[Host:] The Saudi crown prince, Mohammed Bin Salman, paid a visit to the Holy Mosque in Mecca, and took a walk on the roof of the Noble Ka’bah together with a number of his entourage, after that the courtyard and surrounding areas of the Ka’bah were cleared of Umrah pilgrims and prayer attendees. Saudi media reported that the crown prince’s visit to the Holy Mosque today was to oversee the expansion projects and the services offered to Umrah pilgrims. He performed circumabulation (Tawaf) of the Ka’bah and climbed on its rooftop.
[Dr. Mohammed Al-Massari] It’s a chaotic situation that is unbelievable, and they’re a nation that is content with being like sheep, and religious scholars who are ignorant about the fact that the Earth moves in a rotating motion, and who issue fatwas to them about obeying those in authority, and the ‘blessed state through which Allah has made Truth triumphant’, as stated by Ibn Baz. [unintelligible] There is a few intellectuals like Rashid Mubarak, May Allah bless his soul, he spent his whole life giving counsel and guidance, etc, and he once complained to me saying, “When there was a wave of pressures mounting on Saudi Arabia in the ’80s, everyone who wanted would found a newspaper in London, and they would attack Saudi Arabia. So, they would give them 2 or 3 million as hush money. 1, 2 or 3 million. So, in the Supreme Media Council— which Rashid was a member of— of course, now he’s deceased. [unintelligible].
So, a newspaper was founded, and he proposed. (Saudi Prince) Naif was the head of the Supreme Media Council. His death was a few years prior to Rashid’s. It’s said that America assassinated him in Geneva. Allah knows best, anyway. So, Naif proposed that to him, and Rashid said, “My advice is not to take that route at all. This route is nothing but blackmail, and it will become a way through which these people will continually gain money. Let them say whatever they want. What are we afraid of?” This man, Rashid, is supposed to be— or maybe he wanted to embarrass them. Rashid is not a stupid person, but he had a pretty good opinion of the (Saudi) state and its personalities, and he believe that much of what is claimed about them is not true, based on his own personal interactions with them. They would treat him with utmost respect, like I mentioned regarding the Nuclear Council. Continue reading Dr. Al-Massari’s Statement That Infuriated the Wahhabis
[Dr. Mohammed Al-Massari] Despite the fact that now there are documents proving that Saud Ibn Abdul Aziz Ibn Mohammed Ibn Saud Ibn Muqrin Ibn Morkhan, who is the third Imam, if we consider Mohammed Ibn Saud as the first, he would then be the third Imam. That man was in contact with the British, and the British communicated with him and complained to him-
[Host] Again, at what time was that?
[Dr. Al-Massari] This situation— there are documents available on the internet and the dates can be looked up, but it’s around 1780-90, that was when they were communicating with the British, and the latter complained to him about the Qawasim— these Qawasim were Wahhabi jihadis, jihadis, but they were attacking the British vessels at sea. So, Saud Ibn Mohammed stopped them— Saud Ibn Abdul Aziz, he stopped them— Saud the First, or Saud the Elder, as he’s called. He stopped them from engaging in these activities, but even arrested one of the Qawasim and detained him at his place in Riyadh. So, from early on they had established contacts with the British. Some say that they held the British back from the islamic world. That’s not true. In fact, they were collaborating with the British since the first state, and this fact was not previously known until the emergence of documents recently showing that. Continue reading British Role In Establishing First Saudi State – Dr. Mohammed Al-Massari
[Host] But, Mohammed Bin Salman speaks in a tone that is hostile to Iran, and he also talks about preparing for war in the next 15..
[Dr. Mohammed Al-Massari] When the Iranian revolution happened— I think we mentioned that in a previous episode, or we’ll come back to it later in detail, when we come back to Wahhabism and its repercussions in Saudi Arabia. When Iran raised the islamic banner, regardless of whether it is truly islamic or not, the fact is that it raised an islamic banner. Abdel Nasser raised an Arab nationalist banner, and socialist, and revolutionary banner. The latter was confronted with the banner of islamic solidarity by (king) Faisal, and Faisal was able to defeat it, and the historical fact is that this movement was defeated, because Faisal was able to gain the masses, and he used the (Al-Ikhwan Al-Muslimoon) Muslim Brotherhood and exploited them— and we will get back to them in a little while, for that purpose, and he dealt a definitive blow to the nationalist and revolutionary movement. There is no doubt about that.
Iran came on the scene, and the revolution there was carried out on an islamic basis. Shiite Islam, but on an islamic basis. So, there was now a rival. Saudi Arabia enjoyed a monopoly. The Saudi motto was always, “There is no place in the world where the islamic Shariah is applied to the letter except us. Only us” So, now there was a new challenger who was making the claim that “we are applying the islamic Shariah.” Yes, it was according to a different school of thought and sect, but, “We are Muslims and islamists.”
So, now the monopoly was at stake, and the Saudi throne was in jeopardy, in addition to the fact that Iran had deviated from its traditional Shiite theology of awaiting the emergence of the Mahdi, and the Shiite people of Iran had begun to take matters in their own hands and hold elections, etc. All of this poses a lethal danger to the Al-Sauds. So, they played the sectarian card. Now, in addition to this, they want to strike a deal with Israel because he is deeply convinced that the Al-Sauds’ stay in power would not be possible except with the blessings of the US and Israel.
So, his statements on Iran that Khamenei is like Hitler or worse than Hitler, etc, is nothing but playing with the emotions of the Zionists and currying favor with them. Otherwise, this statement is out of context with regards to the regional conflict. There is no justification for him to be described as Hitler or not. He could have described him as Genghis Khan if he wanted, but not as Hitler. It’s clear that this was intended for the Zionist elements in order to play with the emotions of the Jews and gain them in his favor.