Interesting dicussions on destruction of Makkah

[Al Hanif]

In fact you or I are not able to mention one single leader in the Arab world or anywhere else who are not under the influence of America or Western Imperialism.

OH REALLY ???

What about...

Mollah Muhammad Omar
Mahmud Ahmadinejad
Hugo Chavez

The fact is that the Hashemites are respected in the whole Muslim World and have been that for centuries and have held very important positions.

Especially the Hashemites lead by Sayyid Hussein Bin Ali, Sharif of Makkah who was a symbol for our struggle against imperialism and a defender of the traditions, conservatism and Islam.

Hussein Bin Ali is an apostate for taking Brits and French as friends and protectors against the Ottomans.

He is directly responsible for the fell of the caliphate, the loss of independancy of muslim world, the catastrophic economical situation of the muslim world and so many other things

The rulers of Jordan are apostates too for refusing to implement Sharia.

The king of Jordan is the result of an arab having sexual intercourse with a swine. A filthy island ***** copulated with this dirty arab and made this filthy filth.

Jordan rulers have done so much harm to the Palestinians. They don't have any credibility except for cooperating with the Zionists.

They all need to be beheaded.

Why are you idolazing those tribes. Must be an arab feature. No tribe is better than another. The best tribe is the most righteous tribe and Hashemites are definitely one of the lowest filth along with the Sauds. Even Shias are better than them.

The only righteous leader is Mollah Muhammad Omar.

[al-arab]

so what if his not arab ?
**** yemenis not muslims.

he is more muslim then you, you bald *******.

Of course I am Arab. From both father and mother. I belong to the Al-Hussaini tribe who are Sayyids and descendant of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). I have lived whole my life in Arabic countries, I am married to an Arab as well.

I have provided Arab sources as well and now a Western one.


Sunni:

Yes, there were some good people among them but most are apostates for many reasons one of the main is to allow American bases and to collaborate with the West. I am telling you this as a person whose ancestry is from Hijaz and who have lived in Hijaz and is married to an Saudi.

Remember how the Ikwan warriors were treated? How he gained power and proclaimed himself King while not being an descendant of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Remember how the Ottoman Sultan supported Sayyid Hussein bin Ali?

I am not talking about a right I am only saying that Hashemites are and were respected in the Hijaz for centuries and played a important role in the Islamic societies througout history unlike Al-Saud family.

The Hashemites also ruled Hijaz under the Ottoman Empire and where choosen as the Custodians of the Two Holy Mosques and highly respected among Muslims.

[al-arab]

OH REALLY ???

What about...

Mollah Muhammad Omar
Mahmud Ahmadinejad
Hugo Chavez



Hussein Bin Ali is an apostate for taking Brits and French as friends and protectors against the Ottomans.

He is directly responsible for the fell of the caliphate, the loss of independancy of muslim world, the catastrophic economical situation of the muslim world and so many other things

The rulers of Jordan are apostates too for refusing to implement Sharia.

The king of Jordan is the result of an arab having sexual intercourse with a swine. A filthy island ***** copulated with this dirty arab and made this filthy filth.

Jordan rulers have done so much harm to the Palestinians. They don't have any credibility except for cooperating with the Zionists.

They all need to be beheaded.

Why are you idolazing those tribes. Must be an arab feature. No tribe is better than another. The best tribe is the most righteous tribe and Hashemites are definitely one of the lowest filth along with the Sauds. Even Shias are better than them.

The only righteous leader is Mollah Muhammad Omar.

Look you should really read some history.

You should be ashamed to compare them to that filth you mentioned.

It was the Ottoman Empire collaps who were the cause for French and English imperialism not the other way around. Sayyid Hussein Bin Ali tried to continue the Ummah but was removed by the Apostates in form of the Al-Sauds.

It was the autocratic rule and military failures of the Ottoman Empire and neglence of the Arab region that made the Caliphate fall apart. And those Ottoman Sultans were all half Europeans (mostly married Slavic and Caucassian people).

The current Hashemites in Jordan are far from being perfect and I condemn their marriages but they still better than the Al-Saud family.

Hugu Chavez? Seriously? The guy who sells oil to USA? Ahmedinejad? The guy who is constant in danger of being attacked by USA/Israel?

Mullah Omar is a different case but unfortunately he is not rulling a land officially so he is not included.

Mullah Omar is not the rightfull leader for the whole Islamic nation but only for Afghanistan. And he is not perfect himself, remember how he took the coak worn by Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) from the Shrine of the Cloak in Kandahar and proclaimed himself Amir al-Mu'minin? And later borrowed it (stricly forbidden)?

