Zafar Bangash
Zafar Bangash
The Dubai-based Saudi channel denounced Hamas leaders Ismail Haniyeh, Yahya Sinwar and Hizbullah leader Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah as “terrorists”. Far from denouncing the zionist war criminals perpetrating a genocide of the Palestinian people, the Bani Saud mouthpiece attacked resistance leaders. All of them have been martyred by the zionist barbarians.
Muslims throughout the world have rightly asked, where are the Bani Saud with their hundreds of billions of dollars in earnings to help the Palestinian people? Surely, they are not oblivious of Palestinian suffering whose death toll in the last one year has surpassed 42,000 (nearly 200,000 if we take the figure quoted by the British Medical Journal, Lancet in July 2024). How can the Bani Saud be so callous, Muslims ask.
To answer this question, one must look at the origins, nature and role of the Bani Saud. It must also be emphasized that calling the Arabian Peninsula—the name given to it by the noble Messenger (pbuh)—as ‘Saudi’ Arabia is shirk. The Bani Saud do not own this land. No family, clan or tribe can own any land, big or small. The earth and the heavens all belong to Allah, the sole owner and creator of everything in the universe.
The Bani Saud claim to the Arabian Peninsula is akin to the zionists’ claim to the holy land of Palestine. Both are based on fraud and theft of others’ lands. Such mindboggling hypocrisy and theft cannot go unchallenged.
The Palestinians are struggling against their colonial occupiers with bare hands. Muslims in the Arabian Peninsula and beyond must struggle against the Bani Saud and banish them from the cradle of Islam.
The Bani Saud are a primitive Bedouin clan that erupted from Dari‘yyah in 1744 CE (280 years ago). Their singular characteristic is savagery, a common practice in Nejd even today. Through a quirk of history, a local thug from Dari‘yyah, Muhammad ibn Saud met a self-styled preacher, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab. The two needed each other. Ibn Saud, a brigand and thief involved in endless feuds with other tribal chiefs, needed a religious crutch to have a leg up on his rivals. Ibn Abdul Wahhab needed musclemen to protect him from attacks by other preachers, including his own brother, Sulayman ibn Abdul Wahhab who denounced in no uncertain terms his obscurantist views.
The alliance between Ibn Saud and Ibn Abdul Wahhab proved deadly. The hordes from Dari‘yyah moved west and along the way slaughtered members of other tribes and plundered their resources. Before entering Makkah in 1802, they perpetrated a massacre of the inhabitants of Taif, 40 miles south of the holy city. The terrified people of Makkah offered no resistance but that did not save them from the wrath of the Saudi hordes.
The savages from Nejd then turned their attention to religious and historical sites. They mashed them without regard to their sanctity or historical significance. A much worse fate was inflicted upon Madinah. Jannatul Baqi, the last resting place of many Sahaba and the Ahlul Bayt (members of the Prophet’s family) was completely vandalized.
When news of the slaughter in Taif and desecrations in Makkah and al-Madinah reached the Sultan in Istanbul, he was outraged. He ordered his viceroy in Egypt, Muhammad Ali to deal with the Saudi-Wahhabi hordes. He drove them out of the Hijaz in 1813 but Dari‘yyah proved difficult. It was left to Muhammad Ali’s son Ibrahim Pasha to crush the Wahhabi uprising in 1819.
It would be another 100 years before the Wahhabis again erupted, this time under the patronage of the British. The latter instigated them to rise against the Ottoman Turks branding as not being ‘Arabs’ (true) but the British were even worse. In the words of the Wahhabis, they were infidels yet for the sake of power, they were prepared to align themselves with the ‘Infidels’ against fellow Muslims.
The British paid the Ibn Saud as well as Sharif Husain, the Ottoman governor of the Hijaz, handsomely to revolt against the Ottomans. This is what came to be called the ‘Arab revolt’. In his book, Documents on the History of Saudi Arabia, Vol. I (Salisbury, NC, US, 1976, pp.81-82) Ibrahim al-Rashid (ed) gives a detailed account of monies paid by the British to both Abdul Aziz ibn Saud and Sharif Husain.
Since Abdul Aziz ibn Saud was more ruthless, he won in the tussle against Sharif Husain who fled the Hijaz and was settled in Transjordan, a territory carved out illegally from Palestine by the British. By this time, the British had also promised Palestine to the zionists under the now-infamous Balfour declaration of November 1917.
When the Saudi hordes took control of Makkah and al-Madinah the second time, they perpetrated even more horrible crimes. In 1925, when they entered al-Madinah, for three days they raped Muslim women. Only the Saudi-Wahhabi hordes could indulge in such barbaric and degrading acts (For details, see David Haworth: The Desert King: A Life of Ibn Saud, London, 1984).
So, if the Bani Saud do not help the Palestinians, it should come as no surprise. The real tragedy is that many Muslims are either unaware of the Bani Saud’s treachery or refuse to acknowledge it because they have been bought by Saudi largesse. Either way, it is no excuse for justifying the crimes of the Bani Saud.
Like their zionist cousins in Palestine, the Bani Saud are alien invaders in the Hijaz, home to the Haramayn. They must be divested of control from the holy places so that Muslims can restore these to their rightful purpose and function.
No comments:
Post a Comment