Mid-East Leaders' attachmentsTo The Seat of Power. By:Marwan Arikat

When watching the Arab recent Revolutions; you will notice that the longer the régime has been in power, the more likely for the régime to fight more brutally for  his leadership position. For example, the president of Tunisia, Zine El Abidine Ben Ali Who became president in 1987, has abandoned his position without much of a fight. While Egypt's Mubarak, who became president in 1981, had to hope that the largest populated Arab Country Will blink first in the battle between the revolutionaries and the security forces, however, after the massacres around the country, Mubarak resigned. In Libya, the situation is different, after 42 of rule, it seems that Muammar al-Gaddafi has grown very attached to the seat of power. That is why Qaddafi's son has warned the opposition that if they keep up the protests, then they should expect bloodbaths. Thus, the removal of the Hashemite régime in Jordan, which existed since the Balfour Declaration in 1917, Will prove the most difficult to change and may cost the people of Jordan half of their population.

1982, The Year of Arab Catastrophes. By: Marwan Arikat

Months before the vicious massacres of Sabra and Shatilla Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon, perpetrated by extremist elements of the Maronite Phalangists with the help and direct support of Ariel Sharon and the Israeli Occupation Forces, a systematic genocide and extermination of innocent people was happening in neighboring Syria, more precisely in the city of Hama.  However, unlike the Sabra and Shatilla massacres, the genocide committed against the people of Hama did not receive much media coverage in international or even Arab media. Even the US government and major media outlets, which despises the Assad regime, ignored and downplayed  the genocide committed by Hafez Assad and his brother, Rifa'at Assad. This was probably due to the perception in Washington that Assad, as bad as he was, was fighting a common enemy of the US, Israel and the Syrian régime, the "Islamic Fundamentalists."   Moreover,  the United Nations and the rest of the so-called civilized world chose to turn a blind eye to the genocide in Hama that is considered today to be the worst mass extermination and killing in Arab modern history perpetrated by an Arab, the closest  other mass murder that resembled the Hama genocide, was committed by the Jordanian régime against the Palestinian population in Jordan between 1969 and 1970 in what is known as "Black September." Although no one was surprised by the Arab governments and régimes being a silent accomplice to the crimes in Hama, the fact that Arabs had to follow the Israeli media to get a glimpse of what was happening in Hama, Syria, was sickening.   Other than the Syrians, the Palestinians were mostly disgusted by the actions of the Syrian régime, who used and still uses the Palestinian card to silence his opponents, however, the Hama genocide showed the Palestinians that the real purpose of the weapons that the Syrian régime was accumulating was not to liberate Palestine or even the Golan Heights as we were taught in school, but it was used to demolish mosques, houses and infrastructure in the Arab and Syrian city of Hama. The death-toll in Hama, if we choose to ignore the Syrian civilians who until this day are still missing, was estimated to be between 20 to 40 thousands!  Today history is repeating itself, Assad the son, has launched his homicidal machine to crush the protesters in Hama and the rest of Syria. On the other hand, today we do not have any excuse to stay silent and blame mainstream media instead, because we all have access to our own media, thanks to the internet, so we have the choice to expose the Syrian regime or we can choose to be silent accomplices to Assad's crimes.

1982, The Year of Arab Catastrophes. By: Marwan Arikat

Months before the vicious massacres of Sabra and Shatilla Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon, perpetrated by extremist elements of the Maronite Phalangists with the help and direct support of Ariel Sharon and the Israeli Occupation Forces, a systematic genocide and extermination of innocent people was happening in neighboring Syria, more precisely in the city of Hama.  However, unlike the Sabra and Shatilla massacres, the genocide committed against the people of Hama did not receive much media coverage in international or even Arab media. Even the US government and major media outlets, which despises the Assad regime, ignored and downplayed  the genocide committed by Hafez Assad and his brother, Rifa'at Assad. This was probably due to the perception in Washington that Assad, as bad as he was, was fighting a common enemy of the US, Israel and the Syrian régime, the "Islamic Fundamentalists."   Moreover,  the United Nations and the rest of the so-called civilized world chose to turn a blind eye to the genocide in Hama that is considered today to be the worst mass extermination and killing in Arab modern history perpetrated by an Arab, the closest  other mass murder that resembled the Hama genocide, was committed by the Jordanian régime against the Palestinian population in Jordan between 1969 and 1970 in what is known as "Black September." Although no one was surprised by the Arab governments and régimes being a silent accomplice to the crimes in Hama, the fact that Arabs had to follow the Israeli media to get a glimpse of what was happening in Hama, Syria, was sickening.   Other than the Syrians, the Palestinians were mostly disgusted by the actions of the Syrian régime, who used and still uses the Palestinian card to silence his opponents, however, the Hama genocide showed the Palestinians that the real purpose of the weapons that the Syrian régime was accumulating was not to liberate Palestine or even the Golan Heights as we were taught in school, but it was used to demolish mosques, houses and infrastructure in the Arab and Syrian city of Hama. The death-toll in Hama, if we choose to ignore the Syrian civilians who until this day are still missing, was estimated to be between 20 to 40 thousands!  Today history is repeating itself, Assad the son, has launched his homicidal machine to crush the protesters in Hama and the rest of Syria. On the other hand, today we do not have any excuse to stay silent and blame mainstream media instead, because we all have access to our own media, thanks to the internet, so we have the choice to expose the Syrian regime or we can choose to be silent accomplices to Assad's crimes.

