Tag Archives: Islamic Terrorism

Brussels Terror Attack: Due to Western Ignorance of the Turning Point of Islam from Civilization to Barbarism – Part IV

Brussels Terror Attack: Due to Western Ignorance of the Turning Point of Islam from Civilization to Barbarism – Part IV

 

By Prof. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis

 

In three earlier articles published under the titles “Brussels Terror Attack: Due to Western Misperceptions – Part I” (https://megalommatiscomments.wordpress.com/2016/03/23/brussels-terror-attack-due-to-western-misperceptions-part-i/), “Brussels Terror Attack: Due to Western Ignorance of Evil Theological Systems – Part II” (https://megalommatiscomments.wordpress.com/2016/03/24/brussels-terror-attack-due-to-western-ignorance-of-evil-theological-systems-part-ii/), and “Brussels Terror Attack: Due to Western Ignorance of the Barbaric Darkness of Ibn Taimiya’s theological system – Part III” (https://megalommatiscomments.wordpress.com/2016/03/25/brussels-terror-attack-due-to-western-ignorance-of-the-barbaric-darkness-of-ibn-taimiyas-theological-system-part-iii/), I first highlighted the Western ignorance of the Muslim World and more specifically the ignorance of the fact that the extremist way of life, mindset and belief are approved and shared by many hundreds of millions of Muslims in countries other than the evil cradle of Salafism / Wahhabism, i.e. Saudi Arabia; I called that dimension of Western misperception of the Islamic World ‘sociopolitical’.

c34

Then, I proceeded through a historical-religious analysis, emphasizing the putrefaction process caused to the Islamic religion by several Islamic theological systems that were considered heretic when they were incepted and preached, but managed to gradually survive and effectively prevail in our days among most of the world’s Muslim populations.

 

I then established a link between the three successive layers of alteration, distortion, falsification and barbarization of Islam caused by the theological systems of Ahmed ibn Hanbal (8th – 9th c.), Ahmed ibn Taimiyah (13th – 14th c.), and Muhammad ibn Abdulwahhab (18th c.).

 

A most critical dimension of today’s global problem of Islam is the following: although only Saudi Arabia accepts today the heretic Islamic School of Jurisprudence of Ahmed ibn Hanbal (on which depend the other two ulterior theological systems), the theological system of Ibn Taimiya, a vicious heretic and an unconditional Hanbali, although fully rejected as tenebrous at the times of the Islamic Golden Era, is widely accepted today among Muslims, either Hanbali or Hanafi, Maliki, and Shafi’i – the three true and historically valid, and not heretic, Islamic Schools of Jurisprudence.

 

This in itself may not say much to the unspecialized readership. However, if one takes into consideration the fact that Muhammad ibn Abdulwahhab – a barbaric and silly thug, a self-styled Muslim Hanbali theologian, and the founder of modern Wahhabism or Salafism – was the pupil of other ignorant theologians, who were the followers of the evil theological system of Ibn Taimiya, and thus became himself a staunch supporter of Ibn Taimiya, one understands clearly the present disastrous situation of the Muslim world.

 

So, it does not matter whether the entire population and the theological authorities of a Muslim country have contempt for Muhammad ibn Abdulwahhab and reject Wahhabism or Salafism explicitly. It does also not matter whether they proclaim their adherence to the three rightful and lawful Islamic Schools of Jurisprudence (Hanafi, Maliki, and Shafi’i) and reject ibn Hanbal’s system.

 

As long as they accept the abomination of Ibn Taimiya, all Muslims are affected by the Hanbali contamination either they realize it or not. In this case, their declaration of being Hanafi, Maliki or Shafi’i is absolutely worthless and cannot be possibly accepted by any shrewd investigator.

 

As long as they accept the theological obscenity of Ibn Taimiya, all Muslims are inclined to end up Wahhabists and Salafists sooner or later, because the fruit of Ibn Taimiya’s theological lawlessness and political fornication was Muhammad ibn Abdulwahhab, the source of the iniquity and the villainous father of all illiterate, barbaric, heinous and villainous extremists, radicals, and terrorists.

 

The aforementioned historical analysis reveals something critical that both, Islamic terrorists and politically correct Western academia and politicians, have always tried to conceal; in a way, there were Islamic extremists and terrorists who, deeply plunged in illiteracy, ignorance, barbarism and hatred of the “Other”, carried out dreadful acts during the Islamic Ages. Islamic Terrorism is therefore nothing new, and basically it does not pertain to the theological system of Muhammad ibn Abdulwahhab, but to the barbaric lawlessness of Ibn Taimiya, who antedated Abdulwahhab by five centuries and although Hanbali, is accepted by most of today’s Muslim theologians .

