Fatah: Dahlan Involved in Poisoning Arafat, Planning a Coup

Fatah: Dahlan Involved in Poisoning Arafat, Planning a Coup

Fatah has accused ousted party strongman Muhammad Dahlan of “having a hand” in poisoning late President Yasser Arafat, Al-Jazeera’s Arabic-language news site reported Saturday.

Arafat died in a Paris hospital in November 2004. The exact cause of his death remains a mystery, but popular belief among Palestinians holds that he was poisoned.

According to Al-Jazeera, Fatah’s commission of inquiry also found that Dahlan was linked to assassination attempts on other Palestinian leaders and that he had planned a coup in the West Bank.

Senior Fatah leaders Azzam Al-Ahmad, At-Tayyib Abdul-Rahim, Othman Abu Gharbiyya and Nabil Shaath submitted the findings of the inquiry, according to the news site.

Palestinian ambassadors were urged to avoid dealing with Dahlan and Interpol was asked to help arrest the former strongman, the report said.

Palestinian Authority sources told the news site that the West Bank government had come under international and regional pressure not to pursue Dahlan.

After historic downgrade, U.S. must address its chronic debt problems

After historic downgrade, U.S. must address its chronic debt problems


BEIJING, Aug. 6 (Xinhua) — The days when the debt-ridden Uncle Sam could leisurely squander unlimited overseas borrowing appeared to be numbered as its triple A-credit rating was slashed by Standard & Poor’s (S&P) for the first time on Friday.

Though the U.S. Treasury promptly challenged the unprecedented downgrade, many outside the United States believe the credit rating cut is an overdue bill that America has to pay for its own debt addition and the short-sighted political wrangling in Washington.

Dagong Global, a fledgling Chinese rating agency, degraded the U.S. treasury bonds late last year, yet its move was met then with a sense of arrogance and cynicism from some Western commentators. Now S&P has proved what its Chinese counterpart has done is nothing but telling the global investors the ugly truth.

China, the largest creditor of the world’s sole superpower, has every right now to demand the United States to address its structural debt problems and ensure the safety of China’s dollar assets.

To cure its addiction to debts, the United States has to reestablish the common sense principle that one should live within its means.

S&P has already indicated that more credit downgrades may still follow. Thus, if no substantial cuts were made to the U.S. gigantic military expenditure and bloated social welfare costs, the downgrade would prove to be only a prelude to more devastating credit rating cuts, which will further roil the global financial markets all along the way.

Moreover, the spluttering world economic recovery would be very likely to be undermined and fresh rounds of financial turmoil could come back to haunt us all.

The U.S. government has to come to terms with the painful fact that the good old days when it could just borrow its way out of messes of its own making are finally gone.

It should also stop its old practice of letting its domestic electoral politics take the global economy hostage and rely on the deep pockets of major surplus countries to make up for its perennial deficits.

A little self-discipline would not be too uncomfortable for the United States, the world’s largest economy and issuer of international reserve currency, to bear.

Though chances for a full-blown U.S. default are still slim now, the S&P downgrade serves as another warning shot about the long-term sustainability of the U.S. government finances.

International supervision over the issue of U.S. dollars should be introduced and a new, stable and secured global reserve currency may also be an option to avert a catastrophe caused by any single country.

For centuries, it was the exuberant energy and innovation that has sustained America’s role in the world and maintained investors’ confidence in dollar assets. But now, mounting debts and ridiculous political wrestling in Washington have damaged America’s image abroad.

All Americans, both beltway politicians and those on Main Street, have to do some serious soul-searching to bring their country back from a potential financial abyss.

Editor: Yamei Wang

A secret war in 120 countries

A secret war in 120 countries

Somewhere on this planet an American commando is carrying out a mission. Now, say that 70 times and you’re done … for the day. Without the knowledge of the American public, a secret force within the United States military is undertaking operations in a majority of the world’s countries. This new Pentagon power elite is waging a global war whose size and scope has never been revealed, until now.

After a US Navy SEAL put a bullet in Osama bin Laden’s chest and another in his head while storming his compound in Pakistan, one of the most secretive black-ops units in the American military suddenly found its mission in the public spotlight. It was atypical. While it’s well known that US Special Operations forces are deployed in the war zones of Afghanistan and Iraq, and it’s increasingly apparent that such units operate in murkier conflict zones like Yemen and Somalia, the full extent of their worldwide war has remained deeply in the shadows.
Last year, Karen DeYoung and Greg Jaffe of the Washington Post reported that US Special Operations forces were deployed in 75 countries, up from 60 at the end of the George W Bush presidency. By the end of this year, US Special Operations Command spokesman Colonel Tim Nye told me that number will likely reach 120. “We do a lot of traveling – a lot more than Afghanistan or Iraq,” he said recently. This global presence – in about 60pc of the world’s nations and far larger than previously acknowledged – provides striking new evidence of a rising clandestine Pentagon power elite waging a secret war in all corners of the world.
Born of a failed 1980 raid to rescue American hostages in Iran, in which eight US service members died, US Special Operations Command (SOCOM) was established in 1987. Having spent the post-Vietnam years distrusted and starved for money by the regular military, special operations forces suddenly had a single home, a stable budget, and a four-star commander as their advocate.
Since then, SOCOM has grown into a combined force of startling proportions. Made up of units from all the service branches, including the army’s “Green Berets” and Rangers, Navy SEALs, Air Force Air Commandos, and Marine Corps Special Operations teams, in addition to specialised helicopter crews, boat teams, civil affairs personnel, para-rescuemen, and even battlefield air-traffic controllers and special operations weathermen, SOCOM carries out the United States’ most specialised and secret missions.
These include assassinations, counter-terrorist raids, long-range reconnaissance, intelligence analysis, foreign troop training, and weapons of mass destruction counter-proliferation operations.
One of its key components is the Joint Special Operations Command, or JSOC, a clandestine sub-command whose primary mission is tracking and killing suspected terrorists. Reporting to the president and acting under his authority, JSOC maintains a global hit list that includes American citizens. It has been operating an extra-legal “kill/capture” campaign that John Nagl, a past counter-insurgency adviser to four-star general and soon-to-be Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) director David Petraeus, calls “an almost industrial-scale counter-terrorism killing machine”.
This assassination programme has been carried out by commando units like the Navy SEALs and the Army’s Delta Force as well as via drone strikes as part of covert wars in which the CIA is also involved in countries like Somalia, Pakistan and Yemen. In addition, the command operates a network of secret prisons, perhaps as many as 20 black sites in Afghanistan alone, used for interrogating high-value targets.
From a force of about 37,000 in the early 1990s, Special Operations Command personnel have grown to almost 60,000, about a third of whom are career members of SOCOM; the rest have other military occupational specialties, but periodically cycle through the command.
Growth has been exponential since September 11, 2001, as SOCOM’s baseline budget almost tripled from $2.3 billion to $6.3 billion. If you add in funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, it has actually more than quadrupled to $9.8 billion in these years. Not surprisingly, the number of its personnel deployed abroad has also jumped four-fold. Further increases, and expanded operations, are on the horizon.
Lieutenant General Dennis Hejlik, the former head of the Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command – the last of the service branches to be incorporated into SOCOM in 2006 – indicated, for instance, that he foresees a doubling of his former unit of 2,600. “I see them as a force someday of about 5,000, like equivalent to the number of SEALs that we have on the battlefield. Between [5,000] and 6,000,” he said at a June breakfast with defence reporters in Washington. Long-term plans already call for the force to increase by 1,000.
During his recent senate confirmation hearings, Navy Vice Admiral William McRaven, the incoming SOCOM chief and outgoing head of JSOC (which he commanded during the bin Laden raid) endorsed a steady manpower growth rate of 3pc to 5pc a year, while also making a pitch for even more resources, including additional drones and the construction of new special operations facilities.
A former SEAL who still sometimes accompanies troops into the field, McRaven expressed a belief that, as conventional forces are drawn down in Afghanistan, special ops troops will take on an ever greater role. Iraq, he added, would benefit if elite US forces continued to conduct missions there past the December 2011 deadline for a total American troop withdrawal. He also assured the Senate Armed Services Committee that “as a former JSOC commander, I can tell you we were looking very hard at Yemen and at Somalia”.
During a speech at the National Defence Industrial Association’s annual Special Operations and Low-intensity Conflict Symposium earlier this year, Navy Admiral Eric Olson, the outgoing chief of Special Operations Command, pointed to a composite satellite image of the world at night. Before 9/11, the lit portions of the planet – mostly the industrialised nations of the global north – were considered the key areas. “But the world changed over the last decade,” he said. “Our strategic focus has shifted largely to the south … certainly within the special operations community, as we deal with the emerging threats from the places where the lights aren’t.”
To that end, Olson launched “Project Lawrence”, an effort to increase cultural proficiencies – like advanced language training and better knowledge of local history and customs – for overseas operations. The programme is named after the British officer, Thomas Edward Lawrence (better known as “Lawrence of Arabia”), who teamed up with Arab fighters to wage a guerrilla war in the Middle East during World War I. Mentioning Afghanistan, Pakistan, Mali and Indonesia, Olson added that SOCOM now needed “Lawrences of Wherever”.
While Olson made reference to only 51 countries of top concern to SOCOM, Nye told me that on any given day, Special Operations forces are deployed in approximately 70 nations around the world. All of them, he hastened to add, at the request of the host government.
According to testimony by Olson before the House Armed Services Committee earlier this year, approximately 85pc of special operations troops deployed overseas are in 20 countries in the CENTCOM area of operations in the Greater Middle East: Afghanistan, Bahrain, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, and Yemen. The others are scattered across the globe from South America to Southeast Asia, some in small numbers, others as larger contingents.
Special Operations Command won’t disclose exactly which countries its forces operate in. “We’re obviously going to have some places where it’s not advantageous for us to list where we’re at,” says Nye. “Not all host nations want it known, for whatever reasons they have – it may be internal, it may be regional.”
But it’s no secret (or at least a poorly kept one) that so-called black special operations troops, like the SEALs and Delta Force, are conducting kill/capture missions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Yemen, while “white” forces like the Green Berets and Rangers are training indigenous partners as part of a worldwide secret war against Al-Qaeda and other militant groups.
In the Philippines, for instance, the US spends $50 million a year on a 600-person contingent of Army Special Operations forces, Navy Seals, Air Force special operators, and others that carries out counterterrorist operations with Filipino allies against insurgent groups like Jemaah Islamiyah and Abu Sayyaf.
Last year, as an analysis of SOCOM documents, open-source Pentagon information, and a database of Special Operations missions compiled by investigative journalist Tara McKelvey (for the Medill School of Journalism’s National Security Journalism Initiative) reveals, America’s most elite troops carried out joint-training exercises in Belize, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Germany, Indonesia, Mali, Norway, Panama, and Poland.
So far in 2011, similar training missions have been conducted in the Dominican Republic, Jordan, Romania, Senegal, South Korea, and Thailand, among other nations. In reality, Nye told me, training actually went on in almost every nation where Special Operations forces are deployed. “Of the 120 countries we visit by the end of the year, I would say the vast majority are training exercises in one fashion or another. They would be classified as training exercises.”
Once the neglected stepchildren of the military establishment, Special Operations forces have been growing exponentially not just in size and budget, but also in power and influence. Since 2002, SOCOM has been authorised to create its own Joint Task Forces – like Joint Special Operations Task Force-Philippines – a prerogative normally limited to larger combatant commands like CENTCOM. This year, without much fanfare, SOCOM also established its own Joint Acquisition Task Force, a cadre of equipment designers and acquisition specialists.
With control over budgeting, training, and equipping its force, powers usually reserved for departments (like the Department of the Army or the Department of the Navy), dedicated dollars in every Defence Department budget, and influential advocates in congress, SOCOM is by now an exceptionally powerful player at the Pentagon.
With real clout, it can win bureaucratic battles, purchase cutting-edge technology, and pursue fringe research like electronically beaming messages into people’s heads or developing stealth-like cloaking technologies for ground troops. Since 2001, SOCOM’s prime contracts awarded to small businesses – those that generally produce specialty equipment and weapons – have jumped six-fold.
Headquartered at MacDill Air Force Base in Florida, but operating out of theatre commands spread out around the globe, including Hawaii, Germany and South Korea, and active in the majority of countries on the planet, Special Operations Command is now a force unto itself.
As outgoing SOCOM chief Olson put it earlier this year, SOCOM “is a microcosm of the Department of Defence, with ground, air, and maritime components, a global presence, and authorities and responsibilities that mirror the Military Departments, Military Services, and Defence Agencies”.
Tasked to coordinate all Pentagon planning against global terrorism networks and, as a result, closely connected to other government agencies, foreign militaries, and intelligence services, and armed with a vast inventory of stealthy helicopters, manned fixed-wing aircraft, heavily-armed drones, high-tech guns-a-go-go speedboats, specialised Humvees and Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, or MRAPs, as well as other state-of-the-art gear (with more on the way), SOCOM represents something new in the military.
Whereas the late scholar of militarism Chalmers Johnson used to refer to the CIA as “the president’s private army”, today JSOC performs that role, acting as the chief executive’s private assassination squad, and its parent, SOCOM, functions as a new Pentagon power-elite, a secret military within the military possessing domestic power and global reach.
In 120 countries across the globe, troops from Special Operations Command carry out their secret war of high-profile assassinations, low-level targeted killings, capture/kidnap operations, kick-down-the-door night raids, joint operations with foreign forces and training missions with indigenous partners as part of a shadowy conflict unknown to most Americans. Once “special” for being small, lean, outsider outfits, today they are special for their power, access, influence, and aura.
That aura now benefits from a well-honed public relations campaign which helps them project a superhuman image at home and abroad, even while many of their actual activities remain in the ever-widening shadows. Typical of the vision they are pushing was this statement from Admiral Olson: “I am convinced that the forces … are the most culturally attuned partners, the most lethal hunter-killers, and most responsive, agile, innovative, and efficiently effective advisors, trainers, problem-solvers, and warriors that any nation has to offer.”
Recently at the Aspen Institute’s Security Forum, Olson offered up similarly gilded comments and some misleading information, too, claiming that US Special Operations forces were operating in just 65 countries and engaged in combat in only two of them. When asked about drone strikes in Pakistan, he reportedly replied, “Are you talking about unattributed explosions?”
What he did let slip, however, was telling. He noted, for instance, that black operations like the bin Laden mission, with commandos conducting heliborne night raids, were now exceptionally common. A dozen or so are conducted every night, he said. Perhaps most illuminating, however, was an offhand remark about the size of SOCOM. Right now, he emphasised, US Special Operations forces were approximately as large as Canada’s entire active duty military. In fact, the force is larger than the active duty militaries of many of the nations where America’s elite troops now operate each year, and it’s only set to grow larger.
Americans have yet to grapple with what it means to have a “special” force this large, this active, and this secret – and they are unlikely to begin to do so until more information is available. It just won’t be coming from Olson or his troops. “Our access [to foreign countries] depends on our ability to not talk about it,” he said in response to questions about SOCOM’s secrecy. When missions are subject to scrutiny like the bin Laden raid, he said, the elite troops object.
The military’s secret military, said Olson, wants “to get back into the shadows and do what they came in to do.”
Nick Turse is a historian, essayist, and investigative journalist. His latest book is The Case for Withdrawal from Afghanistan (Verso Books).
–Asia Times Online