1982, The Year of Arab Catastrophes. By: Marwan Arikat

Months before the vicious massacres of Sabra and Shatilla Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon, perpetrated by extremist elements of the Maronite Phalangists with the help and direct support of Ariel Sharon and the Israeli Occupation Forces, a systematic genocide and extermination of innocent people was happening in neighboring Syria, more precisely in the city of Hama.  However, unlike the Sabra and Shatilla massacres, the genocide committed against the people of Hama did not receive much media coverage in international or even Arab media. Even the US government and major media outlets, which despises the Assad regime, ignored and downplayed  the genocide committed by Hafez Assad and his brother, Rifa'at Assad. This was probably due to the perception in Washington that Assad, as bad as he was, was fighting a common enemy of the US, Israel and the Syrian régime, the "Islamic Fundamentalists."   Moreover,  the United Nations and the rest of the so-called civilized world chose to turn a blind eye to the genocide in Hama that is considered today to be the worst mass extermination and killing in Arab modern history perpetrated by an Arab, the closest  other mass murder that resembled the Hama genocide, was committed by the Jordanian régime against the Palestinian population in Jordan between 1969 and 1970 in what is known as "Black September." Although no one was surprised by the Arab governments and régimes being a silent accomplice to the crimes in Hama, the fact that Arabs had to follow the Israeli media to get a glimpse of what was happening in Hama, Syria, was sickening.   Other than the Syrians, the Palestinians were mostly disgusted by the actions of the Syrian régime, who used and still uses the Palestinian card to silence his opponents, however, the Hama genocide showed the Palestinians that the real purpose of the weapons that the Syrian régime was accumulating was not to liberate Palestine or even the Golan Heights as we were taught in school, but it was used to demolish mosques, houses and infrastructure in the Arab and Syrian city of Hama. The death-toll in Hama, if we choose to ignore the Syrian civilians who until this day are still missing, was estimated to be between 20 to 40 thousands!  Today history is repeating itself, Assad the son, has launched his homicidal machine to crush the protesters in Hama and the rest of Syria. On the other hand, today we do not have any excuse to stay silent and blame mainstream media instead, because we all have access to our own media, thanks to the internet, so we have the choice to expose the Syrian regime or we can choose to be silent accomplices to Assad's crimes.

