel, senior staff officer for the Soviet Politburo and deputy director for Middle East Operations, in charge of Arabic Department, and relationships with CPSU Central Committee front organizations and friendly parties; advised Central Committee members on Islamic affairs, 1986 -1988. 22 October 2006. [17] Author interview with Abdel Guzman, Grand Imam of Jolo, Jolo City, Sulu Province, The Philippines, 5 March 2004. [18] Author's interview with Abdel Guzman, The Grand Imam of Jolo, Op. Cit. [19] See Freedom House, The Talibanization of Nigeria: Radical Islam, Extremist Sharia Law, and Religious Freedom, March 2002. [20] "Against the Saudization of Somaliland," Addis Tribune (Ethiopia), 21 November 2003. http://www.addistribune.com/Archives/2003/11/21-11-03/Against.htm [21] In March 2002, the official Saudi magazine Ain al-Yaqeen estimated that the Saudi royal family in countries where Muslims were a minority has funded 210 Islamic centers, 1,500 mosques, 202 colleges, and 2,000 madrassas. The number of all Saudi Government and charitably funded institutions beyond Saudi Arabia is much higher. Cited in "Inside the Kingdom," Time, 7 September 2003. [22] Alex Alexiev, "France at the Brink", The San Diego Union Tribune, 20 November 2005. See also: Alex Alexiev, Europe's Islamist Future is Now, The Center for Security Policy, 13 June 2005. [23] Other publications examined include textbooks from the Saudi Ministry of Education and collections of religious edicts by state-sanctioned clerics in the kingdom. See Freedom House, Saudi Publications on Hate Ideology Fill American Mosques, January 2005. [24] Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, "Wahhabism in the Big House: The Teaching of Jihad in American Penitentiaries," The Weekly Standard, 26 September 2005. [25] "Terrorist Recruitment in Prisons and The Recent Arrests Related to Guantanamo Bay Detainees," Testimony of John S. Pistole, Assistant Director, Counterterrorism Division, FBI, before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology, and Homeland Security, 14 October 2003. [26] Testimony of Dr. J. Michael Waller before the US Senate Judiciary Committee's Terrorism Subcommittee, 14 October 2003. [27] Frank Gaffney, A Troubling Influence, Front Page Magazine.com, 9 December 2003. [28] Glenn Simpson, "Suspect Lessons: A Muslim School Used by Military Has Troubling Ties," The Wall Street Journal, 3 December 2003. [29] "For Conservative Muslims, Goal of Isolation a Challenge; 9/11 Put Strict Adherents on the Defensive," The Washington Post, 5 September 2006. [30] Edward L. Morse and James Richard, "The Battle for Energy Dominance," Foreign Affairs, March/April 2002. [31] David Ignatius, "The Operator," The Washington Post, 5 November 2006, p.7. [32] Daniel Pipes, "The Scandal of U.S.-Saudi Relations," The National Interest, Winter 2002/2003. [33] "Oil for Security Fueled Close Ties; But Major Differences Led to Tensions," The Washington Post, 11 February 2002. [34] In November 2006, Nawaf Obaid, a close advisor to Prince Turki, warned in a Washington Post op-ed that a phased American withdrawal from Iraq will result in "massive Saudi intervention," with options including "funding, arms and logistical support" to Sunni insurgents. "As the economic powerhouse of the Middle East, the birthplace of Islam and the de facto leader of the world's Sunni community (which comprises 85 percent of all Muslims), Saudi Arabia has both the means and the religious responsibility to intervene." See Nawaf Obaid, "Stepping Into Iraq: Saudi Arabia Will Protect Sunnis if the U.S. Leaves," The Washington Post, 29 November 2006. [35] Outlook on Renewable Energy in America, Volume II: Joint Summary Report, American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE), March 2007. [36] The Rand Corporation, Building Moderate Muslim Networks, 2007.

