New unconfirmed reports Isis leader Al Baghdadi killed by airstrikes

a reply to: mindseye1609

You're not wrong pal.

The only thing I'd disagree with is the percentage you shared.



I'd be willing to bet it's closer to 95% wahhabi.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

If anyone does kill him both them and all of their family are dead.. because you know they are keeping an eye on every single procedure that gets done.. but I'm sure they made sure of loyal doctors and nurses prior to putting him there...

No way could we be so lucky as to have a nurse administer a lethal dose of something... but its always nice to dream!


a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

I agree with your 95%. But what most don't realize is that the followers of the teachings of Ibn Wahab love to change their name. Notice how no one runs around calling themselves his follower? Nope... they have many different names, and every-time one name is exposed they simply change it to another..

and God knows they run around defending their new names like their very lives depend on it!

Here is the original report from Al Arabiya

Not a good start for the Caliphate if true. Some new Guru will no doubtly materialise.

I guess his dream came true?

Martyrdom is on sale, and at rock bottom prices!

I guess cutting people heads off IS NOT a superior anti-air weapon!

Imagine his shock, or lack of, when there is no reward, just nothingness, go now, into the void, you will be forgotten, we all are eventually.

a reply to: OpinionatedB

PROOF of Photoshop:

COMPARE the photo of his watch on his wrist in THIS picture:
www.ibtimes.co.uk...

...with the photo of of his watch in the supposed post-mortem photo here:
www.iraqinews.com...

...unfortunately, they are IDENTICAL.
Wish I was wrong!

I would have expected this to be all over the MSM today as it happened yesterday,but its not.
I wonder if ISis have a plan for this eventuality?
If its true,it will certainly have pissed off his dirt bag followers in a big way as he was seen as their sort of spiritual king.
We can only guess how they will react if it turns out Al baghdadi is dead.
At least they can't really become more fanatical I suppose as they are already off the chart in that department.

I agree, it looks to be a PSYOP from someone. More than likely some one from the Iraqi Gov't. I'd need the fingers and toes of most of ATS's members to count how many times I have heard that some one had been killed, only to capture or find their body after a firefight months and in some cases years later.

If we did only wound him however, that will be two attempts on his life that have failed (Publically acknowledged anyways) and it will boost his status among his followers. They will point to him and say that he has been blessed by allah.

Allah Shmallah.............what a load of cayuse crap, this phoney war..................

a reply to: OpinionatedB

So much so they follow Al Wahabs teachings over that of Muhammad(pbuh)...


How they have the nerve to call themselves Muslims is a joke.



It's a new age, psychopaths, philosophy not a religion.

originally posted by: stirling
Allah Shmallah.............what a load of cayuse crap, this phoney war..................

Not attacking you, but you brought up a phrase that has always irritated me.

Phony War.

I can tell you that it's not phony when some one is shooting at you. I'm pretty sure that most people, regardless of which side they are on would agree.

This is a real war. The reasoning behind it may be phony, but it is very real to those who are participating in it.

If the U.S. thinks he's dead then we don't have a villain to fight anymore right?

Maybe this is strategic.

Or maybe they are removing him as an asset because the American people are tired of war.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

See.. Can't do that.. Wahhabis are pretty close to the Muslims if old from what I've read. They are even considered "Puritan" Muslims.

That's not to say that like Christianity, Islam as a whole hasn't evolved over the years and matured and gotten away from the more barbaric ways of old. When Al-Wahhab founded his first mission in nejd in the 1700's it was a "revivalist" movement trying to abolish "innovations in Islam"

I'd like to thank ATS as a whole as well as people like you Charlie and willtell and many more for helping me see past my initial misconceptions about Modern mature Islam but the history is also there to see that Islam of old including the Islam of the prophet was a pretty vicious Islam.

Wahhabism is attempting for whatever reason to force this Islam of old on the world and thankfully many Muslims have even taken up the fight so hopefully we can get over this one without too much outside intervention.

For the people more educated then me, what's the end game with Wahhabism? What does the house of saud want to accomplish? The old promise of "rule of lands and men" doesn't really still stand in modern times, or does it? How powerful is the house of saud really?

originally posted by: Walsh

you speak as if they are all one and the same ?

Because they are.

2nd.

Awww, photochopped, booo, and badly!

Being covered right now on UK sky news finally.
Al baghdadi has been wounded they say.

a reply to: mindseye1609

I'm glad you've taken the time to learn for yourself rather than be spoon fed what the media says about Islam.

I appreciate that a lot because knowledge is power, and you're empowering yourself by knowing the difference.




The end game for Wahhabis is difficult to grasp, but they have many fingers in many extremist pies, such as ISIS, funding people like Bin Laden & other groups right now fighting the Assad regime...
But overall I think The House Of Saud is trying to become a super power, money is their main agenda.

& they're pretty powerful, as Middle Eastern countries go on the global scale it's pretty much top of the league.
Or at least level with Israel in what it can get away with.



They behead people much more often than ISIS, but it's not a national debate because they're an Ally!




Islam of the Prophet is still in power today, whether it be the Sunnis, Shia & Kurds fighting ISIS or the the Iraqi army that was on the frontline with the Allies against AlQaeda...
To the Pakistan freedom fighters battling the Taliban...


It's this Jihad that the Prophet told us we have a duty and right to engage in when we are backed against a wall.

Islam was only vicious to those who waged war, and to this day that's what we Muslims are trying to do.


Extremism makes it hard, constant interference hadn't helped it actually bred more problems because people were left devastated losing loved ones for nothing and being disenfranchised by the war on terror...
They picked up Arms with whoever had them to get revenge, in the meantime they aligned themselves with some horrible people like Al Baghdadi...


& the problem ensues!




If he is dead, good #ing riddance!!!

originally posted by: mindseye1609
a reply to: Walsh

The US even has adoption programs for children of servicemen and foreign ladies of service

.. Did in Korea in the 80's anyway lol a friend claims that's her back story... Man genetics is a hell of a thing... A marine and a Korean service woman make for a fireball lemme tell you what.


Also follow most of those groups you listed can be traced back to the "Wahhabi" section of Islam. I'd be willing to bet 75% or more of Islamic extremeism is born of Wahhabi ideals/orders.

The Wahhabi state of Saudi Arabia is the most extremist AND also the most successful at missionary work. The haus-o-saud's financing does wonders for spreading the extremist way. What the end game is I still don't know(IDK if anyone else even does either lol) but I can tell you Saudi Arabia is one of the major instigators of the last 15 years.

i agree with some of what you are saying , while i have no doubts that some funding for these groups is indeed coming from the Saudi Arabia. but its definitely not coming from the KSA Gov , it wouldn't make sense . I don't believe believe 75% of people are born as "whahbi" . i think the majority of Saudi Arabian are of the "salaf" or "salafi" at least all the major scholars were indeed "Salafi" or in short "Sunnie"

here is the difference :

The principal tenet of Salafism is that the Islam that was preached by Muhammad Sallallahu 'alaihi wasallam and practiced by his Companions, as well as the second and third generations succeeding them, was pure, unadulterated, and, therefore, the ultimate authority for the interpretation of the two sources of revelation given to Muhammad, Sallallahu 'alaihiwasallam namely the Qur'an and the Sunnah. This is not interpreted to mean an imitation of cultural norms or trends that are not part of the legislated worship of Islam, but rather the fundamental beliefs of Islam, or 'Aqeedah.

The term Salafi is sometimes replaced with "Wahhabi", especially in American Orientalist and popular literature, but not always in a derogatory sense. However, the term is used overwhelmingly so in Shi'ite and many Sufi references, where it is replaced with the word "Wahhabi" almost as a rule. The term "Wahhabism" is, in turn, connected to various accusations of heresies and practices quite unknown to Salafi adherents, and is often spoken of in the American media in relation to terrorism, or "extremist" Islam.

Salafis categorically reject the Wahhabi label, because they consider it to be largely unfounded, an object of some controversy. Salafis will argue that Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab did not establish a new school of thought but rather revived the pure, unadulterated Islam that was practiced by the earliest generations of Muslims. Abd-al-Wahhab's writings, such as his magnum opus, Kitab at-Tawheed (The Book of Tawheed), plus others such as Masaa'il al-Jaahiliyyah (Aspects of the Days of Ignorance), and Kashf ash-Shubuhaat (A Removal of the Doubts) are agreed upon almost without exception, and are rarely considered by those that use the term "Wahhabi" for an understanding of "Wahhabism", or those who denigrate his methodology and beliefs openly, further consolidating the perceived intent of malice, or misconception.

While the ascription of "Salafi" has most commonly been used in the Arab World, and possibly even more so now by Muslims in the West, it is usually contextual, and secondary to the more common term Ahl-as-Sunnah (i.e., "People of the Sunnah"). Ahl al-Hadeeth (The People of Hadeeth) is more often used in the Indian subcontinent within the same context, identifying the adherents of Salafi orthodoxy, while used more in Arabic academia to specifically indicate the scholars and students of Hadeeth. All are considered to bear the same or similar connotation and have been used interchangeably by Muslim scholars throughout the ages, Ahl al-Hadeeth possibly being the oldest recorded term used to describe the adherents to the beliefs of the first three generations. Ahl as-Sunnah is overwhelmingly used by Muslim scholars, including Salafi scholars, but often by other than the Salafis, such as the Ash'ari sect, leading to a greater use of the term "Salafi" in the context of differentiation.

keep in mind that the majority of the so called "extremist " or "terrorist " are actually natives to whatever country they are organized in a, small percent are foreign fighters .



and these groups have actually made claimed that they are under the "ideology" of Wahhabi or Salafiyaa . however by their actions they are not . they are Khuawarij .

a reply to: Walsh

Walsh my friend, the 75% was towards acts of extremism by Wahhabism, not how much of the population they take up!

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: Walsh

You might b e a muslim apologist but whether you like it nor not muslim extremism is blowing up people all over the world and those people are innocent except they are not muslims. Care to name another so-called religion that incites people to act in this way and is currently doing the same - we all grew out of this behaviour generations ago.

1) ISIS follow Qutubism, not Islam
2) The majority of attacks are on Muslims in Iraq and Syria or each other
3) There's nutters in every single religion - in the UK/EIRE we the threat of the IRA due to Catholic/Protestant War, Tony Blair admitted he prayed to God to decide whether or not to invade Iraq, even Buddhists have suicide bombers.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: Walsh

Walsh my friend, the 75% was towards acts of extremism by Wahhabism, not how much of the population they take up!

I'd be willing to bet 75% or more of Islamic extremeism is born of Wahhabi ideals/orders.

lol , my mistake ... i would agree that they have adopted or hijacked the true understanding of "whhabi" and sort of created their own version that the world now sees as "extremism " . the same thing happened to "salafiyaa" .

we have extremist groups out their claiming to be "salafi" but they are not. The ones that claim to be have not even the basic understanding of Salafi .

so now we have the "labeling" since the majority of Saudi Arabia scholars are Salafi the world now thinks that the KSA supports or is involved in "extremism" .


their is so much to go on about .... i am going to stop before i spend all day here lol

sorry about the mistake .