Saudi Crown Prince: America Asked Us to Spread Ideology of ISIS

V

Viral

Member
Saudi Crown Prince: America Asked Us to Spread Ideology of ISIS

In the latest continuation of western media’s shameless promotion of a known war criminal, the Washington Post sat down with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) last Thursday for a 75-minute discussion (even the Post itself previously published an acknowledgment of his crimes).

Saudi Crown Prince


In the latest continuation of western media’s shameless promotion of a known war criminal, the Washington Post sat down with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) last Thursday for a 75-minute discussion (even the Post itself previously published an acknowledgment of his crimes).
While the Post’s write-up focuses mainly on the allegation that MBS has Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, “in his pocket,” the war in Yemen, and the rights of women in the Kingdom, most curious is the second-to-last paragraph of the report, which states the following:
“Asked about the Saudi-funded spread of Wahhabism, the austere faith that is dominant in the kingdom and that some have accused of being a source of global terrorism, Mohammed said that investments in mosques and madrassas overseas were rooted in the Cold War, when allies asked Saudi Arabia to use its resources to prevent inroads in Muslim countries by the Soviet Union.” [emphasis added]
What? Allies asked Saudi Arabia to use its resources — specifically, investments in mosques and madrassas overseas —to prevent countries from forming alliances with the former Soviet Union?
Of course, it was already known that Saudi Arabia was doing just that for decades, but this is the first time the blame has been openly shifted to Western allies in an interview with a major newspaper.
As the Week explained in 2015, Saudi Arabia has spent billions of dollars “investing heavily in building mosques, madrasas, schools, and Sunni cultural centers across the Muslim world. Indian intelligence says that in India alone, from 2011 to 2013, some 25,000 Saudi clerics arrived bearing more than $250 million to build mosques and universities and hold seminars.”
The effects of this policy have been far-reaching. As even pro-war pundit Fareed Zakaria has documented:
“In Southeast Asia, almost all observers whom I have spoken with believe that there is another crucial cause [behind the ‘cancer’ of Islamic extremism] – exported money and ideology from the Middle East, chiefly Saudi Arabia. A Singaporean official told me, ‘Travel around Asia and you will see so many new mosques and madrassas built in the last 30 years that have had funding from the Gulf. They are modern, clean, air-conditioned, well-equipped – and Wahhabi [Saudi Arabia’s puritanical version of Islam].’ Recently, it was reported that Saudi Arabia plans to contribute almost $1 billion to build 560 mosques in Bangladesh. The Saudi government has denied this, but sources in Bangladesh tell me there’s some truth to the report.”
Saudi Arabia’s funding for extremism has even reached as far as the Indian Ocean. According to the New York Times, Saudi Arabia has “for decades spread its conservative strand of Islam in the Maldives by sending religious leaders, building mosques and giving scholarships to students to attend universities.” Is it a mere coincidence therefore that the South China Morning Post reported that Indian intelligence sources are claiming hundreds of Maldivians have joined ISIS in Syria?
We also know from Hillary Clinton’s leaked emails that Saudi Arabia was almost certainly one of ISIS’ prime sponsors — and that the Clinton camp was well aware of this issue.
While this is the first time a prominent figurehead like MBS has admitted not only that Saudi Arabia spreads its Wahhabist strain of Islam across the world but also that it was done at the request of its western allies, there is proof that MBS’ claim is a well-kept secret of former and current American administrations.
As former U.S. ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad wrote in September 2016, a Saudi official quietly admitted this little-known fact almost two years ago:
“He [the Saudi official] explained that Saudi support for Islamic extremism started in the early 1960s as a counter to Nasserism—the socialist political ideology that came out of the thinking of Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser—which threatened Saudi Arabia and led to war between the two countries along the Yemen border. This tactic allowed them to successfully contain Nasserism, and the Saudis concluded that Islamism could be a powerful tool with broader utility.
“Under their new and unprecedented policy of honesty, the Saudi leadership also explained to me that their
support for extremism was a way of resisting the Soviet Union, often in cooperation with the United States, in places like Afghanistan in the 1980s. In this application too, they argued, it proved successful. Later it was deployed against Iranian-supported Shiite movements in the geopolitical competition between the two countries.” [emphasis added]
 
  • Advertisement
  • V

    Viral

    Member

    Saudi Wahhabism Serves Western Imperialism




    When the Saudi Crown Prince gave an interview to the Washington Post, declaring that it was actually the West that encouraged his country to spread Wahhabism to all corners of the world, there was a long silence in almost all the mass media outlets in the West, but also in countries such as Egypt and Indonesia.

