‘Is ISIL really ‘Sunni’? Not at all’

By Kevin Barrett

The Western media describes ISIL – the ultra-extremist terrorists destabilizing Iraq and Syria – as “Sunni militants.” Headlines read: “Sunni Islamist Militants Seize Mosul.” “Sunni militants capture northern Iraqi town.” “Iraq Army Tries to Roll Back Sunni Militants’ Advance.” The corporate media casts the fighting in Iraq as a Sunni vs. Shia conflict. The Sunni side, according to these reports, is led by ISIL – a group that was expelled from al-Qaeda for being too extreme. But is ISIL really Sunni? Many experts say “no.” Some question whether ISIL has a right to call itself an Islamic group at all. In an interview with Truth Jihad Radio, Islamic scholar Dr. John Andrew Morrow (Ilyas Abd al-‘Alim Islam) questioned ISIL’s Islamic credentials: “A lot of so-called jihad (such as ISIL’s) is not rooted in Islam. Especially if you look at who’s funding it, who’s supporting it, who’s behind it. Western powers have a long history of using jihadists and Islamists to further their own imperial ambitions. In terms of the foot-soldiers, they may think they are fighting for Islam. But if you look closer, you find they’re furthering the cause of the enemy.” Dr. Morrow pointed out that much of ISIL’s behavior is patently un-Islamic. He said that the ISIL terrorists love to film themselves committing war crimes that are forbidden by Islam: “They are very proud to commit atrocities. They film it. They upload it to the internet. They have their own websites.” Dr. Morrow commented on the notorious video showing a Takfiri terrorist eating a dead soldier’s liver: “This is what Hind (an enemy of the Muslims) did. You’re not following the sahaba, you’re not following the Prophet. You’re following the polytheists who were fighting the Prophet when you start cannibalizing corpses. And there was another video of a poor Muslim sister who was strangled to death. I mean, who goes around strangling women to cries of Allahu akbar?” Continuing the habit of vaunting their un-Islamic atrocities, ISIL terrorists recently posted internet videos showing themselves murdering 1,700 captured Iraqi army soldiers. They have also reportedly killed dozens of Sunni imams who refuse to swear allegiance to ISIL. And they are killing Shia Muslims indiscriminately. If these terrorists are Sunni Muslims, why are they systematically violating the tenets of Sunni Islam? In fact, ISIL appears to be far outside of Sunni Islam. The kind of “Islam” espoused by the ISIL Takfiris is an extreme version of the Salafi-Wahhabi school of thought. These people reject the five major Islamic madhhabs (schools of thought) including the four Sunni ones. If you reject all four Sunni madhhabs, how can you call yourself Sunni? In fact, the extreme Salafi-Wahhabis, including the ultra-extreme ISIL, have broken with mainstream Islam as it has existed for fourteen centuries. By jettisoning the established Islamic madhhabs, and stepping outside of Islam as it has always been understood, they have entered a very dangerous territory in which they feel they can just make up the rules as they go along. So they make up such rules as: “It is okay to rape Christian and Shia women. It is okay to eat the internal organs of dead enemies. It is okay to marry ‘jihad brides’ for sex and divorce them after 30 minutes. It is okay to crucify Christian holy men. It is okay to strangle women to death. It is okay to mass-murder civilians. It is okay to mass-execute prisoners of war.” No Sunni in history would recognize this as Sunni Islam. Zaid Hamid, a Sunni Muslim defense analyst from Pakistan, says ISIS and related terrorist groups are not Sunnis, but Kharajite heretics serving an imperial anti-Islamic agenda. (The Kharajites were an ultra-radical group that rejected early versions of both Sunni and Shia Islam and stepped outside of the Islamic community - hence their name, which means “those who step outside.”) Hamid argues that the ultra-radical groups destabilizing Pakistan, Syria and Iraq have indeed stepped outside of Islam, and are making war on Islam and Muslims on behalf of Zionism and imperialism.

