Sheikh Imran Hosein explains everything about Russia, USSR, Ukraine and Israel

Via The Saker

August 09, 2016

 

This video generated about 2 million views.

Sheikh Imran Hosein Discusses Gog, Magog and the End of History

Posted on July 26, 2016

by Richard Edmondson

A new video uploaded by Sheikh Imran Hosein. As the Sheikh points out, Christianity and Islam concur with each other on “the release of Gog and Magog upon the world,” as he refers to it. See my article, if you’ve not yet read it,  Gog, Magog and Skunkwater. Below is a brief excerpt:

Now the genealogy of Japheth comes out of the Book of Genesis, but let’s return—shall we?—to Book of Ezekiel and Gog and Magog. What the two words, Gog and Magog, could in essence be referring to—again keeping in mind the many names…Japheth, Gomer, Magog, Ashkenaz, etc.—is in essence a nation or tribe of people. Well, what do we know about this tribe? Not much, other than that they come from the north—but here again, that geographic reference is strongly emphasized by the prophet. The following comes from Ezekiel 39:2:

I will turn you around and drag you along. I will bring you from the far north and send you against the mountains of Israel.

Well, it can’t be much clearer than that, can it? Gog and Magog come from the far north.

Now Christian Zionists have traditionally viewed this as meaning Russia. That view was of course popular during the Cold War, especially with such noted Christian Zionist “thinkers” as Hal Lindsey—Russia and Red China, along with all the other evil hordes from the north and east, posed the greatest threat to Israel, and when the Gog/Magog invasion finally comes, and the Battle of Armageddon is finally fought, those surely are the forces that would be descending upon the poor, defenseless little Jewish state. This has been the thinking of Christian Zionists ever since the mid twentieth century.

But most Christian Zionists, I would dare say, have never heard of the Khazar Kingdom, or if they have, they’ve probably bought into the hasbara talking point that the Khazar ancestry of Ashkenazi Jews has been “debunked” or “discredited.” Au contraire. It has not. The works of Shlomo Sand, Arthur Koestler, and others who’ve researched the Khazar history have stood the test of time. Wikipedia has an article attempting to explode the “myth” and relegating it to “Internet anti-Semitic websites,” but as has been documented recently (here, here, and here), Wikipedia has become little more than an Israeli propaganda outlet—and the fact remains: the Khazar empire existed—it underwent a mass conversion to Judaism in the eighth or ninth century—and after the kingdom’s fall in the eleventh century many of these people migrated into eastern Europe.

In short, there has been an invasion of Israel, and it has come from the far north. It kinda boils down to who you gonna believe—Wikipedia or the prophet Ezekiel?

Readers might also be interested Sheikh Imran Hosein’s prediction of a civil war in Turkey which he issued in November of last year.

The Turkish Coup: For Russia From Turkey With Enough Love To Last Until The Great War

July 20, 2016

by Imran N. Hosein

Turkish President Erdogan is, of course, quite correct that there was US (and hence NATO) involvement in the attempted coup against his government. He is also quite correct in his accusations against the Turkish Sufi Shaikh, Fathullah Gulen, accusing him of involvement in the coup. It would have been more honest of Erdogan, however, if he had also disclosed that he knew that the coup was coming, he knew that NATO was involved, and he knew that the followers of Gulen, as well as others who were opposed to his rule, were to be deceived and used as sacrificial lambs in NATO’s preparation for war with Russia.

The immediate result of the attempted coup is to make Erdogan strong enough to better lead Turkey, on NATO’s behalf, in NATO’s coming war with Russia.

If Turkey were to eventually announce that it is ending its membership in NATO, and if a Turkish delegation were to head for Russia to discuss an alternate alliance with Russia, the best response from Russia for such a visit would be to gracefully suggest that it be postponed until after the Great War. If the Turkish government were to insist on the visit from Erdogan to Moscow bearing gifts, the Russian President should increase the size of his body-guard.

We note, in addition, and briefly so at this time, that NATO needs a strong Turkey with dazzling credentials to lead the world of Islam to a new Ottoman Islamic Empire that will ensure that the world of Islam would support NATO in the coming war with Russia. That, in short, is yet another explanation of the attempted Turkish coup.

While the information below (prepared in anticipation of the coup and conveniently released at the time of the coup) concerning Turkey’s material progress under Erdogan may be correct, I have publicly condemned Erdogan for what he did (unforgivably so) in Libya, and what he is still doing (again unforgivably so) in Syria. I am also disgusted with ISIS, and alarmed by constant Russian claims that Erdogan’s Turkey is supporting ISIS clandestinely. I know of those who have traveled from far and wide to join the ranks of ISIS, and who have done so while transiting Turkish territory. Hence I am not surprised by reports of ISIS congratulating Erdogan for his success in crushing the revolt.

I anticipated that those in the Turkish Armed Forces who opposed Erdogan, would soon respond to his present crack-down with public disclosures which would reveal information which he would prefer to keep hidden. The first thing I expected to emerge would be evidence that the Turkish claim that the Russian aircraft had entered Turkish air space was a blatant lie, and the Russian demand for an apology was justified! The next thing that might be disclosed was evidence of Turkish clandestine support for ISIS.

Instead, I understand that the Turkish government has already arrested the two pilots who shot down the Russian fighter aircraft, and are blaming NATO for the act that led to the break-down of Turkey’s relations with Russia. This is an excellent move designed to build Russian confidence for an embrace of Erdogan.

However the Russians probably already know that recent events in Turkey will now culminate in the Turkish civil war which I have long anticipated. I expect that such civil war will permit the true conquest of Constantinople prophesied by Nabi Muhammad (sallalalhu ‘alaihi wa sallam).

When that happens, it will give the lie to 500 hundred years of Ottoman claims that Sultan Muhammad Fatih fulfilled that prophecy when he conquered Constantinople in 1452.

I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the martyrs (shuhada) in that battle of 1452 were not those misguided Muslims who died while conquering Constantinople. Rather, the martyrs (Shuhada) were those brave Orthodox Christians who died while defending Constantinople.

I may not live to see it all, but I am not deceived by either Dajjal’s Ottoman so-called Islamic Empire that was empowered by Gog and Magog, or by its resurrected present-day replica that is led by Erdogan. I pray that the true Muslims of Turkey, as well as my students, will also not be deceived!

However, I respect the right of those who differ with me to express themselves, and to argue the validity of their contrary views.

May Allah Most High might always show us the Truth.

