How west dominated the world.

[ghumbasa]

Here i ll add info of how west esp brits and americans divided nations ,countries and invaded them ,brought new secular or satanic laws ,took resources and skills finally left them dependent on debts or dependent on west with its puppet elite govts....

I ll start from saudi arabia rise of ibn e saud with fall of ottomon khilafa...The dirty work was carried out each time by spies and informants from a,ong each nation or sultanat.Incase of arabia...it was "Lawrence of arabia".pic given ...

[ghumbasa]

Muhammad Ibn Abd-al-Wahhab

(Arabic: محمد بن عبد الوهاب) (born 1703 in Uyaynah; died 1792) was a prominent Sunni Muslim scholar who wrote many books against polytheism (or "Shirk").

BiographyChildhood and Early Life:

Some details have been pieced together via the work of numerous historians. Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab is generally acknowledged to have been born in 'Uyayna, in 1703 and to have been a member of the Arab tribe of Banu Tamim. He was thought to have started studying Islam at an early age, primarily with his father ('Abd al-Wahhab), as he was from a line of scholars of the Hanbali school of jurisprudence. While there is some consensus over these details, there is not a unanimous agreement over the specifics and some minority opinions do exist in regard to his place and date of birth. Seemingly his recognition with the Banu Tamim tribe and Hanbali school of thought is in line with the justification by some scholars of being the inheritor of the teachings of Taqi-Al Din Ibn Taymiyyah.

Reforms

Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab spent some time studying with Muslim scholars in Basra (in southern Iraq), and it is reported that he traveled to the Muslim holy cities of Mecca and Medina to perform Hajj and study with the scholars there, before returning to his home town of Uyayna in 1740. Official sources on ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab's life put his visits to these cities in different chronological order, and the full extent of such travels remains disputed among historians.

Almost all sources agree that his reformist ideas were formulated while living in Basra, where he became somewhat famous for his debates with the Islamic scholars there. Dates are missing in a great many cases, thus it is difficult to reconstruct a chronology of his life up until his return to 'Uyayna.

Like most scholars in Najd at the time, Ibn Abd-al-Wahhab was a follower of Ibn Hanbal's school of jurisprudence but "was opposed to any of the schools (Madh'hab) being taken as an absolute and unquestioned authority," and condemned taqlid.

After his return to 'Uyayna, Ibn Abd al-Wahhab began to attract followers there, including the ruler of the town, Uthman ibn Mu'ammar. With Ibn Mu'ammar's support, Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab began to implement some of his ideas for reform. First, he persuaded ibn Mu'ammar to level the grave of Zayd ibn al-Khattab, a companion of the Muslim prophet Muhammad whose grave was revered by locals, citing Islamic teachings that forbid grave worship. Secondly, he ordered that an adulteress be stoned to death, a practice that had become uncommon in the area. These actions gained the attention of Sulaiman ibn Muhammad ibn Ghurayr of the tribe of Bani Khalid, the chief of Al-Hasa and Qatif, who held substantial influence in Najd. Ibn Ghurayr threatened Ibn Mu'ammar that he would not allow him to collect a land tax for some properties that he owned in al-Hasa if he did not kill ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab. Ibn Mu'ammar declined to do this, but ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab was forced to leave. Foremost among his detractors were his own father and brother.

Alliance with the House of Saud

Upon his expulsion from 'Uyayna, Ibn Abd al-Wahhab was invited to settle in neighboring Dir'iyya by its ruler Muhammad ibn Saud in 1740 (1157 AH). Two of Ibn Saud's brothers had been students of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab in Uyayna, and are said to have played a role in convincing Ibn Saud to take him in. Ibn Saud's wife is also reported to have been a adherent to Ibn Abd al-Wahhab's cause.
Upon arriving in Diriyya, a pact was made between Ibn Saud and Ibn Abd al-Wahhab, by which Ibn Saud pledged to implement Ibn Abd al-Wahhab's teachings and enforce them on his and his neighboring towns. Beginning in the last years of the 18th century Ibn Saud and his heirs (The House of Saud) would spend the next 140 years mounting various academic and military campaigns to seize control of Arabia and its outlying regions, finally taking control of the whole of modern day Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in 1922. This provided the movement with a state. Vast wealth from oil discovered in the following decades, coupled with Saudi control of the holy cities of Mecca and Medina, have since provided a base and funding for Salafi missionary activity.

[ghumbasa]

Meanwhile when this activity was going on...brits were busy discovering new lands and islands and enslaving africans plus other lands.