 

In this regard, it would be a colossal mistake for Europe, America and the Western World at large to perceive themselves as the true targets of the Islamic Terrorism. They are not, although there is a vast documentation bearing witness to declarations of numerous well-known terrorists and Salafi terror ideologists, who state that the countries of the West are their target.

 

In reality, terrorism is not the basic characteristic of the Islamic terrorists; barbarism is.

 

And as barbaric elements, they hate most the Sciences, the Arts, the Letters, and the Intellectual Life in its entirety; they abhor Philosophy, the Free Thought, the Investigative Spirit, and the Exploratory Mind. And they target above all Spirituality, Meditation, Contemplation and all the spiritual exercises and activities that de facto liberate the soul from the material-materialistic jail wherein all the Salafists and all the Islamic terrorists want to imprison it.

 

The historical dynamics of this deleterious movement has not yet been studied; this is due to the fact that the well anticipated conclusions are extremely harmful to the politically correct theories, attitudes and behaviors.

 

Pretty much like the followers of Ibn Taimiya destroyed Islamic Civilization within the Islamic World before 400-500 years, today’s Islamic terrorists and Salafists intend to bring down the World Civilization and replace it with an immense darkness, injustice, barbarism, tyranny and inhumanity.

d12

THE TURNING POINT FROM CIVILIZATION TO BARBARISM WITHIN ISLAM – THE TERRORISTS OF THE YEAR 1580!

d11

And here I reach the point with which I concluded the previous article. There is indeed a particularly critical moment, a specific date that can be taken as the turning point in the down spiral, from Civilization to Barbarism within Islam. This can be safely and accurately determined; it is 1580.

d10

What happened then and where?

d1

The fanaticized mob of Istanbul destroyed the Observatory of Istanbul, which was the epitome of the world’s most advanced techniques and technologies with respect to the Islamic Science of Astronomy and Astrology that were both viewed as one science and not two within the context of the Islamic World. The barbaric and abominable deed involved the destruction of thousands of manuscripts, the ruination of hundreds of astronomical instruments that were among the most advanced in the world, numerous killings, and all sorts of violent acts and catastrophes.

d2

The illiterate masses were guided by villainous and thuggish sheikhs and imams, who were the followers of the heretic system of Ibn Taimiya and therefore hated the Islamic Sciences, and more particularly the one that was considered as the supreme among them, namely Astronomy and Astrology. As per their silly beliefs and their misinterpretation of the Quran, which is an indispensable element of all barbarisms carried out in the name of Islam, the observation of the stars and the deduction of conclusions as regards the future are not permissible in Islam. This is of course an aberration.

d3

The barbaric masses and their uneducated sheikhs influenced the supreme religious authority, the sheikh-ul Islam, and demanded the destruction of the Observatory, claiming that the wrong prognostication of the Chief Astronomer and Astrologist was a curse sent by their otherwise fake god. As the imperial authorities were not influenced by the intellectual cholera of Ibn Taimiya, the Sultan did not want to destroy this valuable research center that enabled his country to compete at the international level in terms of science and research. Then, upon recommendation of an illiterate and dark mufti, the masses unleashed their evilness and in the course of manifestations they attacked and destroyed the Observatory of Istanbul.

d4

I herewith include three paragraphs from Wikipedia’s entry on Istanbul Observatory:

d5

In 1574, Murad III became the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire. The empire’s chief astronomer, Taqi ad-Din, petitioned the Sultan to finance the building of a great observatory to rival Ulugh Beg‘s Samarkand observatory. The Sultan approved, and construction was completed in 1577, at nearly the same time as Tycho Brahe‘s observatory at Uraniborg.

d6

This observatory consisted of two large structures perched on a hill overlooking the European section of Istanbul and offering a wide view of the night sky. Much like a modern institution, the main building was reserved for the library and the living quarters of the staff, while the smaller building housed a collection of instruments built by Taqi ad-Din. These included a giant armillary sphere and an accurate mechanical astronomical clock for measuring the position and speed of the planets. With these instruments, Taqi ad-Din had hoped to update the old astronomical tables describing the motion of the planets, sun, and moon.