    Those who read the statement, expected a determined rebuke from Riyadh. It did not come. The sky did not fall. Lightning did not strike the Prince or the Post.
    Clearly, not all that the Crown Prince declared appeared on the pages of the Washington Post, but what actually did, would be enough to bring down entire regimes in such places like Indonesia, Malaysia or Brunei. Or at least it would be enough under ‘normal circumstances’. That is, if the population there was not already hopelessly and thoroughly indoctrinated and programed, and if the rulers in those countries did not subscribe to, or tolerate, the most aggressive, chauvinistic and ritualistic (as opposed to the intellectual or spiritual) form of the religion.
    Reading between the lines, the Saudi Prince suggested that it was actually the West which, while fighting an ‘ideological war’ against the Soviet Union and other socialist countries, handpicked Islam and its ultra-orthodox and radical wing – Wahhabism – as an ally in destroying almost all the progressive, anti-imperialist and egalitarian aspirations in the countries with a Muslim majority.
    As reported by RT on 28 March 2018:
    The Saudi-funded spread of Wahhabism began as a result of Western countries asking Riyadh to help counter the Soviet Union during the Cold War, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman told the Washington Post.
    Speaking to the paper, bin Salman said that Saudi Arabia’s Western allies urged the country to invest in mosques and madrassas overseas during the Cold War, in an effort to prevent encroachment in Muslim countries by the Soviet Union…
    The interview with the crown prince was initially held ‘off the record’. However, the Saudi embassy later agreed to let the Washington Post publish specific portions of the meeting.”

    Since the beginning of the spread of Wahhabism, one country after another had been falling; ruined by ignorance, fanatical zeal and fear, which have been preventing the people of countries such as post-1965 Indonesia or the post-Western-invasion Iraq, to move back (to the era before Western intervention) and at the same time forward, towards something that used to be so natural to their culture in not such a distant past – towards socialism or at least tolerant secularism.

    ***

    In reality, Wahhabism does not have much to do with Islam. Or more precisely, it intercepts and derails the natural development of Islam, of its strife for an egalitarian arrangement of the world, and for socialism.
    The Brits were behind the birth of the movement; the Brits and one of the most radical, fundamentalist and regressive preachers of all times – Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab.
    The essence of the Wahhabi/British alliance and dogma was and still is, extremely simple: “Religious leaders would force the people into terrible, irrational fear and consequent submission. No criticism of the religion is allowed; no questioning of its essence and particularly of the conservative and archaic interpretation of the Book. Once conditioned this way, people stopped questioning and criticizing first the feudalist, and later capitalist oppression; they also accepted without blinking the plunder of their natural resources by local and foreign masters. All attempts to build a socialist and egalitarian society got deterred, brutally, ‘in the name of Islam’ and ‘in the name of God’”.
    Of course, as a result, the Western imperialists and the local servile ‘elites’ are laughing all the way to the bank, at the expense of those impoverished and duped millions in the countries that are controlled by the Wahhabi and Western dogmas.
    Only a few in the devastated, colonized countries actually realize that Wahhabism does not serve God or the people; it is helping Western interests and greed.
    Precisely this is what is right now happening in Indonesia, but also in several other countries that have been conquered by the West, including Iraq and Afghanistan.
    Were Syria to fall, this historically secular and socially-oriented nation would be forced into the same horrid direction. People there are well aware of this, as they are educated. They also see what has happened to Libya and Iraq and they definitely do not want to end up like them. It is the Wahhabi terrorist fighters that both the West and its lackeys like Saudi Arabia unleashed against the Syrian state and its people.

