Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Wahhabis in America
The Weekly Standard ^ | 11/05/2001 | Stephen Schwartz

Posted on 10/28/2001 2:26:48 PM PST by Pokey78

A Saudi export we could do without.

SECRETARY OF STATE Colin Powell thinks "it's a little odd" for the United States to be telling our Saudi allies that they should "muzzle dissent, . . . muzzle those [in Saudi Arabia] who are speaking out against us" and our campaign in Afghanistan.

But the main public critics of the United States in Saudi Arabia are no ordinary "dissenters." They are the Islamofascist imams and muftis of the Wahhabi sect, the ideological arm of the Saudi royal dictatorship. Secretary Powell's solicitousness for the rights of these extremists seems to be based on two unfortunate misconceptions. One is that the Saudi regime is, and should be, part of an alliance with the United States. The other combines a misplaced belief that American standards of free speech should extend to those who plot our destruction, with obliviousness to the global reach of the Wahhabi-Saudi network.

As Powell should be aware, the Wahhabi-Saudi establishment subsidizes terrorism while seeking to control Muslim religious institutions and activities around the world. Saudi influence reaches even the overwhelming majority of mosques in the United States. The issue, therefore, is not muzzling the Wahhabis, but removing the muzzle from their victims, over whom they exercise an abusive control.

There are many critics of Wahhabism-Saudism among American Muslims, but few who are willing to speak out by name for the record. Most have been intimidated into silence. In addition, among the enemies of the Wahhabi-Saudi conspiracy, some of the angriest, most knowledgeable, and most forthcoming with information are not pro-American; they are angry at Riyadh for its compromises with the West. Yet their rage at Saudi duplicity leads them to publicize damaging and verifiable information about Saudi mischief.

Sheikh Hisham Kabbani of the Islamic Supreme Council of America is one critic of Wahhabism who falls into neither of these problematic categories. He is an eloquent public opponent of Wahhabi efforts to regiment American Muslims; and he fully supports American democratic values, as well as a peaceful resolution of the Israeli-Arab conflict. In 1999, Kabbani warned that 80 percent of mosques in the United States are subject to Wahhabi manipulation, through financial subsidies. More recently he wrote of the spreading influence of Wahhabis, who often go by the cover name "Salafis": "Supported by certain regimes pursuing specific ideologies, 'Salafis' are taking over the mosques built in Europe and North America, mostly by Indian and Pakistani immigrants, by means of elections and funding."

But Wahhabi domination involves much more than control over money and the elected governing assemblies of mosques; it also means dictating the curriculum for the training of imams, setting the tone and content of sermons, deciding what books and periodicals may be read in mosque libraries or sold in mosque bookshops, and excluding or otherwise suppressing dissenters.

Wahhabism is based on the justification and promotion of violence against all, including Muslims, who do not share the Wahhabi outlook. Kabbani has called this its "most harmful legacy to society." Pious youths from Muslim countries, sent to be educated in the Gulf states, are brainwashed. On returning to their homes, they brusquely reject the traditional Islam of their parents. Further, they are taught to abstain from all participation in society outside Wahhabi mosques and organizations. For American Muslims this means, Kabbani notes, that they must not vote, serve on juries, or join in interfaith activities. Such strictures prevented the numerous imams and activists associated with Wahhabi mosques in the United States from joining forces with Jews, Christians, and others in behalf of the Muslim victims of the Balkan wars.

The Wahhabi worldwide offensive does not end with such manipulations. Rather, it comprises, in Kabbani's words, "heavy financing, deviant teaching, Internet and book publishing, and biased editing." The Wahhabis are particularly known for the free distribution and dumping on the book market of their literature, including tendentious translations of the Koran, the Islamic scripture. Such materials have included the writings of a Wahhabi bigot, Hamd ibn 'Abd al-Muhsin, who demanded that women who drive automobiles in Saudi Arabia be charged as prostitutes.

Dr. Gibril Fuad Haddad, a Lebanese writer and opponent of Wahhabism-Saudism, has placed nearly the whole Islamic establishment in America and other Western countries on the roster of Saudi-subsidized propagandists. This includes the functionaries who stood alongside President Bush at the Washington Islamic Center soon after September 11. Haddad's condemnation encompasses the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), which exercise immense influence over mosques, the World Assembly of Muslim Youth, and numerous other incarnations of this hydra-headed beast. According to one informant who requested anonymity, Wahhabi imams in American mosques until recently received salaries of between $2,000 and $4,000 a month from the Gulf states.

