The Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia has said it is “necessary to destroy all the churches of the region,” following Kuwait’s moves to ban their construction. Speaking to a delegation in Kuwait, Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah, stressed that since the tiny Gulf state was a part of the Arabian Peninsula, it was necessary to destroy all of the churches in the country, Arabic media have reported. Saudi Arabia’s top cleric made the comment in view of an age-old rule that only Islam can be practiced in the region. The Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia is the highest official of religious law in the Sunni Muslim kingdom. He is also the head of the Supreme Council of Ulema (Islamic scholars) and of the Standing Committee for Scientific Research and Issuing of Fatwas. A Kuwaiti parliamentarian said last month he wanted to ban the construction of churches and non-Islamic places of worship in the Gulf state. MP Osama Al-Munawer announced on Twitter he planned to submit a draft law calling for the removal of all churches in the country. He later clarified that existing churches should remain but the construction of new non-Islamic places of worship should be banned. REFERENCE: Destroy all churches in Gulf, says Saudi Grand Mufti By Elizabeth Broomhall Thursday, 15 March 2012 10:20 AM http://www.arabianbusiness.com/destroy-all-churches-in-gulf-says-saudi-grand-mufti-450002.html Destroy all churches in the Arabian Peninsula – Saudi Grand Mufti Published: 16 March, 2012, 06:30 http://rt.com/news/peninsula-saudi-grand-mufti-701/
King 'Abdullaah - Interfaith Conference (July 2008, Madrid)
King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia had a good idea in convening an interfaith conference in the Spanish capital, Madrid, earlier this month. The meeting brought together some 200 representatives of the three monotheistic faiths - Christianity, Islam and Judaism. Representatives of several Asian religions also came, including Sikhs, Hindus and Taoists, as well as a swami who said he did not belong to any organized faith and asserted that religion divides rather than unites people. King Abdullah's initiative was not without its detractors, who accused the Saudis of monopolizing the debate. One American newspaper described the interfaith dialogue at the conference as a "Saudi monologue." And more than one observer questioned why the conference was held in Spain and not Saudi Arabia. Those who ask such questions clearly do not understand the intricate workings of a country like Saudi Arabia. While there is no doubt that an interfaith conference on that scale would have had far greater impact if it were held in Saudi Arabia, the reality is that to have done so would have been somewhat premature.
If nothing else, the mere fact that rabbis would be openly invited to the kingdom, a country where in principle Jews are not permitted to visit, would have constituted a turning point in relations between Judaism and Islam. It must be remembered that King Abdullah's initiative to seek rapprochement among Muslims and Christians and Jews is not a sentiment necessarily shared by all of his countrymen. As it stands, the Saudi monarch took a double gamble. On a personal level, he met for the first time with representatives of the Jewish faith, including an Israeli, (although one who holds dual citizenship and was registered at the conference as an American). King Abdullah is certain to come under heavy criticism from the hard-core Wahabi orthodoxy back home who are unlikely to welcome any rapprochement with those they consider to be "nonbelievers." Indeed, the Saudi king is putting more than his reputation on the line. Given the kingdom's history, King Abdullah may be gambling with his life. Al Qaeda's campaign of violence, which largely caught Saudi security forces off guard, remains fresh in the minds of many people, not least among members of the Saudi royal family who were targeted by the extremists. Osama bin Laden, who has had his Saudi Arabian citizenship revoked, was highly critical of what he called the decadent lifestyle of the Saudi royal family. The breaking point between bin Laden and the House of Saud apparently came after Saddam Hussein's troops invaded Kuwait in 1990. Fearing the Iraqis would continue their drive south and capture Saudi Arabia's oil wells, the Saudis turned to the United States for protection.
President George H.W. Bush wasted no time in dispatching U.S. Marines to establish a foothold in Saudi Arabia and gradually build a multinational force that months later would expel Iraqi forces from Kuwait. According to Saudi sources, bin Laden was infuriated by the presence of foreign troops on Saudi soil. He sought an audience with the king and asked him to order the withdrawal of U.S. forces. Bin Laden said that he and his fellow veterans from the fighting in Afghanistan would defend the kingdom against any attack by Saddam's troops. According to one official who was present, bin Laden's suggestion that he could take on the Arab world's most powerful army was met with laughter. It was at this point that bin Laden decided that he had to take on the royal family. The rest, as they say, is history. Al Qaeda unleashed a campaign of terror throughout the kingdom. After an initial setback, the Saudi authorities managed to gain the upper hand.