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

Ilan Pappe: A big thank you


Ilan Pappe: A big thank you











Ilan pappe


Ilan Pappe, The Electronic Intifada, 4 September 2009



3 September 2009


Today was a unique day in the history of media coverage and discussion in Israel. All the electronic agencies, radio and television alike, discussed the occupation and the oppression of the Palestinians and more importantly, the possible price tag attached to it. It lasted only for 12 hours and tomorrow the obedient Israeli media will return to parrot the governmental new message to the masses that the "conflict" has ended and is about to be solved. On the one hand, you already have happy-go-lucky Palestinians in the West Bank (see the latest reports by Thomas Friedman in The New York Times and Ari Shavit in Haaretz). And on the other, alas, those who opted out from the blissful new reality: the oppressed Palestinians who still live under Hamas' dictatorship in the Gaza Strip.
Tomorrow we all will go back to the dismal reality in which Palestinian students are imprisoned daily without trial in Nablus, Palestinian children are killed near Ramallah, as also happened today. We will return to the reality of house demolitions as occurred two weeks ago in Jerusalem, of the continued strangulation of the Gaza Strip and the overall dispossession of Palestinians, wherever they are. But today of all days, those of us who happened to be here on the ground saw a light, a very powerful light, illuminating for a very short moment, the horizon of a different reality of peace and reconciliation.
And it was all due to the decision of the Norwegian government to withdraw its investments in the Israeli hi-tech company Elbit (due to the latter's involvement in the construction and maintenance of the apartheid wall). We have to keep a proportional view on this: only one section of Elbit, Elbit Systems, was affected. But the significance is not about who was targeted, but rather who took the decision: the Norwegian ministry of finance through its ethical council. No less important was the manner in which it was taken: the minister herself announced the move in a press conference. This is what transformed for a short while the media scene in the Zionist state.
Usually matters of foreign or military relevance are discussed in the Israeli media by generals or recruited political scientists from the local academia who provide the interviewers with what they want to hear as commentary. In this case, as one could gather from the questions they have posed to the individuals they invited, they wished to hear that the Muslim minority in Norway is behind this. Or that traditional anti-Semitism explains it and that the newly formed Elders of anti-Zion, with the new recruits -- the Iranian and Libyan governments -- concocted it. But since the target was a hi-tech company, the commentators invited to the live bulletins were either experts on economy and finance, such as the economic correspondents of the local dailies or captains of the local industry and hi-tech companies. The views of these commentators are a far cry from those usually expressed here in this and similar venues. But they do deal with economic realities and facts of life, and less with mythology and ideological fabrications. And they explained, on prime time, that it is actually the Norwegian sensitivity to human rights that begot this last action and quite likely similar actions will be taken in the future. For the readers of this site, this may sound boring or too elementary, but the average listener and viewer in Israel has not been exposed to such a clear deduction in the mainstream media by mainstream journalists and personalities for a very long time.
The significance of this alas, short lived exposure of what lies behind the apartheid wall and the fences that encircle the West Bank and the Gaza Strip stems from the seniority of Kristin Halvorsen, the Norwegian finance minister who herself announced the decision to divest. It is the first official act of this kind by a Western government. It is reminiscent of the first day when governments heeded the pressures of their societies in the West to act against apartheid South Africa. We were all moved, and rightly so, when brave trade unions took such decisions against Israel; we were all very hopeful when the International Court of Justice ruled against the wall and when courageous individuals, the last one being the filmmaker Ken Loach, took a firm stand against participating in anything which officially represents Israel. But now there is an evolution, a quantum leap forward and a momentum we have to keep and maintain!
This is a clear message for all the good people in the West looking for ways of helping the Palestinians in their moment of nadir. They want to march and sail peacefully to Gaza, they wish to facilitate more meetings between Israelis and Palestinians and are adamant despite all the hurdles to volunteer in the occupied territories. These are all noble actions but changing the public opinion in the West, is what people in the West can do best. And if one government has already shifted significantly the name and the rules of the game -- be it in a very minor decision that may still be revised under the tidal Zionist reaction, others will surely follow. For the time being all we can say is a huge thank you to a brave politician that will enter the pages of history as someone who paved the way to a better future for everyone in Israel and Palestine.
Ilan Pappe is chair in the Department of History at the University of Exeter.