1982, The Year of Arab Catastrophes. By: Marwan Arikat

Months before the vicious massacres of Sabra and Shatilla Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon, perpetrated by extremist elements of the Maronite Phalangists with the help and direct support of Ariel Sharon and the Israeli Occupation Forces, a systematic genocide and extermination of innocent people was happening in neighboring Syria, more precisely in the city of Hama.  However, unlike the Sabra and Shatilla massacres, the genocide committed against the people of Hama did not receive much media coverage in international or even Arab media. Even the US government and major media outlets, which despises the Assad regime, ignored and downplayed  the genocide committed by Hafez Assad and his brother, Rifa'at Assad. This was probably due to the perception in Washington that Assad, as bad as he was, was fighting a common enemy of the US, Israel and the Syrian régime, the "Islamic Fundamentalists."   Moreover,  the United Nations and the rest of the so-called civilized world chose to turn a blind eye to the genocide in Hama that is considered today to be the worst mass extermination and killing in Arab modern history perpetrated by an Arab, the closest  other mass murder that resembled the Hama genocide, was committed by the Jordanian régime against the Palestinian population in Jordan between 1969 and 1970 in what is known as "Black September." Although no one was surprised by the Arab governments and régimes being a silent accomplice to the crimes in Hama, the fact that Arabs had to follow the Israeli media to get a glimpse of what was happening in Hama, Syria, was sickening.   Other than the Syrians, the Palestinians were mostly disgusted by the actions of the Syrian régime, who used and still uses the Palestinian card to silence his opponents, however, the Hama genocide showed the Palestinians that the real purpose of the weapons that the Syrian régime was accumulating was not to liberate Palestine or even the Golan Heights as we were taught in school, but it was used to demolish mosques, houses and infrastructure in the Arab and Syrian city of Hama. The death-toll in Hama, if we choose to ignore the Syrian civilians who until this day are still missing, was estimated to be between 20 to 40 thousands!  Today history is repeating itself, Assad the son, has launched his homicidal machine to crush the protesters in Hama and the rest of Syria. On the other hand, today we do not have any excuse to stay silent and blame mainstream media instead, because we all have access to our own media, thanks to the internet, so we have the choice to expose the Syrian regime or we can choose to be silent accomplices to Assad's crimes.

Assad's Worst Nightmare

By: Marwan Arikat ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the 2003 Arab summit and shortly before the US invaded Iraq, Bashar Assad of Syria berated the other Arab countries over their silence (and consent) to the US invasion of Iraq. He talked about the evils of allowing imperialist nations to intervene in what he regarded as an Arab internal affair. In addition, he warned the Arab countries that they will be the next target of foreign imperialism and intervention if they do not prevent the US plans to invade and occupy Iraq. Back then, he was regarded, by many people in the Arab world, as a shrewd, farseeing politician who displayed an uncanny wisdom for his age, he was extremely insightful to the extent that his own late cunning father seemed obtuse in comparison. However, the current brutality and violent suppression of the Syrian uprising by his army, security forces, secret police, and government thugs or "Shabiha"proves that Assad has reverted to the primitive mindset of the rest of the other Arab leaders and to the monstrosity of his old-man. This can't be the same perceptive, sagacious, smooth, and savvy Assad of 2003! In 2003, the educated, civilized and articulate Assad reached-out and appealed to the hundreds of millions of Arabs and non-Arabs around the globe. Now he seems incapable of establishing an adequate and a very simple dialogue with his own people. Furthermore, the vicious and cruel crackdown against the (unarmed) Syrian civilian demonstrators makes Assad look like the ignorant and imbecile savage leaders of Libya and Yemen. Moreover, Assad's crimes against his own people and the appearance of mass graves in northern Syria will inevitably pressure foreign countries, especially western nations, to intervene in Syria's internal crisis, thus, fulfilling Assad's worst nightmare. Additionally, Assad initiated foreign intervention in his own country the minute he asked for the support of the persian régime to help him suppress the Syrian local uprising. Iran, one of the Middle Eastern regional imperialist superpowers, was more than happy to mobilize thousands of its notorious and ruthless Iranian Revolutionary Guards (IRG) in support of Assad's grip on power in Syria, because Assad was always regarded as an Iranian proxy. Also, the Iranian régime always dreamt of gaining a foothold along the Lebanese and the Israeli borders in order to directly support and arm its own proxies in Southern Lebanon, Hizbollah. It is worth mentioning that the (IRG) happen to be experts on the suppression of uprisings because they practice it everyday in Iran. The Iranian intervention in Syria has triggered a a chain reaction in the region. For example, Turkey, another imperialist power and a rival of Iran in the region, is building up its troops along the Syrian borders and is threatening to intrude on Syrian territory to prevent the influx of Syrian refugees, escaping Assad's massacres, to Turkey. Likewise, Israel, which is currently deploying its elite units to its northern borders with Syria, will not set idle and accept the presence of Iranian troops in Syria or Lebanon. Besides, Israel is the only nuclear superpower in the Middle East and any Israeli intervention in Syria will cost the Syrians more than the Golan Heights, which Syria lost to Israel in the 1967 war. Also, any Israeli intervention will lead to the globalization of the conflict, because both Israel and Iran are armed to the teeth and both possess weapons of mass destruction. Thus, Assad, who was worried about the impact of foreign intervention in neighboring Iraq on his own country, will now have to deal with foreign intervention in his own backyard, thanks to his brutal and inhumane policy toward his people. Isn't that an Irony?