d7

The observatory did not survive to advance the development of astronomy in the Muslim world. Within months of the observatory’s completion, a comet with an enormous tail appeared in the sky and Sultan Murad III demanded a prognostication about it from his astronomer. “Working day and night without food and rest” Taqi ad-Din studied the comet and came up with the prediction that it was “an indication of well-being and splendor,” and would mean a “conquest of Persia”. Unfortunately, instead of well-being a devastating plague followed in some parts of the empire, and several important persons died. Taqi ad-Din was able to carry on his observations for a few more years but eventually opponents of the observatory and prognostication from the heavens prevailed and the observatory was destroyed in 1580. Other sources give the “rise of a clerical faction,” which opposed or at least was indifferent to science, and specifically to “the recommendation of the Chief Mufti” of the Ottomans, as the explanation for the destruction of the observatory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istanbul_observatory_of_Taqi_ad-Din
d8

More details about the Chief Astronomer and Astrologist Taqi ad-Din Muhammad ibn Maaruf can be found in the respective entry of the Wikipedia and the bibliography provided therein.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taqi_ad-Din_Muhammad_ibn_Ma%27ruf
d9

To be continued

 

 

 

 

 

 

Brussels Terror Attack: Due to Western Ignorance of the Barbaric Darkness of Ibn Taimiya’s theological system – Part III

Brussels Terror Attack: Due to Western Ignorance of the Barbaric Darkness of Ibn Taimiya’s theological system – Part III

 

By Prof. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis

 

In two earlier articles published under the titles “Brussels Terror Attack: Due to Western Misperceptions – Part I” (https://megalommatiscomments.wordpress.com/2016/03/23/brussels-terror-attack-due-to-western-misperceptions-part-i/) and “Brussels Terror Attack: Due to Western Ignorance of Evil Theological Systems – Part II” (https://megalommatiscomments.wordpress.com/2016/03/24/brussels-terror-attack-due-to-western-ignorance-of-evil-theological-systems-part-ii/), I highlighted the Western ignorance of the Muslim World and more specifically of the fact that the extremist way of life, mindset and belief are approved and shared by many hundreds of millions of Muslims in countries other than the evil cradle of Salafism / Wahhabism, i.e. Saudi Arabia; I called that dimension of Western misperception of the Islamic World ‘sociopolitical’. Then, I proceeded through a historical-religious analysis, emphasizing the putrefaction process caused to the Islamic religion by the different Islamic theological systems, and I established a link between the three successive layers of alteration caused by the theological systems of Ahmed ibn Hanbal, Ahmed ibn Taimiyah, and Muhammad ibn Abdulwahhab. In the present article, I will expand further on the nefarious impact that the barbarism of Ibn Taimiyah had on Islam as religion, spirituality, culture, and civilization.

 

As I described in the previous article, “Ahmed ibn Taimiya was the ugly and perverse child of his time“, meaning the period of the Crusades and the Mongol invasions that resulted in the destruction of Baghdad. In fact, his theological system was an introverted reductionism that triggered an overwhelming indifference for, and an abysmal hatred of, the “other”. These characteristics were intensified by ibn Taimiya’s followers who instructed Muslims to limit themselves to basics and to abstain from any contact with, or study of, the “other”.

c2.jpg

WHY TROUBLES GO DEEPER THAN MERE WAHHABISM: THE EVILNESS OF IBN TAIMIYA’S THEOLOGICAL BARBARISM
Of course, after the year 1291 (Fall of Acre), when the last Crusader was out of the Orient, the Islamic World recovered from the Crusades and the Mongol invasions, and continued to expand in terms of imperial power, advance in terms of civilization, and prosper in terms of economic recovery and wealth accumulation. But there were two main negative points that survived for some centuries, gradually spread across the entire Muslim World, and finally prevailed:

c9.jpg
A – The introversion gained momentum among the populations, irrespective of the success of the armies and the caliphs. It was combined with a genuinely un-Islamic reductionism (I mean of course ontological reductionism) as Ibn Taimiya followers – in order to control the masses – diffused the pathetic opinion that Philosophy, Arts, Letters and Sciences are useless, because “only few things are necessary for man to gain the ticket to the Paradise”: by hating and ignoring the “other” (which is a non-Islamic attitude and stance of life) and by preaching and diffusing this mindset, attitude and behavior, the followers of Ibn Taimiya addressed the fears, the sorrow, and the horror generated among the Muslims because of the Crusaders and the Mongols.

B – The bullying exercised by the masses that followed the theologians, who accepted Ibn Taimiya’s heretic theological system, started having an impact in the long run and progressively all the scholars, scientists, artists, architects, mystics, and philosophers came under attack, got dispersed, and disappeared.