Friday, August 28, 2009

The unity of the Ummah: a state of mind above all else


The unity of the Ummah: a state of mind above all else

Perspectives by Iqbal Siddiqui


The unity of the Muslim Ummah is a reality proclaimed in the Qur’an, in the ayah “Verily this Ummah of yours is one Ummah…” (21:92) and numerous others. It is one of the key strengths of the Ummah at many levels, from the cultural to the political. It is the unity of the Ummah, the common understanding that all Muslims are brothers and sisters in faith, that makes Muslims feel at home wherever they may go in the Muslim world. However, translating this principle of unity into practical unity at a more functional level has always proved problematic; from the earliest days of Muslim history there have been differences and conflict within the Ummah, as Muslims have disagreed on fundamental issues of politics and fiqh.
In recent times, there has been a sustained campaign to promote sectarianism in the Ummah in order to isolate Islamic Iran and minimise its influence over the rest of the Ummah. One of the immediate results of the revolution was a massive outpouring of sectarian, anti-Shi‘i literature in the Sunni world, mainly funded by the Saudis and the Islamic institutions linked to them. The impact of this campaign has been immense, with many Sunnis, even those who have no truck with the Saudis, harbouring sectarian hostility towards Shi‘is, to the extent of explicitly or implicitly questioning whether they are even Muslims. Such attitudes are based entirely on ignorance and misunderstanding, albeit deliberately promoted, but are immensely damaging nonetheless. The sectarian violence seen in Iraq in recent years, in which both Sunnis and Shi‘is have been both perpetrators and victims of appalling atrocities, is a tragic example of the dangers of this approach. Even our Western enemies have recognised the potential for damage to the Ummah by emphasising sectarian issues; from the outset the Islamic Revolution was described and discussed as a Shi‘i phenomanon rather than an Islamic one.
We should recognise, however, that these campaigns were successful only because they appealed to receptive minds.  There has unfortunately been a tendency to sectarianism in the Ummah for a long time; there have always been ‘ulama and political leaders, Sunni and Shi‘i alike, who have preferred to emphasise differences between Muslims instead of what they have in common. This has been the case even among those whom Sunnis and Shi‘is recognise as Muslims of different schools of thought, rather than being outside the Ummah. It is the effect of this sort of attitude, reflected in ingrained cultural and social behaviour on both sides, that has, over decades and centuries, laid the ground for the sort of extreme sectarianism that has been deliberately cultivated in the last few decades. It is important to note, moreover, that this is not only a Sunni problem, although — because of the success of the Islamic Revolution — it has been whipped up among Sunnis in particular. There have been plenty of Shi‘i ‘ulama who have responded to the Saudi-financed campaign by choosing to emphasise their Shi‘ism and attacking Sunnis, which attitudes have played into the hands of Sunni sectarians, and have also laid the ground for the Shi‘i extremism in Iraq today. A sectarian sense of Shi‘i exceptionalism has also contributed to the fact that Islamic Iran has failed to reach out to the rest of the Ummah as effectively as it should have done.
Yet throughout Muslim history there have been voices in the Ummah that have sought to minimise differences and focus on what Muslims have in common, rather than focussing on differences and areas of disagreement. In recent years, Crescent has regularly reported on the work of the Majma‘ al-Taqrib bayn al-Madhahib Islami (Organisation for Proximity between Schools of Thought in Islam).
This was created after the Islamic Revolution, but is part of a long tradition of dialogue and cooperation that includes the Dar al-Taqrib al-Madhahib created as a result of the cooperation between senior ‘ulama at Al-Azhar in Cairo and Qum in Iran in the 1940s. This cooperation led to Mahmoud Shaltut, rector of al-Azhar, introducing the teaching of Shi‘i theology at al-Azhar in 1959. Muslims regularly show their instinctive understanding of the unity of the Ummah by supporting Hizbullah, a predominantly Shi‘i movement, and indeed the Islamic State of Iran. The relations between Hizbullah, Iran, and the Hamas resistance movement in Palestine, which is an off-shoot of the Ikhwan, is an example of unity in practice.

Unity is, first and foremost, a state of mind; we must make a conscious effort to realise the unity of the Ummah proclaimed by Allah (Â) by focussing on what we have in common rather than on our differences. At this crucial time in the struggle of the Islamic movement, it is essential that all Muslims, in all parts of the world, and of all schools of thought, rise above sectarian issues to stand united against the enemies of Islam.

pull quote:
Unity is, first and foremost, a state of mind; we must make a conscious effort to realise the unity of the Ummah proclaimed by Allah (Â), by focussing on what we have in common rather than on our differences.

Thursday, August 20, 2009

Wahabism/Salafeesm & Tawheedsm are all innovations and Shirk

Wahabism/Salafeesm & Tawheedsm are all innovations and Shirk - I will prove all these gradually; but the question at hand is NAJD; lets go step by Step.

Since all of you say that “ONLY” what you believe is correct; Let me prove you wrong with Data which Wahabis can’t change or refute; All my evidence is of authentic orign- Lets talk about the following arguments;

(1) Nejd is in Arabia- what the prophet (sal) indicated. Not Iraq as Wahabis try to indicate through fabricated articles. Also forecasts of Nejd and its Shaithan ibn Al-Wahab, Wahabi prophesies (Hadees) of Holy Prophet (sal).
(2) The Birth Place of Mohammed Ibn Al-Wahab Al-Najdi is the same nejd in Arabia. Unless Wahabis say he was born in Iraq.
(3) That Wahabism is SHIRK or an innovation and was spread by Violence- Murder, Rape & Looting. It’s off-shoots the Salafism, Tawheesm,etc.