Most of Those Killed in Helicopter Crash Were “Night Raiders” from Navy SEAL Team 6.

25 Navy SEALs Dead In Afghan Chopper Crash

A helicopter crash in Afghanistan’s eastern Wardak province has killed 31 U.S. special operation troops and seven Afghan soldiers, the country’s president said on Saturday. It was the highest number of casualties recorded in a single incident in the decade-long war.

A helicopter crash in Afghanistan’s eastern Wardak province has killed 31 U.S. special operation troops and seven Afghan soldiers, the country’s president said on Saturday. It was the highest number of casualties recorded in a single incident in the decade-long war.

The majority of those killed in helicopter crash were from Navy SEAL Team 6.

Another source says the team was thought to include 22 SEALs, three Air Force air controllers, seven Afghan Army troops, a dog and his handler, and a civilian interpreter, plus the helicopter crew.

U.S. officials tell The Associated Press that they believe that none of the Navy SEALs who died in a helicopter crash in Afghanistan had participated in the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, although they were from the same unit that carried out the bin Laden mission.

The sources thought this was the largest single loss of life ever for SEAL Team Six, known as the Naval Special Warfare Development Group.

President Obama offered condolences to the dead. “Their deaths are a reminder of the extraordinary sacrifices made by the men and women of our military and their families, including all who have served in Afghanistan,” said Obama in a statement. “We will draw inspiration from their lives, and continue the work of securing our country and standing up for the values that they embodied. We also mourn the Afghans who died alongside our troops in pursuit of a more peaceful and hopeful future for their country.”

President Hamid Karzai sent his condolences to President Obama, according to a statement issued by his office.

“A NATO helicopter crashed last night in Wardak province,” Karzai said in the statement, adding that 31 American special operations troops were killed. “President Karzai expressed his deep condolences because of this incident and expressed his sympathy to Barack Obama.”

NATO confirmed the overnight crash and said the alliance was conducting a recovery operation at the site and investigating the cause of the crash, but did not release details or a casualty figure. The coalition said there “was enemy activity in the area.”

“We are aware of an incident involving a helicopter in eastern Afghanistan,” said U.S. Air Force Capt. Justin Brockhoff, a NATO spokesman. “We are in the process of accessing the facts.”

CBS News correspondent Charles D’Agata said on “The Early Show on Saturday Morning” that, “Nighttime strikes are one of the most successful ways U.S. forces have to battle Taliban hideouts, but they’re also one of the riskiest.”

A spokesman for Wardak province, Shahidullah Shahid, said the helicopter crashed in the Sayd Abad district of Wardak province. The volatile region borders the province of Kabul where the Afghan capital is located and is known for its strong Taliban presence.

The provincial governor spokesman spokesman told CBS News that the joint operation targeting a suspected Taliban compound started shortly after midnight and the Chinook which was ferrying U.S. and Afghan special forces was hit and crashed in to the valley. The spokesman could not give any firm number of casualties as the area has been sealed off by U.S. forces but said that there have been large number of casualties.

Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid claimed the downed aircraft was a U.S. military helicopter and that the Taliban fighters had brought it down with a rocket attack.

In a written statement released Saturday, Mujahid said that NATO attacked a house in Sayd Abad where insurgent fighters were gathering Friday night.

Mujahid said the Taliban fired on NATO and downed the helicopter, killing all the crew. He said eight insurgents also died.

The New York Times cites a military official who requested anonymity as saying the helicopter was shot down by insurgents using a rocket-propelled grenade.

In June 2005, 16 American troops were killed when a U.S. helicopter crashed in eastern Kunar province after apparently being hit by a rocket-propelled grenade.

At NATO headquarters in Brussels, an official said it was a twin-rotor Chinook helicopter. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said he was receiving his information from an Afghan officer in Kabul.

Tajikistan Opting-Out of NATO Steppe Eagle War Games

Avaz Yuldoshev

DUSHANBE, August 4, 2011, Asia-Plus  — Tajikistan will not participate in an annual international peacekeeping exercise, dubbed “Steppe Eagle,” in Kazakhstan this year, Faridoun Mahmadaliyev, a spokesman for the Ministry of Defense of Tajikistan, told Asia-Plus Thursday afternoon.

According to him, an operational group of the Ministry of Defense was supposed to join Kazakh, Kyrgyz, US, British, and Lithuanian servicemen for the ninth annual “Steppe Eagle” peacekeeping exercise.  “But since soldiers and officers of the Tajik national army will be involved in celebrations dedicated to mark the 20th anniversary of Tajikistan’s Independence we will not be able to send the operational group to Kazakhstan,” the spokesman stressed.

He added that Tajikistan is sure to participate in the Steppe Eagle exercise next year.

The purpose of the exercise that is scheduled to take place in Kazakhstan this month is reportedly to rehearse coordination and interaction in carrying out demining operations and peacekeeping missions as well as in discovering and neutralizing illegal armed gangs.

In the meantime, according to information posted on Kazakh Defense Ministry’s website, the first preparatory phase of the special tactical peacekeeping exercise “Steppe Eagle – 2011″, which will open on August 8, began at the “Iliskiy” training center on August 1.

Launched in 2003, the annual “Steppe Eagle” program reportedly aims to promote coordination between Kazakh troops and NATO peacekeepers in carrying out peacekeeping missions as well as to raise practical skills of commanders on management of subunits and organize interaction between them in carrying out peacekeeping missions.

Using Private Armies Where We Aren’t Wanted

[It seems that the CIA has found the ultimate legal loophole for operating outside the eyes of the US Congress and skirting national laws against use of foreign forces.  By putting Blackwater-type of outfits in the counter-narcotics efforts, the US has wiggle-room, allowing it to slip past the national laws.  The US military has a vision, a world where American eyes and boots are in every country, taking action to maintain American control (SEE:  US-trained cartel terrorises Mexico).]

U.S. broadens role in Mexico’s war on drug rings

  • Article by: GINGER THOMPSON , New York Times

The CIA and private military employees are being used to get around Mexico’s prohibition of foreign forces on its soil in a bid to bolster anemic Mexican results.

The United States is expanding its role in Mexico’s bloody fight against drug trafficking organizations, sending new CIA operatives and retired military personnel to the country, and considering plans to deploy private security contractors in hopes of turning around a multibillion-dollar effort that so far has shown few results.

In recent weeks, small numbers of CIA operatives and U.S. civilian military employees have been posted at a Mexican military base, where, for the first time, security officials from both countries are working side by side in collecting information about drug cartels and helping plan operations. Officials are also looking into embedding a team of U.S. contractors inside a specially vetted Mexican counter-narcotics police unit.