    Poster of radical FPI in Jakarta (photo by Andre Vltchek)
    ***

    Despite its hypocritical secular rhetoric, manufactured mainly for local consumption but not for the colonies, the West is glorifying or at least refusing to openly criticize its own brutal and ‘anti-people’ offspring – a concept which has already consumed and ruined both the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Indonesia. In fact, it is trying to convince the world that these two countries are ‘normal’, and in the case of Indonesia, both ‘democratic’ and ‘tolerant’. At the same time, it has consistently been antagonizing almost all the secular or relatively secular nations with substantial Muslim majorities, such as Syria (until now), but also Afghanistan, Iran (prior to the coup of 1953), Iraq and Libya before they were thoroughly and brutally smashed.
    It is because the state, in which the KSA, Indonesia and the present-day Afghanistan can be found, is the direct result of both Western interventions and indoctrination. The injected Wahhabi dogma is giving this Western ‘project’ a Muslim flavor, while justifying trillions of dollars on ‘defense spending’ for the so-called ‘War on Terror’ (a concept resembling an Asian fishing pond where fish are brought in and then fished out for a fee).
    Obedience, even submissiveness – is where, for many reasons, the West wants its ‘client’ states and neo-colonies to be. The KSA is an important trophy because of its oil, and strategic position in the region. Saudi rulers are often going out of their way to please their masters in London and Washington, implementing the most aggressive pro-Western foreign policy. Afghanistan is ‘valued’ for its geographical location, which could potentially allow the West to intimidate and even eventually invade both Iran and Pakistan, while inserting extremist Muslim movements into China, Russia and the former Soviet Central Asian republics. Between 1 and 3 million Indonesian people ‘had to be’ massacred in 1965-66, in order to bring to power a corrupt turbo-capitalist clique which could guarantee that the initially bottomless (although now rapidly thinning) natural resources could flow, uninterrupted and often untaxed, into places such as North America, Europe, Japan and Australia.
    Frankly, there is absolutely nothing ‘normal’ about countries such as Indonesia and the KSA. In fact, it would take decades, but most likely entire generations, in order to return them to at least some sort of nominal ‘normalcy’. Even if the process were to begin soon, the West hopes that by the time it ends, almost all of the natural resources of these countries would be gone.
    But the process is not yet even beginning. The main reason for the intellectual stagnation and lack or resistance is obvious: people in countries such as Indonesia and KSA are conditioned so they are not able to see the brutal reality that surrounds them. They are indoctrinated and ‘pacified’. They have been told that socialism equals atheism and that atheism is evil, illegal and ‘sinful’.
    Hence, Islam was modified by the Western and Saudi demagogues, and has been ‘sent to a battle’, against progress and a just, egalitarian arrangement of the world.
    This version of religion is unapologetically defending Western imperialism, savage capitalism as well as the intellectual and creative collapse of the countries into which it was injected, including Indonesia. There, in turn, the West tolerates the thorough corruption, grotesque lack of social services, and even genocides and holocausts committed first against the Indonesians themselves, then against the people of East Timor, and to this day against the defenseless Papuan men, women and children. And it is not only a ‘tolerance’ – the West participates directly in these massacres and extermination campaigns, as it also takes part in spreading the vilest forms of Wahhabi terrorism and dogmas to all corners of the world. All this, while tens of millions of the followers of Wahhabism are filling the mosques daily, performing mechanical rituals without any deeper thought or soul searching.
    Wahhabism works – it works for the mining companies and banks with their headquarters in London and New York. It also works extremely well for the rulers and the local ‘elites’ inside the ‘client’ states.

    ***

    Ziauddin Sardar, a leading Muslim scholar from Pakistan, who is based in London, has no doubts that ‘Muslim fundamentalism’ is, to a great extent, the result of the Western imperialism and colonialism.
    In a conversation which we had several years ago, he explained:
    Trust between Islam and the West has indeed been broken… We need to realize that colonialism did much more than simply damage Muslim nations and cultures. It played a major part in the suppression and eventual disappearance of knowledge and learning, thought and creativity, from Muslim cultures. The colonial encounter began by appropriating the knowledge and learning of Islam, which became the basis of the ‘European Renaissance’ and ‘the Enlightenment’ and ended by eradicating this knowledge and learning from both from Muslim societies and from history itself. It did that both by physical elimination – destroying and closing down institutions of learning, banning certain types of indigenous knowledge, killing off local thinkers and scholars – and by rewriting history as the history of western civilization into which all minor histories of other civilization are subsumed.”
    As a consequence, Muslim cultures were de-linked from their own history with many serious consequences. For example, the colonial suppression of Islamic science led to the displacement of scientific culture from Muslim society. It did this by introducing new systems of administration, law, education and economy all of which were designed to impart dependence, compliance and subservience to the colonial powers. The decline of Islamic science and learning is one aspect of the general economic and political decay and deterioration of Muslim societies. Islam has thus been transformed from a dynamic culture and a holistic way of life to mere rhetoric. Islamic education has become a cul-de-sac, a one-way ticket to marginality. It also led to the conceptual reduction of Muslim civilization. By which I mean concepts that shaped and gave direction to Muslim societies became divorced from the actual daily lives of Muslims – leading to the kind of intellectual impasse that we find in Muslim societies today. Western neo-colonialism perpetuates that system.”