PART 1;

Let Me 1st Start with Nejd/Najd - Please read the article and then tell me whether you agree with me or not; If you disagree then prove me wrong without using wahabi biased websites/links & articles of of Wahabis/Salafee Jamath or Tawheeds Jamath;

(1)Najd – Nejd- Najdi: (also refer attached maps for better understanding what we're talking about)

Abdullah bin Umar (Radiallhu Anhu) narrates in Muslim Shareef: “The Holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) once emerged from the room of his wife, Hazrat Ayesha (Radiallahu Anha) and pointing towards Najd exclaimed:‘This is the center of Kufr from where the horn of Shaitaan will rise’.”(Muslim Shareef Vol. ii, PP. 1394)

Narrated Ibn ‘Umar: The Prophet (s)said, “O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Sham! O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Yemen.” The People said, “And also on our NAJD.” He said, “O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Sham (north)! O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Yemen.” The people said, “O Allah’s Apostle! And also on our NAJD.” I think the third time the Prophet (s) said, “There (in NAJD) is the place of earthquakes and afflictions and from there comes out the side of the head of Satan.” Sahi Bukhari (Book #88, Hadith #214)
Fact in Modern History: Najd is in Arabia Not In Iraq.
The Kingdom of Hejaz and Nejd was established after the Kingdom of Hejaz had been conquered by Nejd in the mid-1920s. In January 8, 1926, the Sultan of Nejd, Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud, was crowned King of the Hejaz in the Grand Mosque of Mecca. On January 29, 1927 he also took the title King of Nejd, as opposed to the earlier Sultan. At the Treaty of Jeddah in May 20, 1927, Abdul Aziz's realm was recognized by the United Kingdom and was addressed as the Kingdom of Hejaz and Nejd. In September 23, 1932, the main regions Al-Hasa, Qatif, Nejd and Hejaz were unified and the kingdom got its name changed to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The Kingdom of Hejaz and Nejd could pursue its expansionist policy by British arms supplies because of its close relations with the United Kingdom.
All of you’re trying to prove to me and the rest of Forum members that Nejd is in Iraq and you have quoted and given varies links of Wahabi based websites as well as Wahabi-Articles. These links don’t ‘wash with us’ as it is your own creation & fabrication of actual data. We must get independent analysis and independent authentic verifiable data to prove a point.

Many a times we meet ignorant wahabis in life who say that NAJD is Iraq. This statement ensures that the person has been reading Wahabi FABRICATED materials and has been brain washed by the wahabi speakers.If one does not have interest in reading, please analyze these evidence.

Let me prove it to you with a layman’s language that NEJD; the place where Holy Prophet Mohammed (sal) warned Muslims is none other than Nejd province of Arabia using independent and verifiable data.

Even the briefest glimpse at a modern atlas will show that a straight line drawn to the east of al-Madina al-Munawwara does not pass anywhere near Iraq, but passes some distance to the south of Riyadh; that is to say, through the exact centre of Najd. The hadiths which speak of ‘the East’ in this context hence support the view that Najd is indicated, not Iraq. (Refer attached map which speaks for iteself)

The etymological sense of the Arabic word najd, which means ‘high ground’. Again, a brief consultation of an atlas resolves this matter decisively. With the exception of present-day northern Iraq, which was not considered part of Iraq by any Muslim until the present century (it was called ‘al-Jazira’), Iraq is notably flat and low-lying, much of it even today being marshland, while the remainder, up to and well to the north of Baghdad, is flat, low desert or agricultural land. Najd, by contrast, is mostly plateau, culminating in peaks such as Jabal Tayyi’ (1300 metres), in the Jabal Shammar range.

Further evidence can be cited from the cluster of hadiths which identify the miqat points for pilgrims. In a hadith narrated by Imam Nasa’i (Manasik al-Hajj, 22), ‘A’isha (r.a.) declared that ‘Allah’s Messenger (s.w.s.) established the miqat for the people of Madina at Dhu’l-Hulayfa, for the people of Syria and Egypt at al-Juhfa, for the people of Iraq at Dhat Irq, and for the people of Najd at Qarn, and for the Yemenis at Yalamlam.’ Imam Muslim (Hajj, 2) narrates a similar hadith: ‘for the people of Madina it is Dhu’l-Hulayfa - while on the other road it is al-Juhfa - for the people of Iraq it is Dhat Irq, for the people of Najd it is Qarn, and for the people of Yemen it is Yalamlam.’

HadithBook 007, Number 2666: Sahih MuslimAbu Zubair heard Jabir b. 'Abdullah (Allah be pleased with them) as saying as he was asked about (the place for entering upon the) state of Ihram: I heard (and I think he carried it directly to the Apostle of Allah) him saying: For the people of Medina Dhu'l-Hulaifa is the place for entering upon the state of Ihram, and for (the people coming through the other way, i. e. Syria) it is Juhfa; for the people of Iraq it is Dbat al-'Irq; for the people uf Najd it is Qarn (al-Manazil) and for the people of Yemen it is Yalamlam.