Officials on both sides of the border said the new efforts have been designed to get around Mexican laws that prohibit foreign military and police from operating on its soil, and to prevent advanced U.S. surveillance technology from falling under the control of Mexican security agencies with long histories of corruption.

“A sea change has occurred over the past years in how effective Mexico and U.S. intelligence exchanges have become,” said Arturo Sarukhan, Mexico’s ambassador to the United States. “It is underpinned by the understanding that transnational organized crime can only be successfully confronted by working hand in hand, and that the outcome is as simple as it is compelling: We will together succeed or together fail.”

The latest steps come three years after the United States began increasing its security assistance to Mexico with the $1.4 billion Merida Initiative and tens of millions of dollars from the Defense Department. They also come a year before elections in both countries, when President Obama may face questions about the threat of violence spilling over the border, and Mexican President Felipe Calderon’s political party faces an electorate almost certain to ask why it should stick with a fight that has left nearly 45,000 people dead.

Mexico has become ground zero in the U.S. counternarcotics fight since its cartels have cornered the market and are responsible for more than 80 percent of the drugs that enter the United States. U.S. counternarcotics assistance there has grown faster in recent years than to Afghanistan and Colombia.

In the past three years, officials said, exchanges of intelligence between the United States and Mexico have helped security forces there capture or kill some 30 mid- to high-level drug traffickers, compared with two such arrests in the previous five years.

The United States has trained nearly 4,500 federal police agents and assisted in wiretaps, running informants and interrogating suspects. The Pentagon has provided sophisticated equipment, including Black Hawk helicopters, and in recent months has begun flying unarmed surveillance drones over Mexican soil.

Still, it is hard to say much real progress has been made in crippling the brutal cartels or stemming the flow of drugs and guns across the border. Mexico’s justice system remains so weakened by corruption that even the most notorious criminals have not been successfully prosecuted.

“The government has argued that the number of deaths in Mexico is proof positive that the strategy is working and that the cartels are being weakened,” said Nik Steinberg, a specialist on Mexico at Human Rights Watch. “But the data is indisputable — the violence is increasing, human rights abuses have skyrocketed, and accountability both for officials who commit abuses and alleged criminals is at rock bottom.”

Mexican and U.S. officials say efforts begun under Obama are only a few years old, too soon for final judgments. But Eric Olson, of the Woodrow Wilson Center, said: “It’s sort of shocking. Mexico is just now learning how to fight crime in the midst of a major crime wave. It’s like trying to saddle your horse while running the Kentucky Derby.”

Central Asia: Danger of War Over Water a Possibility

Central Asia: Danger of war over water growing

Kazakhstan wants more water from Kyrgyzstan. Uzbekistan wants to prevent Tajikistan from building a dam to generate power. Water supplies in Central Asia are drying up. Without an agreement, the confrontation could degenerate into conflict.

Bishkek – After talks in Bishkek, Kazakh and Kyrgyz officials failed to reach an agreement on Kazakhstan’s request for additional water supplies from upstream Kyrgyzstan. Meanwhile, the worst drought in decades threatens the livelihoods of farmers in Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan.

Kyrgyz Deputy Energy Minister Avtandil Kalmamatov said Kazakhstan asked for more water for wheat and cotton producers in southern Kazakhstan. Talks, he added, would resume very soon. If an agreement is reached, Kyrgyzstan will release water from its Toktogul Reservoir.

The problem goes back a long time. Central Asia is relatively dry and water is not evenly distributed. Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan have lots of it but are poor in energy and raw materials. For this reason, they want Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan to trade water for what they need. Downstream nations have balked at the idea, saying that water belongs to everyone and are opposed to Kyrgyz and Tajik plans for upstream hydroelectric power stations.

Earlier this month the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) released a report on the situation in the Amu Darya Basin. The report noted that temperatures are projected to rise by 2-3 degrees in the next 50 years. It found that glaciers in the high mountains of Central Asia are vanishing. All this puts the Amu Darya in danger. The longest river in Central Asia at 2,540 kilometres, it marks the border between Tajikistan and Afghanistan before flowing through Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan until the Aral Sea.

Under Soviet rule, a network of water pumps and irrigation canals was built to boost the region’s agriculture. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1992, the population of the region has more than doubled, as has the demand for water. More importantly, the agricultural sector still employs 67 per cent of the labour force in Tajikistan, 45 per cent in Uzbekistan, 48 per cent in Turkmenistan and 80 per cent in Afghanistan.

“Differences of opinion” regarding the river were affecting the nature of overall relations between Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, Tajikistan’s foreign minister, Hamrokhon Zarifi, said on 18 July.

At the centre of their disagreement lies Tajikistan’s plan to complete the construction of Rogun, a Soviet-era hydropower dam, on the Vaksh River, one of the sources of the Amu Darya. Once it is completed, it would be the highest hydroelectric dam in the world.

Uzbekistan is concerned that it might lose control over its water. It has called on the international community to act, claiming that the dam would have a negative impact on the environment.

Conversely, Tajikistan said it has no other way of generating energy (which is already rationed in winter), accusing instead Uzbekistan of holding up Tajik exports on its border, including by trains.
At the same time, Uzbekistan has already cut its gas export to Tajikistan and stopped power supplies from Turkmenistan.

The according to the United Nations report, the river cannot meet all the demands put on it and that its volume could shrink.

An agreement is needed to prevent things from degenerating into confrontation.

Tajik Foreign Minister Zarifi recently said that the matter should be referred to the Commonwealth of Independent Nations, which includes former Soviet republics, for a solution. Yet, although Dushanbe wants a deal, it is still pursuing its own road.

Source: Asia News

A very misleading report

A very misleading report

—Farhat Taj

Tribal leaders in South Waziristan (and later all over FATA), who opposed or potentially could oppose the militants’ escape into their area in the wake of the US’s bombing in Afghanistan were killed in pursuit of trapping the US in Afghanistan

On July 31, 2011, a programme on a private TV channel was aired in which a TV crew was transported by the Pakistan Army to Wana, South Waziristan. The army soldiers escorted the team throughout their stay in Wana. The team talked with the soldiers stationed in the area along with some tribesmen, and also aired the development work initiated by the army in Waziristan. The whole programme was misleading.

Before their departure to Waziristan, the anchorperson of the programme said this: “The norm is that when you go to a new place, you first ask around to get a knowhow about the area. We are going to Waziristan, but there is no one to ask about this area.” This is factually wrong. People from Waziristan can be found all over Pakistan in state institutions, universities, the transport business and other job markets. Many people from the area, including the entire Mehsud tribe, are IDPs outside Waziristan. But one has to remember that the TV programme was not meant to air the views of the people of Waziristan or to educate the people of Pakistan about the people of Waziristan. The programme was a piece of propaganda. It was meant to present the perspective of the Pakistan Army, which simply does not concur with the ground reality in Waziristan. It is thus no wonder that the anchorperson could ‘see’ none among the thousands of people from Waziristan scattered all over Pakistan for a chat about the area prior to the journey.

The anchorperson interviewed some tribesmen from Waziristan. One of the tribesmen was the son of Maulana Noor Muhamamd, who the anchorperson introduced as a “shaheed”. This jihadi maulana, recently killed in a suicide attack, always had deep links with the military establishment of Pakistan since the days of the so-called Afghan jihad. He had strong relations with al Qaeda and the Taliban leaders. He had the blood of the innocent people of Waziristan on his hands. How could the television channel declare such a person a shaheed?

The TV programme did not even casually refer to the 200 plus tribal leaders of South Waziristan who have been target killed because they opposed the presence of Taliban and al Qaeda militants in Waziristan. Their families hold the ISI responsible for their brutal assassinations. It is pertinent to mention that a prominent journalist, on a recent TV talk show said that in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attack, the Musharraf government sent a delegation to Afghanistan to pursue Mullah Omar to hand over Osama bin Laden to the US. This was the public stance of the government. Privately, the delegation urged Mullah Omar to defy the US by refusing to surrender bin Laden. The government wanted to drag and humiliate the US into the Afghan quagmire just like the USSR. The journalist stopped at this point, but there is much more in the follow up than what he said. Tribal leaders in South Waziristan (and later all over FATA), who opposed or potentially could oppose the militants’ escape into their area in the wake of the US’s bombing in Afghanistan were killed in pursuit of trapping the US in Afghanistan. This was according to the plan to create a leadership vacuum in tribal society to be filled by the state-assisted Taliban and al Qaeda.

The TV programme remained silent about the presence of the Punjabi Taliban and other foreign militants in the area. Not far from Wana bazaar, where the TV team spoke from, is Doag, the centre of the Punjabi Taliban. The Wazir tribesmen constantly point out (privately for security concerns) that even the Waziri terrorists are a minority. A majority of the militants, they inform, are the Punjabi Taliban. The TV report failed to show the training centre for suicide bombers in the area. The report ignored the ‘good’ Waziri Taliban commander, Mullah Nazir, based in Wana. The report failed to show the petrol station in Wana bazaar where Farooq Yargul Khel was target killed in 2003 precisely because he had publicly declared that he would never allow the militants to enter Wana bazaar and would evict them from the rest of Waziristan through a tribal lashkar. He was the first among the target-killed leaders of Waziristan for their opposition to the Taliban and al Qaeda.

The programme did not even mention the disastrous army agreement with al Qaeda-led Taliban commander, Nek Mohammad, in 2004 that discarded the tribal leaders’-led political order in the area. The agreement is tantamount to dictating a new social contract at gunpoint between the Wazir tribe and Pakistani state, whereby Waziristan was handed over to al Qaeda and the Taliban. The report was also silent on the Wazir tribe’s clashes with Uzbek militants in 2007. Pakistan Army weapons, including long-range artillery, were freely used against the Uzbek militants. Instead of killing the Uzbeks with help from the Wazir tribe, the army authorities let them flee to North Waziristan so as to put them under the influence of the Haqqani network in the area to direct their jihadi energies towards the international forces in Afghanistan. There is nothing in the programme that might suggest that the TV crew had reflected on the commonsense observation of how any local people could provide honest answers in the presence of the army authorities.

A bizarre part of the programme is when its female anchorperson, sitting in a topless military vehicle, veiled herself as the vehicle entered Wana bazaar. “This is the culture here and we have to show respect to this culture,” she pronounced from behind the face veil. The fact is that not all women in the tribal area wear the face veil. Rather than showing respect to the tribal culture, the journalist displayed insensitivity to the tribal norm that accepts that casual female visitors to the area, like this journalist, are exempt from the local pardah (veil) norms. But, let us not forget that the journalist was reporting in Wana bazaar, an area close to the centre of the Punjabi Taliban. Most probably, it was fear of the Punjabi Taliban rather than respect for tribal culture that made her wear a face veil in Wana bazaar.