    Ziauddin Sardar and Andre Vltchek discussing Islam at Mr. Sardar’s club in London (photo by Andre Vltchek)
    ***

    In Indonesia, after the Western-sponsored military coup of 1965, which destroyed the Communist Party of Indonesia (PKI) and brought to power an extreme pro-market and pro-Western regime, things are deteriorating with a frightening predictability, consistency and speed.
    While the fascist dictator Suharto, a Western implant after 1965, was said to be ‘suspicious of Islam’, he actually used all major religions on his archipelago with great precision and fatal impact. During his pro-market despotism, all left-wing movements and ‘-isms’ were banned, and so were most of the progressive forms of arts and thought. The Chinese language was made illegal. Atheism was also banned. Indonesia rapidly became one of the most religious countries on Earth.
    At least one million people, including members of the PKI, were brutally massacred in one of the most monstrous genocides of the 20th century.
    The fascist dictatorship of General Suharto often played the Islamic card for its political ends. As described by John Pilger in his book, “The New Rulers of The World”:
    In the pogroms of 1965-66, Suharto’s generals often used Islamicist groups to attack communists and anybody who got in the way. A pattern emerged; whenever the army wanted to assert its political authority, it would use Islamicists in acts of violence and sabotage, so that sectarianism could be blamed and justify the inevitable ‘crackdown’ – by the army…”
    ‘A fine example’ of cooperation between the murderous right-wing dictatorship and radical Islam.
    After Suharto stepped down, the trend towards a grotesque and fundamentalist interpretation of the monotheist religions continued. Saudi Arabia and the Western-favored and sponsored Wahhabism has been playing an increasingly significant role. And so has Christianity, often preached by radical right-wing former exiles from Communist China and their offspring; mainly in the city of Surabaya but also elsewhere.
    From a secular and progressive nation under the leadership of President Sukarno, Indonesia has gradually descended into an increasingly radically backward-looking and bigoted Wahhabi-style/Christian Pentecostal state.
    After being forced to resign as the President of Indonesia during what many considered a constitutional coup, a progressive Muslim cleric and undoubtedly a closet socialist, Abdurrahman Wahid (known in Indonesia by his nickname Gus Dur), shared with me his thoughts, on the record:
    These days, most of Indonesian people do not care or think about God. They only follow rituals. If God would descend and tell them that their interpretation of Islam is wrong, they’d continue following this form of Islam and ignore the God.”
    ‘Gus Dur’ also clearly saw through all the tricks of the military and pro-Western elites. He told me, among other things, that the 2003 Marriott Hotel bombing in Jakarta was organized by the Indonesian security forces, and later blamed on the Islamists, who were actually only executing the orders given to them by their political bosses from the pro-Western military regime, which until now is being disguised as a, ‘multi-party democracy’.
    In Indonesia, an extreme and unquestioning obedience to the religions has led to a blind acceptance of a fascist capitalist system, and of Western imperialism and its propaganda. Creativity and intellectual pluralism have been thoroughly liquidated.
    The 4th most populous nation on the planet, Indonesia, has presently no scientists, architects, philosophers or artists of any international standing. Its economy is fueled exclusively by the unbridled plunder of the natural resources of the vast, and in the past, pristine parts of the country, such as Sumatra and Indonesian Borneo (Kalimantan), as well as on the brutally-occupied Western part of Papua. The scale of the environmental destruction is monumental; something that I am presently trying to capture in two documentary films and a book.
    Awareness of the state of things, even among the victims, is minimal or out rightly nonexistent.
    In a country that has been robbed of its riches; identity, culture and future, religions now play the most important role. There is simply nothing else left for the majority. Nihilism, cynicism, corruption and thuggery are ruling unopposed. In the cities with no theatres, galleries, art cinemas, but also no public transportation or even sidewalks, in the monstrous urban centers abandoned to the ‘markets’ with hardly any greenery or public parks, religions are readily filling the emptiness. Being themselves regressive, pro-market oriented and greedy, the results are easily predictable.
    In the city of Surabaya, during the capturing of footage for my documentary film produced for a South American television network TeleSur (Surabaya – Eaten Alive by Capitalism), I stumbled over an enormous Protestant Christian gathering at a mall, where thousands of people were in an absolute trance, yelling and lifting their eyes towards the ceiling. A female preacher was shouting into a microphone:
    God loves the rich, and that is why they are rich! God hates the poor, and that’s why they are poor!”
    Von Hayek, Friedmann, Rockefeller, al-Wahhab and Lloyd George combined could hardly define their ‘ideals’ in more precise way.

