The Wahabi Fitna

[Toramana]

http://www.ummah.net/Al_adaab/wahhabi_khariji.html

[Toramana]

Wahabism should be termed Arabism/Beduinism

Wahabism should be termed as Arabism or Beduinism because its motives are to return Islam to Arab puretanism that marked the Beduine way of life and restore Arab monopoly over theological tendencies, politics, economy, etc. within Islamic religion and in the Muslim world. An proof of that is the fact is that today the brutal Saudi regime defacto considers Saudi Arabia to be the political, theological center of Islam.

The entire Wahabi/Beduine ideology is geared towards justifying the oppressive rule by the Al-Saud family over Arabs. The Khalafath Fitna has been invented by the Wahabis/Beduines to butress the dictatorship of Al-Saud family and extend it to non-Arab countries not to mention that, Wahabism/Arabism/Beduinism had been initially developed to repalce Turk leadership of the Muslim world with Beduin leadership.

[Dukhtar-e-Kabul]

but what are the chances of the Arabs every ruling Muslim world again?

[Ghurzang]

Wahabism should be termed as Arabism or Beduinism because its motives are to return Islam to Arab puretanism that marked the Beduine way of life and restore Arab monopoly over theological tendencies, politics, economy, etc. within Islamic religion and in the Muslim world. An proof of that is the fact is that today the brutal Saudi regime defacto considers Saudi Arabia to be the political, theological center of Islam.

The entire Wahabi/Beduine ideology is geared towards justifying the oppressive rule by the Al-Saud family over Arabs. The Khalafath Fitna has been invented by the Wahabis/Beduines to butress that rule further and extend it to non-Arab countries not to mention that the Wahabism/Arabism/Beduinism had been developed to repalce Turk leadership of the Muslim world with Beduin leadership.

Welldone and Well said malgare.......This thing should be realized by muslim ummah,otherwise their future will be in the hands of Saudi's samraj,the real PANDITS OF ISLAM in the dress of Islam..But also add one thing that the agents of this Wahabi Brand of Islam are Ullema of madaaris esp DeWBAND.They are the implementing partner of Saud s family.They have world's most organized and extensive net of propaganda system called MOSQUE and there inside mosque they on boarded his local agent called Mulla..Once the mosque was the place of peace,knowldg,wisdom when prophet was there but now everything has been replaced by Arab s samraji agents.....More..According to Geology it is expected that the underearth resource of OIL will fad away within approx 100 years.Then what will be the most earning source of these lazy dazy,KOLO WASHRABO race of arabs...offcource HAJJ.THey are earning lots of mony from HAJJ without any audit or accountiblitiy..and after 100 or 50 years the price of HAJJ WILL raise to highest level so the arabs thinking for furture richness is still alive....As we all know arabs are not specialized in any other skills ,niether in science nor in technology etc etc..All madrassas and mosques are financially supporting by Arabs in the name of Islam.Who is Usama????why not he fight jihad againts his imperialist kingdom?????''zamung kor ta ye jehad raoro''...All muslims are the victim of NARCISSISM mainly due to ARABS and their agents Mulla,Mufti.There is strong connection among AKHWAN UL MUSLIMEEN,WAHABI ISLAM,SAOD FAMILY,MAODOODI,DR.ISRAR,whose combined venture is REVIVAL OF KHILAFAT THROUGH UNITED PAK-AFGHAN NATIONS......
I am much happy that we have friend like TORAMANA who realy smell the devil....loved this post.It must be discussed more with reason and arguments..
clap clap clap

[Son of Mountains]

there was no wahabism before Queen Victoria. She brought Abdul Wahab, the inventor!

[شمله ور خراساني]

[Nadir Shah]

And lest we forget, these Arabs were the sworn enemies of the Ottoman Caliphate and sided with the Christian British and France. They did not want Turkish/Turkic domination of Arab lands, and we do not want Arab domination of Pashtun/Afghan lands.

[شمله ور خراساني]

And lest we forget, these Arabs were the sworn enemies of the Ottoman Caliphate and sided with the Christian British and France. They did not want Turkish/Turkic domination of Arab lands, and we do not want Arab domination of Pashtun/Afghan lands.

The Turkish Ottoman rulers of 19th and early 20th century were no less evil than their French & British counterparts.

The Turks were usurpers, opressors and colonialists. They extorted people and they left nothing useful behind.

While the kuffar like the British managed to build some roads and other modes of infrastructure, the dumb Turkish usurpers didn't even have the brain to build roads for themselves.

And in regards to religion, graveworhsip' sodomy; alcoholism and prostitutes were widespread through-out the ottoman empire.

Any self respecting muslim would oppose Ottoman empire.

So just because Saudis faught Ottomans, there is no reason to accuse them of anything evil.

Besides, being ruled by some other people is not what a Khilafah should be. Khilafah can be highly decentralized. Autonomy and self government of nations subject to the office of the khalif are not contradictory to Islam. Because there is no standard in quran and sunnah dictating strict hierarchy and tryrannical rule like it was the case during Ottoman rule.