With technical assistance from the United States, Britain, France and Germany, the Saudis put together a highly trained anti-terrorist unit that has proven its worth. After being on the defensive for several long, violent months, the Saudi authorities moved to the offensive, tracking down terrorist cells and arresting scores of extremists and their supporters. Now, the Saudi king is looking forward. His interfaith conference takes Saudi Arabia into the next stage - past the defensive, beyond the offensive and into the pre-emptive. In addressing the issue of religion as a source and motivation for today's violence, the king is moving in the right direction. The time may come when religious conferences like the one in Spain can take place in Saudi Arabia, but now is too early. The clash of religions dates back several centuries; it would be a mistake to even imagine that such a thorny issue can be resolved in a matter of days, months, or even years. REFERENCE: MEETING IN MADRID King Abdullah's experiment By Claude Salhani http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/29/opinion/29iht-edsalhani.1.14860643.html
Destroy all churches in the Arabian Peninsula – Saudi Grand Mufti
Now note the somersault in the below mentioned News
KARACHI, March 4: Demanding formation of a world forum of all religions on the pattern of the United Nations, the World Council of Religions termed it the need of the hour to promote peace by sorting out interfaith disputes and safeguarding rights of religious minorities through negotiations. This demand was made at a seminar held under the auspices of the WCR on ‘Challenge of peace — our religious and social responsibilities’ held on Sunday at a hotel. Speakers from different faiths and sects participated in the programme. Father Pervez Gulzar, Bishop Sadiq Daniel and Michael Javed from the Christian community, Maulana Altaf-ur-Rehman Rehmani of the Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam, Pandit Chamandas from Hinduseva, Maulana Muhammad Sulfi of Jamia Sattaria, Qari Zamir Akhtar Mansoori of the Jamaat-i-Islami, Sardar Ramesh Singh of the Sikh Council, Qazi Ahmad Noorani of the Jamiat Ulema-i-Pakistan and others spoke at the seminar. The speakers were of the opinion that with the disintegration of the Soviet Union and present crises in the capitalist world, it had become clear that the man-made system of governance had failed to deliver and the only system that could end sufferings and worries of the people was the one bestowed upon us by God through His message. Describing the council’s objective as a ‘peaceful co-existence’ of people from all religions, Qari Mohammad Hanif Jalandhry, chairman of the WCR Pakistan chapter, said vested interests were the cause of all wars and riots in the world. The arms industry was based on wars, he said, adding that people faced insecurity because of international politics. Peace is the need of everyone regardless of which religion they follow, he said. “Arms can never be a guarantee of peace but a cause of death and destruction,” said Mr Jalandhry, adding that all issues, including the one related to Balochistan, should be resolved through talks. “The solution lies in bringing all parties and groups to the negotiation table.” Father Pervez Gulzar, Bishop Sadiq Daniel, Michael Javed, Pandit Chamandas and Sardar Ramesh Singh were of the opinion that no religion preached hatred against humanity. Every religion in the world taught its followers to work for peace and love among human beings, they said. Maulana Muhammad Sulfi of Jamia Sattaria, Qari Zamir Akhtar Mansoori of the JI, Maulana Altaf-ur-Rehman Rehmani of the JUI, Qazi Ahmad Noorani of the JUP said terrorism could not be associated with Muslims, as Islam did not preach it. They said even after wars, all issues were resolved through talks. REFERENCE: Interfaith harmony through dialogue stressed Habib Khan Ghori http://www.dawn.com/2012/03/05/interfaith-harmony-through-dialogue-stressed.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DO9A2ItTpYw
On August 2, 1990, Iraq invaded and occupied Kuwait. Through U.S. efforts, a multinational coalition was assembled, and, under UN auspices, initiated military action against Iraq to liberate Kuwait. Arab states, especially the other five members of the Gulf Cooperation Council (Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman, and the United Arab Emirates), Egypt, and Syria, supported Kuwait by sending troops to fight with the coalition. Many European and East Asian states sent troops, equipment, and/or financial support. After liberation, Kuwait concentrated its foreign policy efforts on development of ties to states which had participated in the multinational coalition. Notably, these states were given the lead role in Kuwait's reconstruction. Kuwait's relations with those nations that supported Iraq, among them Jordan, Sudan, Yemen, and Cuba, were slow to recover. Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Chairman Yasir Arafat's support for Saddam Hussein during the war also affected Kuwait's attitudes toward the PLO, though Kuwait supports the Arab-Israeli peace process. The Government of Kuwait has abandoned its previous policy of limiting the entry of workers from nations whose leaders had supported Iraq during the Gulf War. In August 2001, the Interior Minister announced that there were no longer any special restrictions or permits required for Palestinian workers wishing to return to the country. At the end of 2009, there were approximately 30,000 Palestinians, 48,000 Jordanians, and 5,000 Yemenis resident in Kuwait. Since liberation from Iraq, Kuwait has made efforts to secure allies throughout the world, particularly UN Security Council members. In addition to the United States, defense arrangements have been concluded with the United Kingdom, Russia, and France. Ties to other key Arab members of the Gulf War coalition--Egypt and Syria--also have been sustained. During the 2002-2003 buildup to and execution of Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), Kuwait was a vital coalition partner, reserving a full 60% of its total land mass for use by coalition forces and donating significant assistance in kind to the effort. Kuwait continued to provide generous assistance in kind to coalition operations in Iraq. Kuwait has been consistently involved in reconstruction efforts in Iraq, pledging $1.5 billion at the October 2003 international donors' conference in Madrid, and consulting closely with Iraqi officials, including former Prime Minister Ibrahim Jaffari, who visited Kuwait in late October 2005, and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who visited in July 2006 and again in April 2007. Kuwait has been an active and vocal public supporter of the political process in Iraq, welcoming the January 2005 elections and praising Iraq's October 2005 successful constitutional referendum. In April 2008 Kuwait hosted the Iraq Neighbors’ Conference, which was attended by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Iraqi Prime Minister Al-Maliki, and foreign ministers from throughout the region. In October 2008, Lieutenant General (retired) Ali Al-Mou’min presented his credentials as Kuwait’s Ambassador to Baghdad to Iraqi President Jalal Talabani. Two years later, in 2010, Iraq nominated Muhammad Al-Ulum to become the first Iraqi Ambassador to Kuwait since 1990. Kuwait is a member of the UN and some of its specialized and related agencies, including the World Bank (IBRD), International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Trade Organization (WTO), African Development Bank (AFDB), Arab Fund for Economic and Social Development (AFESD), Arab League, Arab Monetary Fund (AMF), Council of Arab Economic Unity (CAEU), Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA), Group of 77 (G-77), Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), INMARSAT, International Development Association (IDA), International Finance Corporation, International Fund for Agricultural Development, International Labor Organization (ILO), International Maritime Organization, Interpol, International Olympic Committee, Islamic Development Bank (IDB), International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Non-Aligned Movement, Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (OAPEC), Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). REFERENCE: Background Note: Kuwait March 13, 2012 Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/35876.htm
Liberation and independence days of Kuwait - the Myth story
Kuwait has been pivotal to two decades of U.S. efforts to end a strategic threat posed by Iraq and then to stabilize that country in its transition to democracy. Because of its close cooperation with the United States, Kuwait is central to U.S. efforts to remain engaged in the northern Persian Gulf region following the completion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq at the end of 2011. However, the fragility of Kuwait’s government could complicate U.S. efforts to use it as a centerpiece of post-withdrawal strategy for the Gulf. A further complication is that Kuwait’s relations with the current government of Iraq are hampered, in part, by long-standing territorial, economic, and political issues unresolved from the 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. Kuwait is increasingly suspicious of Iranian intentions in the Gulf, which aligns Kuwait with U.S. efforts to contain Iranian power in the Gulf and prevent Iran from exerting undue influence in postwithdrawal Iraq. Still, Kuwait maintains relatively normal economic and political relations with Iran so as not to provoke Iran to try to empower pro-Iranian elements in Kuwait. Kuwait’s ruling elites have been in a continuous power struggle for nearly six years, but Kuwait has not faced the mass popular unrest that other governments throughout the Middle East have faced in 2011. The disputes in Kuwait have taken the form of infighting between oppositionists in the elected National Assembly and the ruling Al Sabah family, primarily over the political and economic dominance of the Al Sabah. In March 2009, the infighting led to the second constitutional dissolution of the National Assembly in one year, setting up new parliamentary elections on May 16, 2009. That produced an Assembly that was considered more progovernment and included four women, the first to be elected to the Assembly in Kuwait since women were given the vote in 2005. However, over the subsequent two years, oppositionists in the Assembly continued to challenge the ruling family, producing two unsuccessful attempts to vote no confidence in Prime Minister Shaykh Nasser al-Muhammad al-Ahmad Al Sabah and forcing him to dismiss and rename a cabinet seven times since 2006. The cabinet formed on May 10, 2011, lasted less than one year before opposition allegations of official corruption fueled by popular protests forced the resignation of the government in late November 2011 and the constitutional suspension of the Assembly on December 6, 2011. Mandatory new Assembly elections were held on February 2, 2012, producing a body that is generally adversarial to the government and has strong Islamist influence. Despite the infighting, and in contrast with Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, Syria, and other Middle East countries in 2011, Kuwait is a relatively wealthy society where most citizens apparently do not want to risk their economic well-being to bring about the complete downfall of Al Sabah rule. At the popular