    President Abdurrahman Wahid “Gus Dur” (photo by Andre Vltchek)
    ***

    What exactly did the Saudi Prince say, during his memorable and ground-breaking interview with The Washington Post? And why is it so relevant to places like Indonesia?
    In essence, he said that the West asked the Saudis to make the ‘client’ states more and more religious, by building madrassahs and mosques. He also added:
    I believe Islam is sensible, Islam is simple, and people are trying to hijack it.”
    People? The Saudi themselves? Clerics in such places like Indonesia? The Western rulers?
    In Teheran, Iran, while discussing the problem with numerous religious leaders, I was told, repeatedly:
    The West managed to create a totally new and strange religion, and then it injected it into various countries. It calls it Islam, but we can’t recognize it… It is not Islam, not Islam at all.”

    ***

    In May 2018, in Indonesia, members of outlawed terrorist groups rioted in jail, took hostages, then brutally murdered prison guards. After the rebellion was crushed, several explosions shook East Java. Churches and police stations went up in flames. People died.
    The killers used their family members, even children, to perpetrate the attacks. The men in charge were actually inspired by the Indonesian fighters who were implanted into in Syria – the terrorists and murderers who were apprehended and deported by Damascus back to their large and confused country.
    Many Indonesian terrorists who fought in Syria are now on their home turf, igniting and ‘inspiring’ their fellow citizens. The same situation as in the past – the Indonesian jihadi cadres who fought against the pro-Soviet government in Afghanistan later returned and killed hundreds and thousands in Poso, Ambon and other parts of Indonesia.
    Indonesian extremists are becoming world-famous, fighting the battles of the West as legionnaires, in Afghanistan, Syria, Philippines and elsewhere.
    Their influence at home is also growing. It is now impossible to even mention any social or god forbid, socialist reforms in public. Meetings are broken up, participants beaten, and even people’s representatives (MP’s) intimidated, accused of being “communists”, in a country where Communism is still banned by the regime.
    The progressive and extremely popular Jakarta governor, Ahok, first lost elections and was then put on trial and thrown into jail for “insulting Islam”, clearly fabricated charges. His main sin – cleaning Jakarta’s polluted rivers, constructing a public transportation network, and improving the lives of ordinary people. That was clearly ‘un-Islamic’, at least from the point of view of Wahhabism and the Western global regime.
    Radical Indonesian Islam is now feared. It goes unchallenged. It is gaining ground, as almost no one would dare to openly criticize it. It will soon overwhelm and suppress the entire society.
    And in the West ‘political correctness’ is used. It is lately simply ‘impolite’ to criticize Indonesian or even the Saudi form of ‘Islam’, out of ‘respect’ for the people and their ‘culture’. In reality, it is not the Saudi or Indonesian people who get ‘protected’ – it is the West and its imperialist policies; policies and manipulations that are used against both the people and the essence of Muslim religion.

