A comment sometimes passed by misinformed Ahle Hadtih:
If the Ahle Hadith were wrong, Shaikh Abdul Qadir Jailani would not have been an Ahle Hadith. He used to make raful yadain (lifting the hands between different postures of salah). Does there still remain any doubt about him being an Ahle Hadith?

The Answer to these insults

To call Shaikh Abdul Qadir Jailani an Ahle Hadith is another lie just like all the other
lies.

Shaikh sahib was a follower of Imam Ahmed ibn Hambal (R.A), (Ghunyatut-taalibeen pg.431) whereas the Ahle Hadith refer to taqlid as shirk.
He considered making Nabi (S.A.W) a waseelah (means to gain from Allaah)
permissible, (pg.34) whereas The Ahle Hadith are an enemy to the act of waseelah.
To make a verbal intention (for salah) according to him is better and more virtuous, (pgs.20 & 55) whereasthe Ahle hadith read salah without intention and say that to make a verbal intention is an act of innovation.
He says that the person behind the Imam (in salah) should remain silent when the
Imam is reciting the qiraat, (pg.431) whereas the Ahle Hadith reject this.
He says that taraweeh is of twenty rakats, (pg.294) whereas the Ahle Hadith say this is an innovation.
He acknowledges that the dead can hear, (pg.457) wheras you reject this.
Now you tell me, was Shaikh Abdul Qadir Jailani a Sunni or a Ghair muqallid wahhaabi?
What does remain is whether one becomes a Ghair muqallid just because he makes raful yadain? Well, in that case all the Shia Rafidis are Ghair muqallids, because they make raful yadain at more instances than the Ahle Hadith (in salah).