How The Saudi Monarchy Betrayed The (Salafist) Abd Al-Wahhab and crushed "Wahabism"!

How The Saudi Monarchy Betrayed The (Salafist) Abd Al-Wahhab and crushed "Wahabism"! By: Marwan Arikat I.Who is Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab? A. An 18th century Muslim theologian, from the district of Najd in the Arabian Peninsuela which is currently known as Saudi Arabia B. He was a devout followers of the Hanballi Islamic school of thought, which is one of the four Islamic schools of thought recognized by Sunni Muslims. C. He is associated with the revivalist religious movement of Salafism II. What is Salafism and is it the same as "Wahhabism"? A. A Salafi is one who follows the tradition of Salaf. The word Salaf literally means predecessor, and it is short for the phrase "al-Salaf as-Saleh", which means "The Pious Predecessors." B. The Salaf or " The Pious Predecessors" refers to the first three Generations in Islam, the first generation are the companions or disciples of the Prophet of Islam, the second generation are the followers of the first generation of Islam and the third generation are the followers of the followers of the First generation of Islam. C. According to the Salafi interpretation, the ways and the traditions of the Salaf(The Pious Predecessors), embody the Islam that was preached by Muhammad and practiced by his Companions, as well as the second and third generations succeeding them, which was a pure, unadulterated Islam, and, therefore, the ultimate authority for the interpretation of the two sources of revelation given to Muhammad, namely the Qur'an and the Sunnah. D. Salafism is a puritan Islamic movement, and Salafism as we know it today is based on teachings of Ahmad Bin Hanbal whose main accomplishment was integrating and unifying the other three Islamic schools of thoughts of his mentors and predecessors into one school of thought to prevent any innovations or distortions of Sunnah(the Pure Tradition of Prophet Muhammad), thus, Ibn Hanbal earned the title of "The Imam of the Sunnis." E."Wahhabism" is an orientalist derogatory term, was first coined by the British to describe Salafis, because Salafi fighters known as "Ikhwan(not Al-Ikhwan)"were raiding British Mandate areas such as Transjordan and Iraq. The term was then used by members of anti-Sunni Islamic branches, like Sufis and Shia'a. F. The insinuation behind the terminology of "Wahhabism" to describe Salafism is to make Salafi-thought seem as a foreign concept to Islam, by associating Salafism with the British word "Wahhabism", Muslims might believe that this puritanical Islamic school of thought is an invention by Abd al-Wahhab. Even though, the Salafist movement first appeared 1400 years ago, after the Assassination of the third Muslim head of state, Othman Bin Affan, who was also a close companion of the Prophet of Islam. 1.Salafism appeared as a reaction to the appearance of many deviant "Islamic" Ideologies and groups, some of which encouraged or justified the Killing of Othman 2. Salafism tried to reunite Muslims after the murder of Othman, and tried to prevent the civil wars and the unrest caused by the murder of Othman. 3. The two most famous figures who are mostly associated with initiating the foundations of Salafism, after the civil tension(caused by the murder of Othman) intensified between the Muslim Leadership in Baghdad and the Muslim Leadership in Damascus, were Abdullah Ibn Al-Abbas, the first cousin of Prophet Muhammad, and Abdullah Ibn Omar Ibn Al-Khattab, a young companion of the Prophet and the son of one of the most beloved companions to the Prophet. III. The Pact between Ibn Saud and Ibn Abd al-Wahhab: A.Ibn Abd al-Wahhab and Muhammed Ibn Saud ( the founder of the first Saudi State), signed a pact in which Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab would support Ibn Saud leadership on the condition that Ibn Saud would implement and enforce Ibn Abd-al-Wahhab's teachings, especially ridding the Arabian peninsula of innovations (heretics) in the practice of Islam by bringing the religion back to its purest form. B. The pact or alliance was formalized by the wedding of Muhammad bin Abdul-Wahhab's daughter to Abdul Aziz, son and successor of Ibn Saud. IV. Salafists(Salafis) in the Arabian Peninsula were not pacifists! A. Although Abd- Wahab's ideology is misrepresented these days as a pacifist movement which blindly obeys the "House of Saud," Abd al-Wahhab believed that the peaceful call for Islam cannot be seperated from the physical striving in the cause of God. B. Salafis in the Arabian Peninsula have established a military wing which initiated the first waves of anti-colonial armed resistance and armed raids against the British Occupation forces and their Arab proxies in Transjordan and Iraq. C. The armed wing of