[Explanation of (Arabic) abbreviations:
(AS) = alayhis/alayhas/alayhimus Salaam, “Upon him/her/them be Peace”
(RA) = radi’allahu an’ha, “may Allah be pleased with her”
(SWS) = Saala Allahu alayhi wa Ah’liih wa Salaam, “may the Peace, Blessings and Mercy of Allah be on him and his Pure Family)]
As stated in the “tag-line” of my blog, “Hajji” refers to one who has made pilgrimage (“Hajj”, or “Hagga” in Hebrew) to Mecca. In antiquity Arab Jews made Hajj to Mecca, just as Muslims do today. Both groups still make pilgrimage to Quds—Jerusalem—although Zi’arat is usually the term used for pilgrimage to Quds by Muslims. “Quds” literally translates as “Holy”.
The rituals involved are pretty much the same as described in the biblical book of Genesis, when Is’haaq ibn Ibrahiim—Isaac son of Abraham (AS)—erected a stone edifice called a “mispah” and made tawaf, i.e. walked counter-clockwise around it while worshipping and supplicating his Creator. The main ritual difference between then and now is that we also commemorate the frantic search of Mother Hajjar (Hagar, AS) for water for her infant son Is’mael (AS), by running seven times between the twin hills of Safa and Marwa.
Hajjar and Is’mael (AS) are buried against one wall of al-Kaba, the oldest mispah. The spring that was revealed to her by the Angel Gabriel (AS) is still there. I have been blessed to taste its water—the sweetest in the world.
I became eligible for the title “Al-Hajj” in 1417 A.H./1997 C.E., may Allah Sub’hanahu wa Ta’aala accept my pilgrimage. And there I saw first-hand the utter corruption and injustice of Ibn Sa'ud--those who presume to the title of “guardian” of Masjidul Haramayn, the two Holy Mosques in Mecca and Al-Medina.
For them to claim this title, when Abdul Aziiz ibn Sa’ud began his criminal career robbing and murdering Muslim Hajjis and kidnapping and raping their wives, and when his numerous descendants have comported themselves in even worse fashion, is very nearly sacrilege. Al-Qur’an itself admonishes that only the saalihiin—the Righteous—may be guardians of Masjidul Haramayn. Were this not the case, the Sa’udis would hold their position by consensus and acclamation of Muslim believers word-wide—not because they were forced on us by the British, and kept in place by the Americans.
The criminal family of Sa’ud relieve their overstuffed bowels in gold-plated toilet bowls while the streets outside their palaces are filled with crippled and starving beggars. Those who express their devotions at the graves of our beloved Prophet Muhammad (SWS) in any manner not approved by the rigidly intolerant Wahabbis are beaten and sometimes killed. And it is of course factions among them that finance and support al-Qa’eda, whose vile actions have earned them hatred wherever they go.
I witnessed the bankruptcy of their ideology when I was camped with a party of American Hajjis in Mina, the valley outside of Mecca where—on command from his Creator, Father Ibrahiim (AS) left his younger wife and their infant son. I was the only Shi’i in the party. The Wahabbi “Madrassa” at al-Medina sent two English-speaking “Sheikhs”—one a Sa’udi and one from Trinidad—to indoctrinate the American Hajjis with the Wahabbis’ distorted version of my faith.
The latter launched into a diatribe about the Wahabbis’ favorite “hang-up”, i.e. praying too close to the Baqi, the graves of the Holy Prophet and his family (SWS) which they argue constitutes "shirk"—idolatry. It can of course be proved from the very textual sources they regard as "sahih"—authentic—that our Prophet himself (SWS) prayed at the Baqi, as testified by his wife A’isha (RA).
Further all Muslims performing tawaf around al-Kaba stop and pray in its courtyard en masse it when it’s time to do so, and the graves of Hajjar and Isma’el (AS) are located adjacent to one of its walls. Idolatry—or lack of same—is determined by the object of worship, not the place of its performance. But of course bigotry and hatred have never required logic or reason to support them.
In any event, the Trinidadian puppet-“Sheikh” complained to the American Hajjis that when he and his ilk prevented those from Iran, Pakistan or elsewhere from praying near the graves, they were denounced as “enemies of Allah”. I then stood and replied:
“Ya’Sheikh, that’s not why we call you enemies of Allah. We call you enemies of Allah because you and your Isra’eli business partners have established banks that traffic in ribah—interest—in Mecca itself, despite the fact that Allah has warned in His Qur’an that He would make war against those who traffic in interest.”