But isn’t it true that many Sunni Muslims in Iraq support ISIL? Yes and no. It is true that some ordinary Iraqis from Sunni backgrounds have joined ISIL’s insurrection in Iraq. But these are mainly pro-Saddam revanchists, not religiously-oriented Sunni Muslims. Saddam Hussein, of course, was a radical secularist whose idols were Stalin and Hitler. Saddam’s Ba’ath party was anti-religious and pro-secularist; Saddam’s hatred of the Islamic Awakening was so extreme that he launched a war on the Ayatollah Khomeini’s new Islamic Republic in hopes of preventing the rebirth of Islam. So to call the Saddam Hussein supporters who are joining with ISIL “Sunnis” is misleading. Saddam’s forces, like ISIL, are opposed to Islam in both its traditional Sunni and Shia forms. The full name of Sunnism is “the people of the Tradition of the Prophet and the consensus of the community” (ahl as-sunnah wa l-jamaʻah). Eating the livers of dead enemies is not part of the Tradition of the Prophet – it is the tradition of the enemies of the Prophet. And such behavior is obviously not approved by the consensus of the Muslim community. The Tradition of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is one of inclusion, tolerance, mutual respect, and the forging of alliances between people of different tribes and religions. The original Muslim community, whose founding document is the Constitution of Medina, consisted of Christians, Jews and Muslims living together and sharing power and obligations on an equitable basis. The real Sunna (Tradition) holds to reason and persuasion, and uses violence only as a last resort. The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and his Family and Companions preached peacefully for 12 years, despite atrocious persecution, before God finally authorized them to fight back in self-defense. The real Tradition of the Prophet respects knowledge so much that “the ink of the scholar is more precious than the blood of the martyr.” And the consensus of the Islamic community is that the work of 14 centuries worth of Islamic scholarship – the five major Islamic madhhabs, both the four Sunni madhhabs and the Shia Ja’fari madhhab – collectively represents mainstream Islam. All Sunni Muslims have tremendous respect for Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq, who founded the main Shia madhhab. The terrorists who reject this tremendous scholarly achievement, and want to kill everyone who disagrees with them, are far outside of normative Sunni Islam. So why does the Western mainstream media insist on calling anti-Sunni, anti-Shia groups like ISIL “Sunni”? Perhaps the problem is laziness. Since ISIL has a special hatred for Shia Muslims, the simplest way to portray them is to paint the situation as an alleged Sunni vs. Shia conflict. By defaulting to this lowest-common-denominator description, the media absolves itself from the duty of explaining, in detail, what is actually going on. But it is also possible that the corporate media is intentionally misreporting the situation. The extreme-Zionist neoconservatives launched the US invasion of Iraq in order to break up that country, and the Middle East as a whole, by inciting ethnic and sectarian strife. The “Sunni vs. Shia” meme was created and spread by the Occupiers through a wave of false-flag terrorism. Perhaps the media is trumpeting that meme in order to propagate it. In any case, the world’s Sunni Muslims are being slandered every time the media calls ISIL “Sunni.” It is time for Sunnis to reject this mischaracterization of their religion. Perhaps Sunni Muslims should file a class action lawsuit against the media outlets that are spreading this calumny.

Iran: The Price of Resistance

By Chandra Muzaffar

28 January, 2012


European Union foreign ministers have agreed to a full-fledged embargo on all imports of Iranian crude oil. Towards this end, various measures will be adopted gradually from 23 rd January to 1 st July 2012 . In December 2011, the US Congress (with a 100 to 0 vote in the Senate) presented a mandatory sanctions package to President Obama which starting June 2012 will prohibit any third-country banks and companies from dealing with Iran's Central Bank. Both the EU and US moves, it is alleged, are aimed at pressurising Iran to stop its so-called ‘nuclear weapons' programme through the emasculation of its oil exports which account for more than 80% of its national revenue.

Nuclear Weapons Programme

The first question we should ask is: Does Iran have a nuclear weapons programme? The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) --- its mischievous attempt to raise doubts about Iran 's nuclear energy programme notwithstanding--- admits in its November 2011 Report that there is no evidence of a nuclear weapons programme. Incidentally, every nuclear installation in Iran has been inspected hundreds of times by the IAEA making them the most thoroughly inspected nuclear facilities on earth! Even the US 's own classified National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) 2011--- which the well-known investigative journalist, Seymour Hersh, had exposed in May 2011--- states quite clearly that Iran is not producing nuclear weapons and had in fact halted such a programme way back in 2003. NIE 2011 in a sense reiterates what is contained in NIE 2007.