Why war between NATO and Russia is inevitable in 2017

July 07, 2016

Related

Preparing for Nuclear War By Sheikh Imran Hosein

Published on Feb 24, 2016

Unedited video of Sheikh Imran N. Hosein’s address at the recent seminar on NUCLEAR WAR in Geneva

The End Game Pushing Sheikh Imran Hosein

Nostradamus? Sheikh Imran Hosein iProphet WWIII to starte after Europe closes its borders

Brexit, Russia & Proxy Wars Sheikh Imran Hosein Interview

July 03, 2016

 

Related Videos

At a discussion with representatives of various media outlets, Putin urges journalists to report genuinely on the impending nuclear war. 

Related Articles

• Anti-Brexiteers Hit London Streets

War by November 4, Says Imran Hosein

Posted on June 13, 2016

by Richard Edmondson

Usually when somebody predicts the end of the world by such-and-such date, I don’t pay it any heed. However, Imran Hosein is a man who has made a lifetime study of Islamic eschatology, and whatever your views on that subject may be, I feel compelled to mention that I’ve run a few of Sheikh Hosein’s videos before and found his analyses on world affairs pretty solid. So take it for whatever it’s worth: global war will begin by no later than November 4, 2016. Why the date in November has to do with the US presidential election. In Hosein’s words,

“They cannot take a chance that Donald Trump will become president. They cannot take that chance. Because Donald Trump says, ‘It makes no sense for us to have this antagonistic relationship with Russia.’”

If you would like to construe that as a ringing endorsement of Trump, I guess you’re free to do so, and maybe in some respects it is. But Sheikh Hosein isn’t the only one with such a view of Trump. Consider the remarks of Mark Dankof as quoted in a recent article at Veterans Today:

OK, I’m going to vote for him as the only alternative to the unthinkable election of the Whore of Babylon in November. I agree with Stephen Lendman that Clinton’s election is the best guarantee of World War III. But a Trump Presidency is not a panacea for what ails us. It could end in disaster if he’s elected. Time tells.

By the way, if you follow Sheikh Hosein’s talk all the way to the end, you will see he also predicts that in the upcoming war NATO will be destroyed  and that Israel will emerge as the dominant world power. Interestingly, the Book of Revelation offers a similar view. The following is an excerpt from an article I wrote in November of 2011, almost five years ago:

Part 7

The Final Destruction of YAM

It comes in chapter 18—YAM’s (America’s) final downfall and destruction. “After this,” says John, “I saw another angel coming down from heaven.” [18:1] He then gives us the angel’s words:

Fallen! Fallen is Babylon the Great. She has become a home for demons and a haunt for every evil spirit, a haunt for every unclean and detestable bird. For all the nations have drunk the maddening wine of her adulteries. The kings of the earth committed adultery with her, and the merchants of the earth grew rich from her excessive luxuries. [18:2-3]

As may be expected, the merchants and kings are quite distraught by this turn of events:

When the kings of the earth who committed adultery with her and shared her luxury see the smoke of her burning, they will weep and mourn over her. Terrified at her torment, they will stand far off and cry: Woe! Woe O great city, O Babylon, city of power! In one hour your doom has come. [18:9-10]

In one hour? So is YAM destroyed in a nuclear war? We don’t know. John doesn’t say, and of course such things as nuclear bombs were beyond his comprehension. What he does tell us is this:

Then a mighty angel picked up a boulder the size of a millstone and threw it into the sea, and said: “With such violence the great city of Babylon will be thrown down, never to be found again.” [18:21]

Maybe it’s an earthquake. All we know for sure is that at three separate points [18:10, 17, 19] the text emphasizes the destruction occurs in “one hour.” In any case, the Apocalypse has reached a major turning point: one beast has fallen; the other remains standing.

The other beast that “remains standing” is Israel. Interestingly, it would seem that Islamic and Christian eschatology both have similar views, at least on the downfall of America and the emergence of Israel as the global hegemon. There’s more to the story, though. Maybe at some point I’ll repost the entire article. Or if you like you can check out one of Hosein’s other videos or one of his books. There is probably quite a bit of agreement, if you look closely enough, between the two religions and their respective prophecies.

Has the Saker blog been hijacked by the CIA?

You think that it is a crazy question?

So do I.

But not everybody agrees.

Nevermind that I have created an entire community of blogs whose sole aim is to denounce, oppose and resist against Empire in all its forms, some apparently believe that the CIA has somehow hijacked my blog or maybe co-opted/brainwashed/broken/submitted/etc. me.

Why?

Because I post articles which reflect a point of view different from mine.  The recent article by Gavin Don is a perfect example.  Or the recent articles by Cathal Haughian.

I have also been accused of being anti-Muslim, nevermind that I posted every single speech by Hassan Nasrallah which I could find, that I declare myself an official Hezbollah fanboy and a Nasrallah groupie, that I regularly posts speeches by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, that I have the honor of considering Sheikh Imran Hussein as a friend, that I coined (or, at least, made it popular) the expression “AngloZionist Empire” and that I am a fierce critique of Israel and its racist policies.

The “evidence” against me?

The articles by Ghassan Kadi.

I have also been accused of being a Stalinist.  And an anti-Stalinist.  Yes, both.  Why?

Because of the series of videos about Stalin by Jimmie Moglia.

As for Catire’s article about Venezuela, earned me a ton of accusations of being a, what else, CIA mouthpiece and a reactionary.  Nevermind that my previous articles about Venezuela and Chavez got me accusations of being a crypto-Communist.

(Wait, it gets better!)

I have also been accused of being a Putin-fanboy.  Now that is, I have to admit, absolutely true.  However, I have ALSO been accused of being a Putin-basher following my posting of this article:Putin’s Biggest Failure.

I was accused of being a Serbian Chetnik and a genocide-denier due to my personal position on the events in Srebrenica.  But after I posted an lengthy rebuttal of an article written by a Serbian friend by a Bosnian-Muslim I was accused of being a Bosnian-Muslim propagandist and an enemy of the Serbian people.

And then, of course, I was called a racist.  Many, many times.  Most recently for my article about Europe entitled Saker Rant about a Stolen Europe.  However, the article entitled Putin and Israel – a complex and multi-layered relationship earned me the accusation of being, I quote, a “Jew lover” (that, at least, is partially true – I *do* love a lot of Jews, many of whom have been wonderful friends and immensely kind to me)

Oh, I almost forgot. I am both a rabid Russian nationalist with revanchist imperialist dreams and, in the same breath, a “Surkov-agent” who backstabs Novorussia and whitewashes Putin.