FATA has been converted into a black hole where reality is created and presented to the world in a manner that suits the security establishment of Pakistan. This TV programme is just such an example. Within hours of the programme, the Chinese authorities reportedly blamed the Uzbek militants based in FATA for recent terror attacks in a Muslim-dominated region of the country. Within hours of the programme, there was a drone strike in South Waziristan that killed militants. But, sadly, such media presentations only serve to mislead the people of Pakistan who have no direct access to FATA. It is most unfortunate that Pakistani media outlets are part and parcel of the military’s propaganda to mislead the people of Pakistan.

The writer is a PhD Research Fellow with the University of Oslo and currently writing a book, Taliban and Anti-Taliban

IED Used To Destroy 13 NATO Oil Tankers In Peshawar

13 NATO oil tankers destroyed in Peshawar explosion

Upto 35 oil tankers stationed in terminal under threat from raging fire. PHOTO: AFP/ FILE

PESHAWAR: Two suspected IED explosion at a tanker terminal in Peshawar destroyed 13 oil tankers and containers meant for NATO forces in Afghanistan, on Saturday evening.

According to Express 24/7 correspondent, Umer Farooq at the scene, a suspected IED exploded in a fully loaded oil tanker at a terminal situated in Pishtakhara, due north north-west of Peshawar.

He said that local authorities had cordoned off the area. Up to 30 tankers are parked in the terminal, faced a threat.

SSP Peshawar Ijaz Khan confirmed to the media that 13 NATO oil containers had been destroyed – however the nature of the attack is yet to be ascertained.

Bomb disposal squad officials are searching the site for evidence.


There were no reports of any casualties so far.

As Farooq narrated his report, a second explosion was heard from the terminal.

Fires resulting from the blast and burning fuel raged on and were seemingly out of control of the fire and rescue departments. The intense inferno also threatened other tankers parked in the terminal.

The terminal is located on the ring road. NATO tankers have come under attack on a daily basis on the ring road.



US media jumps to link Pakistan Military to militancy when Brig. Ali Khan’s case is not linked to any militant group. He contacted Hizb Al Tahrir which is a non-Pakistani group based in UK and suspected of links to British intelligence. He is known to be upright and loyal to Pakistan but violated Pakistan military discipoline; expressing political opion while in service is also a violation of the discipline.

Brig Ali Khan

Brig. Khan is a loyal and upright officer, but contacting a foreign, non-Pakistani group linked to British intelligence is a breach and a question of counterintelligence. US media is twisting the story to feed its campaign to incite mutiny within Pakistani Armed Forces. Militant links inside our military is an American conspiracy theory that seeks to demonize and discredit our soldiers. The government and military should do damage-control by challenging the intense propaganda being peddled by our American allies that seeks to break Pakistani military discipline.



ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—Brigadier Ali Khan of Pakistan Army was arrested – six weeks ago – because he contacted persons associated with a foreign, UK-based non-Pakistani religious group known for its links to British intelligence. The case is as much about counterintelligence as it is about violation of military discipline. The Pakistani officer is not linked to any militant activity and has no connection to the OBL case or the brazen attack on a naval base on May 22.

This background information is significant because it proves false the conspiracy theories about ‘militant infiltration’ into Pakistani armed forces.

Western media and the American news outlets in particular are wrongly and deliberately linking Brig. Khan’s arrest to his alleged opposition to the country’s feeble position on US pressure and sovereignty violations. This interpretation is spreading in Pakistan, in the absence of any Pakistani damage-control exercise.

There are unconfirmed reports that suggest Brig. Khan disagreed with the way the military has so far handled repeated violations of Pakistani laws and borders by US military and intelligence.

What needs to be emphasized is that, in either case, Brig. Khan violated military discipline and is being questioned. This does not nullify the fact that he is a well respected officer known for his deep loyalty to Pakistan and its Armed Forces. But violation of discipline is a serious offense. Action of this nature is necessary to maintain military discipline within Pakistan Armed Forces, which are one of the top professional militaries in the world.

What Pakistanis need to remember is that there is a concerted effort by anti-Pakistan elements in Washington and some of their proxies in Pakistani politics and media to incite a mutiny inside Pakistani Armed Forces. Having failed to directly engage the country through armed conflict, small insurgencies and a wave of terror was unleashed to break the country from within. As American desperation increases in Afghanistan, some reckless elements within US government, military and intelligence are suspected of mounting a final push to weaken Pakistani military from within by inciting junior officers against the seniors by accusing them of complicity with US interference inside Pakistan.

Unfortunately, in confirming the arrest, the Pakistani government and military should have immediately moved into damage-control. As soon as the story was out yesterday, mostly American news outlets were quick to twist it to suit the ongoing campaign in the mainstream US media that aims at inciting rebellion inside Pakistani military, exploiting popular discontent over deliberate and repeated American humiliation of Pakistan in the past decade. Gleeful US media reports celebrated how this story confirmed the American conspiracy theory that says Pakistani military is infiltrated by religious extremists. The theory allows strong anti-Pakistan elements in the Washington establishment to demonize Pakistan and gradually build a case against Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. Almost every American news report contained a line that suggested that US officials suspected links between Pakistani military and ‘extremist groups’. This is a longstanding US position designed for political point scoring. Unfortunately, Pakistani military has for too long ignored this type of irresponsible behavior from an ally that is now showing its true colors.


Pakistani government and military should have gone beyond a simple confirmation of the arrest to underline two important points:

The first point is that Brig. Khan was not found in contact with a ‘militant’ group. The correct definition of the said group, Hizb al Tahrir, is that it is a foreign, non-Pakistani, UK-based group that purports to promote Islam. Also, the group is not involved in militant activity in its hometown, Britain, or anywhere else. So if Brig. Khan contacted an activist from this banned non-Pakistani group, it does not mean ‘militants’ have infiltrated Pakistan military. In this case, anyone insisting otherwise is indulging in the demonization of Pakistan Armed Forces as part of the overall American strategy in Afghanistan.

The second point is that expressing political views or political dissent is a violation of military discipline and cannot be allowed, as DG ISPR has already underlined in his statement to BBC. This point needs to be driven home a number of times to counter the propaganda that seeks – rightly or wrongly – to portray this case as one where an officer is being punished for disapproving the country’s foreign policy. If Brig. Khan did express dissent to the existing method of dealing with US meddling, and regardless of how popular this view is among Pakistanis, incitement of dissent within a disciplined military is dangerous.

The best way to counter this impression is to insist that breaking military discipline is not the way to correct the policy. That would weaken the military institution that is a national asset and a den of Pakistani nationalism. The right way of correcting a flawed foreign policy is through politics and public awareness and pressure.


Hizb al Tahrir was formed by a Palestinian in the early part of the twentieth century. The party never took off but the ideas of its founder survived in books and speeches.

It is stunning to note that this group was revived somewhere in the 1980s and ‘90s in the United Kingdom, of all places. Some of the group’s followers from the Middle East were given political asylum by the UK. Today, Hizb al Tahrir is heavily infiltrated by British intelligence agency, MI6. British spooks help the group recruit cadres from mostly British Muslim communities.

A number of spy agencies from Arab and western countries have been using this technique to create or place agents inside Muslim groups. India also began using this method to infiltrate Kashmiri freedom groups using Israeli techniques with Palestinian groups. But the United Kingdom has gone a step ahead of everyone else when it became the world’s biggest safe haven for violent extremists from the Middle East. These extremists, rejected by their own countries, received British passports and welfare money to plot extremism in Middle East and Central Asia. [See Is Hizb al Tahrir Another Project of British MI6?]

British-Pakistani members of Hizb al Tahrir have been directed to attempt recruiting officers inside Pakistani military. This raises the specter of British intelligence penetration into Pakistani military to incite rebellion in the guise of Islamic activism.

© 2007-2011. All rights reserved. ProjectPakistan21.org
Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium
without royalty provided this notice is preserved.

Is Hizb-ut-Tahrir another project of British MI6?

Is Hizb-ut-Tahrir another project of British MI6?

March 21, 2010


General Pervez Musharraf acknowledged in his book, ‘In the Line of Fire’, that Omar Saeed Sheikh – the man who was convicted for killing Wall Street Journal’s correspondent Daniel Pearl, in 2002, was recruited by MI6, the British intelligence agency.

We also know that Omar Saeed Sheikh conducted terrorist strikes in India and was also very close to the sectarian terrorist outfits in Pakistan besides being very close to the former Intelligence Bureau Head, Brig. (rtd) Ijaz Shah.  Omar Saeed was also linked (in the reports of the Associated Press, DAWN, CNN, Fox News, ABC News, among others) to transferring $100,000 to Mohd. Atta, who allegedly led the hijackings of 9/11.

So when people talk about a nexus of the Western intelligence agencies, Pakistani spy masters, and the terrorists in Pakistan, it is more than just conspiracy theory.  Some of the facts have been so well documented and in some instance, as in the case of Omar Saeed Sheikh, acknowledged by people like Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto.

This article provides links to material and reports that indicate that Hizb-ut-Tahrir is in fact a project of the MI6.

From 1986 to 1996, under the leadership of Syrian born Omar Bakri Muhammad, Hizb ut-Tahrir grew from a very small organization in Britain to a one of the most active Islamic organizations in the country. In 1996 Bakri split with Hizb ut-Tahrir over disagreements on policy, style and methods, and focused on another organization Al-Muhajiroun.

A report in Foreign Affairs Journal claims that Hizb ut-Tahrir “dominates” the British Islamist “scene” with some 8,500 members in the United Kingdom, compared to only 1,000 for a rival, Muslim Association of Britain.

Hizb ut-Tahrir in Britain emphasized the importance of Muslims choosing loyalty to their religion above loyalty to Britain or any other country. In Hizb ut-Tahrir’s view, Islam is anti-nationalisttransnational and pan-Islamic in nature. Although it was founded decades ago and is active in many countries, its activities in Central Asia are considered as of vital importance to MI6 as part of Anglo-American strategy to contain the Russians and since the last decade to counter the growing influence of China.

Following the 7 July 2005 London bombings the British government announced its intention to ban the organizationbut abandoned the ban. According to The Independent Blair “shelved the ban after warnings from police, intelligence chiefs, and civil liberties groups that it is a non-violent group, and driving it underground could backfire and according to the Observer because the Home Office believed a legal ban would not stick.

In July 2007, Leader of the Opposition David Cameron asked the new Prime Minister Gordon Brown why the organisation had not been banned from the United Kingdom, arguing it was an extremist group. Gordon Brown responded that more evidence would be needed before banning a group and, when pressed further, John Reid the previous home secretary stepped in arguing that there had already been two reviews of the group with insufficient evidence to justify a ban.

In November of 2009, Mr Cameron again questioned the Government over Hizb ut-Tahrir, claiming that government Pathfinder fund aimed at combating violent extremism was being used to fund schools run by an organisation with links to extremism.

The following links are worth a closer study.