Of course, Iran continues to enrich uranium up to the 20% level required for the production of medical isotopes. This is far below the 85% plus necessary to manufacture a nuclear bomb. Every major leader in Iran has emphasised over and over again that they have no intention of making a bomb. They regard it --- rightly--- as haram (or prohibited in Islam).

Because its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes--- medical research and electricity---- the Iranian government agreed to a nuclear fuel swap deal initiated by Brazil and Turkey in May 2010 which would have seen Iran shipping low-enriched uranium to Turkey in return for fuel for a research reactor. The Western powers and Israel rejected the deal.

Their rejection underscores the stark hypocrisy that surrounds the entire issue of Iran 's nuclear programme. If it is nuclear weapons that they are concerned about why didn't they accept a deal that would have, to a large extent, curbed any clandestine move by Iran to produce such weapons? Or, are certain Western powers and Israel against Iran producing nuclear energy even for peaceful purposes --- a right that Iran possesses as a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)?

It is important to raise these questions for two other reasons. One, the countries that are most vocal in demanding that Iran terminate its uranium enrichment programme are all nuclear weapon states. The US has an arsenal of more than 5000 nuclear warheads while Israel, an undeclared nuclear state---- the only nuclear weapon state in West Asia and North Africa (WANA)--- has perhaps between 200 and 400 warheads. Two, countries such as the US, Britain, France and even Israel had no qualms about assisting Iran to launch its nuclear programme in the fifties when it was under the Shah, Reza Pahlavi. US President, Dwight Eisenhower, saw it as an “atoms for peace” enterprise. One does not have to second guess why they were all so enthusiastic about the Shah's nuclear energy programme---- because the dictator was their gendarme in that corner of WANA, protecting their strategic, political and oil interests with all his brutal might.

Why did the West and Israel change their attitude towards Iran 's nuclear programme? Was it because an Islamic Revolution had occurred in Iran in 1979? Was Islam the decisive factor? Islam per se was not the major reason for the change in attitude. After all, the West counts as its allies a number of countries that view themselves as ‘Islamic States' and subscribe to a somewhat narrow, exclusive idea of Islam and Muslim identity. Saudi Arabia , Qatar and most of the Gulf Sheikhdoms would be outstanding examples. Colluding and collaborating with these states and other Islamic movements has never been a problem for the centres of power in the West.

Independence

The real reason why the Islamic Republic of Iran and its nuclear programme became anathema for the West and Israel was because of Iran 's defence of its independence and integrity in the face of US and Western hegemony. The Islamic Republic under the guidance of its charismatic leader Ayatollah Khomeini was not prepared to submit to US dominance or acquiesce with Israeli arrogance. From the outset --- from 1979 itself--- Iran was determined to manage its own destiny which is why it nationalised oil and strengthened its self-reliance.

In an earlier period--- in 1953 to be exact--- another Iranian leader, this time a highly principled secular democrat, Mohammad Mosaddegh, had also sought to assert Iranian independence and sovereignty by nationalising oil. This incurred the wrath of the British and American elites whose companies dominated the local oil industry. With the help of their intelligence services, they managed to oust Mosaddegh from his Prime Ministership and restore full authority to the Shah.

Others in WANA, at different times and in different circumstances, have also paid the price for resisting dominance.Gamal Nasser in Egypt, HouriBoumediene in Algeria, Hafiz Assad in Syria, Yasser Arafat in Palestine (and other Palestinian freedom fighters), Saddam Hussein in Iraq, and Muammar Gaddafi in Libya, had all at some point or other in their lives refused to yield to hegemonic power. Today, there are leaders like Hassan Nasrallah in Lebanon , Khalil Meshal in Palestine , and Bashar Assad in Syria who continue to resist Israeli power and US hegemony and are therefore targeted by Tel Aviv and Washington.

It is appropriate to observe at this juncture that resistance to US hegemony has had a longer and perhaps more tragic history in parts of Latin America . From Simon Bolivar and Jose Marti to Salvador Allende, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez,Evo Morales, and Rafael Correa these and other illustrious leaders have unflinchingly opposed attempts by the US elite to subjugate the people of Latin America and subordinate the continent to the whims and fancies of its northern neighbour. Indeed, today there is a new determination in Latin America to strengthen the independence of individual states and of the region as a whole through cooperation and collective action that is both innovative and dynamic.