These texts constitute unarguable proof that the Prophet (s.w.s.) distinguished between Najd and Iraq, so much so that he appointed two separate miqat points for the inhabitants of each. For him, clearly, Najd did not include Iraq.

Independent Verifiable data from: http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761571297/najd.html

Najd, also Nejd, region in central Saudi Arabia. A plateau region, it is bounded on the west by the mountains of Al Ḩijāz (the Hejaz) and on all other sides by sand deserts. The region is sparsely inhabited except for a string of oases. The national capital, Riyadh, is located here. Najd became the center of the Wahhabi reform movement of Islam in the 18th century (see Wahhabis). The Wahhabi leader and sultan of Najd, Ibn Saud, began the consolidation of what was to become Saudi Arabia, with the capture of Riyadh in 1901.


Independent Verifiable data from:
http://www.statemaster.com/encyclopedia/Najd
Najd or Nejd (Arabic: نجد Naǧd) is a region in central Saudi Arabia and the location of the nation's capital, Riyadh. Najd is a plateau ranging from 762 to 1,525m in height. The eastern section is marked by oasis settlements, elsewhere the region is sparsely occupied by nomadic Bedouins. An individual from Najd is called a Najdi in Arabic.
Independent Verifiable data from:
http://i-cias.com/e.o/najd.htm

Arabic: najdOther spelling: Nejd
Region in north-central Saudi Arabia, with about 7 million inhabitants (2003 estimate). It was a kingdom from 1902 until 1932. The geography of Najd is rocky plateau. It is bordered by the mountains of Hijaz in the south-west; Jordan and Iraq in the north; the Saudi coast of the Persian Gulf known as al-Hasa in the east; and the empty quarter of the Arabian peninsula, Rub al-Khali, in the south. Najd is politically the heartland of modern Saudi Arabia, as it was from here that the Saud family conquered the rest of the regions now making up the country.In modern Saudi Arabia Najd is called the Central Region, comprising 3 provinces; Ha'il, Buraydah and Riyadh.