I could continue, but you get the point.

So, for those who have a hard time deciding whether I am a Communist or a US agent, a Jew in the employ of the Mossad or a rabid anti-Semite, a pseudo-Christian Muslim or an Islamophobe, etc, etc, etc, let me provide a few hopefully helpful reminders:

First: I regularly publish articles and opinion with which I do not agree.  This is the Saker Blog, not theVölkischer Beobachter and I actually welcome well-written and controversial articles.  At the very least, I see them as an opportunity for an intelligent discussion (just name-calling does not qualify, sorry!) and a chance for those disagreeing to present their case.  I have absolutely no intention of changing this policy and if you cannot live with it, then I suggest you go to any of the million of ‘thinking-in-lockstep’ blogs who present a comfy black and white view of the world.  The fact that I posted an article by X does not mean that I agree/endorse/support with X in general or about every single sentence in his/her article.

Second: I am only accountable for what I actually write.  I am not accountable for paraphrases of my words beginning with “in other words…” not am I accountable for sentences taking out of context.  If I say “A” at the top of an article and some wise-ass finds out that “in other words” I seem to have implied “non-A” somewhere further down, then that his his/her problem, not mine.  So solution here is not for me to change what I wrote or how I write, but to take reading or text comprehension classes (sorry, I don’t have the time to provide those). Which brings me to my last point:

Third: I believe that our world is an immensely complex environment and that very few things, are simply black and white.  Furthermore, it rarely is possible to reduce an fact-based and logically constructed opinion into a short sentence or, even less so, a lone-line slogan.  And that means that being critical does not mean being disloyal any more than being un-critical means being a real friend, ally or supporter.

“Permission to speak freely” my dear readers?

Frankly, I am tired, really tired of these silly and sophomoric accusations.  Yes, I know, they come with the territory.  So this is why I wrote this little clarification.  And the the next time some comment accuses me of being this or that or it’s opposite or both at the same time, I will simply post a link to this post.

Not to be rude to anybody, and with all due respect, I have neither the time nor inclination to constantly deal with the barrage of nonsense.

And, finally, just to end of a gay note, may I post the following absolutely baseless but nevertheless “feel good” question:

How do I know that all these critiques are not, in fact, all CIA-hired trolls?  Or maybe Mossad sayanim?  Maybe every single person who dares to criticize me is in reality an evil agent of some kind of nefarious worldwide anti-Saker conspiracy!  Think of it, we don’t even know how many Jews comment here (gasp of utter horror!!!). Or Muslims (aaaahhhhh!!)!  Or Serbian Chetniks (dead silence at the horror of the thought).  It is not surprising that these attacks *SEEM* to come from very different positions?  Maybe this kind of PSEUDO-diversity is the clear proof of one Evil Hand trying to strangle a angelically innocent Saker whose infallible purity and infinite wisdom just enrages the NWO!

Maybe it’s just my comments section which has been hijacked by the CIA!!!

😛

The Saker

PS: as for those who “threaten” me with a drop in readership or donations for my crimethinking, let me tell you this: the number of readers has been steadily increasing over the past 6 months, the blog right now has its highest figures ever, as for donations, they are stable, neither going up nor down.  Besides,this is neither a popularity contest nor something I do for money.  So these pseudo-prophesies of doom and gloom are simply wrong and laughably obvious in the kind of mindset they are an expression of.

Turkey Russia Syria Nuclear War Sheikh Imran Hosein Interview

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Sheikh Imran Hosein predicted the triumph of Syria, Russia and the conquest of Constantinople (Turkey)

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian 

  

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

ISIS, Paris Attacks, NATO, Syria–Sheikh Imran Hosein Says Nuclear War Probable in a Year or Less

Posted on November 22, 2015

by Richard Edmondson

The footage in the video above was taken from a lecture Hosein delivered in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia on October 24, 2015, the original video for which was uploaded two days later on October 26.  At the time Russia was slightly over three weeks into its air campaign in Syria. In the lecture, as you will see, Hosein predicted that NATO would “up the ante” and “escalate the conflict” in response to the Russian airstrikes. He was correct in this prognosis. On October 31 we saw the downing of the Russian commercial passenger jet over Egypt’s Sinai, followed by the terror attacks in Beirut and Paris on November 12 and 13 respectively.

In the video below, posted just three days ago, Hosein provides commentary on the attacks in Paris and he offers the prediction that nuclear war will break out in a year or less. The video consists of slides only, each containing a written comment, and the slide show is extremely slow moving. You’ll be through reading the captions well before the slide advances, but be patient.

 

Russia NATO Syria and The Malhama In Akhir Al-Zaman By Sheikh Imran Hosein

Russia NATO Syria and The Malhama In Akhir Al-Zaman By Sheikh Imran Hosein

Lecture by Imran N. Hosein delivered at Qaisar Dar al-Salaam in Kuala Lumpur October 24th 2015

 

An Introduction To Islamic Eschatology (End of History) From Geneva By Sheikh Imran Hosein

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Russia, Syria and the End Times

الشيخ عمران حسين وتوقعه بانتصار سوريا وروسيا بالحرب الكبرى وفتح القسطنطينية (تركيا)

 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Sheikh Imran Hosein Responding To Questions From The Saker

The Triangle of Akhir Al Zaman By Sheikh Imran Hosein

The purpose of this brief address is to direct attention to a very important prophecy of Prophet Muhammad (sallalahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) in which we expose and challenge the bogus fraudulent and utterly futile attempt to identify Najd of the prophecy (and the Satanic Age) with a part of Iraq. The people of Hejaz have never, and will never, recognize ‘Our Najd’ as any other than the Najd of Arabia.

All that we have done is to confirm what is already well known, i.e., that the present Saudi-Wahhabi ruling alliance which came out of Najd, represent the Satanic Age prophesied by Nabi Muhammad (sallalahu ‘alaihi wa sallam).