There is no doubt at all that it is Iran 's refusal to be subservient to the US , Israel and their allies, its readiness to resist, that has incensed the powers-that-be. It explains why they are going all out to emasculate the Iranian economy, manufacture mass disaffection with the government and, at the right moment, engineer a regime change. The excuse they are using for this manipulation is of course Iran 's unproven nuclear weapons programme. In the scenario that is unfolding before our eyes, there are shades of the build-up that led to the invasion of Iraq and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein 2003.

Targeting Iran

While Iran's desire to remain independent has been a prominent feature of the nation's personality since the Revolution 33 years ago, there must be situations and circumstances that are more current and contemporarywhich have given rise tothisobsession in Tel Aviv and in certain Western capitals with the targeting and taming of Iran.What are these situations and circumstances? There are many. We shall highlight some of them.

1. In the wake of the Arab uprising, the Israeli elite has become extremely apprehensive about the state's security and its future. It is afraid that popular movements sweeping through WANA would eventually challenge the legitimacy of the Israeli regime. Though Israel's protector, the US, has sought assurances from some of the Islamic parties that have come to power that they will not question the Israeli presence, the Israeli elite regards the increasing influence of states and movements in WANA that are firmly opposed to Israeli suppression of Palestinian rights--- the most powerful of which is of course Iran--- as a huge threat to Israel's very existence. This is why it wants its protector, buttressed by its European allies, to castrate Iran immediately.

2. This fear has increased dramatically in recent months with the economic decline of its protector and the economic crisis embroiling various European states. Israel knows that the US 's decline is part of a general decline which in a sense is irreversible and would therefore want its protector to act decisively against Israel 's foes like Iran now when the US still has the military muscle rather than wait until it is too late. For the US elite itself, the most serious implication of its decline is its loss of control over WANA, the world's major oil exporting region which is, at the same time, of tremendous geostrategic significance. When hegemonic powers are losing their dominance, do they not become more bellicose in attempting to perpetuate their power and privilege? Should we be surprised when they turn against other actors on the ascendancy who are perceived as the cause of their decline?

3. For both the US and Israeli elites and European leaders allied to them, it is Iran which is the lynchpin of the challenge to their hegemony over WANA. Iran maintains a tried and tested link to the Syrian leadership and to the Hezbollah in Lebanon . Hamas is also to a certain degree part of this link which in broad terms constitutes the resistance to US-Israel hegemony. As the fulcrum of this resistance, Iran has displayed remarkable tenacity--- a tenacity which is now expressing itself in its ability to take on US drones and US spies and to openly challenge US military power. Similarly, the Syrian crisis, orchestrated to a large extent by external forces, has revealed the resilience of the Bashar Assad government. Likewise, in defending Lebanon against the Israeli assault in 2006, the Hezbollah showed that it possesses both strategic depth and immense courage which in the end thwarted the Israeli agenda. Both Israel and the US are determined to not only break the link of resistance but also to crush each of the component elements of the link.

4. What has strengthened their determination to act against Iran in particular is the situation in Iraq . The Israeli and US elites had hoped that the conquest of Iraq would help to create a new environment in WANA which would reinforce their grip over oil and strengthen their geostrategic position in the region through a subservient leadership in Baghdad eager to do their bidding. Given Iraq 's importance, the Baghdad leadership, they reckoned, would succeed in shaping an atmosphere in the region conducive to Israel even if it were at the cost of Palestinian self-determination. However, things have not worked according to plan. WhileUS and British companies have managed to secure lucrative oil deals, Israeli and US elites have failed to gain political control over Iraq . A nation that is politically unstable, socially chaotic and deeply divided along sectarian lines, there is endless jockeying for power among contending groups. In the midst of this maelstrom, most of the groups within the majority Shia community seem to have gravitated towards Shia Iran . Shia affinity has undoubtedly smoothened the forging of political ties across the Iraq-Iran border. Recent political developments in Iraq indicate that the influence that emanates from these ties is considerable. It is this that annoys and angers the Israeli, US and British elites. Their political defeat in Iraq which is a major setback for them in WANA and beyond is one of the primary reasons why they are now training their guns on Iran .