1. The first report is that of UK Daily Telegraph, titled ” Islamists who want to destroy the state get £100,000 funding”,  dated Oct. 25, 2009

2.  The second one is a report published by the Executive Intelligence Review, ”Tajikistan-Another Victim of British-Saudi Terror“, dated August 7. 2009

3. The third report by the UK’s Times, “British Islamists plot against Pakistan“, dated  July 4, 2009, does not link MI6 directly but is silent on one fact. How come the British Muslims belonging to the Hizb  while followed so closely by the British intelligence and known to even the Times, are able to travel so frequently between the UK and Pakistan?

4. MI6 agents in Dehli detained, February 18, 2010

The linkages between the so-called Islamic militants and the Western spy agencies, supported by the reports of the western media itself, suggest that some of the so-called extremist or militant groups are merely tools in the much bigger game, called the “Great Game” and MI6 is naturally a major player.

Unfortunately, Pakistanis have become the cannon fodder of the not just the Great Game but also of the ‘turf battles’ among the MI6, the CIA, and the ISI.  Of course, the fact that many of the extremists have gotten out of their control has made things worse but the fight against the terrorists seems like a losing battle in this part of the world because either the ‘old terrorist’ is eliminated and replaced by a new one as Benazir Bhutto put it on Business Plus TV in one of her last interviews, and a ‘good terrorist” is even supported by some of the most prominent figures in the media leave alone the much maligned Pakistani establishment.



The book has been denounced by Wahhabi Muslims and called an “imaginary fictional narrative, coined deliberately to discredit” Muhammad ibn Abd-al-Wahhab “and his followers by the British.”[1] In the West it is considered a forgery and has been described as “an Anglophobic variation on `The Protocols of the Elders of Zion`”[2]


by Mr. Hempher

Excerpts from Iraqi Intelligence Report On Origin of Wahhabism

[Thanks to Mostaque Ali and David Livingstone for the following find.  It links Ibn Saud and Abd-al-Wahab to British spy service and Donimeh Jews (crypto-Jews) of Turkey.  It offers a reasonable explanation of the Wahhabi war against all real Muslims and the reason why the most extreme examples of that false-Islam, often referred to as "Al-Qaeda," kill primarily Muslims.  By this measure, both Zionism and "radical Islam" are two of the primary tools for British subversion in their former Empire.  Help the Muslim people survive this overwhelming assault by British/American/Saudi forces and you just might save the entire world.]

The book has been denounced by Wahhabi Muslims [SEE:  MEMOIRS OF MR. HEMPHER, THE BRITISH SPY TO THE MIDDLE EAST--editor ] and called an “imaginary fictional narrative, coined deliberately to discredit” Muhammad ibn Abd-al-Wahhab “and his followers by the British.”[1] In the West it is considered a forgery and has been described as “an Anglophobic variation on `The Protocols of the Elders of Zion`”[2]

“The Emergence of AI-Wahhabiyyah Movement and its Historical Roots”

A Study Titled:
The Truth about the Wahabi Movement
Intelligence Colonel ‘IjayI Ahmad Salih AI-Jumayli
Air Defense Security System

b. Al-Wahabi Group:
Next to Al- Shaykhiyyah, the colonizer created another extreme Sunni group
called (Al-Wahabiyyah). The British found in Muhammad ‘Abd-al-Wahab many
attributes such as the love of glory, immorality, and extreme views so; they came to
realize that he is the right person to establish the group they wanted. Thus they
started following him step by step until they found the right opportunity; hence they
pointed out to him, the birth of the new faith. Afterwards, they ordered him to
concur with another well known agent of the seasoned British colonizer that is;
Su’ud Bin ‘Abd-al-‘Aziz, and they provided them with the required means to attract
followers. Within a given period offulfilling the duty assigned to them, they killed
Al-Hajjaj and everyone who wouldn’t accept their new faith whether he is Shiite or
Sunni, was destined to death and plundering, and everyone who thought ofvisiting
the holy tomb ofprofit Muhammad (God’s blessing and peace be upon him) and the
holy sites was treated as ifhe was (infidel) (polytheist).
12. Al-Wahabi principles are based on the expiation ofIslamic faiths and promoting
division among Muslims and eliminating the traces of the spiritual Islamic message.
Al-Hijaz is the homeland of this group, and recently the activities of this group have
increased; everyday they issue a book or an article attacking the Islamic sanctuaries.
The Su’ud family spends lots ofmoney in compliance with their masters’ orders to
prevent the unity ofMuslims, create division among them, expiate them, and to
stray each other from the right path. Both groups; Al-Wahabi and Al-Shaykhiyyah
are established on wrong views therefore they brought about disorder, blood
shedding, and killing

Al-Wahabi Movement and its Founder Muhammad ‘Abd-al-Wahab
14. The Wahabi Movement is ascribed to Muhammad Bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab Bin Sulayman
who traces back to Wahib Al-Tamimi. Sheikh Khaz’al traces back the ancestry ofMuhammad
Bin’Abd-al-Wahab Bin Sulayman Bin’Ali Bin Ahmad Bin Rashid Bin Yazid Bin Muhammad
Bin Yazid to the family ofMusharrafwho belongs to Bani Tamim tribe which goes back in its
descent to ‘Adnan1.Whereas Mustafa Tawran states that; Muhammad Bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab is a
descent of a family from the Jews of AI-Dunamah in Turkey. Al-Dunmah refers to the Jews who
declared their embracement of Islam in an effort to insult Islam and to escape the pursuit by the
Ottoman sultans. Subsequently; Tawran confinns that Sulayman; the grandfather ofthe sheikh, is
(Shulman); he is Jew from the merchants ofthe city of Burstah in Turkey, he had left it and
settled in Damascus, grew his beard, and wore the Muslim turban, but was thrown out for being
voodoo. Then he fled to Egypt and he faced by strong objection so; he left to Hijaz and settled in
Al-‘Ayniyyah where he got married and had child whom he called ‘Abd-al-Wahab and claimed
to be from the descent of Rabi’iyyah, and that he was born in Morocco. This has also been
supported by sheikh Rifat Salim Kabar in his book, the Jews of Al-Dunmah and the Origin of
the Saudi Wahabis3 •

15. The origin of the Wahabi movement is that the Arabs, especially those masters of the demons said
that; a poor herdsman by the name of Sulayman had a dream that a flame emerged from him,
spread throughout the land, and started to bum everyone that had an encounter with it. He told of
his dream to someone who interpreted it as; a son of his will establish a strong land. So his dream
came true in the ideology ofMuhammad bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab. Thus when Muhammad grew up, he
became respected [CL: The study has a typo that reads Muhtarifan instead of Muhtaraman] by the
people of his town because ofthat dream which he didn’t know of. In the beginning, he secretly
revealed his faith and a group ofpeople followed him; then he traveled to Great Syria, but no one
there followed him so; he returned to the Land of the Arabs after he left it for three years, he came
to Najd and revealed this faith or (the Movement). Su’ud followed him and they both had strength
in each other; Su’ud strengthened his emirate through religion by following Muhammad bin ‘Abdai-
Wahab in his faith, yet bin’Abd-al-Wahab promoted his missionary by means of sword. With
Su’ud following him and becoming victorious through him, Su’ud became the ruling prince and
bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab the religious leader and their children thereafter took over the rank of their

The British-Wahabi Relation
21. Humfer mentioned in his biography his relation with Muhammad bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab when he
met him in AI-Basra, and how he befriended him and their relationship became very strong to the
extent that Humfer was able to stir ‘Abd-al-Wahab in the way that serves the British intelligence
without him knowing. In Isfahan, ‘Abd-al-Wahab was approached to fulfill a British plan provided that
Britain will protect him, provide him with money and arms, and to give him a small emirate in the
outskirts ofNajd under the following conditions:
a. Expiation ofMuslims and justify killing them and robbing their money.

b. Demolish the Kaaba and the tombs ofthe pioneer Muslims, consider them idols, and
disrespect the Profit and the Caliphates.
Humfer listed the complete details which led him to this result since its beginning in 1710 A.D. when
Britain delegated him to collect information for bracing the ways to break Muslims and control their
land in Turkey, Iraq, Egypt, Iran, and AI-Hijaz. He called himselfMuhammad and learned Persian,
Turkish, and Arabic languages in London; until he reached Turkey and stayed in a mosque for the
purpose of learning. He mastered the Turkish and Arabic languages and learned Islamic science for
two years; then he moved to Basra and worked as a carpenter claiming to be from Azerbaijan. People
believed him because ofhis looks and his Turkish language. He met Bin

‘Abd-al-Wahab there, the ambitious young man irritable and resentful ofthe Turkish rule. Humfer says
that: (The ambitious young man Muhammad, used to think ofhimself as wise as the Koran and Sunna,
and stipulated the views ofthe scholars, not just the scholars ofhis own time and the four Islamic
schools of thought yet; the views of Abi Bakr and ‘Vmar [CL: Muslim Caliphates] too, as he
understood the Koran in a way different from them, and he used to say: “I am leaving you with the
Koran and the Sunna and didn’t say, I am leaving you with Koran, Sunna, AI-Sahaba [CL: the
companions of the profit] and the schools ofthought”
Humfer found his long sought goal in Muhammad who used to look down upon the Caliphates and
Imams such as Abi Hanifah, and said: (I am more discerning than Abi Hanifah). This Spy mentions
that ‘Abd-al-Wahab started to explain Koran in light ofthe views they present to him, not according to
the understanding of the profit’s companions and the sheikhdoms, and this is where he became under
control, poison his thoughts, cause him to fall into mistakes, and commit sins. He started permitting
himself what God had prohibited him from doing. Afterwards; ‘Abd-al-Wahab was approached to
work for the interest ofBritain, and he agreed; and they gave him their big plan to destroy Islam.
Following that; ‘Abd-al-Wahab went to see his family along with Humfer whom he claimed to be a
slave that he bought from the market; he stayed with him for two years during which the plan to
emerge the missionary was concluded. Humfer had gathered the men around him, gave them arms and
money, and years after according to Humfer, the British ministry was able to bring Muhammad bin