[ghumbasa]

Ibn wahhab was forced to flee from*Medina, and in a more rural inland area – in the*Nejd*– he was adopted by the Saud family. With a combination of camel riding warrior power and his religious zeal, the Saud regime spread across Arabia.

In 1802 an army of 12,000 saud and ibn wahhab warriors attacked iraq and slayed 4000 inhabitants, desecrated many holy sites. In 1803 they attacked Makka and, aware of the slaughter in iraq,the Makkans opened their town to Saud rule.After taking power in Medina they smashed grave-sites of many sahaba ra.In 1813, the Ottoman sultan sent expeditions against Wahhabism.They defeated head of the Saud family was taken in a cage to Istanbul and beheaded.

By the late 1800s the Saud family members were refugees in Kuwait. In late 1901, a twenty-year-old member of the Saud family, Abd al-Aziz ibn Saud was without a kingdom in Kuwait but with allies. At the age of 28 he rode from Kuwait with from 40 to 60 relatives and retainers, ready for combat. On a moonless night, January 15-16, ibn Saud and some of his men went over the wall of the compound at Riyadh and prepared for an assault at the main gate at dawn. Ibn Saud and his men killed defenders of the compound. The Rashid family, which had driven out the Sauds and killed the brother of his father, no longer were in possession of Riyadh. Ibn Saud was now in possession of his place of birth – a kingdom that measured 700 by 700 yards.
Continue...

[ghumbasa]

Marriages helped in making alliances, and Ibn Saud made alliances.

In 1914, before the war, Ibn Saud allied himself with the Turks, agreeing that he should have relations with no other foreign power and be committed to joining Turkish forces in resisting any aggression. When war came Saud opted for neutrality and kept his options open. Then he allied himself with the British, who offered recognition of the middle of the Arabian Peninsula (namely the Nejd and Hasa) as his and that of his father before him and his descendants after him – with the proviso that he and his heirs not be antagonistic toward Britain. Ibn Saud agreed not to enter into relations with another foreign power and promised to come to the aid of Ibn Saud should he be the victim of aggression. Britain lent Ibn Saud £20,000, 1,000 weapons and 200,000 rounds of ammunition. Added to this was a subsidy of £5,000 per month. This strengthened Saud against a territorial rival, the Hashim (Hashimite) family, which in 1915 was on side of ottomon khilafa.All dealings were carried out Lawrence of arabia who was constantly in contact with ibn wahhab and al saud.He provided protection to them during times when turkey had driven them off abd helped in rising them again for revolt against khikafa.

Matters became more complicated for Saud in 1916, when the Hashim family broke with the Turks and went over to the side of the British – what became known as the Arab revolt. Britain began looking after their own influence and interests and they drew territorial lines that were not saud s liking especially kuwait.
Rashid family, however, remained allied with Turkey and supplied by Turkey and the dominant power on the Arabian Peninsula. In May 1919 and in 1920, Ibn Saud marched against Rashid.He defeated them with the help of Britian in November 1921, showed them clemency and reconciled with them, marrying the widow of their now dead ruler.Ottomon khilafa was destroyed by help of Al saud and Brits.The Rashid s territory now extended north to territory that the British had given to the Hashemite brothers whom they had made kings of Transjordan and Iraq.Turkey was kept busy with wars from all sides by Brits alleys.

The British responded to a raid by the Ikhwan into Transjordan with a ground and air attack that killed all but 8 of 1,500 Ikhwan.(beduins).On 26 january 1926 ,Al Saud was proclaimed king of Arabia and Hussein fled to cyprus that too became kings of jordan later.

[ghumbasa]

Lawrence of Arabia (T.E.Lawrence)
Thomas Edward (T.E.) Lawrence was born at Tremadoc in Wales in 1888. He was the son of Thomas Chapman, who later changed his surname to Lawrence. T E Lawrence was born out of marriage*- relatively rare in Victorian Britain. He was a very able pupil and could read at the age of four. He was also reading Latin at the age of six. Lawrence won a scholarship to Oxford University and developed a passion for reading - especially books on military history.

At Oxford University, Lawrence read History and gained a first class honours pass. While a student at Oxford, he travelled to the Levant where he visited Crusader castles. After gaining his degree , he joined an expedition by D G Hogarth to excavate Carchemish. He found that he had a natural affinity with the Arab people who he met. He learned their language and customs and spent time reading about their history.