5. Iran 's influence over Iraq has also riled some regional actors. The monarchical elite in Saudi Arabia , with its Wahabi orientation, often manifests an almost visceral hatred towards the Shia sect. Some Saudi leaders regard it as their duty to defend the Sunni majority against the rising Shia tide. They are not alone in perceiving growing Shia influence and power --- in Iraq , in Syria through the Alawite elite, in Lebanon via Hezbollah, and in Bahrain--- as a mortal threat to the Sunnis. The Qatari leadership and even some Turkish politicians and intellectuals have begun to ring the alarm bells. The latter, it is said, are backing some hard-line Sunnis in Iraq . These anti-Shia sentiments which are spreading quite rapidly in WANA have heightened the antagonism towards Iran . They have strengthened the hand of the US and Israel and their European allies as they prepare to move against the Iranian Republic .

6. For the US curbing Iran 's influence goes beyond WANA. Iran has become close to Russia in the last couple of years. The relationship is strategic and economic especially since they have overlapping interests in Central Asia and the Caspian region. Russia itself is re-asserting its power in Eastern Europe , Central Asia , West Asia and South Asia , much to the chagrin of the US . That is why it is uneasy about a Russian-Iranian nexus developing in the future.

7. Of even greater significance to the US 's hegemonic agenda is the relationship between Iran and China . Largely economic in nature, China imports 9% of its oil and 15% of its gas from Iran . China has massive investments in the oil and gas industry in Iran , and is helping to upgrade its infrastructure in general. Since access to energy is critical for China 's development, the US which is determined to contain China , is keen on exercising control over China 's sources of energy supply. What this means is that curtailing Iran 's oil and gas exports may in fact be part of a larger agenda whose principal goal is the containment of China , the nation that the US and the West view as the most formidable challenge ever to their centuries old dominance.

8. Iran 's expanding ties with various Latin American countries also irks the US . Countries such as Cuba , Venezuela , Nicaragua , Ecuador , Bolivia and Brazil , among others have become good friends of Iran in recent years. Most of these states are opposed to US dominance over Latin America . A couple of them have become very critical of Israeli occupation of Palestine . Since Venezuela and Ecuador are also major oil exporters, the US is worried that the ties that Iran , also an important oil exporter, is forging with them could enhance their collective clout in the global economy to the detriment of the US . This is yet another reason why the US sees Iran as a challenge to its hegemonic power.

9. It is not just because of Iran 's ties with oil exporting states in Latin America or its export of oil to China that oil is also a factor that explains the targeting of Iran . As one of the top five oil exporters in the world, Iran is an attractive destination for a lot of oil companies especially from the US --- a country which has been excluded from Iran 's petroleum sector for more than three decades. According to petroleum experts there are oil and gas fields that have yet to be explored fully. There is also money to be made from infrastructure investments. US and other Western oil firms are hungering to go in--- just as they moved into Iraq after the invasion in 2003.

10. A final factor that is responsible for this fixation with Iran is perhaps the position of the US dollar. The dollar, needless to say, is one of the most crucial pillars of US global hegemony. This is the reason why any attempt to redefine its role as the world's principal reserve currency elicits an immediate response from US financial and political circles. In the last few years Iran has been steadily distancing itself from the US dollar in its trade transactions. At the end of December 2011, it signed an agreement with China that states that the Iranian rial and the Chinese yuan would be used in bilateral trade. In early January 2012, Iran made a similar arrangement with Russia , the rial and the rouble replacing the US dollar. Iran and India are holding discussions on moving out of dollar settlements. Trading in gold is an option they are considering. These moves by Iran have assumed great significance because others, including US allies, are abandoning the dollar in some of their bilateral trade arrangements. Japan and China , for instance, have announced that they will trade in yen and yuan.Because Iran is perceived as one of those nations pushing hard for the abandonment of the dollar, the US has her in its sights. It has been suggested that one of the reasons why the US decided to invade Iraq in 2003 was because Saddam Hussein had switched from the dollar to the euro for the sale of his country's oil.