Su’ud to ‘Abd-al-Wahab’s side and together they assumed Al-Dar’iyyah, the capital ofthe new
22. The relationship between the Wahabis and Britain didn’t end after Humfer (or Muhammad), as he
called himself, completed his mission. Thus Britain worked on emerging the so called Muhammad bin
‘Abd-al-Wahab, and arranged for his meeting with Muhammad bin Su’ud to destroy the Arabic
Islamic State, and for the sake of the British interests; the British! Wahabi relations lasted from the
eighteenth century till this date. In the early twentieth century, the British began developing these
relationships in a form oftreaties, and to fulfill their plans; the Indian government appointed a Jewish
British officer by the name (David Shakespeare) and sent him to Riyadh, upon the breakout of the First
World War, to represent the British interests. This British officer led one of the Wahabi invasions in
1915 A.D. with ‘Abd-al-‘Aziz bin Su’ud to seize Ha’il along with five thousand individuals who
started out from Kuwait to kill the family of Rashid who was against Britain; the family of Shammar
was able to defeat them and kill (Shakespeare)2. Thus the leadership was tended to (Johan Philippi) to
coordinate between the Wahabis and Britain, and due to the fact, he changed his name to (Muhammad
Philippi) and changed later to Hajj (‘Abdallah Philippi), he grew his beard, gave a monthly salary
equal to 500 sterling pounds to ‘Abd-al-‘Aziz and to his father ‘Abd-al-Rahman

and 25 sterling pounds to each of his brothers. Also; he brought 30,000 rifles with their ammunition
and formed a religious army that abide by the image ofthe sheikhs completely, and was called (the
Brotherhood Army) their distinctive mark is a (turban) over the head and their motto is (The smell of
Paradise is approaching, who wants to be first?)! .
Philippi led the first meeting between Bracey Cocas, the British envoy to the Arab Gulf, and’Abd-al’
Aziz bin Su’ud in Al-Qasir Camp in 1915; by virtue ofwhich he granted ‘Abd-a1-‘Aziz the medal of
the British Sultanate for his service to Britain, Bracey Cocas, in that meeting, called on the problem of
the Palestinians and the Jews and asked for ‘Abd-al-‘Aziz’s help by giving the Palestinian land to the
Jews as a collateral for the endurance of his power, hence he said: (I think this is a guarantee for your
endurance as it is in the interest of Britain that the Jews have a homeland and existence, and Britain’s
interests are, by all means, in your interest) ‘Abd-al-‘Aziz replied: (Yes; ifmy acknowledgement
means so much to you, I acknowledge thousand times granting a homeland to the Jews in Palestine or
other than Palestine)2
Various views in the Wahabi Movement
23. Historians and writers who have discussed the Wahabi movement and the History ofthe Su’ud
family have differed in their views, some ofthem consider it a corrective movement, some have ranked

it among the destructive religious movements that are heresiarch extreme, some considered it a foreign
movement that has slipped in to destroy Islam by means of the Jews, Britain, the western, and
America, others considered it a religious movement at the beginning, but has been made for the
purpose of the Su’ud family that is eager to control the Arabic Peninsula in Najd and AL-Hijaz. I
deemed it appropriate to list most of the views I have read:
In that respect, Darwazah stated that: (This movement ia ascribed to a scholar from Najd bt the name
of Sheikh Muhammad bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab, originally from a town by the name of’Ayniyyah in Najd.
He was educated by AI-Hanbali school ofIslamic thought. He was in Iraq and other Arabic countries
and witnessed what the Arab Muslims were up to from heresies, religiously and morally forbidden
acts, and bad habits which contradict Islam. He began to disapprove that and condemn that, and to call
upon them to return to Islam and its attributes in the book ofGod and his Profit)3.
Another view states that (During the days of Sultan Salim, injustice grew on the hands of every wicked
giant, and so did the mighty power of’Abd-al-‘Aziz bin Sa’ud; he made roads scary, by filling them
with bombs, and soldiers calling for the heresy ofMuhammad

Bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab flaring up fires every where there is population and structure and calling everyone
who believed in one God and spent his day and night praying; infidel. He permitted shedding blood of
Muslims and called them by the names which are attributed to infidels)!
As for Father Karmaly he says ofthe Wahabi calling that (they are Sunnis from Ahmad bin Hanbal’s
school ofthought, or AI- Wahabi because the Wahabis are Hanbalis[ CL: ascribed Ahmad bin Hanbal].
Yet the reformists who are enemies from Najd called them that because they want to ascribe to a new
faith and accuse them of being infidels, yet that is not the case, the Hanbalis are Wahabis and the
Wahabis are Hanbalis in their faith although the name is new but the religion of the people of AIKhumaysiyyah
(a City in Najd) is the religion ofthe forefathers CL: That is the religion of Profit
Muhammad and his Companions] and the religion ofthe Islamic Sheikh Bin Taymiya the religion of
its student sheikh Muhammad bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab)2.
Whereas ‘Abd- aI-Wahab AI-Shammari mentions in his introducing ofAI-Wahabi Movement (The
Wahabi is the movement of AI-Tunisi in Tunis and a friend of Hasan Khan in Mubal and Amir’Ali in

Al-Shammari goes back to say: (The Jewish origins had reflected on the attitude ofthe Wahabies and
the Su’ud family who have used Terrorism, Killing, Slaughtering, and destruction against the Arab
Muslims. Through their alliance with the British, the foreigners, and some ofJewish Masonic leaders)4
And Khahni justifies this as follow (when the followers of; Abd-al-Wahab set out destroying domes
and removing what was on the grave of the profit( God’s blessing and peace be upon him) from
ornaments and Jewels; He and his friends were accused of infidelity and atheism. As a matter of fact;
There was no need for this annoyance because the base of the Wahabi actions is connected to Sunnaitself
because it was the recommendations of the profit (God-, blessing and peace be upon him)s
And so does Darwazah to drop charges of the Wahabis when he says (The Ottoman state &
Muhammad ‘Ali, have collaborated on spreading a propaganda against the Wahabi missionary and
depict it as a distorted faith, or movement, from the book ofGod and the Sunna of his profit, So in
order to make their Muslim soldiers fight them because of their faith and prompt all the skins to
approve that just like what Al- Zaydiyyah did with their war on the Zaydi Imams. Although there is no
deviation from the book of God and the Sunna ofhis profit especially in The Wahabi movement there
is a calling to return to the book of God and the Sunna of his profit)6

However; the professor attorney Mr. Faryid mentions in his book (The Wahabis are people who
followed the method ofMuhammad bin ‘Abd- al- Wahab; a man who was born in AI- Dar’iyyah, Arab
land form ofNajd and AI-Hijaz Ever since he was little he displayed signs ofnoble descent and,
determination, he was also known for his noble deeds among all who resort to him. After he studied
AI- Hanfi school of thought in his home land, he traveled to Isfahan, Seeking its scholars and learned
from them until his religious information became vast especially in the area or interpreting the Koran.
He Returned to his homeland in 1171 Hegira and adopted the faith ofAba Hanifah and used religion as
means to achieve the intentions ofhis prejudice faith or political goals, and used the method of force,
adventure and war as means of expanding and attacking. Thus, the Wahabis considered all Muslims
infedals and their land is the land of atheism, and should be conquered as long as they don’t believe in
the Wahabi missionary that denied all Islamic schools ofthought).1
Yet Muhammad Jawad Maghniyyah describes the Wahabi movement saying; (Since the Wahabi
movement had emerged in the Arabic Peninsula during the eighteenth century, they have practiced

hostility, killing women, children, and elderly of Arab Muslims in the Arabic Peninsula and what
surrounded him from the land of Iraq and of Great Syria. It is not strange that the final goal of
Wahabis is to destroy Islam, and create division between Sunnis and Shiite)2
Darwazah then returns to remind that (No matter how the Wahabi movement originally possessed
corrective religious feature, yet the inclusion of Su’ud family in it, the mixing with politics, and the
end conclusion which was led by this Great Kingdom; all ofthat can be considered from the features of
the Arabic Renaissance and the modem Arabic movement)3
Dr. Al- Khafni describes them in his encyclopedia by saying (Al- Wahabi movement is an elapsed
movement driven by Muhammad bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab 1115-1206 of Hegira spread out by many. It was
said that is a corrective religious notion which transformed the theroical thoughts of Bin Timiyyah into
application. It was also said ofMuhammad bin Abd-al-wahab that, he is the chiefof the modem
corrective religious movement in the Arab Peninsula and he followed the righteous method of the
ancestors calling for pure unity and condemning heresies and destroying what had gotten stuck to
Islam from delusions. His missionary which he declared in 1143 of Hegira was the first flare for the
Arabic renaissance in the whole world and the reform in India, Egypt, Iraq, Great Syria and Morocco
and others. Who were affected so; AI-Alusi emerged in Iraq, Al- Afghani in Afghanistan,
Muhammad’Abbduh in Egypt, Jamal-ai-Din Al-Tunisi in Tunisia Sadiq Hasan Khan in Mubal, and
Amir Ali in Kalkata then his company made him

become diligent and independent, thus he established an independent faith which was acknowledged
by his followers who attended to him, and many people accepted the faith)!.
But Dr. Maymunah Khalifah stated that (Its is imperative that we judge the Wahabi movement by the
standards of its era in order to admit that; it brought on good deed to the region ofNajd and rescued it
from the state of ciaos and division that prevailed)2
Then she goes back to say (The Wahabi movement is distinguished by a violent and strong feature; at
the time in which it maintained its religious appearance, it became an extreme national political
movement in essence aiming for unity and the establishment of an Arabic empire and threw out the
Persian and Turkish foreign influence from the region. For that reason, the Wahabis got in conflict
with most oftheir neighbors; everyone who was not a Wahabi was accused of atheism and deviation
from what is right)3.

Lonkirk describes the Wahabi movement by saying: (Since then, the Najdi Empire of Bin Su’ud was
known by the Wahabi faith. Thus the believers ofthis narrow minded, anti-existence, and deserters
faith have expanded their tiny state by fighting Muslims whose faith became spoiled in their dealing
with their neighbors; each invasion had its religious Fatwah. Their hatred to prosperous deserters
surrounding Najd from every direction made them, not just, use extreme violence yet; they committed
acts that made many people believe that their intention is to attack Islam itself. As a matter of fact;
their toughest citizens or their most savage tribes and fighters knew very little ofthe Koran and

The Conclusion
24. The many trips of’Abd-al-Wahab, his interaction with Muslim Scholars all over the world, and
what he had learned and seen have affected his ideological structure. First; he studied AI-Hanbali
school of thought, then AI-Hanafi school of thought in Iraq and Turkey, and the Shiite faith in Iran; all
of these studies had equipped him with more information about religion and interpretation which made
him conceded so; he picked up a new school ofthought in which he denied Muslims, many oftheir
traditions and worship principles, and accused them of atheism, the thing that made Muslims hate him
more. His father, who was mentioned in the books they wrote, was among the first to oppose he

prevented him from going too far with his missionary. Soon after his father parted with life, he
declared his missionary again until his brother Sulayman; judge of Huraymulah, confronted him and
accused him ofbeing atheist and heresy, and that is proved in the publications of Sheikh Khaz’al who
is close to the Wahabis, and in all issuances ofthe Islamic world that consider the Wahabi movement
After ‘Abd-al-Wahab met with Muhammad bin Su’ud and combined their efforts, this religious
movement became political with dimensions and goals set for power and religion, in which the
movement have tried to control the Arabic Peninsula and its outer skirts and subjugate it to the power
of the Saudi Wahabis, by using hostile practices such as killing, captivity, robbing wealth and
properties from their opponents in addition to destroying cities, burning them down, demolishing the
domes of its holy men, and stealing their treasures as to what happened to the dome ofZayd bin AIKhattab’s
grave in AI-‘Ayniyyah, and what they did to the shrines of ‘Ali and AI-Husayn (peace be
upon him) in the cities ofNajaf, Karbala’, and others.
The common interests between the Wahabis and the British have agreed in aggression and expansion.
They have agreed by means of secret and open treaties, the first have imposed expansion in the Arabic
Peninsula and eliminate their opponent from Arabic tribes, and the second goal was to control the
countries of the Arab Gulf, rob their wealth and subjugate them to the power ofthe Su’ud family. In
addition to that; they passed the Jewish-British scheme to find a home land for the Jews in Palestine.
The Wahabis were able to pass few heresies by mixing them with the Islamic teachings in order to
enable weakness of the mind and belief in their calling. However; these myths had surfaces and were
cleared up by the efforts of Muslims who have worked hard to expose the hidden evil intentions which
the Wahabis were aiming at.
Finally, I ask God almighty and all powerful that I was successful in this modest work ofmine, and
God is the guardian of success.