The Hadith of Najd: The land of Najd, which for two centuries has been the crucible of the Wahhabi doctrine, is the subject of a body of interesting hadiths and early narrations which repay close analysis. Among the best-known of these hadiths is the relation of Imam al-Bukhari in which Ibn Umar said: ‘The Prophet (s.w.s.) mentioned: “O Allah, give us baraka in our Syria, O Allah, give us baraka in our Yemen.” They said: “And in our Najd?” and he said: “O Allah, give us baraka in our Syria, O Allah, give us baraka in our Yemen.” They said: “And in our Najd?” and I believe that he said the third time: “In that place are earthquakes, and seditions, and in that place shall rise the devil’s horn [qarn al-shaytan].”’This hadith is clearly unpalatable to the Najdites themselves, some of whom to this day strive to persuade Muslims from more reputable districts that the hadith does not mean what it clearly says. One device used by such apologists is to utilise a definition which includes Iraq in the frontiers of Najd. By this manoeuvre, the Najdis draw the conclusion that the part of Najd which is condemned so strongly in this hadith is in fact Iraq, and that Najd proper is excluded. Medieval Islamic geographers contest this inherently strange thesis (see for instance Ibn Khurradadhbih, al-Masalik wa’l-mamalik [Leiden, 1887], 125; Ibn Hawqal, Kitab Surat al-ard [Beirut, 1968],18); and limit the northern extent of Najd at Wadi al-Rumma, or to the deserts to the south of al-Mada’in. There is no indication that the places in which the second wave of sedition arose, such as Kufa and Basra, were associated in the mind of the first Muslims with the term ‘Najd’. On the contrary, these places are in every case identified as lying within the land of Iraq.The evasion of this early understanding of the term in order to exclude Najd, as usually understood, from the purport of the hadith of Najd, has required considerable ingenuity from pro-Najdi writers in the present day. Some apologists attempt to conflate this hadith with a group of other hadiths which associate the ‘devil’s horn’ with ‘the East’, which is supposedly a generic reference to Iraq. While it is true that some late-medieval commentaries also incline to this view, modern geographical knowledge clearly rules it out. Even the briefest glimpse at a modern atlas will show that a straight line drawn to the east of al-Madina al-Munawwara does not pass anywhere near Iraq, but passes some distance to the south of Riyadh; that is to say, through the exact centre of Najd. The hadiths which speak of ‘the East’ in this context hence support the view that Najd is indicated, not Iraq.On occasion the pro-Najdi apologists also cite the etymological sense of the Arabic word najd, which means ‘high ground’. Again, a brief consultation of an atlas resolves this matter decisively. With the exception of present-day northern Iraq, which was not considered part of Iraq by any Muslim until the present century (it was called ‘al-Jazira’), Iraq is notably flat and low-lying, much of it even today being marshland, while the remainder, up to and well to the north of Baghdad, is flat, low desert or agricultural land. Najd, by contrast, is mostly plateau, culminating in peaks such as Jabal Tayyi’ (1300 metres), in the Jabal Shammar range. It is hard to see how the Arabs could have routinely applied a topographic term meaning ‘upland’ to the flat terrain of southern Iraq (the same territory which proved so suitable for tank warfare during the 1991 ‘Gulf War’, that notorious source of dispute between Riyadh’s ‘Cavaliers’ and ‘Roundheads’).Confirmation of this identification is easily located in the hadith literature, which contains numerous references to Najd, all of which clearly denote Central Arabia. To take a few examples out of many dozens: there is the hadith narrated by Abu Daud (Salat al-Safar, 15), which runs: ‘We went out to Najd with Allah’s Messenger (s.w.s.) until we arrived at Dhat al-Riqa‘, where he met a group from Ghatafan [a Najdite tribe].’ In Tirmidhi (Hajj, 57), there is the record of an encounter between the Messenger (s.w.s.) and a Najdi delegation which he received at Arafa (see also Ibn Maja, Manasik, 57). In no such case does the Sunna indicate that Iraq was somehow included in the Prophetic definition of ‘Najd’.Further evidence can be cited from the cluster of hadiths which identify the miqat points for pilgrims. In a hadith narrated by Imam Nasa’i (Manasik al-Hajj, 22), ‘A’isha (r.a.) declared that ‘Allah’s Messenger (s.w.s.) established the miqat for the people of Madina at Dhu’l-Hulayfa, for the people of Syria and Egypt at al-Juhfa, for the people of Iraq at Dhat Irq, and for the people of Najd at Qarn, and for the Yemenis at Yalamlam.’ Imam Muslim (Hajj, 2) narrates a similar hadith: ‘for the people of Madina it is Dhu’l-Hulayfa - while on the other road it is al-Juhfa - for the people of Iraq it is Dhat Irq, for the people of Najd it is Qarn, and for the people of Yemen it is Yalamlam.’These texts constitute unarguable proof that the Prophet (s.w.s.) distinguished between Najd and Iraq, so much so that he appointed two separate miqat points for the inhabitants of each. For him, clearly, Najd did not include Iraq.