Suffering; Mistakes

The ten points elaborated here prove that the US and its allies have zero tolerance for any challenge, however minor, to US hegemonic power or to the position of Israel . Those who resist their power and position will pay the price. In the last 30 odd years, Iran has paid the price of resistance in hundreds of ways. Less than a year after the Islamic Revolution, a war was imposed upon Iran --- a war led by the Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein, on behalf of all the Gulf Sheikhdoms, a number of other Arab states, the US, Britain, certain other Western governments, and even the Soviet Union. Though Iran 's adversaries had different motives, their common objective was to crush the Revolution which they saw as a challenge to their interests. A million lives were lost on both sides of the divide in the eight year war which emasculated the Iranian economy and sapped the nation's energy. In June 1981, a vicious bombexplosion wiped out some top political leaders, a huge number of parliamentarians, and leading figures in the Judiciary. This, and other subsequent terrorist attacks, it is alleged,were master-minded by a militant group operating from Iraq called the Mujahideen-e-Khalq. In recent years the Islamic Republic's nuclear programme has been subjected to a cyber- attack and four of its scientists have been assassinated. And for decades, Iran has been under US economic sanctions which have had a negative impact upon its development programme.

Indeed, very few countries have been subjected to the pain and suffering that Iran has gone through in the last 33 years. The perseverance and fortitude of the Iranian people, as we have alluded to, is awe-inspiring. And yet, an objective analysis of Iran 's response to hegemony would suggest that Iranian leaders and activists have also made serious mistakes. From the perspective of international law and diplomacy, it was clearly wrong of Iranian students to seize the US Embassy in Tehran on 4 November 1979 and hold its occupants hostage for 444 days. Storming the British Embassy in the nation's capital on 29 November 2011 was also a foolish act for which Iran 's Minister of Foreign Affairs has apologised. Likewise, allegations of foul-play in the June 2009Presidential Election could have been better handled. The Iranian authorities should have countered those allegations by demonstrating their commitment to total electoral transparency and accountability. The language that the current Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, sometimes employs on matters of grave international significance is intemperate and injudicious. However difficult the situation maybe, there is no need to deliberately provoke or irritate one's enemies. As a case in point, though Ahmadinejad's oft-quoted remarks about Israel were distorted and twisted by the Western media and politicians, the Iranian President could have adopted a more mature yet principled stance vis-à-vis the Jewish state.

Hegemonic Agenda

Ahmadinejad's predecessor, Muhammad Khatami, proved that it was possible to defend Iran 's independence and dignity without being unduly confrontational. He sought to meet the challenge of hegemony by insisting upon dialogue among civilisations and the politics of inclusiveness. Khatami was prepared to talk to the US leadership. But instead of welcoming the offer of dialogue, US President, George Bush Junior, chose to castigate Iran as part of an “axis of evil.”

The demonization of Iran proves yet again that regardless of whether the target adopts a confrontational or conciliatory approach, the hegemon will continue to pursue its agenda. It is an agenda that has a power and potency of its own. In the context of WANA, Israel , it is so apparent, is the driving force behind US hegemonic power.

Making people everywhere aware of this and what its consequences are is one of the most urgent tasks at hand. This task is perhaps a little less difficult today compared to the past for two reasons. One, as we have stated a number of times before, US helmed hegemonic power is declining. People are becoming much more critical of US's global role now. Two, the citizens of WANA in particular are acutely conscious of what hegemonic intervention can lead to after witnessing the chaos and catastrophe that have befallen Iraq and Afghanistan . They are also beginning to sense--- after the initial euphoria---- that Libya may also be heading towards calamity. Foreign intervention they know is not the solution. It is the problem.

Immediate Measures

While mass consciousness building about the danger of hegemony as the ultimate repudiation of human dignity will take time, we could propose some immediate measures thatshould be taken to avert military strikes against Iran and to prevent a war in WANA. The BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) grouping could through the UN Security Council suggest a new nuclear deal which would allow Iran limited uranium enrichment under strict supervision within a larger treaty signed by all the states in WANA and other leading powers that pledges to create a nuclear weapon free zone in the region within a certain time-frame. The manufacture, storage, saleand distribution of other weapons of mass destruction should also be prohibited. As the formulation of such a treaty begins in earnest, all sanctions against Iran should also be lifted. There are other challenges notably the Israeli occupation of Arab lands, the establishment of an independent, sovereign Palestinian state and the status of Israel , which should also be resolved at the same time.