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Muslim Alliance with Rum By Sheikh Imran Hosein 9 Feb 2015

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

In the Charlie Hebdo psyop double standards, logical fallacies and crass ignorance are everywhere

The Saker

Many of pointed out that apparently the French and most westerners seem to be much more upset when 12 people die in Paris then when hundreds, thousand and tens of thousands die elsewhere.  It appears that the 1980s slogan “don’t touch my pal” which was originally supposed to denounce racism now has been “re-worked” into a, if not racist, then at least a chauvinistic mode: don’t kill French leftists no matter how offensive their discourse is.  I won’t make that case again here, but because by now anybody still capable of critical thought “got it”, but I will look at another, much less noticed case of double standards: the one about the issue of moral pain.Here is what the official doxa tells us: Muslims have no right to whine about their Prophet being insulted, this is part of free speech.  It is disingenuous for them to claim that they have been hurt by these caricatures, in reality they have not been hurt, they just had their feathers ruffled by a bit of disrespectful speech.  How can you possibly compared such ruffled feathers with issues of life and death?

So is there such thing as moral pain and can it be compared to physical pain?

Let’s look at the record as it stands in the West:

Any psychologist will explain to you that not only does moral pain exist, but it can be worse then physical pain.  This is why some people confess to crimes (whether real or not) when they are told that their family members will be tortured next even though they themselves had found the internal courage not to yield to torture inflicted upon them.  An idea can hurt more then physical pain.

The Geneva conventions specifically forbid mock executions even though all they inflict is fear (a form of moral pain).

In France, it is currently illegal to even question the official version of the so-called “Holocaust” precisely because doing so would cause moral pain to the very few actual “Holocaust survivors” still alive.  This protection from moral pain even extends to the relatives and descendants of “Holocaust survivors” who were born already after the war and how never suffered from any ill-treatment themselves.

At the famous Nurenberg trial Julius Streicher was sentenced to death even though he never committed any other crime then “infecting the German mind with the virus of anti-Semitism“.  He was, by the way, also viciously tortured before his execution.  His crime?  He was the founder and editor of a newspaper, Der Stürmer, a nasty racist propaganda paper whose name can be roughly translated as “The attacked” or “The stormer”.  Apparently, hate speech can even get you the death penalty in the West.

The 8th Amendment of the US Constitution prohibits “cruel and unusual punishment” especially if it “degrading to human dignity”.  Apparently, for the Founding Fathers human dignity was an extremely valuable and real thing which deserved to be protected.

Even in GITMO (hardly a bastion of civilization and human rights!) following the 2005 scandals about the desacration of the Quran, it was decided that the rules about the manipulation of the Quran (which had already existed in the past) would be strictly implemented.  So even in waterboarding GITMO insulting the Prophet is considered beyond the norms of civilized behavior.  Apparently not in Paris.

What about law defending against slander?  Are they not here to protect people from the pain resulting from somebody else’s speech? Do we not care if somebody dear to us is insulted or ridiculed?

So who are we kidding here?  Do I need to bring further examples to make my point everybody in the West already knows that caricatures like the one published by Charlie Hebdo really bring on real pain to Muslims.  We are not talking about ruffled feathers or irritation, we are talking about real moral and psychological distress here, the kind which normally western civilizational and legal norms try to protect people form.

The truth which others dare not speak but which I will spell out for you here is simple: western elites have the same attitude towards Muslims as Victoria Nuland has for the EU: f**k them!  That is the real message not only Charlie Hebdo but the entire teary circus around the Paris massacre sends to Muslims worldwide: bleep you, your religion and your Prophet, bleep you and your victims – thousands and even millions of your dead Muslims (Iraq anybody?!) are not worth 12 of our guys, and we get to limit your speech, but don’t you dare limit ours!

And if a Muslim dares to object, he is instantly reminded about “his” stonings, burkas, terrorist attacks, etc. with the inevitable punch line: Islam is in no position to give lessons to the civilized West.   Sadly, Islam is vulnerable to such attack because of its support for the death penalty and its use of various frankly inhuman execution methods, but that is far from being the full picture.

First, until recently the West ALSO had plenty of execution methods which are infinitely worse then those legal in Islam (anybody doubting this better read the Wikipedia entry under Robert-Francois Damiens or remember that the French abolished the guillotine only in 1981 and against the popular will).  Second, at least Islam is honest about its punishments.  Compare that with the USA were people are officially sentenced to prison terms like in other civilized countries, but where it is well known, understood and accepted that your chances of being brutally assaulted or anally raped are very high, especially if you are weak, and where people are held in supermax isolation units which the UN correctly defines as torture.

Second, it is artificial to compare two (or more) civilizations by only comparing their penal codes.  Why not compare other forms of violence such as warfare or genocides.  Here, even the worst of the worst Muslims (the Ottomans) compare very favorably with the Europeans, I am sorry if I offend the latter, but that is a fact.  Though, of course, there have been plenty of examples of Muslim atrocities (by the Ottomans and the Persians in particular), but compared to what the West did to entire continents (African, North and South America) these are truly minor incidents.  Of course, folks in the West are not too knowledgeable about all this, and the comforting narrative is that Europe was civilized, a heir to the Greek and Roman civilizations (a lie – post Frankish Europe re-discovered antiquity thanks to Muslims and Jews!) whereas the Muslims are just goat herders from the deserts of the Arabian Peninsula.  Comforting narrative for sure, but factually wrong.  Muslims, however, are very much aware of this history and don’t like to be looked down by the very westerners which they see as rather brutish and always bloodthirsty.

Third, there is a feature of modern western civilization which does set it apart from pretty much all others.  The quasi-total absence of the sacred.  For a modern, secular and educated person in the West there is very little which is truly sacred.  In the past, wives and mothers still used to be sacred, and telling an Italian or Spaniard “cornuto” or “hijo de puta” could get you knifed. Nowadays a French rap group proudly calls itself “Nique Ta Mère“.  Some will say this is progress, I suppose.  In the USA, the flag is sacred.  At least to some.  And, apparently, for millions of people in France – free speech, including deliberately offending free speech, is sacred.  Except when it is directed a Jews, in which case it can land you in jail.  For most Muslims, the prophets are so sacred that every time they mention their name they add “sallallahu alayhi wasallam” (peace be upon him).  Now, you don’t have to be a Muslim yourself or to approve of the Prophet to be capable of understanding that the Prophet Mohammed is truly dear and even sacred to Muslims.  The fact that there is nothing sacred left in the West does not mean that the rest of the world has slouched down to a similar degree of degeneracy or that those who hold nothing for sacred have a license to impose their lack of anything sacred or their indifference on everybody else and offend them to their (sick) heart’s content.

