Ads by Muslim Ad Network

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What complaints do you have against Wahhabis?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Ahsen82 it follows logically that if one supports a corrupt individual , the Supporter and the supported are both corrupt
    http://www.ilovepalestine.com/campai...imesinGaza.gif

    "It does not befit the lion to answer the dogs."

    – Imam al-Shafi’i (Rahimahullah)

    Comment


    • #32
      Here's another type a recent example of treachery Ahsen82

      https://www.ummah.com/forum/forum/ge...s-peace-offers

      Hope your keeping up with what's happening
      http://www.ilovepalestine.com/campai...imesinGaza.gif

      "It does not befit the lion to answer the dogs."

      – Imam al-Shafi’i (Rahimahullah)

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Abu Kamel View Post
        Ahsen82, there is a knowledge gap btw you and several of us, and I would not be surprised you are a young man in is 20s who reached adulthood just recently. There is a long litany of charges with evidences against the Saudi monarchy of today. It is interesting to note that the monarchy was recognized in 1932, and Saudi American relations began in earnst, or in open, in 1933. American oil companies (Standard Oil and Texas Oil) discovered oil in 1938, ARAMCO, the Saudi American joint oil company was formed in 1943 and also in that year, the US president Roosevelt declared Saudi defense is a vital interest to America, establishing a permanent alliance btw the two nations, for Saudi oil was vital to supplying the American military during WWII. The full extent of that alliance and what it would mean for Arabia was not known in 1943, or at least it did not become a major point of conflict. However, in 1956 or so, shaykh Bin Baaz and others opposed ARAMCO compounds in Dhahran as cultural colonial settlements, as these compounds were permanent. In 1990, Bin Baaz, then grand mufti of the monarchy, passed a fatwa allowing American and kafir forces to be stationed in Arabia in defense of the monarchy. Many ulama opposed this, and several signed a petition letter in opposition. IIn 1991 it was called "Letter of Demands". In 1992, they published a follow up called "Memorandum of Advise"- "Madhakirar An Nasihah". Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen (rh) was one of several ulama who signed these. Bin Baaz was reported to call these ulama and intellectuals "khawarij" and threw many of them in prison, others went into exile. Of the Saudi intellectuals who opposed this, a group emerged called the Committee for Defense of Legitimate Rights" ( CDLR) led by Saad al Faqih and Muhammad al Maasari. From 1994 on, CDLR faxed 100s of documents to Saudi numbers to present the charges with evidences against the regime. I doubt you can find the 100s of pages of documents the CDLR published online, but if you did, you would see Shariah arguments against the Saudi regime which are really irrefutable. Such as how they used administrative law to attempt to circumvent Shariah, effectively rendering Shariah obsolete in areas of foreign policy, economics, politics, foreign relations. https://www.nytimes.com/1992/12/15/w...-omission.html Here is UBL 's 1995 Open Letter to king Fahd which followed up with many of the charges made in previous years https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/An_Op...inet_Reshuffle From 1991 until 2001, the monarchy silenced, imprisoned, blackballed, in some cases tried to assassinate, essentially destroying opposition to the monarchy's Misguided direction. All of this was done with America as its closest ally, while Saudi ulama were expelled from the Senior council of Scholars, imprisoned, their reputations destroyed, many were tortured in unspeakable ways. And after 2001, America's position as the partner and ally of the Saudi monarchy was no longer openly opposed in the kingdom.
        Subhan Allah. So you are going to quote a man like Osama Bin Laden to convince me?

        Are you serious?

        Comment


        • #34
          I read the letter of Osama Bin Laden and I did not find it convincing.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Saif-Uddin View Post
            Ahsen82 it follows logically that if one supports a corrupt individual , the Supporter and the supported are both corrupt
            The scholars you think are corrupt have probably advised the rulers in secret about their corruption.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Ahsen82 View Post

              Subhan Allah. So you are going to quote a man like Osama Bin Laden to convince me?

              Are you serious?
              All that I posted, and the only thing you have to say is fane outrage that I cited OBL from 1995? How dare me?

              I cited the NY Times too. They have perpetually lied about Islam and Muslim affairs for over a 100 years, spreading misguidance, slander, and worse- they have contributed directly to support the invasion, conquest, and destruction of Iraq, in particular the Sunni Muslims of Iraq. The death toll of their American invasion and occupation and transfer of power to the Shia kafir regime, is millions exiled, millions displaced, 100s of 1000s injured, 100s of 1000s killed- all mostly from Ahlil Sunnah. Need I mention the rapes- 1000s of rapes of Sunni Muslim women by Shia death squads TRAINED and equipped by America.

              So when the matter of moral outrage arises, OBL was the "lesser evil" .
              Allahumma, aranee al haqqu haqqan wa arzuqnee itiba`ahu, wa aranee al baatilu baatilaan wa arzuqnee ijtinaabahu.Oh Allah! show us the truth as true, and inspire us to follow it. Show us falsehood as falsehood, and inspire us to abstain from it.
              " Do you know what destroys Islam? A mistake made by a scholar, the argument of a hypocrite in writing and the ruling of leaders who wish for people to stray

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Ahsen82 View Post

                The scholars you think are corrupt have probably advised the rulers in secret about their corruption.
                I'm referring to the ones who support them akhi,

                Scholars have an obligation to condemn the Evil of a Tyrant, particularly when it's done on public, just keeping quiet shows complacency
                http://www.ilovepalestine.com/campai...imesinGaza.gif

                "It does not befit the lion to answer the dogs."

