🔻 History, heresiology, anthropology and all things muslamic — and I use em dashes.
Joined November 2020
- Tweets11.5K
- Following659
- Followers7.2K
- Likes15K
Knowledge North retweeted
This "Muslim" is a patsy. He has been rolled out to stoke hatred and radicalise his fellow low-IQ idiots. Once he has served his purpose, he'll get discarded and arrested.
Knowledge North retweeted
Sister, in your debate, you claimed that the hadith about the Muslims fighting those with Mongoloid features was fulfilled with the Mongol sack of Baghdad (c. 1258).
The prophesy was actually fulfilled many centuries before this, during the era of the Companions. See here:
youtu.be/JjXe-tyGa4Y
Knowledge North retweeted
Regardless, in Islam, we don't oppose falsehood with falsehood.
There is no way a believer can justify slut shaming any woman by sharing scantily clad images of her or directing others towards such illicit content.
This is blatantly anti-Islamic behaviour from you, brother, and you carry the sin of all those whose desires you've aroused or the haram you've in any case invited others to gaze upon.
I'd have replied to you directly when you posted those images, but I didn't want any share of your sin or further increasing your own burden on the Day of Resurrection.
إِنَّ اللَّهَ يَأْمُرُ بِالْعَدْلِ وَالْإِحْسَانِ وَإِيتَاءِ ذِي الْقُرْبَىٰ وَيَنْهَىٰ عَنِ الْفَحْشَاءِ وَالْمُنكَرِ وَالْبَغْيِ ۚ يَعِظُكُمْ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَذَكَّرُونَ
Knowledge North retweeted
No Muslim has ever or would ever call for such a pointless ban. Not only do we not care for what others eat, but during prayer in particular, we're too focused on our godly duty to particularly give a damn. So please go head: gorge yourself to death on bacon, pork belly and ham.
Knowledge North retweeted
What you deride as "criticiz[ing] people" is nothing but the sharing of reminders to the believers, encouraging each other towards steadfastness upon the truth, warning and admonishing against falling into falsehood, and correcting and refuting what may be exhibited of misguidance.
All such criticism is not just an aspect of Islam. It is Islam in so far as the Prophet ﷺ said:
الدِّينُ النَّصِيحَةُ
"The religion [of Islam] is sincere counsel."
As regards the duty of hisba specifically — calling others to accountability through enjoining the good and forbidding evil publicly — then this is from the greatest expressions of jihād. And the Prophet ﷺ said:
وَمَنْ جَاهَدَهُمْ بِلِسَانِهِ فَهُوَ مُؤْمِنٌ
So even were it true that criticizing people is all that I do, then you've no right to object to something legislated in the revelation and so highly lauded in our religion.
Rather, I can hope for reward from my Lord, as could you, the beneficiary, had you received the nasiha with humility — to say nothing of welcoming one's critic with gratitude and felicity. As Umar said:
رحم الله امرأ أهدى إليّ عيوبي
"May Allah have mercy on the one who gifted me my faults."
My behaviour towards you would only be objectionable if the criticism was (a) unwarranted and/or (b) in opposition to the Book and the Sunna.
As for (b), every counsel I've given thee, whether explicitly or implicitly, evoked the guidance bequeathed to us by Allah and His Nabi,
الصلاة والسلام عليه
While as for (a)—your deservedness of criticism and rebuke—this is something you've yourself admitted to… to a point.
So your insulting me above, when at least superficially my words were sincere and done out of love, speaks to your reprehensible character and rebellious conduct.
Your protest that you and others are only "trying their best" does not absolve you for falling short. Not when your best is manifestly in opposition to the Sunna and the principles ahl as-sunna taught.
Each time I've advised you, its been with good manners, directing you towards matters of Islam that you are patently ignorant of, such as the impact of territoriality on blasphemy, or matters you are aware of, but too arrogant to take care of. Because when it comes to harming the reputation of Islam online, after your friend Mohammed Hijab, you're second in line.
As for your demanding to know what I'm doing, then a question returns to you. What do think is required of me or any Muslim beyond the (farā'id) obligations that upon every individual have been specified, or the collective obligation (fard kifāya) of dawa wherein one believes oneself qualified?
But since you ask, had you bothered to look, you'd have learnt of the overseas masājid and marākiz I've founded and funded, the dawa literature I've authored and published, the communities I have supported, even after getting banned and deported.
In the online English space alone, I defy to bring anything to rival what I've brought on the intersectionality of adiqa, history, and intellectual Salafi thought.
