Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Obama admits to Saudi's toxic Wahhabi influence on the Muslim world watch

    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Leukocyte)
    What's the big deal? The Saudis cannot be blamed for vile people like ISIS
    Why not? At least, the Saudi leadership and clerics. The brand of Wahabi Islam they peddle is a direct cause of ISIS and of course many rich Saudis have funneled money to extreme Islamist terror factions, including ISIS. The main perpetrators of 9/11 were all Saudis and there are numerous books and allegations linking Saudi princes to the attacks.

    The country needs drastic reform, it's a medieval throwback injected into the modern world by western oil interests and maintained in power with huge corruption, arms supplied by the UK, US and others and some horrible relationships between the Saudi plutocrats and those they corrupt in the west. Many of the ruling families and Saudi rich are also complete hypocrites, imposing rigid and fanatical interpretations of Islam at home, whilst ignoring them in their palatial residences and western boltholes.

    More than almost any other single country, Saudi Arabia is a source and cause of evil in today's world.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by stefano865)
    Man just leave wasabi out of this.

    Tastes pretty good.

    Yeah, it's an easy mistake.

    Wasabi





    Wahabi

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Butternuts96)
    Jheeze. 95% of Muslims don't know what the term wahhabi means and just throw it around like it's nothing. 100% of non-muslims do the same.
    Wahhabism is just a (Derogatory) name given to those muslims who practise islam exactly how it was practiced by Muhammed (Peace and prayers upon him) and his companions and the next two generations that had followed them, chronologically. Why do they follow this path? Because Muhammed ordered us to follow these people in an authentic saying of his. NB: Muhammed had also told us that there should be no innovataion in Islam under any circumstances ie No new religious practices should be established after he passes away until the end of time itself.

    FYI Wahhabism = Salafism. One and the same.

    Abdul Wahhab saw muslims beginning to innovate in the religion and worshipping trees and saints and dance (sufis/shias) and he got a lot of hate for telling people not to innovate. He told them to come back to their original religion. He also provided accepted evidences to the innovators that their actions were major sins and nullifiers of their faith. They obviously didn't like that and called him a party pooper and anybody that believed him was a "Wahhabi" when all he did was ask them to learn about their religion before making up silly rituals.

    The innovators don't like us to ruin their fun so they like to call us wahhabis to annoy us and they also like to call us terrorists.

    However, terrorists like ISIS were foretold by Muhammed (Peace and prayers upon him) and he had ordered that the Muslim caliph must kill these terrorists (something that never gets told by the media). These guys aren't wahabbis contrary to what the world believes. Fact: These guys were called the khawaarij and they have been unanimously refuted by all scholars around the world including salafi/wahhabi scholars. But still, everybody loves to associate the salafis to the terrorists because it's fun and it's revenge for us being party poopers when we tell them to stop dancing and singing in the mosques and such.

    IMPORTANT POINT: The Saudi Royal Family and the wahhabi/salafi business are separate. The kings and princes live a lavish, higher life of which they are not necessarily religious but most importantly they are not representatives of salafism contrary to what the entire world believes. Sure, the country's majority follow salafism and so do their leaders by NAME, but not by practise. So do not take the wrong/good actions of the Royal Family/Government as the action of a salafi.

    Fact: Even though the royal family do not necessarily practise Islam their best, they are 100% against terrorism just like 99.9% of all muslims around the world.

    Any questions/confusions about what I said, please message me
    Check out what they're doing in Yemen.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    Yeah, it's an easy mistake.

    Wasabi





    Wahabi

    :rofl:

    Appreciate your sense of humour.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I am no defender of the Wahhabi State, indeed, I am a great opponent of monarchist and religious tyrannies, I find their values to be an offense to civilized values, gender equality and the rights of those who do not belong.

    But to water down the problems within different Muslim societies to Wahhabism is overly simplistic. In any case, a Wahhabist within the Saudi contexts, means apolitical, loyal to the government and only interested in personal matters. Most of these groups from AQ to IS are anti-Wahhabi and see themselves as the rejectionalist of official Saudi State ideology. It also doesn't deal with the problems caused by Shi'i militias and groups in places like Iraq and Syria- who have nothing to do with Saudi funding. I am not anti-Shi'i, I am against all forms of Sectarianism, I have many wonderful Shi'i friends who are some of the most beautiful people and their faith enriches them. Just as I don't think Sunni is synonymous with IS or Saudi Arabia, I do not think Shi'i is synonymous with Hezbollah or Hashd militias, the problem with ME regional politics is it will not allow people to see the difference.