[Toramana]

When oil was discovered in Beduine desert in 1933, Western attitude to the king of Beduines (AL-Saud) once again changed radically after the initial alliance between Beduines and Westerners against Ottoman Empire. In 1940's, a secret meeting was held between King Saud and President Troman (?) in a ship in which the American President promised to protect the Saud-Wahabi oligarchy against external, internal threats e.g., communism, democratic movements in SA in return for Arab alliance with the West against USSR and American control over Saudi oil.

During 1950s, when secular, liberal Arab nationalism of Jamal Abdu-Nasir and Baath Party became a challenge for the West, Saud-Wahabi oligarchy togethor with Akhwanul Muslimin came in handy to the West offering an alternate version of Arab nationalism rooted in pan-Islam and promising to-restablish Arab influence over non-Arab Muslim countries. Since then, Saudi-Wahabi ologarchy has thrived and today weilds tremendous influence in the Muslim world thanks the huge petro-economy at its disposal.

[Toramana]

The Turkish Ottoman rulers of 19th and early 20th century were no less evil than their French & British counterparts.

The Turks were usurpers, opressors and colonialists. They extorted people and they left nothing useful behind.

It is unfortunate that the beduine begotary is not letting you see through the argument. Al-Saud-Wahabi duo didn't side with French and British colonialists for the supremacy of Islam but to win Arab freedom from Turks and reclaim leadership of the Muslim world. It is true that Turks were not angels, they at least were Muslims and there was no justification of Arab/Beduine allliance with the West against fellow Muslims (from a Muslim standpoint) wherein they will rule the Muslim world through their viceroys.

And in regards to religion, graveworhsip' sodomy; alcoholism and prostitutes were widespread through-out the ottoman empire.

All these things sane reverance to graves are widely prevalent in SA today. The late King Fahad used to call prostitutes from Lebanon for sensual pleasures (and the present rulers continue to do so) and once wrote a poem to praise the beauty of Margret Thetcher, the ex-British prime minister.

Any self respecting muslim would oppose Ottoman empire.

Yes for Arab supremacy and in connivance with non-Muslims.

Besides, being ruled by some other people is not what a Khilafah should be. Khilafah can be highly decentralized. Autonomy and self government of nations subject to the office of the khalif are not contradictory to Islam. Because there is no standard in quran and sunnah dictating strict hierarchy and tryrannical rule like it was the case during Ottoman rule.

An inherently authoritarian and failed institution against which Arabs themselves had to revolt for the same motives as mentioned above cannot gaurantee self-rule to other nations. The present Wahabi/Beduine propaganda as I said earlier is aimed at making AL-Saud with their debauched Wahabi buddies the Khulafa of the Muslim world.

[Mujib]

[Wahhabis Yusuf Estes]

This is faulty logic and false history.

1. The heretical Shi`i sect that believes in the divinity of Sayyidina `Ali (ra) is called the `Alawi sect (after `Ali). Al-`Ali is the name of Allah Most High. Qadianis are also known as Ahmadis. Ahmad is the name of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace).

Scholars of Islam have labelled followers of Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab's sect as Wahhabis. This is how they are known all over the world.

2. Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab's teachings were condemned and refuted by his own family, his teachers, and the scholars of his land. As soon as this sect arose, Muslims scholars condemned it and wrote books in refutation of it.

[شمله ور خراساني]

This is faulty logic and false history.

1. The heretical Shi`i sect that believes in the divinity of Sayyidina `Ali (ra) is called the `Alawi sect (after `Ali). Al-`Ali is the name of Allah Most High. Qadianis are also known as Ahmadis. Ahmad is the name of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace).

Scholars of Islam have labelled followers of Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab's sect as Wahhabis. This is how they are known all over the world.

2. Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab's teachings were condemned and refuted by his own family, his teachers, and the scholars of his land. As soon as this sect arose, Muslims scholars condemned it and wrote books in refutation of it.

the prophet muhammad saww was also condemned and his uncle ridiculed him.

So what's your point?

[inqilab]

"Scholars of Islam" he means his masters the british empire.

No muslim ever uses Allahs name to insult another.

[شمله ور خراساني]

"Scholars of Islam" he means his masters the british empire.

No muslim ever uses Allahs name to insult another.

people who consider dead people burried under ground to possess supernatural powers would strongly disagree with you.

[شمله ور خراساني]

"And say not of those who are slain in the way of Allah: 'They are dead.' Nay, they are living, though ye perceive (it) not. (The Noble Quran, 2:154)"
"Think not of those who are slain in Allah's way as dead. Nay, they live, finding their sustenance in the presence of their Lord. They rejoice in the Bounty provided by Allah: And with regard to those left behind, who have not yet joined them (in their bliss), the (Martyrs) glory in the fact that on them is no fear, nor have they (cause to) grieve. They glory in the Grace and Bounty from Allah, and in the fact that Allah suffereth not the reward of the faithful to be lost (in the least). (The Noble Quran, 3:169-171)"

thats regarding shuhadah, Not sufi saints who died dancing around drunk.

And that still does not prove that we should worship them because they died as martyrs.