    Aghanistan US air force Bagrani base (photo by Andre Vltchek)
    ***

    While the Wahhabi/Western dogma is getting stronger and stronger, what is left of the Indonesian forests is burning. The country is literally being plundered by the Western multi-national companies and by its local corrupt elites.
    Religions, the Indonesian fascist regime and Western imperialism are marching forward, hand in hand. But forward – where? Most likely towards the total collapse of the Indonesian state. Towards the misery that will come soon, when everything is logged out and mined out.
    It is the same, as when Wahhabism used to march hand in hand with the British imperialists and plunderers. Except that the Saudis found their huge oil fields, plenty of oil to sustain themselves (or at least their elites and the middle class, as the poor still live in misery there) and their bizarre, British-inspired and sponsored interpretation of Islam.
    Indonesia and other countries that have fallen victims to this dogma are not and will not be so ‘lucky’.
    It is lovely that the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman spoke publicly and clarified the situation. But who will listen?
    For the Indonesian people, his statements came too late. They did not open many eyes, caused no uprising, no revolution. To understand what he said would require at least some basic knowledge of both the local, and world history, and at least some ability to think logically. All this is lacking, desperately, in the countries that have found themselves squashed by the destructive imperialist embrace.
    The former President of Indonesia, Abdurrahman Wahid, was correct: “If God would come and say… people would not follow God…”
    Indonesia will continue following Mr. Wahhab, and the capitalist dogma and the Western imperialists who ‘arranged it all’. They will do it for years to come, feeling righteous, blasting old North American tunes in order to fill the silence, in order not to think and not to question what is happening around them. There will be no doubts. There will be no change, no awakening and no revolution.
    Until the last tree falls, until the last river and stream gets poisoned, until there is nothing left for the people. Until there is total, absolute submission: until everything is burned down, black and grey. Maybe then, few tiny, humble roots of awakening and resistance would begin to grow.
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    ma fi akmakh mnel american right ella el arab left.
     
    V

    Viral

    Member

    Spread of Wahhabism was done at request of West during Cold War – Saudi crown prince

    Spread of Wahhabism was done at request of West during Cold War – Saudi crown prince


    The Saudi-funded spread of Wahhabism began as a result of Western countries asking Riyadh to help counter the Soviet Union during the Cold War, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman told the Washington Post.
    Speaking to the paper, bin Salman said that Saudi Arabia's Western allies urged the country to invest in mosques and madrassas overseas during the Cold War, in an effort to prevent encroachment in Muslim countries by the Soviet Union.
    He added that successive Saudi governments had lost track of that effort, saying "we have to get it all back." Bin Salman also said that funding now comes mostly from Saudi-based "foundations," rather than from the government.
    The crown prince’s 75-minute interview with the Washington Post took place on March 22. Another topic of discussion included a previous claim by US media that bin Salman had said that he had White House senior adviser Jared Kushner "in his pocket."
    Bin Salman denied reports that when he and Kushner – who is also Donald Trump's son-in-law – met in Riyadh in October, he had sought or received a greenlight from Kushner for the massive crackdown on alleged corruption which led to widespread arrests in the kingdom shortly afterwards. According to bin Salman, the arrests were a domestic issue and had been in the works for years.
    He said it would be "really insane" for him to trade classified information with Kushner, or to try to use him to advance Saudi interests within the Trump administration. He stated that their relationship was within a normal governmental context, but did acknowledge that he and Kushner "work together as friends, more than partners." He stated that he also had good relationships with Vice President Mike Pence and others within the White House.
    The crown prince also spoke about the war in Yemen, where a Saudi-led coalition continues to launch a bombing campaign against Houthi rebels in an attempt to reinstate ousted Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi as president. The conflict has killed thousands, displaced many more, driven the country to the brink of famine, and led to a major cholera outbreak.
    Although the coalition has been accused of a large number of civilian deaths and disregard for civilian lives - an accusation which Riyadh denies - the crown prince said his country has not passed up "any opportunity" to improve the humanitarian situation in the country. “There are not good options and bad options. The options are between bad and worse,” he said.
    The interview with the crown prince was initially held off the record. However, the Saudi embassy later agreed to led the Washington Post publish specific portions of the meeting.
     