The most disgusting kind of westerner is the kind that actually takes pride in offending the feelings of those who still do have things which are sacred to them.  This is what Charlie Hebdo was all about.  Theirs was not a “discourse”, it was an endless quest to become the most offensive, vulgar and crude newspaper in Europe.  And, by the way, before the latest Charlie Hebdo psyop, this disgusting and stupid paper printed 60’000 copies for a country of 66’000’000 people.  But then, apparently, some French matter more then others (what else is new?).  Double standards again.

When considering any aspects of the Charlie Hebdo psyop you will inevitably find that double standards and logical fallacies are everywhere.  That some speech is freer then other, that some victims matter more then others, that some atrocities are more atrocious then others and that some pain gets more respect then other.  But the worst for me is this sickening solidarity with those who made insulting others into some kind of noble feat, these “heroes” are lionized for their “courage” to generate real moral pain in others.  I see nothing noble in that at all and the fact that they were brutally and viciously murdered by, apparently, a gang of Takfiri freaks does not make then anyway more respectful.

One more thing: some of you have expressed outrage at the fact that Sheikh Imran Hosein said that the biggest evil the world has ever seen will rule from Jerusalem.  Clearly, the good Sheikh is a vicious anti-Semite, right?

(Sigh)

I wish that those who speak about the “Christian West” actually knew a little something of Christianity, especially of Christian eschatology.  What the Sheikh was saying is in no way different from what the Church Fathers said, including that the Antichrist would rule over the world from Jerusalem.  A 5min search on the Internet gave me these pretty decent sources:

http://biblelight.net/fathers-on-antichrist.htm
http://www.unitypublishing.com/prophecy/AntichristbySaints.htm
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/hippolytus-christ.html

Islamic eschatology is, by the way, remarkably similar to the traditional Christian one.  A quick search under the term “Dajjal” yielded these sources:

http://www.islaam.org/al_mahdi/dajjaal.htm
http://islamqa.info/en/8806
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL60F84B368D3270FF

As for Sheikh Imran Hosein’s advice to the Muslims of France to leave while they can, it is fully in line with this admonition of Christ Himself who told his apostles

“And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.  Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.” (Matt 10:14-15). 

One does not have to agree with what the Sheikh says, but that is hardly a reason to call him crazy or anti-Semitic.Frankly, what I see taking place is mostly a lashing out against Islam and against Muslims which is first and foremost based on crass ignorance.  I personally am not a Muslim and I vehemently disagree with some teachings and practices of Islam.  And I am on record saying that I fully support what I call “Putin’s ultimatum” to the Takfiri freaks: stop or we will exterminate you.  And, when needed, Putin did exactly that: since 2000 Russia has literally executed every single leader of the Chechen insurgency, every single one.  Some were killed in Russia, others in Chechnia, others even elsewhere, but they are all dead.  And the Wahabi “Icherkian” insurgency has been literally exterminated too.  Not only that, but Putin has fully backed Assad, the other man who has not hesitated to physically exterminate as many Takfiri freaks as possible (and Assad did such a good job of it that they had to retreat to Iraq).  And I am on record supporting Assad too.  And, finally, I have always fully supported Hezbollah and Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, not only in their war of national liberation against Israel, but also in their struggle against the so-called “Syrian opposition” (where the freaks who murdered the Charlie Hebdo people came from!).  I don’t think that anybody even minimally honest can accuse me of having any sympathies for the Takfiri/Wahabi terrorists or for their actions in Paris.

But to those of you who take issue with my statement that the “West” cannot win against the Muslim world I say this: take the example of Russia and realize that the Russians can kill Wahabis, but they cannot kill Wahabism.  It took a Muslim man like Akhmad Kadyrov and his son to defeat the Wahabi ideology in Chechnia.  The same goes for the West: no matter how many ISIS or al-Qaeda terrorist the western security services kill (or, pretend to kill!), the ideology of Takfirism will only be defeated by other Muslims (who, by the way, are always the first and main victims of the Takfiri freaks!).

Just take one look at Hollande, Merkel or Obama and tell me that they have anything at all to say other then vapid platitudes and insipid lies?  Do you really believe that they have anything to oppose to the ideas of Osama bin-Laden, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi or even Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab or Taqi ad-Din Aḥmad ibn Taymiyyah?

Methinks that the western leaders are both too arrogant and too ignorant to face this reality and that they think that they can outsmart the devil on their own – hence the unleash the Takfiri demon against Muslim world and the Nazi demon against the Donbass.  I say that with leaders like that the West has exactly *zero* chance to prevail.  And considering that with each passing year the western leaders become even dumber, more arrogant, more pathetic and more clueless, I see no reason to believe that the West will win the “clash of civilizations” it itself created.

Now please don’t shoot the messenger.

The Saker

POSTED BY VINEYARDSAKER: AT 02:00 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Message from Sheikh Imran Hosein to the French People

POSTED BY VINEYARDSAKER: AT 04:57

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Peculiarities of Russian National Character

TUESDAY, JANUARY 13, 2015

Source

 ← Ancient Slavic god Zimnik: a squat old man, long hair the color of snow, wears a white coat, always barefoot. Carries an iron staff, one swing with which instantly freezes everything solid. Can summon snowstorms, ice storms and blizzards. Goes around taking whatever he likes, especially children who misbehave.Recent events, such as the overthrow of the government in Ukraine, the secession of Crimea and its decision to join the Russian Federation, the subsequent military campaign against civilians in Eastern Ukraine, western sanctions against Russia, and, most recently, the attack on the ruble, have caused a certain phase transition to occur within Russian society, which, I believe, is very poorly, if at all, understood in the west. This lack of understanding puts Europe at a significant disadvantage in being able to negotiate an end to this crisis.

Whereas prior to these events the Russians were rather content to consider themselves “just another European country,” they have now remembered that they are a distinct civilization, with different civilizational roots (Byzantium rather than Rome)—one that has been subject to concerted western efforts to destroy it once or twice a century, be it by Sweden, Poland, France, Germany, or some combination of the above. This has conditioned the Russian character in a specific set of ways which, if not adequately understood, is likely to lead to disaster for Europe and the world.Lest you think that Byzantium is some minor cultural influence on Russia, it is, in fact, rather key. Byzantine cultural influences, which came along with Orthodox Christianity, first through Crimea (the birthplace of Christianity in Russia), then through the Russian capital Kiev (the same Kiev that is now the capital of Ukraine), allowed Russia to leapfrog across a millennium or so of cultural development. Such influences include the opaque and ponderously bureaucratic nature of Russian governance, which the westerners, who love transparency (if only in others) find so unnerving, along with many other things. Russians sometimes like to call Moscow the Third Rome—third after Rome itself and Constantinople—and this is not an entirely empty claim. But this is not to say that Russian civilization is derivative; yes, it has managed to absorb the entire classical heritage, viewed through a distinctly eastern lens, but its vast northern environment has transformed that heritage into something radically different.