Direct us, if you can, to a better defence of the Sahaba during the fitna that befell them than my Civil War playlist. Show us a better articulation for the foresight and political astuteness of Ali, for the Companionship of Muawiya, the exoneration of Talha, Zubayr and Aisha, and a better freeing from the charge of treachery and rebellion than what I volunteered for Husayn and Abdullah b. Zubayr.
Show us a more through exposition of Hizb ut-Tahrir, the crypto-Rafida with fanciful claims to work for a khilafa, than my series on the devious cult.
Show us any research in any language online that has shed light on the Taymiyyan moment in the Ottoman Empire at its greatest expanse as expansive as mine.
Bring us a more nuanced exploration of the restoration of tawhid and the political reinstatement of the Athari creed at the hands of the Wahhabis than my take on the subject – and we're barely half-way through yet.
Show us a more consistent defence of the mujāhidin of Falastin against their detractors from the yahūd, ghulāt and the munāfiqin than what I routinely translate from the ulamā ar-rāsikhin.
I'm not highlighted any of the above by way of boasting, astaghfirullah. Whatever I produce of good is due to Allah's Grace alone in spite of myself, while the flaws are entirely mine.
I'm only mentioning all this because you insisted, and also, to illustrate which of us really have the right to claim Islamic orthodoxy.
Because the reality is you, brother, mix truth with falsehood, raising the corrupt Bible over your head while throwing Abu Bakr as-Siddiq under your feet.
There's nothing to gloat about regards your debating Christians either. This is something many of us did in our teens and 20s, though with significant differences.
For one, unlike you, we weren't put to trial by having to play to fanboys or a camera crew.
Also, while we were keen to have our learning validated from the ulamā, those who are obviously more knowledgeable than we were/are. Your authority, by contrast, is given to you from the juhalā and the ghawghā – fickle-minded followers who are even more ignorant and immature than you are.
Insha'Allah, a long-form video on the Devil’s Deception of the Dawah Bros is not too far. In the meantime, I hope you'll sit down, wise up, and take some critical nasiha.
Knowledge North retweeted
Of course, no scholar of the Bible says that Jesus preached the trinity. The trinity, as you known, began developing as a dogma from the 2nd century onwards — after its claimed the Greek Bible was originally complied.
The problem here, brother, is more fundamental though. Our dawa is to the Islam of the Quran, not to unreliable reports of what may or may not have been passed down of the sayings of Jesus in the Bible.
"That basically makes the debate on whether the Quran is true" is exactly the point of dawa. To have the people read and consider the Quran.
Sure, there can be utility in pointing out contradictions between what Christianity claims of Jesus and what their texts claim Jesus said of himself. But all that should be no more than a means to an end: to bring the discussion to Islam itself.
The problem with the bible-aggrandising Muslim movement is that you'll spend the entire time wrangling over the semantics of a corrupted scripture, going to such extremes that you'll start making positive truth claims for the Bible in a way that's only allowed for the Quran. Essentially, you'll make the Bible your dawa, betraying an inferiority complex vis-à-vis the Quran's capacity to argue its own case.
قُلْ فَلِلّهِ الْحُجَّةُ الْبَالِغَةُ
Say, "But with Allah is the perfect proof and argument." (Q.6:149)
This is why the debate title/prompt, "Did Jesus teach the Trinity?"—apparently proposed by the Muslim side—is so misleading. Its a dereliction of the duty of dawa when you've no intention of appealing to the only certain sources for Jesus' teaching: the Quran and Sunna.
A more truthful title would have been, "Did the Jesus of the Bible teach the Trinity?", as then its clear that this discussion is not an Islamic one, but a secular critique which an atheist or non-evangelical Christian could equally make.
But the reason the Muslim side were so willing to assume the role of the secular critic rather than that of the caller to Islam is because, as they conceded right at the outset, they recognise the Greek Gospels as representing the true historical account of Jesus, wherein his true teachings are found.
In other words, in effect, the Muslims were not making a secular case after all, but a religious case. Just not the case for the religion of Islam, sadly.
So to that [religion of Allah] invite, and remain on a right course as you are commanded, and do not follow their inclinations but say, "I have believed in what Allah has revealed of the Quran, and I have been commanded to do justice among you. Allah is our Lord and your Lord. For us are our deeds, and for you your deeds. There is no [need for] argument between us and you. Allah will bring us together, and to Him is the [final] destination." (Q.42:15)
Knowledge North retweeted
While this is a welcome step forward, brother, I fear you're overlooking a crucial factor in verbal engagement with one's disbelieving antagonists, namely: territoriality.