                – Imam al-Shafi’i (Rahimahullah)

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Ahsen82 View Post

                  The scholars you think are corrupt have probably advised the rulers in secret about their corruption.
                  Yes, stuff is done in private but we're talking lots and lots of scholars over the years. How about scholars advising the public about not following the regime when it does something wrong or questionable?

                  Is there a single scholar you can name?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Abu Kamel View Post
                    Some history on the Saudi monarchy. Today's Saudi monarchy is supposedly the third state and attempt at an alliance between the descendants of imam Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab and Amir Muhammad Ibn Saud (rhm).

                    These shaykhs formed an alliance in Diriyah, Arabia which became an Islamic state (or emirate) in 1157AH/1744 ce.
                    This emirate was attacked and destroyed by the Ottoman army led by the Bektashi Shii Ibrahim Pasha, son of Muhammad Ali Pasha. The Pashas were from the kafir Bektashi shia sufi order and had massacred Mamluk military commanders in Misr before starting heir campaign in Arabia. The Ottoman/Uthmani Pasha army attacked Diriyah in 1817, destroying and razing the town in 1819, leaving military forces garrisoned there.

                    Make note, the Muhammad Ali Pasha forces prepared to invade and conquer the Islamic emirate based on this alliance in 1811. But before they invaded Arabia, they invited 100s of Mamluk beys (military commanders) to a citadel on the pretense of a celebration, but instead massacred 400+ Of them. They went about Misr murdering Mamluks everywhere. This left the Bektashi Shia sufi ruler and his sufi brethren to dominate Misr, preparing the way for Secularization and kufrization of Misr and British Taghut transformation of Misr into a kufr nation state.

                    Make no mistake, Bektashi shia Sufis led he Ottoman army against the believers at Diriyah.
                    And the alliance ended in 1818 ce with the execution of Amir Abdullah bin Muhammad Ibn Saud who ruled from 1814-1818ce. So the original Islamic emirate or Islamic state of Arabia ceased to exist. Today's Saudi monarchy claims its authenticity from that original alliance, but in reality it is a fraudulent representation of that authentic emirate or state.

                    today's Saudi monarchy began in 1901 and was officially declared the kingdom of Saudi Arabia unified under the descendant of Muhammad bin Saud in 1932 ce. The first Saudi King of this regime was Abdul Aziz bin Abdur Rahman bin Faisal bin Turki bin Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Saud.
                    apparently a group of the mamluks wanted to work with the british

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Dontknowname View Post
                      apparently a group of the mamluks wanted to work with the british
                      I was making the point that the military force that destroyed the Islamic state at Diriyah was impious, unrighteousness, led by a murderous impostor who was most likely a Zandeeq.

                      As as for the Citadel massacre, it was a foul despicable affair.
                      Apparently the Pasha killed/martyred them based on a letter from the French mission which claimed it intercepted it going from a senior Bey to the British. The French had just been defeated and withdrew from Egypt, leaving behind a mission. The French found a way to intervene in Egyptian Muslims with this supposedly intercepted letter. The letter claimed the Bey offered complete allegiance for himself and all Mamluks to the British crown.

                      a wise man once said: in politics, there are no coincidences.
                      The Pasha wanted to get rid of the Mamluks as did the French and the British. The French wanted to keep the Pasha on the side of Western empires and to not let him turn towards Islam. To turn towards Islam would set back all the French and British had achieved.
                      The Mamluks were once the champions of the Ahlil Sunnah wal Jamaat and Islam, expelling all Crusaders and strengthening Islam in Egypt and Shaam.
                      Of course, that was centuries before and they had become deviant, a corrupted, ineffective organization with a deviant, corrupted culture.
                      So all three forces in Egypt wanted an excuse and justification to remove the Mamlukiyah.

                      In that sense, the greater likelihood is the letter was a fabrication of the French spies in Egypt, as every Western mission in Muslim lands then and now is a espionage center for its nation.

                      Or, Pasha himself fabricated it to provide the justification for destroying the. That wasn't the first time his rivals were assassinated. The Pasha originally arrived in Egypt as a second to one who was wali of Egypt by the Zorroman sultan's command. But he was assassinated and MAP took overall the position.

                      So the perfect incriminating evidence falls into his lap at the perfect time right before his military leaves.

                      The reality is MAP was the tool of the Tawaghit west. If Egypt was an Islamic wilaya that was corrupt and in decline, MAP turned into a kufr nation, with British help, and even French help.

                      These kinds of despicable machinations are what Muslims bring to themselves when they collude and ally with disbelievers.
                      Allahumma, aranee al haqqu haqqan wa arzuqnee itiba`ahu, wa aranee al baatilu baatilaan wa arzuqnee ijtinaabahu.Oh Allah! show us the truth as true, and inspire us to follow it. Show us falsehood as falsehood, and inspire us to abstain from it.
                      " Do you know what destroys Islam? A mistake made by a scholar, the argument of a hypocrite in writing and the ruling of leaders who wish for people to stray

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X