Najd in the HadithThere are many hadiths in which the Messenger (s.w.s.) praised particular lands. It is significant that although Najd is the closest of lands to Makka and Madina, it is not praised by any one of these hadiths. The first hadith cited above shows the Messenger’s willingness to pray for Syria and Yemen, and his insistent refusal to pray for Najd. And wherever Najd is mentioned, it is clearly seen as a problematic territory. Consider, for instance, the following noble hadith:Amr ibn Abasa said: ‘Allah’s Messenger (s.w.s.) was one day reviewing the horses, in the company of Uyayna ibn Hisn ibn Badr al-Fazari. [...] Uyayna remarked: “The best of men are those who bear their swords on their shoulders, and carry their lances in the woven stocks of their horses, wearing cloaks, and are the people of the Najd.” But Allah’s Messenger (s.w.s.) replied: “You lie! Rather, the best of men are the men of the Yemen. Faith is a Yemeni, the Yemen of [the tribes of] Lakhm and Judham and Amila. [...] Hadramawt is better than the tribe of Harith; one tribe is better than another; another is worse [...] My Lord commanded me to curse Quraysh, and I cursed them, but he then commanded me to bless them twice, and I did so [...] Aslam and Ghifar, and their associates of Juhaina, are better than Asad and Tamim and Ghatafan and Hawazin, in the sight of Allah on the Day of Rising. [...] The most numerous tribe in the Garden shall be [the Yemeni tribes of] Madhhij and Ma’kul.’ (Ahmad ibn Hanbal and al-Tabarani, by sound narrators. Cited in Ali ibn Abu Bakr al-Haythami, Majma‘ al-zawa’id wa manba‘ al-fawa’id [Cairo, 1352], X, 43).The Messenger says ‘You lie!’ to a man who praises Najd. Nowhere does he praise Najd - quite the contrary. But other hadiths in praise of other lands abound. For instance:Umm Salama narrated that Allah’s Messenger (s.w.s.) gave the following counsel on his deathbed: ‘By Allah, I adjure you by Him, concerning the Egyptians, for you shall be victorious over them, and they will be a support for you and helpers in Allah’s path.’ (Tabarani, classed by al-Haythami as sahih [Majma‘, X, 63].) (For more on the merit of the Egyptians see Sahih Muslim, commentary by Imam al-Nawawi [Cairo, 1347], XVI, 96-7.)Qays ibn Sa‘d narrated that Allah’s Messenger (s.w.s.) said: ‘Were faith to be suspended from the Pleiades, men from the sons of Faris [south-central Iran] would reach it.’ (Narrated in the Musnads of both Abu Ya‘la and al-Bazzar, classified as Sahih by al-Haythami. Majma‘, X, 64-5. See further Nawawi’s commentary to Sahih Muslim, XVI, 100.)Allah’s Messenger said: ‘Tranquillity (sakina) is in the people of the Hijaz.’ (al-Bazzar, cited in Haythami, X, 53.) On the authority of Abu’l-Darda (r.a.), the Messenger of Allah (s.w.s.) said: ‘You will find armies. An army in Syria, in Egypt, in Iraq and in the Yemen.’ (Bazzar and Tabarani, classified as sahih: al-Haythami, Majma‘, X, 58.) This constitutes praise for these lands as homes of jihad volunteers.‘The angels of the All-Compassionate spread their wings over Syria.’ (Tabarani, classed as sahih: Majma‘, X, 60. See also Tirmidhi, commentary of Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Rahman al-Mubarakfuri: Tuhfat al-Ahwadhi bi-sharh Jami‘ al-Tirmidhi, X, 454; who confirms it as hasan sahih.)Abu Hurayra narrated that Allah’s Messenger (s) said: ‘The people of Yemen have come to you. They are tenderer of heart, and more delicate of soul. Faith is a Yemeni, and wisdom is a Yemeni.’ (Tirmidhi, Fi fadl al-Yaman, no.4028. Mubarakfuri, X, 435, 437: hadith hasan sahih. On page 436 Imam Mubarakfuri points out that the ancestors of the Ansar were from the Yemen.)‘The people of the Yemen are the best people on earth’. (Abu Ya‘la and Bazzar, classified as sahih. Haythami, X, 54-5.)Allah’s Messenger (s) sent a man to one of the clans of the Arabs, but they insulted and beat him. He came to Allah’s Messenger (s.w.s.) and told him what had occurred. And the Messenger (s) said, ‘Had you gone to the people of Oman, they would not have insulted or beaten you.’ (Muslim, Fada’il al-Sahaba, 57. See Nawawi’s commentary, XVI, 98: ‘this indicates praise for them, and their merit.’)The above hadiths are culled from a substantial corpus of material which records the Messenger (s.w.s.) praising neighbouring regions. Again, it is striking that although Najd was closer than any other, hadiths in praise of it are completely absent.This fact is generally known, although not publicised, by Najdites themselves. It is clear that if there existed a single hadith that names and praises Najd, they would let the Umma know. In an attempt to circumvent or neutralise the explicit and implicit Prophetic condemnation of their province, some refuse to consider that the territorial hadiths might be in any way worthy of attention, and focus their comments on the tribal groupings who dwell in Najd.
The Generality of the Hadeeth Pertaining to the Fitna Coming from the East.
Al-Bukhaaree includes this hadeeth in the chapter: "The affliction will appear from the East"
212) From the father of Saalim: The Prophet, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, stood up besides the pulpit (and pointed towards the east) and said: "Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there! From where appears the horn of Satan" or he said, "the horn of the Sun"
213) From ibn Umar that he said: I heard the Messenger of Allaah, sallallaahu alyahi wa sallam, saying while facing the east: "Indeed Afflictions are there, from where appears the Horn of Satan."
Medieval Islamic geographers contest this inherently strange thesis (see for instance Ibn Khurradadhbih, al-Masalik wa’l-mamalik [Leiden, 1887], 125; Ibn Hawqal, Kitab Surat al-ard [Beirut, 1968],18); and limit the northern extent of Najd at Wadi al-Rumma, or to the deserts to the south of al-Mada’in. There is no indication that the places in which the second wave of sedition arose, such as Kufa and Basra, were associated in the mind of the first Muslims with the term ‘Najd’. On the contrary, these places are in every case identified as lying within the land of Iraq.
Nejd and its “Shaithan Wahabi” prophesies (forewarning Hadees)
The Prophet said, Peace be upon him:"They [Khawarij = those outside] transferred the Qur'anic verses meant to refer to unbelievers and made them refer to believers." This is exactly What Wahabis/Salafis & Tawheeds do. 100% fits their description.
"What I most fear in my community is a man who interprets verses of the Qur'an out of context." This is exactly What Wahabis/Salafis & Tawheeds do. 100% fits their description.