level, demonstrations by opposition groups over official corruption, security force brutality, citizenship eligibility, and other issues have been relatively small and their demands limited to the formation of a constitutional monarchy in which the Assembly names a prime minister. The Assembly passage of national budget in late June 2011—a budget loaded with subsidies and salary increases—appeared intended to quiet the unrest. The government also has used a measure of repression, including beatings and imprisonments. On other regional issues, in part because of its leadership turmoil, Kuwait tends to defer to consensus positions within the Gulf Cooperation Council; this deference is evident in Kuwait’s stances on the Israel-Palestinian dispute as well as on the uprisings in Yemen, Syria, and Bahrain. On Bahrain, in March 2011, Kuwait joined a Gulf Cooperation Council intervention on the side of the government, but unlike Saudi Arabia and UAE, Kuwait sent naval and not ground forces. REFERENCE: Kuwait: Security, Reform, and U.S. Policy Kenneth Katzman Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs February 8, 2012 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RS21513 http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RS21513.pdf
Dar-us-Salam International Branches (Saudi Arabian Publishing House) - Only Muslim are allowed to Preach even in Kaafir Land & Muslim Also Complain a Lot
Hijab (Islam) & US Nationality (Kufr) go Together Daily Dawn 17 March 2012 Back Page
+&+US+Nationality+(Kufr)+go+Together+Daily+Dawn+17+March+2012+Back+Page.jpg)
Inside the Saudi Kingdom
ISLAMABAD: Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, the chief of Jamaat ud Dawa (JuD) a charity organisation accused by West and India for exporting terror from Pakistan, has confessed for the first time about his meeting with al Qaida founding father Osama Bin Laden and said that he studied from the same scholar who taught bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri. “Yes once I had met Osama Bin Laden but that is an old story I met him probably in 1982 in Saudi Arabia and in that meeting we just waived at each other,” said Saeed in an interview with Dawn.com. Saeed’s organisation was banned by the United Nations Security Council days after the Mumbai attacks in November 2008 for its alleged involvement in the attacks and extremists activities. However local courts have allowed the organisation to work in Pakistan. Saeed, the most wanted man by India, is a holder of double master’s degree in Islamic Studies and also is a former teacher at Engineering University, Punjab. He said he was a proud student of Sheikh Bin Baz. Bin Baz was the grand mufti (scholar) of Saudi Arabia from 1993 to until his death in May 1999. AfPak head and a retired CIA officer, Bruce Riedel in his book titled “The Search for Al Qaeda” has described Bin Baz as one who “preached a very reactionary brand of Islam, proclaiming earth is flat, banning high heels for women as too sexually provocative, barring men from wearing Western suits and imposing other restrictions on behavior.” When asked is it not a coincidence that he studied under the same cleric who taught Osama Bin Laden and Aiman al al-Zawahiri? Saeed said it was the honour for both the students and the teacher. When asked about the reports regarding the financial help by Osama Bin Laden for establishing Lashkar-i-Taiba back in 1989-90, Saeed denied by calling it “baseless allegation.” Asked how it was possible that he could not have met Bin Laden in neighboring Afghanistan while he was waging Jihad next door in Indian administered Kashmir, Saeed brushed aside the question saying, “put this matter aside.” Saeed declared the killing of Osama Bin Laden as extra judicial act and in the same breath he said that it was yet to be verified if the al Qaeda chief was in the Abbotabad compound or not. He said that US was the biggest terrorist who did not prove anything against bin Laden in any court of law. When asked if his men or he himself were helping the jihad in Afghanistan, Saeed said that the Afghanis were doing well themselves and they did not need anybody’s help. “We are doing what we can do for them,” he added. Saeed who used to hide from cameras has started appearing on television screen these days, when asked about the reason behind this change of mind he said that he has taken this decision to counter the propaganda against himself and his organisation. REFERENCE: Osama, Zawahri and I had same teacher: Hafiz Saeed By Azaz Syed http://www.dawn.com/2012/02/07/bin-laden-zawahri-and-i-had-same-teacher-hafiz-saeed.html
Saudi Salafi Shiekh Ibn Baz Fatwa of Apostasy against Saddam Hussein
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUor52ke7pE
Late. Abd al-Aziz ibn Abd Allah ibn Baaz [Saudi Grand Mufti who issued Fatwa against Saddam and then against Osama Bin Ladin] Let me be blunt and allow me to say that since the first day of arrival of First Oil Rich Pedophile/Pederast Arab Rascal Sheikh in Pakistan our Rulers from General Ayub to Zardari [Bhutto is included] played the Role of Pimps and Paddlers for them e.g. Wild Hunting Parties [with every kind of vice] in the most poor areas of Pakistan i.e. South Punjab – The Seraiki Belt – or you may say the HQ of Punjabi Taliban. They way these Rascals Treat Working Class [Educated Middle Class] from Pakistan, India and Bangladesh could only be called worst kind of slavery and cruelty because from Airport to Work Place these Arabs [from Executive to Citizen] insult them and violate every Law given in the book particularly the Labour Laws. And these very Arabs are Financing the Khawarijs in Pakistan, let me show all of you their real face:
King Fahd presented Kalashnikov to another pervert Saddam Hussein [Fahd ordered Mutawwas to Issue Fatwa against the Same Saddam when Saddam fingered Wahabi Kuwait [Kuwait is even worst than Saudi Arabia] Enjoy the picture and after the pictutre read about the Debauch, Womanizer, Gambler Khadimul Haramian Sharifain.http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/Third_Party_Photo/2006/12/29/1167409329_2813.jpg
Khadim ul Harmain Sharifain - Shah Fahad The Debauch - In reality, it was a test of the ebullient Fahd’s capacity to govern. The Crown Prince would have to live down his personal reputation as a reckless womanizer, drinker, and gambler. REFERENCE: King Fahd’s Saudi Arabia by Harvey Sicherman August 12, 2005 http://www.fpri.org/enotes/20050812.middleeast.sicherman.fahdsaudiarabia.html
Real Face of King Fahd: There were stories of all night sessions at seedy clubs in Beirut, of affairs with belly dancers, and of the wife of a Lebanese businessman paid $100,000 a year to make herself available. Then in 1969, Fahd was said to have lost $1,000,000 in a single dusk-to-dawn marathon of Scotch-fuelled gambling at the tables of a MonteCarlo nightclub. He was summoned back to Riyadh by his brother, the then King Faisal Abdul Aziz ibn Saud. REFERENCE: Life and legacy of King Fahd By Paul Wood BBC defence correspondent Last Updated: Monday, 1 August 2005, 10:14 GMT 11:14 UK http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4734505.stm
Saudi Arabia’s King Fahd: [The Mutawwa in Chief due to his fingering Streets of Pakistan are burning] Real Face: His visits with his retinue of 3,000 had earned the local tradesmen riches indeed. It is estimated that an extra €30,000 (£21,000) a day was spent just in Puerto Banus. As heir apparent, Fahd first visited Marbella in 1974 and stayed at the Incosol hotel and spa. He booked 100 rooms but some of the princesses didn’t like the decor so he ordered the dark carpets to be changed to white. As a reward, Fahd left the hotel a tip of $300,000 — enough for the entire staff to receive, in effect, an extra year’s salary. He told one Spanish journalist that he liked Marbella because “it was a land blessed by Allah”, referring to the Arab occupation of most of Spain from the 8th to the 13th century. In the early 1980s he started the construction of his Mar Mar Palace, a replica of the White House. Because of increasing ill health (he suffered a stroke 10 years ago), he last visited in August 2002, just after a £134m refurbishment of the palace. REFERENCE: Marbella mourns its own King Midas King Fahd’s epic spending enriched his favourite part of Spain, says Deirdre Fernand From The Sunday Times August 7, 2005 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/article552402.ece
Vice-President George H. W. Bush returns from his trip to the Middle East, where he has passed along a message to Iraq to step up its air war against Iran (see July 23, 1986). The covert machinations nearly become public knowledge when US embassy officials in Saudi Arabia, learning of the Saudi transfer of US arms to Iraq earlier in the year (see February 1986), question the Saudi ambassador to the US, Prince Bandar. Bandar, fully aware of the arms transfer, tells the officials that the transfer was “accidental” and the amount of arms transferred was negligible. The State Department is also curious about the transfer, warns that the arms transfer violates the Arms Export Control Act, and says it must inform Congress of the transfer. Such a notification would endanger the entire process, and possibly short-circuit another arms deal in the works, a $3.5 billion transfer of five AWACS planes to Saudi Arabia, of which Congress has already been informed. But after the White House notifies the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Richard Lugar (R-IN), and mollifies Lugar by telling him the arms sales to Iraq were “inadvertent,” “unauthorized,” and involved only a “small quantity of unsophisticated weapons,” Lugar agrees to keep silent about the matter. Another senator later approaches Lugar about rumors that Saudi Arabia is sending US arms to Iraq, and recalls that “Dick Lugar told me there was nothing to it, and so I took his word.” [NEW YORKER, 11/2/1992] REFERENCE: August 5, 1986: Covert Arms Sales to Iraq Nearly Revealed http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=us_iraq_80s_134#us_iraq_80s_134 Profile: Bandar bin Sultan a.k.a. "Bandar Bush", Prince Bandar http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=bandar_bin_sultan
Shaking Hands: Iraqi President Saddam Hussein greets Donald Rumsfeld, then special envoy of President Ronald Reagan, in Baghdad on December 20, 1983. REFERENCE: US NATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein: The U.S. Tilts toward Iraq, 1980-1984 National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 82 Edited by Joyce Battle February 25, 2003 http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/What a joke that Aal-e--Saud and Saudi Muttawwa Abd-al-Aziz ibn Abd-Allah ibn Baaz issued a Fatwa of Takfeer [Apostasy] against Saddam Hussein [that too after he was no more of any use to Corrupt Aal-e-Saud and Wahhaabi Muttawwas whereas an Anarchist Pakistan Ahl-e-Hadith Scholar Late. Ehsan Elahi Zaheer [who was on the payroll of Aal-e-Saud and Saudi Muttawwas rather he was student of Salafi Islamic scholars such as Muhammad Nasiruddin al-Albani and Abd-al-Aziz ibn Abd-Allah ibn Baaz] had addressed Sddam Hussein and his Ba'ath Party Member [as per Saudi Fatwa "Apostate, Secular, Socialist i.e. KAAFIR] REFERENCE: Ehsan Elahi Zaheer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ehsan_Elahi_Zaheer
صدام حسين مع إحسان إلهي ظهير رحمه الله - فيديو نادر
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P68GstP37go
Really sometime "This Muslim Ummah" is so hypcortie that one wants to puke.
Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney, accompanied by senior aide Paul Wolfowitz and US CENTCOM commander-in-chief General Norman Schwarzkopf, visits Saudi Arabia just four days after Iraq invades Kuwait (see August 2, 1990). [SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, 8/3/2000; DUBOSE AND BERNSTEIN, 2006, PP. 100] Cheney secures permission from King Fahd for US forces to use Saudi territory as a staging ground for an attack on Iraq. Cheney is polite, but forceful; the US will not accept any limits on the number of troops stationed in Saudi Arabia, and will not accept a fixed date of withdrawal (though they will withdraw if Fahd so requests). Cheney uses classified satellite intelligence to convince Fahd of Hussein’s belligerent intentions against not just Kuwait, but against Saudi Arabia as well. Fahd is convinced, saying that if there is a war between the US and Iraq, Saddam Hussein will “not get up again.” Fahd’s acceptance of Cheney’s proposal goes against the advice of Crown Prince Abdullah. [SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, 8/3/2000; DUBOSE AND BERNSTEIN, 2006, PP. 100-101] With Prince Bandar bin Sultan translating, Cheney tells Abdullah, “After the danger is over, our forces will go home.” Abdullah says under his breath, “I would hope so.” Bandar does not translate this. [MIDDLE EAST REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, 9/2002; HISTORY NEWS NETWORK, 1/13/2003] On the same trip, Cheney also visits Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak, who rejects Cheney’s request for US use of Egyptian military facilities. Mubarak tells Cheney that he opposes any foreign intervention against Iraq. [SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, 8/3/2000] US forces will remain in Saudi Arabia for thirteen years (see April 30-August 26, 2003). REFERENCE: August 5, 1990 and After: Cheney Secures Permission for US Forces to Attack Iraq from Saudi Arabia http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a080590cheneysaudi#a080590cheneysaudi Profile: Bandar bin Sultan a.k.a. "Bandar Bush", Prince Bandar http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=bandar_bin_sultan
USA/Great Britain/King Fahd financed Iraq Iran War but when Saddam Hussein entered Kuwait [Worst than Saudi Arabia] Fahd ordered Saudi Retard Toady Mutawwas to Issue Fatwa against the Same Saddam. Debauch Saudi Wahabi Somersault Fatwa of Takfeer against Saddam Hussein. In 1996 then-UN Ambassador Madeleine Albright was asked by 60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl, in reference to years of U.S.-led economic sanctions against Iraq, “We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that is more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?” To which Ambassador Albright responded, “I think that is a very hard choice, but the price, we think, the price is worth it.” - BAGHDAD, Oct. 10 — A team of American and Iraqi public health researchers has estimated that 600,000 civilians have died in violence across Iraq since the 2003 American invasion, the highest estimate ever for the toll of the war here. The figure breaks down to about 15,000 violent deaths a month, a number that is quadruple the one for July given by Iraqi government hospitals and the morgue in Baghdad and published last month in a United Nations report in Iraq. That month was the highest for Iraqi civilian deaths since the American invasion. But it is an estimate and not a precise count, and researchers acknowledged a margin of error that ranged from 426,369 to 793,663 deaths. It is the second study by researchers from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. It uses samples of casualties from Iraqi households to extrapolate an overall figure of 601,027 Iraqis dead from violence between March 2003 and July 2006. REFERENCE: Iraqi Dead May Total 600,000, Study Says By SABRINA TAVERNISE and DONALD G. McNEIL Jr. Published: October 11, 2006 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/11/world/middleeast/11casualties.html
Donald Rumsfeld meets Saddam Hussein 1983
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaP7ZrmkcuU
Late. Abd al-Aziz ibn Abd Allah ibn Baaz [Saudi Grand Mufti who issued Fatwa against Saddam and then against Osama Bin Ladin] - When Saddam invaded Kuwait - [Immediately a Fatwa was issued against Saddam - "During the Iran-Iraq war, Saudi Arabia bankrolled the Saddam Hussein regime with the express approval of Washington DC which at that time saw Saddam Hussein as a bulwark against Shia fundamentalism. It came as a terrific shock to the Saudi Royals when Saddam Hussein turned his attention to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Again, the Royal family turned to the Ulema and obtained (with difficulty) a Fatwa, permitting the use of non-Muslim foreign troops on Saudi soil to defend Saudi Arabia against a foreign invader - one the Ulema regarded as a secular apostate. Thus the Saudi Royal family invited the USA to send it its troops for Operation Desert Storm- the operation to defend Saudi Arabia and liberate Kuwait - largely at Saudi expense." As per 9/11 Commission Report “In August 1990, Iraq invaded Kuwait. Bin Ladin, whose efforts in Afghanistan had earned him celebrity and respect, proposed to the Saudi monarchy that he summon mujahideen for a jihad to retake Kuwait. He was rebuffed, [Saudi Fatwa issued in 90s against Osama Bin Ladin - http://abdurrahman.org/jihad/binlaadin.pdf Usama Ibn Ladin Al-Kharijee (our position toward him and his likes) - By Abdul Aziz Ibn Abdullaah Ibn Baz [PDF] - Taken from http://www.troid.org/] and the Saudis joined the U.S.-led coalition. After the Saudis agreed to allow U.S. armed forces to be based in the Kingdom, Bin Ladin and a number of Islamic clerics began to publicly denounce the arrangement. The Saudi government exiled the clerics and undertook to silence Bin Ladin by, among other things, taking away his passport. With help from a dissident member of the royal family, he managed to get out of the country under the pretext of attending an Islamic gathering in Pakistan in April 1991.”