Is there still time to persuade the powers-that-be to consider proposals like this? Or is it already too late in the day? Is the hegemon--- or is Israel--- about to strike?

Dr. Chandra Muzaffar is President of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST) and Professor of lobal Studies at UniversitiSains Malaysia .

Malaysia .

27 January 2012

No, he is not an American agent!

Abu Dharr

Caution! This article is not written for the rationally disabled or for those who are reproach-free.

In the past month, the world was abuzz with the announcement of the American president that US forces had killed Osama bin Laden (OBL). We seriously doubt that Osama bin Laden was killed at the time, in the manner, or at the place they officially said he was. Many alternative news media have done the job of debunking and repudiating the official US version of Osama’s death. At this point, we take a moment to look beyond statements of the ruling class in Washington, at this Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaeda political widget.

Before OBL and al-Qaeda sprang into the public mind (this was in the early to mid-1990s) there was an Islamic leadership and an Islamic heroic sacrifice that had Washington and Tel Aviv politically hypnotized and militarily confounded — and that is the Islamic Revolution and its political administration in Iran. All Euro-American and Ziono-American policies were for more than a decade preoccupied with policies and in fact haunted with strategies of how to diminish or defeat in a conclusive manner the first burst of Islamic self-determination in the contemporary world.

Their proxy in Baghdad failed through a long and drawn out war to bring the Islamic Revolution and the Islamic purpose in Iran to its knees. Parallel to that, the Zionist military in occupied Lebanon was taking a beating at the hands of Hizbullah and the Islamic resistance until they finally had to withdraw their occupation forces in ignominy (May 2000). The ruling elites in Washington and Tel Aviv were sitting on thorns as they watched their incompetence and deterioration unfold from an ascending Iran to an aspiring Hizbullah. The new set of anti-American and anti-Zionist circumstances demanded a “stroke of genius”. Enter the Taliban and al-Qaeda. To refresh one’s memory, Afghanistan for a decade and a half (1979–1995) was swarming with mujahidin from many corners of the earth, particularly those who marched there from Arabia to the cadence of an American-Arabian master plan for jihad to defeat the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.

Tens of thousands of mujahidin were all over Afghanistan fighting valiantly against the brutal Soviet occupation not knowing they were being used by the Saudis, who themselves were being used by the Americans, who in turn were being used by the climactic interests of the Yahud. As long as these credulous and trusting warriors in Afghanistan were fighting the evil empire they were heroic mujahidin in the political literature of Arabia and America, until finally the Soviets were defeated. Now that the Soviets were out of Afghanistan, what do you do with a reserve of hardened combatants who were on the warpath in Afghanistan? Combatants who were motivated to take on an Islamic enemy militarily? Behold the kickoff of al-Qaeda and OBL. To set the stage for that we had tens of thousands of Taliban (religious students) acting like professional soldiers, experienced commanders, and competent armed forces moving from Pakistan into Afghanistan at a time when the Afghans were slugging it out against themselves (remember the major polarized “Islamic” forces around Ahmad Shah Mas‘ud and Gulbuddin Hikmatyar?)

Well now there was a new kid in town. The Taliban became the rulers of Afghanistan with the support and recognition of three US satellite nation-states: Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). In this Taliban enclave we had the bourgeoning of al-Qaeda and its leader OBL. Let us make it very clear that many if not all the Islamic foot-soldiers in al-Qaeda and to a lesser extent in the Taliban are sincere and single-minded Muslims. In their heart they went out on a course of jihad for the sole purpose of raising the banner of Islam high and eminent. The problem with them was not in their heart and motivation; it was in their mind and cognition. Little were they aware of the fact that they were pawns on a global chessboard of duplicity, chicanery, and enmity.