Nobody is perfect but the fact remains that the Hashemite family (and other Sayyid) have played a much bigger rule in the Islamic societies for centuries and gained much more respect than the apostates in form of Al-Saud family who allow American bases on the most Holy Muslim land and support Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan. This have nothing to do with idolizing but very truth Muslim can see, that the Al-Saud family are apostates and stole the keys as Custodians of the Two Most Holy Mosques when they came to power, a title that was in Hashemite hands for centuries and nearly since the beginning of Prophet Muhammads (pbuh) appaerance to the world.

[sunni]

Of course I am Arab. From both father and mother. I belong to the Al-Hussaini tribe who are Sayyids and descendant of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). I have lived whole my life in Arabic countries, I am married to an Arab as well.

I have provided Arab sources as well and now a Western one.


Sunni:

Yes, there were some good people among them but most are apostates for many reasons one of the main is to allow American bases and to collaborate with the West. I am telling you this as a person whose ancestry is from Hijaz and who have lived in Hijaz and is married to an Saudi.

Remember how the Ikwan warriors were treated? How he gained power and proclaimed himself King while not being an descendant of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Remember how the Ottoman Sultan supported Sayyid Hussein bin Ali?

I am not talking about a right I am only saying that Hashemites are and were respected in the Hijaz for centuries and played a important role in the Islamic societies througout history unlike Al-Saud family.

The Hashemites also ruled Hijaz under the Ottoman Empire and where choosen as the Custodians of the Two Holy Mosques and highly respected among Muslims.

i know you are arab, dont need to prove me :P

the ottoman empire was not accepeting imam abdul wahab daw'a and thats why he started the fight....... ppl were praying to graves and doing bad things. they becom jahils again.
is it cuz they are ashraf u trying to show them right ......did you read what i have posted ?
they didnt let muslims saudis go to hajj and killed them in some fights.........you think the khalifa should be one of the ashraf ? no its not.
it was in the kheelafa time, and he should was from quraish. but then it went into powers who ever wins he is the king.
thats how amir almumneen mulla omar become our amir almumneen now days.

[al-arab]

Sunni:

Just saw your latest post on the previous page (page 6) which I somehow did not see until know.

I never said that Shia's are the same as Sunnis. I think I made it clear that I would prefer that there would not be sects (read Shias) and one single unity. I even have written this several times.

We also have agreed on this subject when we last time discussed Shia's.

You do not need to tell me the madh'habs I already mentioned them in my post! You asked what "wahhabism" was and I gave you an answer and said that the word was construced by the Western media.

I also told you that you are a Muslim as long as you follow the Holy Quran, the Hadith and the teachings of our Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

I also told you that the Madh'hab's have little difference in common (and the difference that exist is not important) were founded by humans and a result of cultural and religious development.

We do not disagree with anything from what I see, so I think you have misunderstood my post, the one you have quoted.

[al-arab]

i know you are arab, dont need to prove me :P

the ottoman empire was not accepeting imam abdul wahab daw'a and thats why he started the fight....... ppl were praying to graves and doing bad things. they becom jahils again.
is it cuz they are ashraf u trying to show them right ......did you read what i have posted ?
they didnt let muslims saudis go to hajj and killed them in some fights.........you think the khalifa should be one of the ashraf ? no its not.
it was in the kheelafa time, and he should was from quraish. but then it went into powers who ever wins he is the king.
thats how amir almumneen mulla omar become our amir almumneen now days.

Look brother, my only problem is the Al-Saud family and their backing of apostates such as America, Israel the west etc and how they killed the Ikhwan forces and persecuted the tradiotionalist and conservatist Muslims.

Yes, I prefer Sayyid Hussein bin Ali, Sharif of Makkah than the Al-Saud. That does not mean that all Hashemites are perfect or that all Al-Saud are bad. That is also why I from the beginning condemned does who called every Saudi for a "wahhabi" (Karachi and Scimitar) because this is not truth.

If I was alive 100 years ago I would have supported Sayyid Hussein bin Ali, Sharif of Makkah, the Ikhwan forces and the conservative and traditional Muslims of that time.

And most IMPORTANTLY I would support them not only because they are hashemites and have gained respect for centuries and have ruled Hijaz for centuries and been the Custodians of the Two Holy Mosques but ALSO because they wanted to install the Ummah and Caliphate once again and where even supported by the last Ottoman Sultan.