Indeed, the multifarious Wahhabi entities spend money like, well, a Saudi oil prince--some of it on political lobbying. In 1999, the Saudi embassy in Washington announced a grant by the Islamic Development Bank of $250,000 to the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) for the purchase of land in Washington, to be used in the construction of "an education and research center." CAIR is, without doubt, the most obnoxious front for terrorist apologetics to be found in the United States; even since September 11, it has relentlessly sought, on the pretext of promoting "sensitivity," to dictate how Islam may be discussed in American media. Its methods are anything but subtle, usually featuring peremptory demands and even threats, and until recently it was notably successful. (CAIR, incidentally, is but a minor line item in the Wahhabi budget. The Saudi embassy statement announcing the grant to CAIR also reported gifts of $395,000 for the construction of a school in Tanzania and $30 million for "Islamic associations in India.")

Wahhabi-Saudi lobbying is nothing if not bold. In 1999, Saudi "relief agencies" were on the scene in Kosovo within a month of the end of the NATO intervention, showering money for Wahhabi indoctrination. The Saudi embassy in Washington proudly declared, on that occasion, that a goal of the effort was "promoting Islamic curricula as a mandatory component in Kosovo schools." But while Kosovar Albanians are Muslims in their majority, they include a significant Catholic minority, especially prominent in intellectual life.

It was no wonder, then, that on December 29, 1999, the Kosovapress news agency, media arm of the former Kosovo Liberation Army, issued a strong denunciation of the infiltration of Wahhabi-Saudi missionaries. It declared, "For more than a century, civilized countries have separated religion from the state. . . . We now see attempts, not only in Kosovo but everywhere Albanians live, to introduce religion into public schools. . . . Supplemental courses for children have been set up by foreign Islamic organizations who hide behind assistance programs. Some radio stations . . . now offer nightly broadcasts in Arabic, which nobody understands and which lead many to ask, are we in an Arab country? It is time for Albanian mosques to be separated from Arab connections and for Islam to be developed on the basis of Albanian culture and customs."

The Saudis also use their control over the city of Mecca--destination of the hajj pilgrimage that is one of the five pillars of Islam, obligatory for all who can afford it--as an opportunity for political shenanigans. In their hands, the hajj frequently becomes a paid junket useful for recruitment purposes. In 2000, the Muslim World League (much overdue for a full investigation into its funding of Osama bin Laden, but omitted from the president's list of groups whose funds have been frozen) hosted 100 prominent American Islamic personalities on hajj. They were accompanied by a delegation of 60 Latin American "academics and specialists." All expenses for the latter were paid by Prince Bandar Ibn Sultan Ibn Abdul Aziz, Saudi ambassador to the United States. Last year the Saudis advertised their subsidy of 1,500 pilgrims from Europe, Asia, Africa, and North America. In 1999, the Saudis paid for 100 influential American Muslims to "make hajj." The list of such expenditures seems limitless.

Resentment of this religious colonialism is rife among American Muslims, however subdued its expression now. One authoritative source who also asked to remain nameless but who was long courted by the Islamic Society of North America told me, "American Muslims are getting real sick of Wahhabi domination." Others, however, note that ISNA has recently feigned openness to non-Wahhabi Muslims, just as its leaders portrayed themselves as "anti-terrorist" to President Bush.

For Wahhabis everywhere, the party line is laid down in Riyadh, which simultaneously foments terrorist teaching and disclaims any responsibility for Wahhabi atrocities, exemplified by those of bin Laden. Saudis corrupt Muslims abroad in exactly the way that the Soviet Union once bought the loyalty of foreign intellectuals, labor leaders, and guerrilla fighters, and for the same ends. This worldwide subversion can be combated only as fascist and Communist sedition were once fought: with courage and determination, and in full solidarity with the Muslim heroes in the forefront of resistance to it.



Stephen Schwartz is writing a book to be titled The Two Faces of Islam.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

1 posted on 10/28/2001 2:26:48 PM PST by Pokey78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
The roads of terrorism are paved in and out of Saudi Arabia.
2 posted on 10/28/2001 2:40:02 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
More Stephen Schwartz?
3 posted on 10/28/2001 2:40:37 PM PST by Patria One
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78; dennisw
For American Muslims this means, Kabbani notes, that they must not vote

That was the only bit of optimism in the article.