April 15, 2002

The Truth About The Wahabi Movement
Index ofsubjects
Page Subject
Definition ofAI-Wahabi Movement
Historic Glance About the Wahabi Movement
The Organizational Structure of the Wahabi Movement
Rituals and Practices ofThe Wahabi Movement
The Common Jewish Descent ofMuhammad bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab and Muhammad bin Su’ud
The Saudi Wahabi Jewish British Alliances
Muhammad bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab And Muhammad bin Su’ud and the British Intelligence
The Aggression and Savageness ofthe Wahabis Towards the Arab Muslims
The British Plan to Destroy Islam and Muslims

The purpose of this study is to reveal the truth about the traitor Wahabi Movement through its
behavior and acts, and the history ofthe birth of its founder; Muhammad bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab, his
connection and relations with foreign powers along with the Su’ud family where both have used the
Wahabi Movement as means to achieve their political objectives and their savage treatment with Arab
Muslims who refused to accept their Wahabi belief; which disapproves of all Islamic schools of
thought whether they are Sunni or Shiite. The Wahabi’s attitude towards the Arab Muslims was
nothing but faces ofbetray, killing ofwomen, children, and elderly, as well as robbing properties and
Definition of AI-Wahabi Movement
It is a political and religious movement that is suspected in ideology and practice. It was
found by the colonial departments so it can work through it with the traitor Saudi regime in order to
fulfill its goals in the Arab Nation and the Muslim world in general by striking at the most important
element of their life and that is the Islamic religion. Furthermore; to create doubt in their most
cherished shrines and a ciaos in their thinking. They used the rout ofpower, adventure, and wars for
the sake of expansion and aggression. The Wahabis had considered all Muslims infidels and their lands
are lands of atheism and must be controlled as long as they don’t believe in their Wahabi missionary
which denied all Islamic faiths.
Brief Historic Glance at the Wahabi Movement and its Founder
The Wahabi Movement had emerged in the Arabic Peninsula through the eighteenth century,
and the philosophy of AI-Wahabi and the term Wahabi is relative to the founder ofthis movement
“Muhammad bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab” who grew up in the city of AI-‘Ayniyyah in Najd and called for
fanaticism and excessiveness in Islam so; he was thrown out by the people ofNajd and he went to Iraq.
He settled in the city ofAI-Basra, and set out again to call to his conservative views which contradict
the principles ofIslam. The people ofAI-Basra got upset with him and threw him out because he was
telling people oftraditions of the profit that were not entrusted in the Books of Sunna. He was also
interpreting Koran in ways which were not intended by the God ofthe skies. He escaped from AIBasra
on foot and almost died of extreme heat, thirst, and hunger. He returned to Najd and settled in
the city of”Huraymulah” then he was thrown out of it and returned
44 of 56

to “AI-‘Ayniyyah” and was behaving as ifhe was a new profit, talking in the name of the creator his
almighty; just like what the deserters did after the death of the seal of the profits and missionaries
Muhammad, God’s blessings and peace be upon him,just like Musaylima the liar.
Muhammad bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab took advantage ofhis new location in AI-‘Ayniyyah and started
evoking trouble and disorder resulting from his order to destroy the dome ofthe grave of ‘Vmar bin
‘Abd-al-Khattab, may God be pleased with him, and all holy shrines, as well as not paying almsgiving
and other conduct which contradict religious obligations. This made Muslims of the Arab Peninsula
become outraged therefore; the prince of AI-Hisa’ and AI-Qatif, ordered ‘Vthman bin Mu’ammar to
get rid ofMuhammad bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab so, he was thrown out of AI-‘Ayniyyah. Bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab
chose to go to AI-Dar’iyyah. He arrived there in 1160 of Hegira to meet an individual who isn’t much
different in his wrongful behavior, this individual was Muhammad bin Su’ud bin Muhammad who is a
relative ofthe current Su’ud family.
In the beginning of the eighteenth century, the Su’ud family’s influence settled in the city ofAIDar’iyyah
which prompted Muhammad bi Su’ud to search for a way to achieve his ambitions in
expanding his power outside AI-Dar’iyyah and controlling the Land (Najd) by invasion and adventure.
He agreed with Muhammad bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab to use the Wahabi principles in politically by
considering all Arab Muslims in Arab Peninsula (Infidels who have deviated from Islam and deserted
it because they are non Wahabis) Therefore they should be killed and attack their homeland, seize their
properties, kill them, and violate their women.
The Organizational Structure of the Wahabi Movement
The Wahabi Movement’s organizational structure is a pyramid frame as follow:
a. Comrade. It is the first step that a person newly gained to the faith goes through.
b. Herald
c. Mujahid
d. Chief
e. Trustee
f. Member ofthe Consultative Council

g. Group Leader
As for the organizational units and their subsidiary cells; they are:
a. The Circle. Designated for a group ofcomrades and led by Mujahid.
b. Family. A circle of chiefs led by a trustee.
c. Troop. A Circle of trustees lead be a member of the consultative council
d. Annual Conference: nominated to it a chief and above in rank.
Rituals and Practices of the Wahabi Movement
Wahabi has its own practices and rituals that are perfonned during worship ceremonies and
through which we can identify its elements and external aspects which are represented by the
1. Wearing a short gown (Dishdashah), and long under trousers, preferably white color.
2. Growing of the beard and trimming of the mustache.
3. Walking in groups or being present in groups.
4. They look as follow for the Friday prayers:
a. They do not pray the Sunna prayer.
b. They rest their hands on the upper part oftheir chest.
c. Stand with their feet semi spread.
d. Stand in the first raw so others can emulate them in their moves.
e. Constantly move the index finger in prayer, while reading the greetings.
5. They do not pray in mosques which contain tombs.
6. They do not cite any prayers after the calling for prayer had ended.
7. A Muslim’s saying: Our Master Muhammad, God’s blessing and peace be upon him, (because;
they say that he had died) and he is no one; God had sent him and his role is completed.
8. The recommend no visiting of tombs, no building ofdomes and rooms over the tombs, and
make that forbidden.

9. Considering the reading of Koran in a loud voice before the Friday prayer, a heresy.
10. Forbid TV watching, going to the movies, and taking pictures.
11. Exercise religious slogans during marriage ceremonies.
The Jewish descent ofMuhammad bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab and Muhammad bin Su’ud
1. The original Arabic sheikhs ofNajd as well as the scientific resources, confirm that
Muhammad bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab is from a Jewish family from “AI-Dawnamah” in Turkey. The
Dawnamah here refers to those Jews who have declared their Islam for the purpose ofharming
Islam and save themselves from the chase by the Ottoman Sultans.
The story ofthose Turkish Jews begins in the seventeenth century when the Jewish (ShaShai
Zaybi) claimed that the expected Messiah who told the priests that he will appear in tongues to
save the Jews of the world from the oppression which they were subject to during the
seventeenth century because of the struggle over faiths in Europe and the Catholic inspection
courts. Thus Shabahai had Jewish supporters so; he was convicted by the Ottoman authorities
and was notified by Sheikh AI-Islam (An Ottoman religious position) at the Sublime Porte [CL:
Ottoman authority] that; he will be executed by hitting him with arrows and ifhe doesn’t die;
the Sultan will change his claim that he is the expected Messiah. When Shibshai felt death in
front of his eyes, he denied the Messiah and superficially declared his Islam and that his name
is (Sir ‘Abd-al-‘Aziz). But as a matter of fact, he never had gotten rid of his Judaism better yet;
his Rabi friends were happy that he superficially declared his Islam because; he saved his life
and their movement. Therefore the Turkish Muslims called Shabshai and his Jewish followers
who have pretended to be Muslims; the name (Dawnamah). It is a Turkish name which means;
the return to the right guidance. Thus AI-Dawnamah played a major role in harming Islam and
Muslims, and directly contributed to all factors that destroyed Islamic values in the society and
the immorality and bad behavior ofMuslims.
The Jews ofDawnamah who have pretended to be Muslims; continued to practice their
Shabathic Jewish traditions which emphasized not to marry Muslims and pretend their
adherence to the traditions

and values of Islam so that; they will not be harassed by anyone. One of the things was for
everyone to have two names; one fake Muslim name, and one original Jewish name such as;
(Schulman) and his alleged name is Sulayman, one ofthe merchants in the Turkish city of
Burhat. This Jew left Turkey and settled in Damascus/ Syria; trading in Islamic religion after he
let his beard grow and wore the Muslim turban. Thus he was denied by the people of Syria and
they threw him out for his quackery He fled to Egypt and was received with opposition, he left
to AI-Hijaz afterwards and stayed in Mecca. The people ofMecca threw him out for his
quackery as well. Finally he settled in a village called AI-‘Ayniyyah, there he found room for
quackery and claimed to be ofthe descent of Rabi’ah and that he was born in Morocco after his
father traveled there. Tjen Schulman or (Sulayman) and had a child whom he called’Abd-alWahab
then ‘Abd-al-Wahab had children whom one of them is called Muhammad; the founder
of the Wahabi calling.
2. As for his partner in the Wahabi missionary, Muhammad bin Su’ud; he is ofa Jewish descent
as well ascending to the Jew (Mardakhai bin Ibrahim bin Mushi) who used to sell kernels in AIBasra.
A group from (‘Anzah) tribe, AI-Masalikh moiety; came to buy from him, and when
they told him that they were from AI-Masalikh he pretended to be from the same family, but he
came to Iraq long time ago and settled in AI-Basra because ofa dispute between his father and
members of’Anzah tribe. Because ofthis alleged relationship, Mardakhai gave this group
generously and loaded the camels for them which made them very happy to have a cousin in
Iraq, and when AI-Masalikh intended to leave and return to their homeland, Mardakhai asked
them ifhe can accompany them to his alleged homeland Najd. They welcomed him and so has
Mardakhai arrived in Najd and his name became (Farhan Ibrahim Musa). By virtue of his
wealth, a number of Christians have gathered around him which made the tribes ofAI-‘Ajman,
Bani Khalid, and Banu Hajar sense the seriousness of the deceitful Jew and threw him out
where he fled to a land by AI-‘Arid called; (Al-Malibaydir wa Ghasibah) known today as (AIRiyadh)
So; he asked ‘Abdallah bin Hajar, the owner of that land, for his permission to stay
there and he agreed, but Mardakhai, the Jew, betrayed the man and killed him and his family
and seized the land and called it (AI-Dur’iyyah) to settle in it. Later on; Mardakhai married his
son who came with him from