But that did change when the Al-Saud took control and destroyed our dream of a Ummah. Later they invited the Americans.

I firmly believe that it could have been different with the Hashemite in power. Now this is history and we must look forward and look at today. And what I see is a Saudi Arabia with alliance of America and American bases. I do not like that.

Who is responsible for that? Ordinary faithful Saudis or the corrupt Al-Saud family? Of course the latter.

There is nothing wrong with the law (Shariah) nor the people only the rulers.

Let me ask you this question?

Why do you seem to support Al-Saud family?

What is your opinion of respected schoolars who all say that Al-Saud have commited a great crime when they became puppets of America?

Don't you feel ashamed and angry when you know that there are American bases in Saudi Arabia thanks to Al-Saud?

I do.

Mullah Omar also condemns them. So did Osama bin Laden.

[Al Hanif]

It was the Ottoman Empire collaps who were the cause for French and English imperialism not the other way around. Sayyid Hussein Bin Ali tried to continue the Ummah but was removed by the Apostates in form of the Al-Sauds.

I don't blame him because he wanted to revive the Ummah. I blame him because he took French and Brits as friends and protectors, therefore according to the Noble Qu'ran, he is an apostate. You can call him Sayyid day and night, he's an apostate. The word of Allah SWT is eternal.

Islam is not a special club where some ethnicities joined to make a big mafia in the world to promote their interests. Islam is the submission to Allah SWT. If you fail to obey to what he said, even in the lowest of his commandments, then you are ACTING like a jew. Hussein Bin Ali was against Turkish domination, but he was for an Arab Caliphate. That says it all.

If he was righteous, he would have made a revolt but without the help of kuffars, like Mollah Omar is doing or like Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) did but he didn't and became an apostate according to Islamic laws.

Your behaviour is the reason why the muslim world hates you. You only think about your arab interests and not about the ummah. You are too proud of your race, of your tribes and all this bull****.

Hugu Chavez? Seriously? The guy who sells oil to USA? Ahmedinejad? The guy who is constant in danger of being attacked by USA/Israel?

Exactly, the guy who is not kissing Bush like Saudis do and the guy who is not recognizing Israel and the guy who does not have a peace treaty with it. How dare you comparing Iran with Jordan ? Jordan needs a flamethrower to clean it from this filth.

Mullah Omar is a different case but unfortunately he is not rulling a land officially so he is not included.

I know you need someone like the Jordan ruler who is a hardcore zionist ruling a land in power. Since he's ruling a land, he's fine with you.

Mullah Omar is not the rightfull leader for the whole Islamic nation but only for Afghanistan. And he is not perfect himself, remember how he took the coak worn by Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) from the Shrine of the Cloak in Kandahar and proclaimed himself Amir al-Mu'minin? And later borrowed it (stricly forbidden)?

Mollah Omar has not done anything out of the boundaries of Islam.

This might be wrong but that doesn't make him a kafir.

Sauds funded american war in Iraq therefore they are apostates.

Hashemites in Jordan refuse to implement Sharia therefore they are apostates.

Nobody is perfect but the fact remains that the Hashemite family (and other Sayyid) have played a much bigger rule in the Islamic societies for centuries and gained much more respect than the apostates in form of Al-Saud family who allow American bases on the most Holy Muslim land and support Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Both are the cancer of Islam. I hope a Pashtun Caliphate arise soon. Insha'Allah.

[sunni]

Sunni:

Just saw your latest post on the previous page (page 6) which I somehow did not see until know.

I never said that Shia's are the same as Sunnis. I think I made it clear that I would prefer that there would not be sects (read Shias) and one single unity. I even have written this several times.

We also have agreed on this subject when we last time discussed Shia's.

You do not need to tell me the madh'habs I already mentioned them in my post! You asked what "wahhabism" was and I gave you an answer and said that the word was construced by the Western media.

it was from the jews and what the suffis and shia supported this name.
they should have called us the muhammedia but they knew it may not scare ppl and would make them like it...and they choose this name cuz of the khwa'rej sect in some old time in islamic countries in africe was called wahabiya....they wanted to make ppl think we are the same and now ppl believing it.

I also told you that you are a Muslim as long as you follow the Holy Quran, the Hadith and the teachings of our Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

do shia follow the prophet and our quran ?
why then we should call them muslims and UNITY with them ?
do you know some of them dont believe that the quran is complate
some of them swearing at sahab and prophet wives
some of them saying Jibril mistaked and ali should was the prophet not muhammed.
they are sects too.
they belive the mahdi is a live and only thier imam's know where he is...

like our sunni shaykh al a'ror said we sunnis want one thing from shia that only one of our mulla's goes to this place which thier imams go and meet mahdi ... and meet our sunni mulla we all will become shia.
is that hard ?


shia who do this things are not muslims.