Since this subject is of overwhelming complexity, I will focus on just four factors, which I find essential for understanding the transformation we are currently witnessing.

1. Taking offense

Western nations have emerged in an environment of limited resources and relentless population pressure, and this has to a large degree determined the way in which they respond when they are offended. For quite a long time, while centralized authority was weak, conflicts were settled through bloody conflict, and even a minor affront could cause former friends to become instant adversaries and draw their swords. This is because it was an environment in which standing your ground was key to survival.

In contrast, Russia emerged as a nation in an environment of almost infinite, although mostly quite diffuse, resources. It also drew from the bounty of the trade route that led from the Vikings to the Greeks, which was so active that Arab geographers believed that there was a salt-water strait linking the Black Sea with the Baltic, whereas the route consisted of rivers with a considerable amount of portage. In this environment, it was important to avoid conflict, and people who would draw their swords at a single misspoken word were unlikely to do well in it.

Thus, a very different conflict resolution strategy has emerged, which survives to this day. If you insult, aggrieve or otherwise harm a Russian, you are unlikely to get a fight (unless it happens to be a demonstrative beating held in a public setting, or a calculated settling of scores through violence). Instead, more likely than not, the Russian will simply tell you to go to hell, and then refuse to have anything further to do with you. If physical proximity makes this difficult, the Russian will consider relocating, moving in any direction that happens to be away from you. So common is this speech act in practice that it has been abbreviated to a monosyllabic utterance: “Пшёл!” (“Pshol!”) and can be referred to simply as “послать” (literally, “to send”). In an environment where there is an almost infinite amount of free land to settle, such a strategy makes perfect sense. Russians live like settled people, but when they have to move, they move like nomads, whose main method of conflict resolution is voluntary relocation.

This response to grievance as something permanent is a major facet of the Russian culture, and westerners who do not understand it are unlikely to achieve an outcome they would like, or even understand. To a westerner, an insult can be resolved by saying something like “I am sorry!” To a Russian that’s pretty much just noise, especially if it is being emitted by somebody who has already been told to go to hell. A verbal apology that is not backed up by something tangible is one of these rules of politeness, which to the Russians are something of a luxury. Until a couple of decades ago, the standard Russian apology was “извиняюсь” (“izviniáius’”), which can be translated literally as “I excuse myself.” Russia is now a much more polite country, but the basic cultural pattern remains in place.

Although purely verbal apologies are worthless, restitution is not. Setting things right may involve parting with a prized possession, or making a significant new pledge, or announcing an important change of direction. The point is, these all involve taking pivotal actions, not just words, because beyond a certain point words can only make the situation worse, taking it from the “Go to hell” stage to the even less copacetic “Let me show you the way” stage.

2. Dealing with invaders

Russia has a long history of being invaded from every direction, but especially from the west, and Russian culture has evolved a certain mindset which is difficult for outsiders to comprehend. First of all, it is important to realize that when Russians fight off an invasion (and having the CIA and the US State Department run Ukraine with the help of Ukrainian Nazis qualifies as an invasion) they are not fighting for territory, at least not directly. Rather, they are fighting for Russia as a concept. And the concept states that Russia has been invaded numerous times, but never successfully. In the Russian mindset, invading Russia successfully involves killing just about every Russian, and, as they are fond of saying, “They can’t kill us all.” (“Нас всех не убьёшь.”) Population can be restored over time (it was down 22 million at the end of World War II) but the concept, once lost, would be lost forever. It may sound nonsensical to a westerner to hear Russians call their country “a country of princes, poets and saints,” but that’s what it is—it is a state of mind. Russia doesn’t have a history—it is its history.

Because the Russians fight for the concept of Russia rather than for any given chunk of Russian territory, they are always rather willing to retreat—at first. When Napoleon invaded Russia, fully planning to plunder his way across the countryside, he found the entire countryside torched by the retreating Russians. When he finally occupied Moscow, it too went up in flames. Napoleon camped out for a bit, but eventually, realizing that there was nothing more to be done (attack Siberia?) and that his army would starve and die of exposure if they remained, he beat a hasty and shameful retreat, eventually abandoning his men to their fate. As they retreated, another facet of Russian cultural heritage came to the fore: every peasant from every village that got torched as the Russians retreated was in the forefront as the Russians advanced, itching for a chance to take a pot shot at a French soldier.

Similarly, the German invasion during World War II was at first able to make rapid advances, taking a lot of territory, while the Russians equally swiftly retreated and evacuated their populations, relocating entire factories and other institutions to Siberia and resettling families in the interior of the country. Then the German advance stopped, reversed, and eventually turned into a rout. The standard pattern repeated itself, with the Russian army breaking the invader’s will while most of the locals that found themselves under occupation withheld cooperation, organized as partisans and inflicted maximum possible damage on the retreating invader.

Murmansk, 68°58′45″, pop. 300,000 January 12: first sunrise in 40 days Length of day: 38 minutes

Another Russian adaptation for dealing with invaders is to rely on the Russian climate to do the job. A standard way of ridding a Russian village house of vermin is simply to not heat it; a few days at 40 below or better and the cockroaches, bedbugs, lice, nits, weevils, mice, rats are all dead. It works with invaders too. Russia is the world’s most northern country. Canada is far north, but most of its population is spread along its southern border, and it has no major cities above the Arctic Circle, while Russia has two. Life in Russia in some ways resembles life in outer space or on the open ocean: impossible without life support. The Russian winter is simply not survivable without cooperation from the locals, and so all they have to do to wipe out an invader is withhold cooperation. And if you think that an invader can secure cooperation by shooting a few locals to scare the rest, see above under “Taking offense.”3. Dealing with foreign powers

Russia owns almost the entire northern portion of the Eurasian continent, which comprises something like 1/6 of the Earth’s dry surface. That, by Earth standards, is a lot of territory. This is not an aberration or an accident of history: throughout their history, the Russians were absolutely driven to provide for their collective security by gaining as much territory as possible. If you are wondering what motivated them to undertake such a quest, see “Dealing with invaders” above.