    V

    Viral

    Member
    More like a "Crusader Creation". Something like Yves-Saint-Laurent Creation?:p
     
    Joe tayyar

    Joe tayyar

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    Please done show this thread to @LVV, bya3mil sakteh lol
     
    AtheistForYeezus

    AtheistForYeezus

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    Please done show this thread to @LVV, bya3mil sakteh lol
    Trump recently endorsed the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, which means he was indirectly criticising Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan's role in aiding Islamist insurgents.
     
    My Moria Moon

    My Moria Moon

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    (Awwalan, shou Muki, 2tou3 w mara2? Promise ma ba2a t3eeda ?‍♂)

    Secondly, what Muhammad Ben Salman revealed is common knowledge. In their cold war chess game over world domination, the super powers spared no means, anything went and all moves were 7alal. In the early 80's, after the invasion of Afghanistan, the Americans hayyajo el saudis to declare a discreet nafeer 3am, whereby the pioneer ISISist Ben Laden shipped himself there along with thousands of likeminded stone heads. They called themselves moujahidin and were instantly armed by the Americans. These in turn happily sent the bills back to the Saudis who also gladly payed them.

    Even when the Iranian Shah was kicked out and their embassy personnel was taken hostages a year before the Soviet Afghan invasion, the Americans licked their humiliation wounds while being overly satisfied with the new situation: after all an even more solid wall, a theocracy, had now risen against the soviet expansion southward.
     
    My Moria Moon

    My Moria Moon

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    Trump recently endorsed the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, which means he was indirectly criticising Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan's role in aiding Islamist insurgents.
    Trump is his usual "kaka eater". His mouth twists to where his business points or according to a sudden vagary-du-jour. Sometimes he gets it right, through mere chance.
     
    Indie

    Indie

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    People are conflating wahhabism and the mujaheddine.

    Wahhabism flourished in Saudi Arabia after extremists bombed and occupied Mecca in 1979, in response to the royal family's efforts at Westernizing the country. After the violence settled, the royals realized that, to stay in power, they had to accomodate the wahhabists. This had nothing to do with the U.S.

    The fact that the U.S. supported the mujaheddine in Afghanistan, during the cold war, is nothing new. Everyone has known it for a long time, and the Americans openly acknowledge it. There is no "scoop" here.

    At the time, the Soviets were occupying Afghanistan and the Americans saw the mujaheddine as local freedom fighters who wanted to free their country from Soviet occupation. The Americans had no way to know that, decades later, the mujaheddine would turn into the Taliban and then ISIS.

    If anything, this shows that the Americans were willing to help Muslims in the face of soviet aggression. Ironically, the Muslims took that help and used it to grow a violent, anti-American movement.
     
    V

    Viral

    Member
    Muhammad Ben Salman revealed is common knowledge
    Are you suggesting the US created the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan who mutated into Taliban, then Al Qaeda who bombed 9/11 so the US goes to Afghanistan and replace the USSR, then invade Iraq, then Al Qaida mutates into ISIS and Jayesh Islam to take over Iraq and Syria and choke Iran and when they fail, they had a new excuse to go back to Iraq or else. And somewhere in between they created the Muslim Brotherhood to overthrow Nasser's secular movement in Egypt for trying to protect the countries resources for its own people just like Iran's Mossadegh did and got overthrown?
    How dare you say that??? 12578


    :lol:
     
    Rafidi

    Rafidi

    Legendary Member
    People are conflating wahhabism and the mujaheddine.
    Wahhabism flourished in Saudi Arabia after extremists bombed and occupied Mecca in 1979, in response to the royal family's efforts at Westernizing the country. After the violence settled, the royals realized that, to stay in power, they had to accomodate the wahhabists. This had nothing to do with the U.S.
    The fact that the U.S. supported the mujaheddine in Afghanistan, during the cold war, is nothing new. Everyone has known it for a long time, and the Americans openly acknowledge it. There is no "scoop" here.
    At the time, the Soviets were occupying Afghanistan and the Americans saw the mujaheddine as local freedom fighters who wanted to free their country from Soviet occupation. The Americans had no way to know that, decades later, the mujaheddine would turn into the Taliban and then ISIS.
    If anything, this shows that the Americans were willing to help Muslims in the face of soviet aggression. Ironically, the Muslims took that help and used it to grow a violent, anti-American movement.
    If you have half knowledge about something or you're ignorant, it is best at times to not post just for the sake of making others know you exist.