What were the consequences of this “Emirate of Afghanistan”, an emirate whose emotions were running ahead of its mind? In the first instance, we had the implementation of “Shari‘ah” in what may be described as a premature manner. Remember, Afghanistan was a country devastated by war; hunger and poverty were rampant and all around. Families were torn apart and dislocated. State institutions were not present. A civil war was still brewing. And in the middle of all this, without any forethought, the Taliban-al-Qaeda duo began implementing Islamic law on a population that is living at a sub-society level and with social and economic conditions that are akin in some aspects to the society in Madinah and Arabia when ‘Umar (d) suspended “legality” to relieve people who were living at the survival level. But you can’t tell that to these emotionally charged but rationally bereft officials. Then came their oddball and madcap act in which they blasted the stone chiselled image of the Buddha. As if all the previous Muslim generations dating all the way back to the days of the sahabah did not discover this “idol” but these Taliban and al-Qaeda types did. And boom! Even a delegation of Muslim scholars headed by none other than Shaikh Yusuf al-Qardawi could not convince them otherwise. These emotions-first, thoughts-last types were passionately programmed to “enjoin what is good and forbid what is evil” as they saw it, and only as they saw it — as they are al-fi’atu al-najiyah (the saved and redeemed faithful) — in reference to their oft-quoted hadith about the Ummah disintegrating into 73 groups all of them condemned except one.

And to further prove their mettle, they went to Mazar-e-Sharif to kill Shi‘i Muslims there and to make sure they kill Iranian Shi‘i Muslims, some of whom had “political immunity” — if that ever was any consideration in their vocabulary and definition of rawafid! These Zionist and imperialist, well-monitored specimens of “Islamic Fundamentalism” passed their test with flying colors. They proved that they have what it takes to plunge the whole Muslim world into a dark age of obscurantism and Islamic civil wars that will extend imperialism’s looting of Muslim resources and Zionism’s occupation of Islamic lands. Before the grand performance of 9/11 there had to be some feats-of-camouflage. So we had the American embassy bombing in Africa and the USS Cole attack off the coast of Yemen. As this imperialist and Zionist media-sponsored presentation of OBL and al-Qaeda eclipsed to a large extent the Islamic Revolution in Iran and the Islamic liberation in Lebanon the show went on and the denouement took place on 9/11. OBL, after initially denying any involvement, emerged as an iconic hero or sensational villain to all those who also had their emotions trumping their thoughts. And the rest is history as they say.

Having said all of the above — and there is much more that you can fill in with the information that a Muslim mind can glean — we do not for one moment mean to say that OBL and those with him were CIA agents or imperialist toadies. Such is the role of Turki and Bandar among a cabal of Saudi others. Rather OBL in ways that were unknown to him became an executor of necessary movements that would justify imperialist wars and occupations. In his wildest dreams he probably never knew that he was being set up and prompted to do, more or less, exactly what he and his vacuous brethren-in-arms were doing. This is what happens when individuals are brought up in the tedious and deadening religious climate of an American Saudi Arabia. Uncommon and remarkable as it is, we have a person (OBL) who deep down inside of himself thinks that he is taking on the enemies of Islam — and this is attested to by his sermons and statements — while at the same time he becomes the imperial instrument in setting off a chain of events that are needed by imperialists and Zionists to justify their military occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq and their political movements to unseat rulers who are outdated and no longer useful in the broad imperialist schemata of things.

The takfiri soul of the salafi body of Saudi sponsored zealots was used to the hilt by Zionists and imperialists in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Persian Gulf, and elsewhere to bleed the Muslim body into imperialist submission. There are many Muslims around the world who cannot see how manipulative-prone other Muslims become when they have not thought through their God-given responsibilities. The Saudi kingdom by taking the Muslim mind out of the Qur’an and Sunnah has provided imperialism and Zionism with diehards who think they are doing Allah’s (swt) will, not realizing they are undeclared proxies of the enemies they are purportedly fighting against.


Say, “Shall We tell you who are the greatest losers in whatever they do? [It is] they whose efforts have gone astray in this world’s life, and who nonetheless think that they are doing good works: it is they who have chosen to reject their Sustainer’s power illustrations and encounter.” Hence, all their [good] deeds come to nought, and no weight shall We assign to them on Resurrection Day (18:103–105).


The Islamic Revolution and Islamic liberation have weathered this attack from within — by the Saudi regime directly and by the Israeli and American regimes indirectly.

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