"QUOTE
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaP7ZrmkcuU
Late. Abd al-Aziz ibn Abd Allah ibn Baaz [Saudi Grand Mufti who issued Fatwa against Saddam and then against Osama Bin Ladin] - When Saddam invaded Kuwait - [Immediately a Fatwa was issued against Saddam - "During the Iran-Iraq war, Saudi Arabia bankrolled the Saddam Hussein regime with the express approval of Washington DC which at that time saw Saddam Hussein as a bulwark against Shia fundamentalism. It came as a terrific shock to the Saudi Royals when Saddam Hussein turned his attention to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Again, the Royal family turned to the Ulema and obtained (with difficulty) a Fatwa, permitting the use of non-Muslim foreign troops on Saudi soil to defend Saudi Arabia against a foreign invader - one the Ulema regarded as a secular apostate. Thus the Saudi Royal family invited the USA to send it its troops for Operation Desert Storm- the operation to defend Saudi Arabia and liberate Kuwait - largely at Saudi expense." As per 9/11 Commission Report “In August 1990, Iraq invaded Kuwait. Bin Ladin, whose efforts in Afghanistan had earned him celebrity and respect, proposed to the Saudi monarchy that he summon mujahideen for a jihad to retake Kuwait. He was rebuffed, [Saudi Fatwa issued in 90s against Osama Bin Ladin - http://abdurrahman.org/jihad/binlaadin.pdf Usama Ibn Ladin Al-Kharijee (our position toward him and his likes) - By Abdul Aziz Ibn Abdullaah Ibn Baz [PDF] - Taken from http://www.troid.org/] and the Saudis joined the U.S.-led coalition. After the Saudis agreed to allow U.S. armed forces to be based in the Kingdom, Bin Ladin and a number of Islamic clerics began to publicly denounce the arrangement. The Saudi government exiled the clerics and undertook to silence Bin Ladin by, among other things, taking away his passport. With help from a dissident member of the royal family, he managed to get out of the country under the pretext of attending an Islamic gathering in Pakistan in April 1991.”"QUOTE
Misconception: The Islaamic Threat
In recent years, a great deal of attention in the media have been given to the threat of "Islaamic Fundamentalism". Unfortunately, due to a twisted mixture of biased reporting in the Western media and the actions of some ignorant Muslims, the word "Islaam" has become almost synonymous with "terrorism". However, when one analyses the situation, the question that should come to mind is:
Do the teachings of Islaam encourage terrorism?
The answer: Certainly not!
Islaam totally forbids the terrorist acts that are carried out by some misguided people. It should be remembered that all religions have cults and misguided followers, so it is their teachings that should be looked at, not the actions of a few individuals. Unfortunately, in the media, whenever a Muslim commits a heinous act, he is labeled a "Muslim terrorist".
However, when Serbs murder and rape innocent women in Bosnia, they are not called "Christian terrorists", nor are the activities in Northern Ireland labeled "Christian terrorism". Also, when right-wing Christians in the U. S. bomb abortion clinics, they are not called "Christian terrorists". Reflecting on these facts, one could certainly conclude that there is a double-standard in the media! Although religious feelings play a significant role in the previously mentioned "Christian" conflicts, the media does not apply religious labels because they assume that such barbarous acts have nothing to do with the teachings of Christianity. However, when something happens involving a Muslim, they often try to put the blame on Islaam itself - and not the misguided individual.
Certainly, Islaamic Law (Sharee'ah) allows war - any religion or civilisation that did not would never survive - but it certainly does not condone attacks against innocent people, women or children. The Arabic word "jihaad", which is often translated as "Holy War", simply means "to struggle". The word for "war" in Arabic is "harb", not "jihaad". "Struggling", i.e. "making jihaad", to defend Islaam, Muslims or to liberate a land where Muslims are oppressed is certainly allowed (and even encouraged) in Islaam.
However, any such activities must be done according to the teachings of Islaam. Islaam also clearly forbids "taking the law into your own hands", which means that individual Muslims cannot go around deciding who they want to kill, punish or torture.