    Now for the record, I am not saying Saudi Arabia has done nothing bad, their criminal war on Yemen, suppression in Bahrain and in Eastern Saudi Arabia, make them a bad influence, but they are not he sole cause of the badness in the region.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    It is the religion of islam itself that is the issue. No matter what sect you are from you are still a crazy person. There is no moderate version of islam nor can there be.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Let's be honest, Saudis are basically ISIL with enough security to prevent civil war. Same ideology, same methods, they just do it lawfully and don't have enough opposition to cause a war.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Doesn't stop Britain and other western nations flogging military hardware to them tho.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by carlskep)
    Mr Obama is highly informed about the origins of al-Qa’ida and Isis, describing how Islam in Indonesia, where he spent part of his childhood, had become more intolerant and exclusive. Asked why this had occurred, Mr Obama is quoted as replying: “The Saudis and other Gulf Arabs have funnelled money, and large numbers of imams and teachers, into the country. In the 1990s, the Saudis heavily funded Wahhabist madrassas, seminaries that teach the fundamentalist version of Islam favoured by the Saudi ruling family.” The same shift towards the “Wahhabisation” of mainstream Sunni Islam is affecting the great majority of the 1.6 billion Muslims in the world who are Sunnis.
    This is true, but it takes two to tango. Iran has also been a malign and sectarian influence. Just because Saudi Arabia is a disgusting regime that doesn't mean that Iran gets off the hook for being a fascistic theocracy. Iran executes in some years ten times as many people as Saudi Arabia. In Iran, homosexual acts still attract the death penalty and stoning is still a legal punishment for adultery. The government is still dominated by clerics and Iran have morality police just like Saudi Arabia has the religious police.

    I do not like the Saudi Arabian regime at all, if anything I view them as close to being an enemy of the West. I view the Pakistani military-intelligence establishment in similar terms. I would ideally love for us to have a foreign policy structure in that part of the world centred around three democratic "I's"; Israel, Iran and India. But that is only if Iran can liberalise and democratise.

    It is dishonest to pretend that the Iranian regime is this sincere, anti-imperialist force for justice. And so I hope that President Obama is changing American policy regarding Saudi's propagation of Wahabism, but I also hope that this doesn't mean licencing and indirectly supporting Iran's sectarian agenda
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thus-Spoke-Lara)
    I am no defender of the Wahhabi State, indeed, I am a great opponent of monarchist and religious tyrannies, I find their values to be an offense to civilized values, gender equality and the rights of those who do not belong.

    But to water down the problems within different Muslim societies to Wahhabism is overly simplistic. In any case, a Wahhabist within the Saudi contexts, means apolitical, loyal to the government and only interested in personal matters. Most of these groups from AQ to IS are anti-Wahhabi and see themselves as the rejectionalist of official Saudi State ideology. It also doesn't deal with the problems caused by Shi'i militias and groups in places like Iraq and Syria- who have nothing to do with Saudi funding. I am not anti-Shi'i, I am against all forms of Sectarianism, I have many wonderful Shi'i friends who are some of the most beautiful people and their faith enriches them. Just as I don't think Sunni is synonymous with IS or Saudi Arabia, I do not think Shi'i is synonymous with Hezbollah or Hashd militias, the problem with ME regional politics is it will not allow people to see the difference.

    Now for the record, I am not saying Saudi Arabia has done nothing bad, their criminal war on Yemen, suppression in Bahrain and in Eastern Saudi Arabia, make them a bad influence, but they are not he sole cause of the badness in the region.
    Superb comment, very nuanced and well informed (which is rare on these boards). I am utterly opposed to the Saudi regime, but it is unfortunate many on the hard left take opposition to Saudi to mean that Iran must somehow be good.

    Iran has been a very bad, sectarian influence on Iraqi politics, for example. The Shi'a hardline parties, which have direct links to Tehran, run death squads and have killed many innocent people merely for perceived apostasy, for being a sexual minority, and so on. Unfortunately many Western leftists are only able to see things in black and white; if one party is bad, their opponents must be good.

    I oppose both Sunni sectarianism and Shi'a sectarianism, and I hope to see secularist forces empowered in all ME countries. Hope you take a look at my comment above
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    Lol @ all the non-salafi Muslims. Instead of pointing fingers why don't you analyse what YOU believe in.

    Unless you're against the execution of apostates, adulterers. You think paedophilia is wrong. You thing slavery is wrong. You think domestic abuse is wrong. (The list goes on and on and on)

    Don't be hypocritical, you share a lot of the same views. But of course "we're good. They're just making us look bad"

    -former salafi
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by stefano865)
    Man just leave wasabi out of this.

    Tastes pretty good.

    BRUH.... I was JUST going ask if they meant Wasabi ffs lol
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LVRG)
    BRUH.... I was JUST going ask if they meant Wasabi ffs lol

    Great minds think alike.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Unfortunately, we have sectarianism in the region, because it's in the interests of those who want power in the Middle East. There's no reason why a scholarly doctrinal issues should become the forefront of political discourse in the Middle East- unless in serves some kind of political agenda either in Saudi Arabia or Iran. For the Saudi's the internal sectarian issue has nothing to do with a historical episode that took place 1, 400 years ago, but is a mechanism of survival to prevent a general revolt against the Saudi regime. Most Saudis have similar grievances against their government, in Qatif (Shi'i majority region), an uprising as part of the general Arab Spring wave took place and it was something most Saudi's could relate too. The Saudi government had to stop it for spreading and so manipulated the narrative of the protest movement- from using force in the hope of encouraging the demonstrators to do the same- and separating them by playing up on the Shi'i identity of the protesters in Qatif and openly suggesting that they were Iranian foreign agents. The same happened in Bahrain too. Assad did it in Syria.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: March 20, 2016
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.