The context of the ayah you cited (Q. 48:29), as with Abu Bakr's rebuke of Urwa you previously drew upon to justify your behaviour, was one of open hostility between the pagan and Muslim polities (Mecca and Medina respectively), around the event of Hudaybiyya.
A state can enforce red lines and discipline transgressors. In the absence of such power, we risk writing cheques with our mouths that our limbs can't cash — not to mention provoking and escalating blasphemous attacks against Islam's sacred symbols. Such attacks are, after all, constitutionally protected in the non-Muslim societies we have chosen to reside in and whose freedoms we have, de facto and de jure, signed up to.
I intend to address these issues in greater detail in a forthcoming video on the Devil's Deception of the Dawah Bros. In the meantime, I pray you'll find this 👇 video on territoriality and blasphemy beneficial:
youtu.be/IjcCsxcB4aM
May Allah bless you and keep you in good health.
And may He grant that you spend only lawfully acquired wealth.
Knowledge North retweeted
المصارع المسلم وبطل وزن الخفيف والولتر ويت الداغستاني اسلام مخاشيف يتعلم ويقرأ القران الكريم عند احد مشايخ السعودية
Knowledge North retweeted
🧵 I don't know whether you're genuinely this gormless or deliberately this deceitful; whether you're actually practicing taqiyya and pretending to be clueless, or if you actually are this clueless.
Knowing what we do of people trapped in cults like HT, especially those who fail to escape them long into adulthood after most youths will have grown up, wised up, and moved on, it's entirely possible that you've developed a zombie-like psychosis, wherein the cult devotee is incapable of processing or even recognising any argument that challenges or undermines his sect’s sacred precepts. Instead, he defaults to chanting mantras, sloganeering, and jeering at outsiders and decriers.
To you the reader, while Andalusi and Tahriris like to think themselves intellectual, they are in truth pseudo-intellectual—and that’s us being charitable. They have an infantilised perception of the real world, of history, geopolitics, and of Islam, which they forgo describing as a religion in favour of the more secular-sounding "ideology" with a set of "systems."
Every doubt and deflection Andalusi has raised, I already addressed, including in direct response to him in my video, HT & the Shia. But reading his responses here, you'd think he was never thoroughly refuted.
So, for the sake of thoroughness, amma address his dodging and deceit yet one more time...
Knowledge North retweeted
Nice try. 😏
The quote is from Orwell's review of a book by Sholem Asch—you know, the Yiddish author who was blasted by his Jewish supremacist peers for trying to say nice things about Jesus!
Anyway, looks like this genocide-apologising Zionist rag didn't get the memo:
Knowledge North retweeted
Beyond horrifying.
Gentiles holding Jews accountable for war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity. 😱
The chutzpah!
Knowledge North retweeted
The Palestinian Holocaust is being televised yet people deny it.
The Jewish Holocaust was not televised yet you can get jailed for denying it.
What a crazy world we live in.
Knowledge North retweeted
Shaykh Faiṣal al-Jāsim’s response to Yāsir Burhāmī’s rejection of defending the people of Gaza
In Shaykh Yāsir Buhrāmī’s words, there are multiple contradictions and points of criticism:
Among them: he mentioned that it is not permissible to wage jihād against the occupying state today until we first inform them of the annulment of the treaty and renounce it openly. By this, he refers to the Camp David Accords between Egypt and the occupying state. Then, in the same segment, he stated that the Jews had already breached the treaty by their usurpation of the lands of East Jerusalem — and this is a clear contradiction.
Moreover, the Jews have violated the treaty in several ways: including their entry into the Philadelphi Corridor with heavy military vehicles, which is a direct breach of the treaty’s terms, as well as their closure of the Rafaḥ crossing, among other violations. Anyone who examines the events that followed the treaty knows this. Thus, if it is evident that the Jews have breached the treaty in multiple ways, then it is clear that it would be permissible to initiate fighting against them without prior notification — just as the Prophet ﷺ did with Quraysh when they broke their covenant. Therefore, Shaykh Buhrāmī’s excuse of requiring to notify the Jews before fighting them is baseless.