If you think that foreign powers repeatedly attempted to invade and conquer Russia in order to gain access to its vast natural resources, then you are wrong: the access was always there for the asking. The Russians are not exactly known for refusing to sell their natural resources—even to their potential enemies. No, what Russia’s enemies wanted was to be able to tap into Russia’s resources free of charge. To them, Russia’s existence was an inconvenience, which they attempted to eliminate through violence. 

What they achieved instead was a higher price for themselves, once their invasion attempt failed. The calculus is simple: the foreigners want Russia’s resources; to defend them, Russia needs a strong, centralized state with a big, powerful military; ergo, the foreigners should be made to pay, to support Russia’s state and military. Consequently, most of the Russian state’s financial needs are addressed through export tariffs, on oil and natural gas especially, rather than by taxing the Russian population. After all, the Russian population is taxed heavily enough by having to fight off periodic invasions; why tax them more? Thus, the Russian state is a customs state: it uses customs duties and tariffs to extract funds from the enemies who would destroy it and use these funds to defend itself. Since there is no replacement for Russia’s natural resources, the more hostile the outside world acts toward Russia, the more it will end up paying for Russia’s national defense.

Note that this policy is directed at foreign powers, not at foreign-born people. Over the centuries, Russia has absorbed numerous immigrants: from Germany during the 30 years’ war; from France after the French revolution. More recent influxes have been from Vietnam, Korea, China and Central Asia. Last year Russia absorbed more immigrants than any other country except for the United States, which is dealing with an influx from countries on its southern border, whose populations its policies have done much to impoverish. Moreover, the Russians are absorbing this major influx, which includes close to a million from war-torn Ukraine, without much complaint. Russia is a nation of immigrants to a greater extent than most others, and is more of a melting pot than the United States.

4. Thanks, but we have our own

One more interesting Russian cultural trait is that Russians have always felt compelled to excel in all categories, from ballet and figure-skating to hockey and football to space flight and microchip manufacturing. You may think of champagne as a trademark French product, but last I checked “Советское шампанское” (“Soviet champagne”) was still selling briskly around New Year’s Eve, and not only in Russia but in Russian shops in the US because, you see, the French stuff may be nice, but it just doesn’t taste sufficiently Russian. For just about every thing you can imagine there is a Russian version of it, which the Russians often feel is better, and sometimes can claim they invented in the first place (the radio, for instance, was invented by Popov, not by Marconi). There are exceptions (tropical fruit is one example) and they are allowed provided they come from a “brotherly nation” such as Cuba. That was the pattern during the Soviet times, and it appears to be coming back to some extent now.

During the late Brezhnev/Andropov/Gorbachev “stagnation” period Russian innovation indeed stagnated, along with everything else, and Russia lost ground against the west technologically (but not culturally). After the Soviet collapse Russians became eager for western imports, and this was quite normal considering that Russia wasn’t producing much of anything at the time. Then, during the 1990s, there came the era of western compradors, who dumped imported products on Russia with the long-term goal of completely wiping out domestic industry and making Russia into a pure raw materials supplier, at which point it would be defenseless against an embargo and easily forced to surrender its sovereignty. This would be an invasion by non-military means, against which Russia would find itself defenseless.

This process ran quite far before it hit a couple of major snags. First, Russian manufacturing and non-hydrocarbon exports rebounded, doubling several times in the course of a decade. The surge included grain exports, weapons, and high-tech. Second, Russia found lots of better, cheaper, friendlier trading partners around the world. Still, Russia’s trade with the west, and with the EU specifically, is by no means insignificant. Third, the Russian defense industry has been able to maintain its standards, and its independence from imports. (This can hardly be said about the defense firms in the west, which depend on Russian titanium exports.)

And now there has come the perfect storm for the compradors: the ruble has partially devalued in response to lower oil prices, pricing out imports and helping domestic producers; sanctions have undermined Russia’s confidence in the reliability of the west as suppliers; and the conflict over Crimea has boosted the Russians’ confidence in their own abilities. The Russian government is seizing this opportunity to champion companies that can quickly effect import replacement for imports from the west. Russia’s central bank has been charged with financing them at interest rates that make import replacement even more attractive.

Some people have been drawing comparisons between the period we are in now and the last time oil prices dropped—all the way to $10/barrel—in some measure precipitating the Soviet collapse. But this analogy is false. At the time, the Soviet Union was economically stagnant and dependent on western credit to secure grain imports, without which it wouldn’t have been able to raise enough livestock to feed its population. It was led by the feckless and malleable Gorbachev—an appeaser, a capitulator, and a world-class windbag whose wife loved to go shopping in London. The Russian people despised him and referred to him as “Mishka the Marked,” thanks to his birthmark. And now Russia is resurgent, is one of the world’s largest grain exporters, and is being led by the defiant and implacable President Putin who enjoys an approval rating of over 80%. In comparing pre-collapse USSR to Russia today, commentators and analysts showcase their ignorance.

Conclusions

This part almost writes itself. It’s a recipe for disaster, so I’ll write it out as a recipe.

1. Take a nation of people who respond to offense by damning you to hell, and refusing to having anything more to do with you, rather than fighting. Make sure that this is a nation whose natural resources are essential for keeping your lights on and your houses heated, for making your passenger airliners and your jet fighters, and for a great many other things. Keep in mind, a quarter of the light bulbs in the US light up thanks to Russian nuclear fuel, whereas a cut-off of Russian gas to Europe would be a cataclysm of the first order.

2. Make them feel that they are being invaded by installing a government that is hostile to them in a territory that they consider part of their historical homeland. The only truly non-Russian part of the Ukraine is Galicia, which parted company many centuries ago and which, most Russians will tell you, 

“You can take to hell with you.” If you like your neo-Nazis, you can keep your neo-Nazis. Also keep in mind how the Russians deal with invaders: they freeze them out.

3. Impose economic and financial sanctions on Russia. Watch in dismay as your exporters start losing money when in instant retaliation Russia blocks your agricultural exports. Keep in mind that this is a country that, thanks to surviving a long string of invasion attempts, traditionally relies on potentially hostile foreign states to finance its defense against them. If they fail to do so, then it will resort to other ways of deterring them, such as freezing them out. “No gas for NATO members” seems like a catchy slogan. Hope and pray that it doesn’t catch on in Moscow.