"The confusion [fitna] comes from there (and he pointed to the East = Najd in present-day Eastern Saudi Arabia)." This is exactly What Wahabis/Salafis & Tawheeds do. 100% fits their description.
"A people that recite Qur'an will come out of the East, but it will not go past their throats. They will pass through the religion (of Islam) like the arrow passes through its quarry. They will no more come back to the religion than the arrow will come back to its course. Their sign is that they shave (their heads)."
"There will be in my Community a dissent and a faction, a people with excellent words and vile deeds. They will read Qur'an, but their faith does not go past their throats. They will pass through religion the way an arrow passes through its quarry. They will no more come back to the religion than the arrow will come back to its original course. They are the worst of human beings and the worst of all creation. The one who kills them or is killed by them is blessed. They summon to the book of Allah but they have nothing to do with it. Whoever kills them is closer to Allah than they. Their sign is that they shave (their heads)."
Also: "There will be people in my Community whose mark is that they shave (their heads). They will recite Qur'an, but it will not go past their throats. They will pass through religion the way an arrow passes through its target. They are the worst of human beings and the worst of all creation."
"The apex of disbelief is towards the East [Najd]. Pride and arrogance is found among the people of the horse and the camel [Bedouin Arabs]."
"Harshness and dryness of heart are in the East [Najd], and true belief is among the people of Hijaz."
"O Allah, bless our Syria and our Yemen!" They said: "Ya Rasulallah, and our Najd!" He didn't reply. He blessed Syria and Yemen twice more. They asked him to bless Najd twice more but he didn't reply. The third time he said: "There [in Najd] are the earthquakes and the dissensions, and through it will dawn the epoch [or horn] of shaytan."
A version has, "The two epochs [or horns] of shaytan." Some scholars have said that the dual referred to Musaylima the Arch-liar and to Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab.
Some books of history mention the following version in the chapters devoted to the battles against the Banu Hanifa:
"There will be towards the end of time a people who will say to you what neither you nor your forebears ever heard before. Beware of them lest they misguide you and bring you confusion."
"They recite Qur'an and consider it in their favor but it is against them."
"There will be Dajjals and liars among my Community. They will tell you something new, which neither you nor your forefathers have heard. Be on your guard against them and do not let them lead you astray."
"Some people will be standing and calling at the gates of hell; whoever responds to their call, they will throw him into the Fire. They will be from our own people [i.e. Arabs] and will speak our language [Arabic]. Should you live to see them, stick to the main body (jama`a) of the Muslims and their leader. (If there is no main body and no leader,) isolate yourself from all these sects, even if you have to eat from the roots of trees until death overcomes you while you are in that state."
On the authority of Abu Sa`id al-Khudri: "Verily in the wake of this time of mine comes a people who will recite Qur'an but it will not go past their throats. They will pass through religion the way an arrow passes through its quarry. They will kill the Muslims and leave the idolaters alone. If I saw them, verily I would kill them the way the tribe of `Aad was killed [i.e. all of them]."
"A shaytan will appear in Najd by whose dissension the Arabia will quake."
"At the end of times a man will come out of Musaylima's country and he will change the religion of Islam." Note: Most of the Khawarij were from the Najd area, from the tribes of Banu Hanifa, Banu Tamim, and Wa'il. Musaylima was from the Banu Hanifa, and Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab is from Tamim.
Abu Bakr said concerning the Banu Hanifa (the tribe of Musaylima the Liar): "Their valley [Najd] will not cease to be a valley of dissensions until the end of time, and the religion will never recover from their liars until Judgment Day," and in another version: "Woe to al-Yamama without end."
When `Ali killed the Khawarij, someone said: "Praise be to Allah Who has brought them down and relieved us from them." Ali replied: "Verily, by the One in Whose hand is my soul, some of them are still in the loins of men and they have not been born yet, and the last of them will fight on the side of the Dajjal/Antichrist."
"There will be a huge confusion within my Community. There will not remain one house of the Arabs except that confusion will enter it. Those who die because of it are in the fire. The harm of the tongue in it will be greater than that of the sword."
Only Wahabis shave their heads/Trim the hair very short as a rule.
I have now proved with Authentic Islamic Data, Historical Evidence and independently verifiable data that NEJD/NAJD is in Arabia; The Birth place of Shaithan Ibn Al-Wahab!

If you think I'm wrong then prove yourself with evidence, not just waste our time with more of Wahabi articles.


"King is always Right! "

King is of Ahl al Sunnah wal Jamaah so the King Can't go wrong!

A Muslim is Never a Wahabi/Salafee Jamath or Tawheed Jamath as these are innovations in Islam & Shirk!

Ibn Al-Wahab is the Shaithan who killed Muslims, Raped & Looted Muslims just for Power! Please read part 2 for historical evidence showing Al-Wahab as an Enemy of Muslims & Islam!

A Muslim is a Muslim just as Allah & Rasool(sal) wanted us to remain - We dont need to call ourselves anything else!

Kind regards
Sabry
King@sol.lk