AI-Basra, whose name was (Jack Dan) and he changed to (AI-Qarn). He married him to a
woman from (‘Anzah) tribe who gave birth to Muhammad and Su’ud afterwards; hence the
descent of the Su’ud family started in AI-Dar’iyyah, which goes back in origin to this Jewish
murderer and thief.
The Saudi Wahabi British Jewish Alliances
The Saudi Wahabi relations with the British go back to the eighteenth century, for they are the
ones who worked up with Muhammad bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab the extremist so alleged Wahabi
Movement, and they are the ones who brought together him, and Muhammad bi Su’ud in order
to combine their efforts in serving the British colonial interests, and destroy the Arabic Islamic
principles and values. These relations and cooperation lasted through the nineteenth century. In
the early twentieth century, the British began to develop these relations in a form of compacts
and agreements after the Wahabis ofthe Su’ud family had become a great entity in the Arabic
Peninsula due to their invasions, inhumanity, and the help ofthe British. To execute these
duties, the British government had prepared a British officer (Jewish) in India by the name of
David Shakespeare, and sent him to Riyadh when the First World War erupted to represent the
British interests there.
In the early 1915 A.D. Shakespeare led one of the Wahabi invasions along with ‘Abd-al-‘Aziz
bin Su’ud to conquer Ha’il. The British intelligence had mobilized an expedition consisting of
five thousand individuals, started from Kuwait to kill the Rashid family who were against the
British. But the Rashid family, the Shammar family, and the people ofHa’il were capable of
defeating this invading power and killed David Shakespeare in that battle. Thus this was a
catastrophe to Britain and the Wahabi Su’ud family.
The Jewish Wahabi Saudi relations have continued on and become deep-rooted with time to the
extent that the British officials were talking about Palestine and the Jews without any
embarrassment or hesitation. In 1945 A.D. and to be exact, on February 17; and in Cairo, ‘Abdal-‘
Azizi bin Su’ud met with the well known, colonialist and British prime minister, and the guardian of Jews, (Winston Churchill) the man who truly proven to be a friend in the time of
hardship and distress, and if it wasn’t for him the Jews would have never reached the minimal
of their rights.

Muhammad bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab and Muhammad bin Su’ud and the British Intelligence
In 1973, the autobiography ofthe British spy “Humfer” has been translated in regards to his
work in Istanbul and Iraq, and his relation with Muhammad bin’Abd-al-Wahab, the founder of
the Wahabi Movement, when he was living in AI-Basra where he met him and befriended him.
Thus their relationship became substantial and intimate to the degree which enabled Humfer,
the spy, to stir Muhammad bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab the way the British intelligence chose to.
Afterwards, when Muhammad ‘Abd-al-Wahab was in Isfahan; he was openly approached to
run the Wahabi Movement in order to fulfill the British plan as a course, in return for Britain
protecting him from other governments, and scholars who will attack him by means ofmoney
and weapons, in addition to having an emirate, even if it is small, on the outer skirts ofNajd.
As for the conditions which Muhammad bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab had put forth; they are to do the
1) Expiate all Muslims and permit killing them, steal their money and dishonor
their dignity.
2) Demolish AI-Ka’ba for it is an atheist remnant, prevent people from
performing pilgrimage, and entice the tribes ofstealing pilgrims and killing
3) Work hard to prevent the teachings ofthe caliphs and fight the nobles ofHijaz
[CL: The Sharif].
4) Destroy domes, tombs, and holy shrines in Mecca, Medina and everywhere
else; considering it atheist and polytheism, in addition to disrespect to the
Profit Muhammad, God’s blessing and peace be upon him, his Caliphates, and
the Islamic Scholars.
5) Spread confusion and terror in the land.
6) Propagate a modified and deviated Koran.

Years after the ‘Abd-al-Wahab began his work; the British official circles, were able to win
Muhammad bin Su’ud, and asked him to work along with Muhammad bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab.
They sent the spy Humfer to inform them that; Muhammad bin ‘Abd-al-Wahab will assume
religion, while Muhammad bin Su’ud will assume authority so they can conquer people’s
hearts and bodies. Britain was supplying them secretly with sufficient money, and bought them
few servants, who were the best British intelligence officers, and trained them in Arabic
language and desert fights.

The Aggression and Savageness of the Wahabis Towards the Arab Muslims
The eighteenth and nineteenth centuries have witnessed invasions and wars ofdestruction and
elimination carried by the Wahabis against the Arab Muslims people ofNajd, Iraq, and Great Syria and
after that; AI-Hijaz in the early twentieth century.
The Wahabis began to expand in the land ofNajd and their struggle with the princes of Riyadh lasted
since the year 1746 A.D. that is the year in which the prince of Medina and its people, women and
children, to evacuate it because of the savage nature of the Wahabis. But Muhammad bin Su’ud sent
his Wahabi army led by his son ‘Abd-al-‘Aziz to other areas of Najd under the pretense of, cleansing
Islam from polytheism and heresies. In 1792 A.D. they conquered most of AI-Ihsa’ region and it
became the base for their expansion in the eastern part of the Arabic Peninsula.
Besides; the continuous attacks which the Wahabis have launched against Iraq and its tribes as well as
the inhumanity practiced in the name of spreading the light of God and his untruly and falsely calling,
had made the Iraqi tribes fight the Wahabis in the same way they fight infidel thieves. Therefore the
Wahabis poured their severe anger on the Iraqis and their various faiths; hence the Iraqi situation
became worse between the years of 1792 – 1797 because the raids were fast and inhumane in their
assault on properties and dignities.
Thus, sheikh Thuwayni, sheikh of AI-Muntafik, had confronted them; he was the first Iraqi to lead the
fight against them. He gathered around him people of the Arabs of ‘Aqil from Baghdad, and relieves
came from other Iraqi cities especially; Kuwait and AI-Zubayr. He tried to go deeper in to kill the
Wahabis but he was killed on the hands of a black man whom they have utilized for that purpose. The
savage Wahabi invasions continued against the tribes in western part of Iraq, and after one year and
few weeks they decided to send a new expedition to Iraq in the summer of 1798 A.D. So; the tribes of
Bani ‘Aqil, AI-‘Abyd, Shammar and others gathered under the leadership of Muhammad Beh AI-

Shawi and moved forward to AI-Basra and was joined by the tribes of AI-Zafir, AL-Muntafak, and
Bani Khalid. Thus the Bin Su’ud the Wahabi army leader was afraid to face them and agreed to the
conditions they presented to him which are; not to attack Iraq, treat the Iraqi pilgrims with kindness,
return the cannons the he had seized, and pay a fine. The Wahabi, Bin Su’ud agreed and signed the
agreement in the year 1799.

But the Wahabis have violated the agreement and started attacking the Iraqi pilgrims then raided the
city of (‘Innah) in 1800 A.D., they killed, robbed, and raided the village of (Kabisah) but its people
resisted them vigorously.
They also attacked Karbala’ in 1801 A.D. seeking the holy tombs ofthe grandchildren of Profit
Muhammad, God’s blessings and peace be upon him, permitting the killing of women, children and
elders, destroying the tomb of Imam AI-Husayn (May God be pleased with him) and tear out its iron
bars, fence and mirrors, furthermore; they looted the inscriptions and the precious findings from the
gifts of the Pashas and Princes, they also stole the wall sculpture, pulled out the gold from ceilings,
stole chandeliers and fancy rugs, precious hangings and doors set in jewels. This savage and barbaric
expedition led by Su’ud bin ‘Abd-al-‘Aziz bin Su’ud.
The Iraqis did not attack the Wahabi ‘Abd-al-‘Aziz bin Su’ud much, but after about one year; an Iraqi
attacked’Abd-al-‘Aziz and killed him in AI-Dar’iyyah stabbing with a knife in revenge for what the
Wahabis had done in Karbala’ .
The British plan to destroy Islam and Muslims
Revealing the British intelligence documents that aimed to destroy Islam and Muslims within
one century, so Islam become old news after being the reality which confronted its top agents working
to achieve the fourteen items ofthe agreement. They ordered to keep the document secretive and
warned about disclosing its contents so that Muslims will not be aware of it and take adverse actions,
and the document sums up as follow:

1. The positive cooperation with the Caesars of Russia to seize the Islamic region of Bukhara,
Tajikistan, Armenia, Kharasan, and others and cooperating with them.
2. The positive cooperation with France and Russia to put together a comprehensive plan to
destroy the Islamic world internally and externally.
3. Create disputes and severe conflicts between the Turkish and Persian governments and stir up
sectarianism and racialism between both sides.
4. Give part of the Islamic countries to non Muslims; (first) Yathrib to the Jews, (second)
Alexandria to the Christians, (third) Yazid to the Parisian Zarusht,

(fourth) AI-‘Amara to AI-Sa’ibah, (fifth) Karaminshah for those who make God out of’Ali
bin Abi Talib, (sixth) AI-Musil for AI-Yazidyyin, (seventh) the Gulf of Dhars to the Hindus,
(eighth) Tripoli for Druze, and (ninth) Qarid for AI-Tubiyyin.
5. Planning to squander both Turkish and Persian Islamic governments into the largest number
possible ofconflicting small local authorities as is the case in India, applying the rule of
(Divide and Conquer) and (Divide and Destroy).
6. Plant false religions and faiths in the body ofthe Islamic countries as follow:
a. Plant four religions in the body ofthe Shiite countries as follow:
1) A religion that idolizes AI-Hussayn bin ‘Ali, and the right location is Karbala’
2) A religion that worships Ja’far AI-Sadiq, and the right location is Isfahan
3) A religion that worships AI-Mihdi AI-Maw’ud and the right location is
4) A religion that worships ‘Ali AI-Rida, and the right location is Kharasan.
b. Make the four Sunni faiths, independent without connection to each other; they are the
only Muslims and the rest are infidels and should be killed and eradicated.
7. Spread immorality among Muslims through adultery, sodomy, alcohol, and gambling.
8. Take an interest in cultivating corrupted rulers in the land that are a tool in the hands of the

9. Prohibit the Arabic language as much as possible and expand on non Arabic languages such as,
Sanskrit, Bayisiyyah, Kurdish, and Pashto; and expand the scope for local dialects branching
off Arabic which entails disconnecting Arabs from the great language which is the language of
Koran and Sunna.

The Conclusion
From what was previously mentioned about the acts ofthose bloody murderers who have
distorted Islam and its principles, and using it as the tool to fulfill the Zionist and Colonial aspirations
to divide the unity ofMuslims, humiliate them and control their lands and fortunes. The Su’ud family
and the Wahabis were the tool which was and still is at work to destroy the Arabic Islamic civilization,
expiate the nation ofMuhammad (God’s blessing and peace be upon him), and their rule was; you’re
either a Wahabi or will be killed, robbed, your money will be seized and your dignity is violated.