[Al Hanif]

Brother Al-Arab, I do not mean to hurt you.

Please, understand that all of those rulers are bad and you should not support them.

[al-arab]

Sunni:

I am just saying that according to Almighty Allah Muslims are the one you follow the Holy Quran, the Hadith and the teachings of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

As long as they do that I have not a problem with anyone as long as they do that.

I do not know why you again mentions Shias. We both agreed a few weeks ago when we both said that Shias are not real Muslims. And I still believe that from what I have seen and know.

Al-Hanafi:

Brother, you make it to simplistic. The Otoman Empire were also apostates for collaborating with Western powers for centuries and shifting between them.

The Sharif needed Western assistance to create Arab Muslim countries and to proclaim an Ummah. He only used them in a greater course. This is different to Al-Saud and Ottoman Empire who just wanted to control as much land as possible. The same with teh Mughal Empire, the Pashtuns here can tell you about it. This is the same with all empires.

Therefore we needed an Ummah and the Sharif of Makkah wanted exactly that but was removed by the apostates (Al-Saud) before he could do it.

Even the late Sultan of the Ottoman Empire supported him!


You need to realize that I have not said that Jordan is a brilliant country. I have only said that Sayyid Hussein bin Ali was a MUCH better choiche than the Al-Saud apostates. Because they wanted to establish an Ummah and because they have been faithfull for the Muslim faith since the birth of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and because they were Custodians of the Two Holy Mosques for centuries until the apostates came in form of Al-Saud and destroyed the brave and noble Ikhwan warriors (one of the most noble Muslims) and our dream of a Ummah. They also later invited the Americans on the most holy Muslim land. This is one of the worst sins.

My view is supported by the most respected Sunni schoolars and also by Mullah Omar.

Yes, now you understand that no Muslim is perfect.

We need to remove the Al-Saud family because they control the most Holy places for us. They are now the Custodians of the Two Holy Mosques.

When they, Insha'allah will be removed whe can proclaim an Ummah yet again. This can not be done from Afghanistan unfortunately or other Muslim country.

That is why Saudi Arabia is crucial.

[sunni]

Look brother, my only problem is the Al-Saud family and their backing of apostates such as America, Israel the west etc and how they killed the Ikhwan forces and persecuted the tradiotionalist and conservatist Muslims.

Yes, I prefer Sayyid Hussein bin Ali, Sharif of Makkah than the Al-Saud. That does not mean that all Hashemites are perfect or that all Al-Saud are bad. That is also why I from the beginning condemned does who called every Saudi for a "wahhabi" (Karachi and Scimitar) because this is not truth.

If I was alive 100 years ago I would have supported Sayyid Hussein bin Ali, Sharif of Makkah, the Ikhwan forces and the conservative and traditional Muslims of that time.

asharaf didnt accept imam abdul wahab daw'a and didnt let him to go to makkkah and nor the muslims who followed him. they didnt let them for hajj.
you prefer those who were worship the graves and makeing islam pic so bad and ugly ?
rly ?

And most IMPORTANTLY I would support them not only because they are hashemites and have gained respect for centuries and have ruled Hijaz for centuries and been the Custodians of the Two Holy Mosques but ALSO because they wanted to install the Ummah and Caliphate once again and where even supported by the last Ottoman Sultan.

its the ottoman sultan who put us to this cuz of them islam become weak. they should have thinked about it and accepted imam abdul wahab daw'a and everything was going to be clear and good.
it was them who were having fun and thier last sultans were a bad sultans didnt take care of islam.
you support them ? you are getting it emotionally, dont take the right side.

But that did change when the Al-Saud took control and destroyed our dream of a Ummah. Later they invited the Americans.

I firmly believe that it could have been different with the Hashemite in power. Now this is history and we must look forward and look at today. And what I see is a Saudi Arabia with alliance of America and American bases. I do not like that.

Who is responsible for that? Ordinary faithful Saudis or the corrupt Al-Saud family? Of course the latter.

no i dont think so. i dont wanna think of me worship graves and praying to other things than allah.

There is nothing wrong with the law (Shariah) nor the people only the rulers.

i agree. the new ones. the ones who just being USA sucker.

Let me ask you this question?