    The Shia have been the ones suffering from the extremism of Wahhabism and it's takfiri movement for centuries, since the emergence of Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahab, the founder of Wahhabism. The Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia (holding religious power) is always a descendant of Ibn Abdul-Wahab, while the king (holding political power) is always a descendant of Al-Saud. This alliance paved way for the house of saud to acquire religious legitimacy, knowing well that monarchy is frowned upon in Islam generally, and even more in Shia Islam particularly. The British supported al saud right from the start and used them to kick out the ottomans. The wahahbis and Ibn Saud ransacked Najaf and Karbala twice, and looted and maimed thousands of Shia Muslims. Abdul Aziz Ibn Muhammad Ibn Saud, a son in law of Ibn Abdul Wahab himself was assassinated, after the attacking the holy shrines in Iraq, and his Iraqi assassin is believed to have been Shia.

    Tribes in Arabia, mainly Sunnis, that refused to pay allegiance to Ibn Saud were also massacred under the cover of apostasy for rejecting the "Muslim ruler". They committed a massacre in Taef.

    The Saudi Wahhabi extremism didn't start today or yesterday. It started before yesterday. Isis is a manifestation of that. Had Isis succeeded, we would have had another house of saud and another Wahhabi monarchy in Iraq and the Levant (Syria and Lebanon).
     
    V

    Viral

    Member
    History keeps on repeating.
    Here is how radicals are created to hijack legitimate opposition movements and turn them into terrorists to destroy societies and nations. Syria is the latest example.

     
    Indie

    Indie

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    If you have half knowledge about something or you're ignorant, it is best at times to not post just for the sake of making others know you exist.

    The Shia have been the ones suffering from the extremism of Wahhabism and it's takfiri movement for centuries, since the emergence of Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahab, the founder of Wahhabism. The Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia (holding religious power) is always a descendant of Ibn Abdul-Wahab, while the king (holding political power) is always a descendant of Al-Saud. This alliance paved way for the house of saud to acquire religious legitimacy, knowing well that monarchy is frowned upon in Islam generally, and even more in Shia Islam particularly. The British supported al saud right from the start and used them to kick out the ottomans. The wahahbis and Ibn Saud ransacked Najaf and Karbala twice, and looted and maimed thousands of Shia Muslims. Abdul Aziz Ibn Muhammad Ibn Saud, a son in law of Ibn Abdul Wahab himself was assassinated, after the attacking the holy shrines in Iraq, and his Iraqi assassin is believed to have been Shia.

    Tribes in Arabia, mainly Sunnis, that refused to pay allegiance to Ibn Saud were also massacred under the cover of apostasy for rejecting the "Muslim ruler". They committed a massacre in Taef.

    The Saudi Wahhabi extremism didn't start today or yesterday. It started before yesterday. Isis is a manifestation of that. Had Isis succeeded, we would have had another house of saud and another Wahhabi monarchy in Iraq and the Levant (Syria and Lebanon).
    How is this an answer to my post?
     
    My Moria Moon

    My Moria Moon

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    Moreover, Ben thou3ban is telling WP half the truth, perhaps what he's been told himself by his senile father, royal uncles and grandfathers. The full truth is that who wants to sit inside own house on a highly explosive dogma such as wahhabism, when one's entire royal life circles around the finest palaces, floods of whisky and round the clock good food and sexual pleasures?

    Exporting the deadly poison to all corners of this vast world was the only way for Al Saud mafia to entertain the excited clergies and various horning-for-middle-ages islamic da3iyat. This would ensure these retards focus will stay away from the royalties and will be kept busy planning for world domination.
     
    Dynamite Joe

    Dynamite Joe

    Well-Known Member
    Trump recently endorsed the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, which means he was indirectly criticising Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan's role in aiding Islamist insurgents.
    Then he's a hypocrite. His policy in Sri Lanka, Yemen, and other places is what?
     
    AtheistForYeezus

    AtheistForYeezus

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    Then he's a hypocrite. His policy in Sri Lanka, Yemen, and other places is what?
    I think Saudi Arabia's operation in Yemen is justified. The Houthis pose a serious threat to the kingdom. What's not justified is their disproportionate use of force.
     
    Top