Even if we assume the treaty is still valid, that the Jews had not violated any of its conditions, and that it is impermissible to fight them without notification — and that supporting the people of Gaza depends on notifying the Jews of withdrawal from the treaty, while such support is obligatory — then why did Shaykh Buhrāmī not comment on the failure to fulfill this obligation, namely the obligation to notify the Jews of withdrawal? Especially given that more than a year and a half had passed since the genocide against the people of Gaza?
Another point of criticism: his reliance on the permissibility of abandoning fighting if the disbelievers’ army is more than double the size of the Muslims’ army. This is a clear mistake: this kind of endurance is only related to offensive jihād, or to defensive jihād if the enemy is at the borders of Muslim lands but has not yet entered them or usurped them. In that case, it is not obligatory to confront them if their number is more than double the Muslims’. However, if the enemy invades Muslim lands, storms their homes, usurps their territory, and sheds their blood, violates their wealth, and assaults their honor, then defending against them becomes individually obligatory (farḍ ʿayn) and does not depend on such conditions — because it is a matter of repelling an aggressor, as clearly stated by the scholars.
Furthermore, the ruling concerns numbers, not weaponry: meaning it would be allowed for Muslims to abandon fighting if the disbelievers are more than double their number, but not if their strength or firepower is merely twice as great. Strength is measured by capability, not just numbers, as Allāh says: {And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and steeds of war}. [8:60]
Another criticism: Shaykh Buhrāmī did not address the many measures that states could take apart from warfare, including threatening to annul treaties, actually withdrawing from treaties without declaring war, closing land, air, and sea routes, supplying the people of Gaza with weapons — just as Western countries supply the occupying state — and imposing economic boycotts, among many other options. The Islāmic countries have not even prosecuted the occupying state in the International Court of Justice, nor joined South Africa’s lawsuit, nor pursued charges against the head of the occupying government and his aides in the International Criminal Court as war criminals. If the Islāmic countries failed to pursue such relatively easy legal actions, how can it be appropriate for us, as preachers, to rush to defend them and justify their failure to engage in the obligatory acts of jihād and support?
1️⃣
في كلام الشيخ ياسر برهامي تناقضات ومؤاخذات متعددة:
منها: أنه ذكر عدم جواز جهاد دولة الاحتلال اليوم حتى نُعلمهم بنقض العهد، وننبذ إليهم على سواء، ويقصد بذلك معاهدة كامب ديفيد بين مصر ودولة الاحتلال، ثم ذكر في نفس المقطع أن اليهود قد نقضوا العهد في اغتصابهم أراضي القدس الشرقية، وهذا من تناقضه.
ويضاف أيضًا أن اليهود قد نقضوا المعاهدة من عدة أوجه: منها دخولهم محور فيلادلفيا بآلياتهم العسكرية الثقيلة، وهو نقض لصريح لشروط المعاهدة، ومنها إغلاقهم لمعبر رفح، وغير ذلك من الأمور التي نقضت بها دولة الاحتلال المعاهدة بفعلها أمورا تخالف بعض شروطها، وكل من سبر الأحداث التي جرت من اليهود عقب المعاهدة يعلم ذلك، فإذا تبيّن أن اليهود قد قاموا بنقض المعاهدة من عدة أوجه، فلا يخفى حينئذ جواز بداءتهم بالقتال دون إعلام، كما فعل النبي ﷺ بقريش حينما نقضوا العهد، فاعتذار الشيخ برهاني بوجوب إعلام اليهود قبل قتالهم اعتذار واهٕ.
ولو قدرنا أن المعاهدة ماضية، وأن اليهود لم يقع منهم نقض لبعض شروطها، وأنه لا يجوز قتالهم إلا بعد إعلامهم، وكانت نصرة أهل غزة متوقفة على إعلام اليهود بالانسحاب من المعاهدة، والنصرة واجبة، فما الذي منع الشيخ برهامي من التعليق على عدم القيام بهذا الواجب، وهو إعلام اليهود بالانسحاب من المعاهدة، حيث كانت نصرة أهل غزة متوقفة عليها، وقد مضى على حرب الإبادة على أهل غزة أكثر من سنة ونصف؟!
ومن المؤاخذات: استدلاله بجواز ترك القتال إذا كان جيش الكفار أكثر من ضعفي جيش المسلمين، وهذا خطأ ظاهر، فإن هذه المصابرة إنما هي في جهاد الطلب، أو في جهاد الدفع فيما إذا نزل العدو بلاد المسلمين ونزل في حدود المسلمين، وحاصرهم، لكنه لم يدخل أرضهم ولا غصب بلادهم، فلا يجب حينئذ الخروج إليه إذا كانوا أكثر من ضعفي المسلمين، وأما إذا دهم العدو بلاد المسلمين، واجتاح ديارهم، وغصب أرضهم وبلادهم، واستباح دماءهم وأموالهم وأعراضهم، فدفاعه حينئذ متعين، ولا يُشترط فيه هذا الشرط ولا غيره، لأنه حينئذ من باب دفع الصائل، كما نص عليه العلماء.
ثم إن هذا الحكم إنما في العدد لا في العدة، أي؛ يجوز للمسلمين ترك قتال الكفار إذا كانوا أكثر من ضعفي المسلمين عددًا، لا فيما إذا كانت قوتهم تُقدر بضعفي قوة المسلمين، لأن القوة قد قُدرت بالاستطاعة لابالعدد، في قوله ﴿وَأَعِدّوا لَهُم مَا استَطَعتُم مِن قُوَّةٍ وَمِن رِباطِ الخَيلِ﴾.
ومن المؤاخذات: أن الشيخ برهامي لم يعرج ما يمكن للدول فعله غير القتال، وهي أمور كثيره، منها: التهديد بإلغاء المعاهدات، أو إلغاؤها فعلا والانسحاب منها بدون إعلان حرب، ومنها: إغلاق الأجواء البرية والجويه والبحرية، ومنها: إمداد الغزاويين بالسلاح، كما تفعله دول الغرب مع دولة الاحتلال، ومنها: المقاطعة الاقتصادية، وأشياء أخرى كثيرة، فإن الدول الاسلامية لم تقم حتى بمقاضاة دولة الاحتلال في محكمة العدل الدولية، ولم تنضم إلى الدعوى التي قامت بها جنوب إفريقيا، كما أنهم لم يقوموا برفع دعوى على رئيس حكومة الاحتلال ومعاونيه في المحكمة الجنائية الدولية باعتبارهم مجرمي حرب. فإذا كانت الدول الإسلامية لم تقم برفع مثل هذه الدعاوى في المحاكم الدولية، مع يسرها، فهل يستحقون منا نحن الدعاة أن ننبري للمحاماة عنهم، وتبرير تفريطهم بترك القتال، أو النصرة الواجبة؟! وهل يُتصور ممن ترك أيسر الأمور أن يكون مريدا لأعظمها، لكن منعه العجز الشرعي أو الحسي؟!
ومن المؤاخذات: أنه اعتذر عن عدم القيام بنصرة أهل غزة بالقتال بأنهم لم يشاوروا المسلمين في بداءة الاحتلال بالقتال، فنقول للشيخ: وهل في جهاد دفع الصائل مشاورة؟! كيف وقد اقتحم العدو بلادهم، واغتصب أرضهم، واستباح دمائهم وأموالهم وأعراضهم، وانتهك مقدساتهم، فهل يمكن لعاقل فضلا عن عالم، أن يطلب من المُعتَدَى عليهم مشاورة المسلمين قبل قيامهم بمدافعة الصائل على أنفسهم وأعراضهم وأموالهم وأرضهم؟!
ويُقال أيضًا: هب أن المستضعفين لم يشاوروا دول المسلمين، مع وجوب المشاورة، فقاموا بقتال الكفار الصائلين بدون مشاورة، فتسلط عليهم الكفار مجتمعين بدولهم، وسعوا في إبادة المسلمين المستضعفين كما هو حاصل الآن في غزة، فهل يجوز حينئذ ترك نصرتهم، والامتناع من الجهاد معهم، بحجة أنهم بادروا بدون مشاورة؟! هل يقول بهذا مسلم فضلا عن عالم أو طالب علم؟!
... للكلام تتمة
Knowledge North retweeted
‘Forgive me, mother. This is the path I chose—to help people.’
These were the last words of Rifaat Radwan, who filmed his own murder in Rafah. He was part of a Red Crescent convoy aiding wounded civilians. The convoy—clearly marked, unarmed, with flashing lights—was attacked on March 23, 2025.
For five days, the UN and Red Crescent were denied access to search for the missing rescue workers. When granted entry, they found 15 rescuers buried in a mass grave. The UN and Red Cross have called it the deadliest assault on their workers since 2017.
On April 2, the IDF stated that on March 23, ‘several vehicles were identified advancing suspiciously toward IDF troops without headlights or emergency signals,’ and their movement wasn’t coordinated in advance, prompting troops to open fire on these ‘suspected vehicles.’
However, the paramedic’s video, recovered from his body and verified by The New York Times, shows the convoy’s emergency lights were on, contradicting the IDF’s claim and proving their account of the attack was a lie.
Knowledge North retweeted
If you look closely you will see people fly high into the sky and fall back down to Earth.
This is September 11th for Palestinians, every single day for 18 months
teapawt.org/NouR_GaZaa/status/1907…
Knowledge North retweeted
This will ultimately end with the total and utter eradication of all Zionists from the face of the earth.
Slowly but surely, European peoples are shedding the shackles of shabbos goydom, freeing themselves from servitude to the sadistic and spiteful Israeli terror state.
Christians will seek to redress the wrongs of decades of genocidal complicity by turning on the Jéwish supremacists they had enabled for so long.
As usual, the revilers of Jesus and his mother will seek refuge among Muslims. But, alas!, none shall be found. ZioNazis scurrying for their worthless lives will be hunted down to a miserable man. No mercy shall be shown. No quarter shall be given. Not this time. Not any more.
For the whole world has now seen the true face of Talmudic tyranny. And it is the horrid, ugly face that discerning folks had warned of all the while.
So enjoy your báby-bútchering while you can. It is but a respite from the impending reckoning. The time for honouring yourself shall soon be at an end.
Knowledge North retweeted
A letter to Donald J. Trump from Prince Turki bin Faisal Al Saud, a Saudi prince and former government official who served as the head of Saudi Arabia's General Intelligence Presidency from 1979 to 2001. He is a grandson of Saudi's founder King Abdulaziz and son of King Faisal. He is the chairman of the King Faisal Foundation's Center for Research and Islamic Studies.
The letter:
Dear President Trump,
The Palestinian people are not illegal immigrants to be deported to other lands. The lands are their lands and the houses that Israel destroyed are their homes, and they will rebuild them as they have done after previous Israeli onslaughts on them.
Most of the people of Gaza are refugees, driven out of their homes in what is now Israel and the West Bank by the previous Israeli genocidal assault on them in the 1948 and 1967 wars. If they are to be moved from Gaza, they should be allowed to return to their homes and to their orange and olive groves in Haifa, Jaffa and other towns and villages from which they fled or were forcibly driven out by the Israelis.
Mr President, many of the tens of thousands of immigrants who came to Palestine from Europe and other places after the Second World War stole Palestinian homes and land, terrorised the inhabitants and engaged in a campaign of ethnic cleansing. Alas, America and the UK, the victors of the war, stood by and even facilitated the murderous evictions of the Palestinians from their homes and lands.
America and the UK did not want to receive the victims of Adolf Hitler’s Holocaust, so they were content with sending them to Palestine. In the book Eight Days at Yalta, the author Diana Preston refers to a conversation between then US president Franklin Roosevelt and his Russian counterpart Joseph Stalin. Preston writes: “Conversation turned to the subject of Jewish homelands. Roosevelt said he was a Zionist… When Stalin asked Roosevelt what present he planned to make [Saudi king] Ibn Saud, he replied his only concession might be to give him six million Jews…”
Fortunately, when Mr Roosevelt did meet Ibn Saud, the king disabused him of that offer and suggested that the Jews should be offered the best lands in Germany as compensation for the Holocaust. Alas, Harry Truman, Roosevelt’s successor, wholeheartedly supported Jewish immigration to Palestine and eventually became instrumental in the creation of Israel.
The violence and bloodshed we witness today are the result of that action and the previous British complicity with Zionist ambitions from 1917 until then.
Mr President, your declared intent to bring peace to Palestine is much lauded in our part of the world. I respectfully suggest that the way to do that is to give the Palestinians their inalienable right to self-determination and a state with its capital in East Jerusalem, as envisaged in UN General Assembly Resolutions 181 and 194 and Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, and the Arab Peace Initiative.
All the Arab and Islamic countries, as well as the Palestinian Authority, accept the terms of the Arab Peace Initiative to end hostilities and establish relations with Israel. One hundred and forty-nine countries recognise the Palestinian state. Please make your country the 150th. No peace in the Middle East will be realised without addressing this noble issue justly and fairly.
Be remembered as the peacemaker.
Prince Turki Al Faisal
Knowledge North retweeted
If Muslims thought burning Churches was the thing to do, they'd have started with the Church of the Holy Seplecure when they liberated Jerusalem 1,388 years ago. That most sacred of Christian sites still stands.
Can't say the same for the Churches Zionists bombed in Gaza though.