4 posted on 10/28/2001 2:40:38 PM PST by vrwc54
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vrwc54
Wahhabis have a way to silence dissenting tonges ... cut off the head. I read that approx. 80% of Imams preaching in American Mosques are of the radicalized variety, akin if not actually Wahhabis, products of the radical Madrassas. Deport every single one of them, sent to Saudi Arabia ... only problem with that is, al Saud doesn't want the fanatical bastards in thier country to overthrow the Saud family regime! They've been supporting the fanatics in an effort to garner their benign neglect of house of Saud. Time is up.
5 posted on 10/28/2001 2:47:38 PM PST by MHGinTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: vrwc54
When is a religion not a religion? Wahhabism seems to qualify as a non-religion?
6 posted on 10/28/2001 2:49:08 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
"SECRETARY OF STATE Colin Powell thinks "it's a little odd" for the United States to be telling our Saudi allies that they should "muzzle dissent, . . . muzzle those [in Saudi Arabia] who are speaking out against us" and our campaign in Afghanistan."

Not as odd as some of the pronouncements of Mr. POwell, such as this one. Would he have supported allowing Nazi supporters to voice their opposition to U.S. policies in WWII? Mr. Powell is clearly the very WORST of Bush's appointments. At least Chrissie Whitman has been relegated to second class status and effectively defanged. But this man, with his most unsoldierly approach to foreign policy is dangerous.

The U.S. has been attacked. On its home soil. 5000 plus U.S. citizens lie dead in the wreckage of the world trade center. Anthrax is running rampant and may be part of a foreign biowarfare attempt at killing U.S. leaders and civilians.

This is not time for an olive branch, condescention to extremist wackos foreign or domestic, or half-way military measures. It is time for the U.S. government to act. NOW. By striking by air and land at the Taliban WHEREVER they are hiding. If they chose to use THEIR civilians as shields to attack or resist us, they are responsible not we.

Did we hesitate to bomb civlian centers in WW 2if it was required? Did we allow Nazis to hide from us in cathedrals or churches? Did we allow Nazi sympathizers to undermine our war effort here or abroad?

Then what is the difference here? The World Trade Center Attack was worse then Pearl Harbor. Why the kid gloves? If the Saudis don't want to support us they are just as much our enemies as the Iraqis and the Taliban, and oil is war material. We can and should just sieze their oil fields if they won't cooperate with us.

7 posted on 10/28/2001 3:06:09 PM PST by ZULU
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
. . .only problem with that is, al Saud doesn't want the fanatical bastards in thier country to overthrow the Saud family regime!

Yes. It has struck me more than once recently that the most extreme fundamentalist groups where terrorists such as Atta are recruited and groomed are not on Mid-East soil, but in Europe and N. America. Atta's parents sent him from Egypt to Germany to get a degree, not anticipating that he would be recruited into the terrorist stream of Islam. This is not an isolated incident. These groups CANNOT operate as freely and openly in those moderate Arab countries, who, as you say, fear overthrow by these groups and take steps to suppress them. England, Germany, Canada, the US -- the freedom of the West (which they hate and want to destroy) has allowed these groups to "grow" terrorists, which they could NOT so easily do in the cradle of Islam itself!

This makes for a conundrum. What are we doing to prevent the recruitment and grooming of terrorists in Europe and N.A.? (I don't mean terrorist cells -- I mean the fertile breeding ground . . .) What can/should we do? In addition to stopping PC nonsense . . .

8 posted on 10/28/2001 3:09:17 PM PST by AMDG&BVMH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78; *taliban_list
Isn't this the same group of Muslims doing the nasty stuff in Algeria?

In afghanistan we call them the Taliban, don't know what their name is in Algeria.

To find all articles tagged or indexed using

taliban_list

Click here:

taliban_list

9 posted on 10/28/2001 3:11:57 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
It looks like there is justification for "admitting" Saudi Arabia into the Union as a state. New Texas would be an appropriate name.
10 posted on 10/28/2001 3:13:11 PM PST by rightofrush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
The Two Faces of Islam

Yep, they are two-faced all right. But it's going to take at least another 5,000 American lives for us to realize it. Israel already knows though, and why do the Muslims need a new Palestine state when they already have Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and every other country in the middle east?

11 posted on 10/28/2001 3:17:56 PM PST by Terrorista Nada
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rightofrush
It looks like there is justification for "admitting" Saudi Arabia into the Union as a state. New Texas would be an appropriate name.

Don't mess with Texas.