Salafism was named "Ikhwan" which meant "brothers" (not to be confused with "Al-Ikhwan" or the non-salafi Muslim Brotherhood.) D. "Ikhwan" raided Transjordan and Iraq, which were under British occupation, so many times that the Birtish were enraged and wanted to crush the Salafist"Ikhwan." E. The Saudi Family did not have an army, so it relied on "Ikhwan" to subdue the Arabian Peninsula based on the agreement with Abd al-Wahhab. F. The "Ikhwan" is one of the first anti-colonial resistance moveme in the Arabian Peninsula. G. The "Ikhwan" stood out, because resistance movements in the Middle East were usually initiated by the educated, city inhabitants who belonged to middle or upper class. While " Ikhwan" were religious, salafi Bedouin tribesmen. Thus, the "Ikhwan" did not conform to the common Arab stereotype that Bedouins were primitive in their thinking, because Bedouins are believed to be tribally oriented, rather than ideologically oriented. H. "Ikhwan's" allegiance were to God and His Prophet and loyalty to the tribe came second. Their mission was to eliminate all forms of idolatry in the Arabian Peninsula and the rest of the Arab World. The interest of the tribe was not their priority. I. After the British occupation failed to crush "Ikhwan," they conspired with the Saudi Family to eliminate "Ikhwan." The Brits promised to support the Saudi future state if the "Ikwan" were defeated, and sure enough the Saudi established alliances with different tribes and were armed by the British with modern weapons, along with the support of British Royal Air-force, helping the Saudi Family defeat the "Ikhwan" who relied on primitive weapons like swords and spears. V. How did the Modern Saudi Monarchy silence the many descendants of Abd al-Wahhab? A. The Saudi Family knew that even after the defeat of "Ikhwan", the countless descendants of if Abd al-Wahhab (later named Al-Sheikh, or the tribe of the [religious]Scholar) were concentrated in Najd which happens to be the home base of the House of Saud, and Al-Shiekh were as large as the Saudi Family or the House of Saud. B. Moreover, Al-Shiekh was more supported by the religious scholars and followers of Abd al-Wahhab than the Saudi Family. C. To ensure the support and the allegiance of Al-Shiekh and their supporters, the Saudi Family established a pact with Al-Shiekh which puts the Islamic Holysites under the control of Al-Shiekh, in addition, legislation of internal affairs as well as the religious courts of law are to be based on the salafi principals put down by Abd al-Wahhab. D. Therefore, the legislative council or "Shura" council in Saudi Arabia, is run until this day by the descendants and the followers of Abd al-Wahhab. E. In addition, the affairs and the management of the Two Holy Mosques in Mecca and Medina must be run by a direct descendant ( not only a follower) of Abd al-Wahhab, which was a coup d'état against the Hashemites (the tribe of the Prophet of Islam) and the their relative tribes of Mecca and Medina who were the ones in charge of the of the two Holy Mosques since the death of the Prophet ( In the case of Mecca, the Meccan tribes, including the Hashemites, controlled Mecca for centuries before the Birth of the Prophet of Islam) until the collapse of the Ottoman empire in 1917. VI. Why is this deal a betrayal of the original pact with Abd al-Wahhab? A. Abd al-Wahhab wanted the basics of Islam or the traditions of the Salaf spread around the Muslim World, and more specifically in the eastern part of the Arab World(Arabia, Yemen, Great Syria and Iraq) while the Saudi Family limited the teachings to the borders of modern Saudi Arabia. B. Abd al-Wahhab did not separate between internal and external affairs, he was determined to ensure that Islamic law would apply to all affairs of the state, and not only limited to internal affairs. C. Abd al-Wahhab and other Salafis refused any harmonious relations with colonial powers( "Ikhwan's" raids and battles against the British.) D. Abd al-Wahhab believed that Muhammed Ibn Saud ( the founder of the first Saudi State) will run the state as Caliphate State not as a royal state. E. Abd al-Wahhab would've not made the pact with the Saudi Family if he had known that they would follow secular traditions with regard to State's external affairs, monarchy system or the State's funds and wealth. F. Salafis in general do not regard anyone, especially the head of the state and his family, as exempt from the Islamic law of the land. G. In addition, almost all Salafis agree that the head of the state is a care taker and enforcer of the Divine Law which is interpreted by the legislative council or the council of the scholars (Shura Council). This means that the head of the state must implements Shura Council laws, hence, the head of the state cannot make-up any laws.