When war was declared in August 1914, Lawrence tried to join the army but was turned down because he was too small. The minimum height set by the army was five feet five inches. However, he persevered and after several months he was given a commission. Lawrence joined the intelligence branch of the general staff. His knowledge of Arabic led to a posting to Egypt where he served in the 'Arab Bureau' at GHQ. Lawrence had an unorthodox approach to his commission. Ignoring the protocol in the British Army for smartness of uniform, he was seen as a very able but scruffy junior officer.

The British military campaign in the Middle East had not started well. The British had easily repulsed a Turkish attack on the Suez Canal but their pursuit of the Turks across Sinai ground to a halt near Gaza. In other areas in the region, the Turks had been more successful, especially in Aden.

[ghumbasa]

The book: In Lawrence in Arabia: War, Deceit, Imperial Folly, And The Making Of The Modern Middle East veteran war correspondent Scott Anderson brilliantly details how the Modern Middle East came into existence.

The region, as presently constituted, is more or less the result of intrigue, accidents, and policies gone wrong during and after World War I. Contrary to the post-war narrative of the West ruining the region, the familiar themes of today – jihad, oil, Zionism, colonialism – were far from the minds of most statesmen a century ago.

In a frank admission, British Colonel Thomas Edward [T.E.] Lawrence called the Great Arab Revolt of 1916 a “sideshow of a sideshow.”
The carnage across Europe had relegated the Middle East to a position of “secondary importance” before, and even after, the uprising began on June 5, 1916. Accordingly, men of modest résumés had plenty of leeway to influence the outcome of the war. Anderson focuses on four such individuals; a German diplomat eager to foment jihad against the British (Curt Prüfer); an American employee of Standard Oil of New York who later became the lone American intelligence officer in the Middle East (William Yale); a Zionist agronomist who created a spy ring in Palestine that passed information to the British (Aaron Aaronsohn); and Lawrence, a well-traveled archeologist before the war.

The young spies were quickly immersed in the region’s labyrinthine politics, which began with the government in Constantinople. In 1908, a cadre of young army officers staged a coup against the sultan. The Committee of Union and Progress, also known as the Young Turks, reinstated the empire’s parliamentary constitution and embarked on an ambitious modernization program. Their edicts emancipated women, granted full rights of citizenship to religious and ethnic minorities, and promoted Turkish nationalism.

The results bordered on catastrophic. By 1913, “separatist movements had sprung up across the breadth of what remained of the empire.” The Young Turks’ liberalism “enraged Muslim traditionalists” and its promotion of Turkish nationalism alienated the empire’s Arab subjects. To Prüfer’s frustration, the government’s call for jihad against the Triple Entente (Great Britain, France, and Russia) in November 1914 fell on deaf ears.

One reason for the tepid response was Emir Hussein bin Ali. Hussein was one of the Muslim world’s most respected religious figures, and the patriarch of a family (the Hashemite clan) that had guarded the Islamic holy cities of Mecca and Medina “since the tenth century.” The conservative Hussein clashed frequently with Constantinople over the Ottoman Empire’s newfound liberalism before the war, and his response to the call for jihad infuriated the Young Turks that were aggravated by Donmeh and those spies.

[ghumbasa]

http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=ZfY8LjpCMro

After Britian ..role of American came for oil.They made pacts with Al saud and formed ARAMCO company.See the history.

[ghumbasa]

http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=ZfY8LjpCMro

Muslim traitors who sold jeruselum to Brits annd Americans.

[ghumbasa]

http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/12045-blood-oil-and-the-american-dream

TODAY:

Blood, Oil and "The American Dream"




In our times, in a media-saturated culture in which well-packaged and comforting lies are explicitly preferred to unsettling truths, those who reveal sordid realities are often dismissed if not reviled.Whistleblowers and voices of integrity—from Dennis Kucinich and Ralph Nader to Julian Assange and Bradley Manning—engage in the often-thankless vocation of disturbing complacency; and those awakened from their lying dreams angrily threaten to “kill the messenger” (figuratively?—or perhaps literally).

I am reminded of Henrik Ibsen’s bitterly satirical play An Enemy of the People.The protagonist, a maverick scientist named Dr. Stockmann, has dreamed up a project to turn his backwater town into a cosmopolitan health spa.However, he later discovers that the project, upon which the town has invested its capital and its future, is hopelessly ruined by contaminating waste coming from upriver.At a meeting of the townspeople, he tries mightily to inform, explain, warn—but his fellow citizens refuse to listen and shout him down, finally even labeling him “an enemy of the people.”At that moment, he announces the discovery of an even greater source of corruption–“that all the sources of our moral life are poisoned and that the whole fabric of our civic community is founded on the pestiferous soil of falsehood.”

In the last half of the 20th century, the American economy promised the realization of a “dream” of universal home ownership and a veritable cornucopia of consumer goods. The coveted, high-consumption ideal of unparalleled material comforts, based as it was on easy credit, offered the two-car garage and the three-bedroom house.But by the 1990s, with almost one motor vehicle per adult and domestic oil fields largely depleted, the economy had become addicted to an endless ocean of foreign oil.As U.S.-based oil companies further extended their tentacles globally, a bloated U.S. War Machine-in-overdrive laid waste to entire countries, creating incalculable human suffering in its quest to secure access to the oil which fed an insatiable Moloch called the “American Way of Life.”

Dis-information and fabricated pretexts manufactured the consent of a largely passive populace which resigned itself to, or often cheered on, the next waging of aggressive war–“the supreme international crime,” according to the Nuremberg Charter.By 1996, U.S. diplomat Madeleine Albright matter-of-factly stated on national television that the deliberate killing some 500,000 Iraqi children had been “worth it”—and her remark provoked little concern, let alone outrage, among the American citizenry.(The draconian U.S.-UN sanctions in the early 1990s, had deprived the Iraqi people—whose water treatment plants and medical facilities had been deliberately destroyed in the Gulf War—of urgent necessities like vaccines, medicines, food.)

Two millennia ago, ruthless Roman commanders would lay siege to a city, starving the people into submission and enslavement.But such generals, no matter how cruel, lacked the advantages of modern artillery and air strikes.And, despite other fiendish torments available for their use, they did not have the chemical know-how to drop clouds of white phosphorus or giant combustibles, thereby burning and incinerating thousands of people living below.Often merciless, their crimes were nonetheless circumscribed by the spatial and technical limits of the times.Such was not the case in the U.S. invasion, bombing, and occupation of Iraq.

The statistics are horrifying, unspeakable—although we must (relentlessly) speak of them. If one ponders, for even a few minutes, what such statistics mean, one suffers serious emotional disturbance and disorientation."Roughly” 500,000 children in the early 1990s?“About” a million people killed by the invasion and its aftermath?* “A few million” more lives maimed, displaced, wrecked (as much by grief and despair as by physical mutilation)? Such statistics are terribly abstract, obscenely abstract: an adding-machine tabulates an endless list of corpses into an abstract figure to be entered in the chronicle of “collateral damage,” “civilian casualties,”—or a “body count.”

Yet such icy abstraction can suddenly become terribly concrete—when we scrutinize up-close the faces and bodies of children “unlucky” enough to have inhabited a city called Falluja.In the short RAI documentary “Falluja: The Hidden Massacre,” we see a city completely in ruins, bricks strewn everywhere, with the occasional motionless, crushed child to be discerned beneath the rubble. We see, with a fierce lucidity, the squashed faces and scorched skulls of little children—viciously burnt to death by the napalm (MK77) the killers chose to inflict on these innocent victims.We see many other things, unspeakable things, unspeakable crimes of which we must find a way to speak—and to speak with searing moral clarity.

Within neo-colonial systems (empires), those living in the “core” nation are led to believe that they can and should enjoy an affluent standard of material comforts—even if it is based on military conquest, resource-expropriation, and the exploitation of cheap labor (in “peripheral” places like the Middle East).Those Americans who continue to believe in an unrealistic standard of material affluence—based as it is on an addiction to an energy-guzzling, hyper-consumption “way of life”—will continue to tolerate U.S.-initiated oil wars and minimize the threats posed by global warming.

If trying to sustain the “ideal” of American-style prosperity nowadays is based on war (i.e., imperial Terrorism)—as well as its counterparts of trade embargoes and “regime change”–why even care if the U.S. economy continues to falter or even collapse?True, those who suffer the most are always poor people and innocent children Nonetheless, even with better jobs and financial reform, “the American Dream” of material affluence can only be sustained by expropriating Middle Eastern oil through military aggression, draconian sanctions, and neoliberal privatizations.

The “American Dream”–with its equation of “consuming” with living, with its “middle-class” ideal of car and home ownership, with its addiction to frivolous (and vulgar) amusements—is, in itself, morally bankrupt. The culture is an insatiable Moloch which feeds on oil—and has already demanded the mass sacrifices of innocent children ten thousands miles away to get it.A “declining” standard of “living”?High unemployment?* Persisting problems with affordable health insurance?