 America's Fifth Column ... watch PBS documentary JIHAD! In America -- here

12 posted on 10/28/2001 3:20:33 PM PST by JCG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: AMDG&BVMH
What can the gov't do?... Profile the radical Imams and deport them along with any radicals associated to them, back to the nation listed on their visas. If they're citizens here, strip them of citizenship for inciting sedition.

What can we the people do?... Here's an FR thread that deals with what we can do, daily. Read through some of the anecdotal stories and see why we shouldn't leave home now without a camera and something to write on.

The URL is http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/553304/posts?q=1&&page=1

13 posted on 10/28/2001 3:21:05 PM PST by MHGinTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Isn't there a bounty on moslem terrorists??? Do they have to be alive to collect??
14 posted on 10/28/2001 3:26:19 PM PST by cayman99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AMDG
This makes for a conundrum. What are we doing to prevent the recruitment and grooming of terrorists in Europe and N.A.?

We're doing nothing. We've been inviting the enemy into our house all along, and we've done nothing since to prevent them coming here. We have not closed our borders to middleeasterners, we make no effort to deport terrorists, we dont even deport people who are suspected of being terrorists, we don;t check on the validity of student visas. We have 8 million illegal aliens whome we are not even attempting to find and deport.

Political correctness is destroying this country no less than terrorism.

The fall of the American empire is coming

15 posted on 10/28/2001 3:30:55 PM PST by liberalism=failure
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ZULU
Did we hesitate to bomb civlian centers in WW 2if it was required? Did we allow Nazis to hide from us in cathedrals or churches? Did we allow Nazi sympathizers to undermine our war effort here or abroad? Then what is the difference here? The World Trade Center Attack was worse then Pearl Harbor. Why the kid gloves?

Different country today than in WWII. Then it was America today it is Amerika.

But don't get discouraged. Unlike previous wars where most but not all of the politicians and priveleged sit on the sidelines and watch uniformed young men in their late teens and early twenties get killed; the elitists are in danger now. It's a new type of war now where the wealthy and priviledged, and women and children have to worry about being killed.So we will respond. -Tom

16 posted on 10/28/2001 3:45:12 PM PST by Capt. Tom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN; liberalism=failure
I agree with what both of you have said.

I bookmarked the citizen action site, and will be vigilant.

I am especially concerned about the observation that the US is doing nothing to take control of our borders. 1. We are asking real people in our Armed Forces to possibly die in a h**l hole like Afghanistan, or someother jet-to-be-named terrorist-sponsoring-state -- yet from 9/11 till today (Di Fi's bill may be a step) we have NOT shown the political will to stop more terrorists from coming in on the same kinds of visas, and are even increasing access to our hallowed shores to Pakistan and Saudi Arabia "passport holders" -- who could be anybody, as their passports are apparently easily faked. 2. In allowing that, we are placing "free trade" above the security and lives of real Americans. This is worse than the old cold war MAD doctrine.

In other words, the lives of real Americans are being placed in jeopardy by these policies, and there is no sign they will change unless WE THE PEOPLE demand it!

17 posted on 10/28/2001 3:49:12 PM PST by AMDG&BVMH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Bump for a later read.
18 posted on 10/28/2001 3:49:40 PM PST by NotJustAnotherPrettyFace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
The time is indeed up yet they continue to think they can play both sides. That only works as long as both sides remain viable. The results this time are not going to be a stalemate.
19 posted on 10/28/2001 3:54:40 PM PST by Let's Roll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Powell isn't and never was worth a damn. He's about as bright as 4 watt light bulb.

He dicked up a lot of the operation in Panama and during Desert Storm he was a Pentagon spit shine politcal guy, Schwartzkoff was the brains behind the operation.

He was picked as SOS as a political move, he had virtually no experience on the world stage or diplomacy whatsoever.

Now he often operates outside the reservation saying and doing stupid things. The Bush administration has no choice but to leave him outside the loop and hope he doesn't hurt anybody, which only makes matters worse.

At this point they can't fire him because that'll give their opponants the opportunity to sink their claws into them.

This is what you when you think of things like race and politics when you need to get a job done. I guess they felt like they needed to parade Powell around the Bush ranch during the election and are now paying the price. Affirmitive Action has no place when a President is picking a cabinet. The Bush team is learning that the hard way.

Condi Rice is light years ahead of Powell in intelligence and experience and would have made a great SOS.

20 posted on 10/28/2001 4:07:22 PM PST by AAABEST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson