Ladies and gentlemen, another extraordinary display of historical ignorance masquerading as academic scholarship. Fraud Jiang now wants Muslims to believe that the dawah of Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab رحمه الله was manufactured by British intelligence and that this supposed British operation is responsible for extremism throughout the Muslim world. An extraordinary accusation from someone whose public career is primarily associated with secondary education rather than an established university professorship in Islamic history. Yet people hear the title professor and immediately mistake it for expertise. If you cannot distinguish an academic title from demonstrated scholarly competence, perhaps you should reconsider whom you appoint as an authority on Islamic history. Firstly, let us address this imaginary British creation called Wahhabism. Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab رحمه الله did not establish a new religion bearing that name. His writings called to Tawhid, the Quran, the Sunnah and the understanding of the Salaf. The term Wahhabism became a polemical designation employed by opponents, including Ottoman writers, before entering wider historical literature. The existence of a historical label does not establish the invention of a new religion, much less a British intelligence operation. Read Kitab al Tawhid, Kashf al Shubuhat, al Usul al Thalathah, al Qawaid al Arba and the authenticated correspondence of the Shaykh. Identify where he announces a new revelation, establishes a new religion or instructs Muslims to follow British political interests. Produce the primary sources rather than repeating accusations. Secondly, the argument concerning the British East India Company and Basra is an embarrassing example of historical association being presented as historical proof. Yes, the East India Company established a trading factory in Basra in 1723, although English commercial involvement in the city began earlier. Yes, the Shaykh travelled to Basra during his pursuit of religious knowledge. Neither fact demonstrates recruitment, financing, instruction or ideological direction by British intelligence. Basra was an Ottoman commercial and intellectual centre. Scholars travelled there to study. Merchants travelled there to trade. The presence of British commercial representatives does not establish that every religious student visiting the city was operating under British instructions. The East India Company transferred its Gulf headquarters to Basra in 1759, and its representative received formal recognition as British consul in 1764. These developments must not be confused with the earlier establishment of its trading factory or the Shaykh’s religious activities. If the British supposedly created his dawah, identify the British officer who recruited him. Produce the authenticated correspondence. Establish the financial transactions. Identify the operational instructions. Demonstrate the historical connection between the Company and his theological writings. The notorious Memoirs of Mr Hempher is not reliable contemporary documentation of such an operation. An allegation repeated for generations does not become evidence merely because somebody delivers it confidently before a camera. Thirdly, the Shaykh’s intellectual foundations were not invented in a British commercial office. His religious education developed within the Hanbali scholarly tradition, and his writings repeatedly drew upon earlier scholars, particularly Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al Qayyim رحمهما الله. These scholars lived centuries before the Shaykh and before the establishment of the East India Company. Anyone claiming that the British invented his entire theological framework must explain the existence of these earlier sources and demonstrate which specific doctrines supposedly originated with British intelligence. Fourthly, let us address the accusations of indiscriminate takfir, because this is where the discussion becomes particularly revealing.