“We call you enemies of Allah because you have established non-Muslim troops on Arab soil, in direct defiance to the Divine Ordinances of Sura Tawba” (the 9th chapter of Qur’an) “and to one of the final commands of your Prophet (SWS).”
“And we call you enemies of Allah because you have ALWAYS gone to war on the side of non-Muslims against Muslims. THAT’S why we call you enemies of Allah.”
I then left the group in disgust. I was shortly approached by a young Pakistani man serving with the Sa’udi police (this is the norm—members of Ibn Sa’ud do almost no work for themselves). This individual warned me that “this is not America. You can’t go around saying things like that here—you can be made to disappear.”
I laughed and replied, “Firstly, if I was from Iran or Pakistan, I might have reason to be afraid. But I’m an American. Ibn Sa’ud makes sajdah (bows down) to the Americans—they won’t dare harm me.”
“Secondly, when I got off the plane in Jeddah I saw a sign written in four languages that said ‘Welcome guests of Allah’. It didn’t say ‘Welcome guests of Ibn Sa’ud.’ I’m not here for them.”
“Thirdly, and most importantly, your Prophet (SWS) told you it is Jihadul-Akbar—the Greatest Jihad—to tell a tyrant the truth about himself. If you make me “disappear” while I’m doing that, I’ll reappear in heaven. And you’ll reappear in hell.”
I was never again, to my knowledge, approached by any other member of the Sa’udi government while I was in Arabia. I seriously doubt it was because they feared Allah, but rather because they feared to attack an American citizen. I guess the only thing positive I can say concerning this is that, had they been Isra’elis that wouldn’t have stopped them.
And now we learn that military troops of this criminal regime have—on “invitation” from King Hamad ibn Isa al-Khalifa—invaded and occupied Bah’rain, the playground of rich Sa’udi princes (along with Monaco and Beverly Hills) in response to ongoing peaceful protests demanding social and political reforms.
Bah’rain is predominantly Shi’a, but is ruled by an American-backed Sunni minority. To provide an idea of what the Shi’a can expect by way of treatment from the Sa’udis, I’ll paraphrase a “fatwa” of their “patron-saint” Muhammad ibn abdul-Wahabb, the founder of the Wahabbi movement:
Abdul-Wahabb ruled that the blood, property and women of Shi’a was halal—lawful—for his followers. This was the “religious” basis for Abdul-Aziiz’s blasphemous attacks on pilgrims traveling to Mecca. He further added that the blood, property and women of Sunnis who disagreed with the first ruling were also lawful to his followers. Al-Qa’eda openly declares adherence to this ruling today. The Sa’udi Army doesn’t openly declare it (when anyone else is listening)—they simply carry it out. And they are doing so.
The protests in Bah’rain were nonviolent, and were aimed at achieving reforms by people tired of being second-class citizens in their own country. The monarchy security forces shot them anyway and without hesitation. Bah’rani police fired on a funeral procession of a protestor killed 02/14/11 and inflicted 26 casualties, one fatal. On 02/17/11 a two year-old girl was shot multiple times by police. The next day they fired on peaceful protestors again, resulting in 66 casualties. At last count there have been over 500 casualties, including 20 fatalities, and a yet-to-be-determined number of “disappearances”.
Medical personnel have been shot trying to provide emergency treatment to the wounded, and “security” forces have blockaded all medical centers in the country. In one instance medical personnel attempting to leave a hospital treating wounded protestors were beaten by police. After the Sa’udis arrived in March, their soldiers commandeered ambulances and trucks in Shi’a villages and fired on the residents from them.
And despite all this and much worse, the Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff was sent to Bah’rain to reassure the monarchy of its support. Obviously the overriding issue is continued Bah’raini support of the US Fifth Fleet's ongoing mission to threaten the Islamic Republic of Iran, which would probably evaporate if REAL Muslims attained state power in Bah’rain. Once free of coercion, people tend not to provide succor to their oppressors.
So where are the “humanitarian concerns” that were so passionately cited as justification for attacking Lybia? Apparently Baruq O’bomba and Hillary the Harridan are more concerned about cancellation of the Grand Prix/Formula One race, or perhaps protecting the world’s largest liquor warehouse located there, and thus want things “stabilized” for this puppet regime no matter how many lives it costs.
As I said in my previous blog, please don’t waste type trying to argue that the US is acting according to “humanitarian considerations” anywhere in the middle-east. There isn’t enough humanity among all our ruling criminals taken together to fill a thimble.