Why do you seem to support Al-Saud family?

i dont. :S

What is your opinion of respected schoolars who all say that Al-Saud have commited a great crime when they became puppets of America?

who are this schoolars ? show me one schoolars talked about islam and afghanistan and what is happening to us there, show me one who supported the talibans ?

Don't you feel ashamed and angry when you know that there are American bases in Saudi Arabia thanks to Al-Saud?

not only the saudis all of the islamic countries are slaves to the amercians.

the black flags are fighting in kharasan and they will bring us to the light inshalla.
they will come to palestine one day nearr inshalla.

I do.

Mullah Omar also condemns them. So did Osama bin Laden.

god bless them and you.

[al-arab]

Burial in Jerusalem. Where was those masses when the first fake "king" of al-Saud died?

Unfortunately, the Sharif was betrayed by the British when Al-Saud attacked him and removed him.

The Sharif also fought for the Ottoman Empire (the Caliph) AGAINST the Al-Saud who were not interested in the Caliphate or Ummah.

"When Hussein declared himself King of the Hejaz, he also declared himself King of all Arabs (malik bilad-al-Arab). This aggravated his conflict with Ibn Saud, with whom he had fought before WWI on the side of the Ottomans in 1910. Two days after the Turkish Caliphate was abolished by the Turkish Grand National Assembly on March 3, 1924, Hussein declared himself Caliph at his son Abdullah's winter camp in Shunah, Transjordan.[3] The claim to the title had a mixed reception, and he was soon ousted and driven out of Arabia by the Saudis, a rival clan that had no interest in the Caliphate. Saud defeated Hussein in 1924. Hussein continued to use the title of Caliph when living in Transjordan."

I know you are opposed to the Al-Saud just as I am.

But please could you mention a better option than the Sharif 100 years ago? The Ottoman Empire collapsed and the late Sultan gave his support to the Sharif. What was the other solution? British rule? Al-Saud (we have seen how it has went)? Who? There was nobody else at that time, only the traditional Muslims such as the Sharif, the Ikhwan warriors and all the schoolars who supported the cause of the Sharif and the Ummah.

[sunni]

Sunni:

I am just saying that according to Almighty Allah Muslims are the one you follow the Holy Quran, the Hadith and the teachings of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

As long as they do that I have not a problem with anyone as long as they do that.

I do not know why you again mentions Shias. We both agreed a few weeks ago when we both said that Shias are not real Muslims. And I still believe that from what I have seen and know.

im trying to tell you, shia can not be in the same path as we are in.
they dont want to.
they even say its the greatest thing to kill a sunni.
dont be naive.
we have lived btw them, they would put things in your food....etc

like i said shia who do the things we have mention and said are not muslims.
and mybe there are some shia who dont follow shia's and they are just being called shia cuz of thier parents being shia.

[al-arab]

Sunni:

I did not support any Sultan, in fact they were to blame for the mess we are in today (American influence).

I don't condemn Wahhab, nor do I prefer Hashemite to him or the other way around. I have only said that I oppose the Al-Saud apostates and if I lived 100 years ago I would support the Ummah, the Sharif and the Ikhwan warriors. Nothing else than that.

Apart from that Arab land should not be subject to western imperilism and should be based on Shariah and ruled by truth Muslims.

The Hashemites did not support worship it was the people and the Ottomans did nothing to change that when they ruled. Sharifs father wanted to remove this, but got warning from Sultan.

The Hashemite were the most conservatice together with Muhammad Ibn Abd-al-Wahhab.

The PROBLEM was that the Al-Saud family claimed to be supporters of al-Wahhab to gain power to later take control of Najd. Just look how they have ruled since? Not according to Al-Wahhab.So this argument is worth nothing, my brother.

Remember when the Muhammad ibn Ibrahm Al al-Shaykh (descendant of Al-Wahhab and Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia) issued a fatwa calling for the abdication of "king" Saud in 1964?

The problem was the Ottoman Empires military and religious faillures and failure of caring for the Arab World together with Western interference (colonialism) and the appearance of the Al-Saud.

All this together resultated in our dream of a Ummah was dead, but Insha'allah it will soon see the light again.

[Karachi]

Sunni, there are many different ways for people to stop committing shirk.

saudis have destroyed all these sites and are making Makkah in to some thing like las vegas, the poorer people who perform hajj get no benefit from these luxury hotels and malls, its only made for the rich class of people

But i dont expect you to understand this because your are some agent of saudi zionist royals, i can see the way you curse every one around here, how good of a muslim you are.