Surrounded by a soulless banality propped up by vicious wars, those who hold fast to truth and universal human values are confronted with Dr. Stockmann’s haunting question: “What does the destruction of a community matter if it lives on lies?”

[ghumbasa]

Destruction of ottomon khilafa ll tell later...
Question: Is this not the case when invasion happens and true islam goes out of the window witb either distorted islam or secularism rises...nationality wars and Arab land was further divided in tiny kingdoms...Same pattern was happening in subcontinent...till today.As now oil ll be replaced by gas reserves.

[ghumbasa]

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=s52T0OUe66U

This ll give a brief info of how khilafa was destroyed.

[Toramana]

What about the Punjabi Army that fought for imperialists as mercenaries and still are doing that?

[ghumbasa]

What about the Punjabi Army that fought for imperialists as mercenaries and still are doing that?

What about nds and hindu training centres that are promoting terror and blasts in pakistan? The list could be more...but the camps are discovered and reported by activists.If any camp or torture cell is discovered then it ll be added.

[ghumbasa]

19th Century Wars Of The British Empire



Between 1799 and 1815 the British Empire was constantly involved in fighting Napoleon in at least 7 different campaigns.
1801 to 1805 British empire fights the Kingdom of Koya
1802 to 1805 The Second Anglo Maratha War… the British East India Company fights the Maratha Confederacy
1803 to 1805 British empire fights Kingdom of Kandy
1803: British empire fights several European nations in what is called Emmet’s Insurrecton
1806-7 British invasions of the Rio de la Plata
1806-7 British fight the Ashanti Fante War
1806-11 Vellore “Mutiny” British E. India Company
1807 to 1812 Anglo Russian War 1807 to 1812
1807 to 1809 Anglo Turkish War
1808 to 1810 Rum Rebellion against New S. Wales
1810 to 1817 Conquest of Madagascar
1810 to 1820 Punjab War British E. India Co. (which operated like a rogue intelligence agency)
1811 Invasion of Java British E India Co.
1811 Fourth Xhosa War
1811 Ga-Fante War
1812 War of 1812 between Britain and US
1814 to 1816 Gurka War British E. India Co.
1815 Second Barbary War
1815 Second Kandyan War
1817 to 1818 Third Anglo Maratha War British E India Co.
1817 Pernambucan Revole British empire
1821 to 1832 Greek War of Independence
1823 to 1831 First Anglo Ashanti War
1823 to 1826 First Anglo Burmese War
1828 to 1834 the Liberal Wars as the British fought King Pedro IV
1832 Black Hawk War
1833 to 1840 First Carlist War

1834 to 1836 Sixth Zhosa War
1837 to 1838 Lower Canada Rebellion (Those in power describe revolutions as riots, rebellions, uprisings, mutinies, mob action etc.)
1839 to 1842 Afghanistan…. This was cited as British E India Co. but thousands of British soldiers were killed.. only 1 left alive.
1839 to 1842 First Opioum War Britain v China
1839 to 1851 Civil War in Uruguay. British involved.
1843 Wairau Affray British settlers fight native New Zealanders
1845 to 1846 First Anglo-Sikh War (one of many different wars in British invasion of India)
1845 to 1846 Flagstaff War Once again British fight native New Zealanders
1846 Another campaign of Britain against native New Zealanders
1846 to 1847 Seventh Zhosa War
1846 to 1848 Mexican American War Britain involved against Mexicans
1846 to 1848 Wanganui Campaign 4th campaign against native New Zealanders
1848 to 1849 Second Anglo Sikh War
1850 to 1864 Britain v China war called Taiping Rebellion
1850 to 1853 Eighth Xhosa War
1852 to 1853 Second Anglo Burmese War
1853 to 1874 Britain v China this time called “The Miao Rebellion”
1853 to 1856 Crimean War
1856 to 1857 British war with Nicaragua and the Republic of Sonora
1856 to 1860 Second Opium War in China as the British imperialists distributed opium to the Chinese (and earlier smallpox infected blankets to American Indians, the machine gunning and head clubbing of Asian Indians)in Amritsar and other places)
1856 to 1857 Anglo Persian War
1857 to 1858 Mistakenly called India’s first war of independence or the Rebellion of 1857… the Indians ever since the invasion by Britain had been fighting the invaders in different areas of the country
1858 Coeur D’Alene War
1858 Fraser Canyon War (British troops arrived when war over)
1861 to 1865 American Civil War… Britain despite having abolished slavery in 1832, gave aid to the South
1861 to 1867 Franco Mexican War Britain helped France
1863 to 1864 Bombardment of Shimonoseki in Japan by British