Trial and punishment must be carried out by a lawful authority and a knowledgeable judge. Also, when looking at events in the Muslim World, it should be kept in mind that a long period of colonialism ended fairly recently in most Muslim countries. During this time, the people in these countries were culturally, materially and religiously exploited - mostly by the so-called "Christian" nations of the West. This painful period has not really come to an end in many Muslim countries, where people are still under the control of foreign powers or puppet regimes supported by foreign powers.
Also, through the media, people in the West are made to believe that tyrants like Saddam Hussein in Iraq and Moamar Qaddafi in Libya are "Islaamic" leaders - when just the opposite is true. Neither of these rulers even profess Islaam as an ideology, but only use Islaamic slogans to manipulate their powerless populations. They have about as much to do with Islaam as Hitler had to do with Christianity! In reality, many Middle Eastern regimes which people think of as being "Islaamic" oppress the practice of Islaam in their countries. So suffice it to say that "terrorism" and killing innocent people directly contradicts the teachings of Islaam. .......... Prepared by: Abu 'Iyaad REFERENCE: Misconception: The Islaamic Threat http://www.fatwa-online.com/aboutislaam/0020221.htm http://www.fatwa-online.com/index.htm http://www.fatwa-online.com/worship/jihaad/jih009/index.htm
Question: O esteemed Shaykh, what is happening now (in Iraaq) so what is the position of the Muslim towards this trial, and is there a Jihaad, and are do those soldiers who are in the Gulf have the ruling of being mujaahideen, and may Allaah reward you.
Shaykh Ubayd al-Jaabiree: I dont know why this question (is asked) when, when we have just ended the speech with what I consider to comprise the answer to it and to its likes. However, despite this, just so that it is said, that Ubayd has neglected some of the questions.
So I say: Firstly, not all of the Iraaqi society is Muslim. Rather, amongst them is the Marxist, amongst them is the Ba'athist Heretic, and amongst them are numerous orientations. And there are Muslims amongst them...
And amongst them are the Raafidah. And the positions of the Scholars towards the Raafidah is well known, amongst them are those who declared them Disbelievers.
Secondly, we have Rulers and those who have authority, and it is obligatory to give them hearing and obedience, and around our rulers are those who have knowledge, and experience, and speciality in the political affairs. So we do not undermine them, and we have already mentioned previously that the general affairs are not for just any person. Rather, they are for whom? For those in authority.
And as it is appropriate, I also say that those who call to cutting off from the products of America and Britain and others, then those people have a resemblance to the Raafidah. Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah mentions in Minhaaj us-Sunnah, in the first volume, and I believe it is page 38, "From the stupidity of the Raafidah is that they do not drink from the river that was unearthed (i.e. dug out, like a well) by Yazeed". So those Harakiyyoon and Hizbiyyoon, have resembled the Raafidah. And what an evil model (that is). And the most repugnant for a person that his model, and way is that of the Raafidah.
Thirdly, the banner of fighting in Iraaq, who is carrying it? It is carried by Saddaam Hussain at-Takreetee, and he is the leader of the Ba'athi Party in his land...and the Ba'athi Party, is secularist, disbelieving, heretical. Its foundation is upon mixing and not differentiating between a Sunni Muslim, Guidance from the Scholars Concerning Iraaq and between the Jew, Christian, Communist, and others. They are all the same, equal. And for this reason, their slogan is, as their poet has said:
I believe in, -- (Shaykh Ubayd): I seek refuge in Allaah --
I believe in al-Ba'ath as the Lord which has no partner
And in Arabism as a religion, which has no other (religion)
This is their religion, qawmiyyah (nationalism) and shu'oobiyyah, and their religion is not Islaam. So built upon this, the one who fights under the banner of the Iraaqi government, then he is fighting under a banner of disbelief. And we do not dispute that the people of Iraaq have the right to defend themselves. They can defend themselves, their blood, their honour and their wealth, they can defend those who transgress upon them, whether America or Britain or other than them.
So it is obligatory upon us, the community of Muslims that we ask Allaah in our supplication that He delivers the Muslims amongst the people of Iraaq. So whoever said O Allaah save the [Iraaqi Society]1 , then he has erred. This supplication of his reaches even the Marxist and the Communist. And the Ba'ath Party is at the front of the [supplication of the] one who supplicates for the Iraaqi society (in general). No, but supplicate to Allaah that He delivers the Muslims amongst the people of Iraaq. And that he relieves them of their distress. This is what I can add now. .......... Translated by: Abu 'Iyaad REFERENCE: NEWS\ Monday 31 March 2003 Shaykh 'Ubayd al-Jaabiree on the Position Towards Iraq From a Paltalk Session today 31/03/2003 at 8:30pm UK Time http://www.fatwa-online.com/news/0030331.htm
"UNQUOTE"
Saudi Arab's Fatwa (Religious Edict) against Al-Qaeda & Osama Bin Laden