4. Mount an attack on their national currency, causing it to lose part of its value on par with a lower price of oil. Watch in dismay as Russian officials laugh all the way to the central bank because the lower ruble has caused state revenues to remain unchanged in spite of lower oil prices, erasing a potential budget deficit. Watch in dismay as your exporters go bankrupt because their exports are priced out of the Russian market. Keep in mind, Russia has no national debt to speak of, runs a negligible budget deficit, has plentiful foreign currency reserves and ample gold reserves. Also keep in mind that your banks have loaned hundreds of billions of dollars to Russian businesses (which you have just deprived of access to your banking system by imposing sanctions). Hope and pray that Russia doesn’t put a freeze on debt repayments to western banks until the sanctions are lifted, since that would blow up your banks.

5. Watch in dismay as Russia signs major natural gas export deals with everyone except you. Is there going to be enough gas left for you when they are done? Well, it appears that this no longer a concern for the Russians, because you have offended them, and, being who they are, they told you to go to hell (don’t forget to take Galicia with you) and will now deal with other, friendlier countries.

6. Continue to watch in dismay as Russia actively looks for ways to sever most of the trade links with you, finding suppliers in other parts of the world or organizing production for import replacement.

But now comes a surprise—an underreported one, to say the least. Russia has just offered the EU a deal. If the EU refuses to join the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with the US (which, by the way, would hurt it economically) then it can join the Customs Union with Russia. Why freeze yourselves out when we can all freeze out Washington instead? This is the restitution Russia would accept for the EU’s offensive behavior with regard to the Ukraine and the sanctions. Coming from a customs state, it is a most generous offer. A lot went into making it: the recognition that the EU poses no military threat to Russia and not much of an economic one either; the fact that the European countries are all very cute and tiny and lovable, and make tasty cheeses and sausages; the understanding that their current crop of national politicians is feckless and beholden to Washington, and that they need a big push in order to understand where their nations’ true interests lie… Will the EU accept this offer, or will they accept Galicia as a new member and “freeze out”?

Related Vidoes

Imran Hosein (Moscow State University); Islam & The West

Sheikh Imran Hosein :Destruction of American Empire, Russia and UK,Israel New Super Power

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Marrying a female child before puberty is Rape – Saudi Religious Leader OKs the Rape

Published on Monday, 05 January 2015 05:01

Issues fatwa critics say will ‘devastate countless young girls‘

Sheikh Abdul Aziz al-Sheikh

WASHINGTON – Saudi Arabia’s Grand Mufti, Sheikh Abdulaziz Al al-Sheikh, the kingdom’s top religious authority in the ultra-conservative Wahhabi school of Sunni Islam, has ruled it’s acceptable for men to marry girls so young the West would deem it nothing short of pedophilia and rape.

Despite the Saudi justice ministry’s failed efforts to date to set 15 as a minimum age to marry a girl in the kingdom, Grand Mufti Abdulaziz declared there is nothing prohibiting Muslim men from marrying girls even younger.

As Grand Mufti, Abdulaziz is president of the Supreme Council of Ulema (Islamic scholars) and chairman of the Standing Committee for Scientific Research and Issuing Fatwas, which means he speaks authoritatively in Islamic teachings.

Grand Mufti Abdulzaiz’s more recent ruling on marrying young girls comes following a similar ruling in 2011 by Dr. Salih bin Fawzan, a prominent cleric and member of the Saudi’s highest religious council, who issued a fatwa, or religious edict, that there is no minimum age to marry girls, “even if they are in the cradle.”

Fawzan’s fatwa came from a similar edict in the Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari li Ibn Battal, which said the ulema, or Islamic scholars, agreed to permit fathers marry off their small daughters.

“The ulema have agreed that it is permissible for fathers to marry off their small daughters, even if they are in the cradle,” the edict declared. “But it is not permissible for their husbands to have sex with them unless they are capable of being placed beneath and bearing the weight of the men. And their capability in this regard varies based on their nature and capacity.

Fawzan said there is nothing in Islamic, or Shariah law, that sets a minimum age limit on marrying girls, citing Quran 65:4.

“It behooves those who call for setting a minimum age for marriage to fear Allah and not contradict his Shariah, or try to legislate things Allah did not permit,” Fawzan said. “For laws are Allah’s province, and legislation is his exclusive right, to be shared by none other. And among these are the rules governing marriage.”

“The grand point of the Saudi fatwa, however, is not that girls as young as nine can be married, based on Muhammad’s example, but rather that there is no age limit whatsoever,” Middle East expert Raymond Ibrahim writes in Middle East Forum. “The only question open to consideration is whether the girl is physically capable of handling her ‘husband.’”

“The lives of countless young girls are devastated because of this teaching,” Ibrahim said.

He cited the case of an 8-year-old girl who died on her “wedding” night when her “husband” raped her. He also referred to a 10-year-old girl who hid from her 80-year-old “husband.”

Grand Mufti Abdulaziz and Fawzan’s fatwas come even as Saudi men have been reportedly purchasing young girls from Syrian refugee camps in Lebanon and Jordan.

As WND recently reported, rich Saudi Arabian men – some associated with the Saudi royal family – have been purchasing for their sexual pleasure Syrian girls and young women from among the hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing the Syrian civil war conflict to Lebanon and Jordan.

Most of these Saudi men are said to be in their 60s and 70s. When they tire of the girls, they often hand them off to other men.

“They come into Lebanon and Jordan and go to the Syrian refugee camps where the Syrian families there have nothing,” one Lebanese source told WND. “The Saudis then offer $200 for girls aged 9 to 14 years and take them from their families. Because the families are so desperate for money, they give in to the temptation.”

The United States, allied with Saudi Arabia, has been silent on its treatment of young girls..

“Given the influence the United States has over Saudi Arabia, why hasn’t your president confronted the Saudis about this?” one source asked WND. “Sometimes, the girls are returned to their families, but they won’t have a future.”

Source: wnd.com

ED NOTE:

Listen to a Real Scholar, Sheikh Imran Husein stating that Marrying a female child before puberty is Rape. In the following Video Highlights the coincidence of recovering of Pharaoh and the first Zionist congress in 1898, followed by the first Arab Spring against the Ottoman’s Empire and the Creation of Zionist Saudi Kingdom. Learn on how the Second Arab Spring turned into a  Yankee Jihad in Libya and Syria,

Learn about Quran Prophecy about the alliance of Arab with Orthodox Christians led by Russia- Surat Ar-Rum No. 30

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud Betrayar of Islam by Sheikh Imran Hossein

بانوراما _ مرض الملك عبد الله وهبوط الاسهم المالية السعودية | العالم

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!