For the first time, around the years 1350-1400, within Islam was formed a driving force which was pushing toward ignorance, darkness, hatred and barbarism. 

c17.jpg

It is obvious that such evil force could not exist without targets. Even worse, the targets had to be close. Shia Muslims and Oriental Christians were the first to be targeted. Then, it was the turn of the mystics, the Sufis, the philosophers, the erudite scholars, the astronomers, the chemists, the architects, the poets, the intellectuals, and the artists.

 

An inherent element of the evilness of Ibn Taimiya’s system is uniformity; the hatred of the other – in and by itself – eliminates every chance for diversity. At the social level, this situation means that you cannot differ, because you then become the “other”, and you get subsequently targeted. This means that you cannot carry out experiments in Chemistry, you cannot make sidereal observations in the Observatory, you cannot meditate, and you cannot explore or study anything, because “only few things are necessary for man to gain the ticket to the Paradise” and because the quasi-totality of the population, who are ignorant and uneducated, are not involved in these activities. This means that, by being a genuine scholar, polymath, mystic, explorer, erudite intellectual, philosopher, scientist, architect, artist or author, you differ, you automatically become the “other”, and consequently you are immediately taken as target.

 

During those centuries many Muslim scholars, polymaths, mystics, explorers, erudite intellectuals, philosophers, scientists, architects, artists or authors were persecuted – not by the power of the Sultan and Caliph but – by the average people at the very local, social level; they were forced to stop their scientific, philosophical, artistic or spiritual activities, they were obliged to move to other countries, and they were killed. And a systematic disregard for the Islamic Spiritual, Intellectual, Academic and Scientific Heritage was imposed, so that average Muslims forget the Golden Era of Islam, i.e. the greatness that the filthy and evil minds of ibn Hanbal and ibn Taimiya were virtually unable to ever reach.

c22.jpg

Last, in cases of illustrious names of the foremost Islamic scholars of the Golden Era of Islam, the likes of al Farabi (Alpharabius), Muhyiddin ibn Arabi, ibn Sina (Avicenna), Nasir al Din al Tusi, ibn Rushd (Averroes), Al Ghazali, and others, they were all systematically, uninterruptedly and viciously denigrated, defamed and execrated by the uneducated, uncultured and sullen followers of the tenebrous theology of ibn Taimiya. This continues down to our times.

c20.jpg

As regards ibn Taimiya, he gave the evil example; speaking against al Ghazali, he said: “This Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, despite his brilliance, his devotion to Allah, his knowledge of kalam and philosophy, his asceticism and spiritual practices and his Sufism, ended up in a state of confusion and resorted to the path of those who claim to find out things through dreams and spiritual methods” (Majmu’ al-Fatawa, vol. 4, p.71).

c29.jpg

It goes without saying that this force destroyed the Islamic Civilization, driving the Muslim World to a bestial level of total insignificance around the years 1600-1700. For reasons which rather pertain to foreign affairs, not one caliph / sultan decided to oppose openly and drastically the force of darkness. We refer mainly to the Ottoman times now, because Sunni Islam in Europe, Asia, and Africa was multi-divided in the period 1300-1500, until Selim I (Yavuz Sultan Selim, the ‘stern’ one) reinstated the Caliphate in its magnitude. When the expanded Ottoman Empire was engaged in ferocious battles against Spain in Western Mediterranean, against Austria-Hungary in Central Europe, against Abyssinia in the Horn of Africa, and occasionally against Iran (and later Russia) in the East, it would be impossible for a Caliph (the Sultan) to trigger a deep social chasm by arresting the followers of the vicious, Satanic theological system of Ahmed ibn Taimiya and by declaring an open war against them. Sultans, in their majority, tried to basically rule against the dark ideas of these ignorant people, without turning openly against them.

selim I.jpg
Through the above, one can conclude that a great number of populations that traditionally belonged to and followed the Shaffi’i, Hanafi and Maliki schools of jurisprudence started being gravely affected and genuinely altered because of the socially forced diffusion of the villainous system of Ahmed ibn Taimiya, a Hanbali.

c32.JPG
In a way, viewed through a historical perspective, the diffusion of that system across 96-98% of all the Muslims’ territories (the rest 2-4% representing the Arabian Desert) represents a late and indirect form of Hanbalization of the Shaffi’i, Hanafi and Maliki schools of jurisprudence.

In fact, this process never stopped; it was only spread over and over.

c33.png

However, in the whole process, there is particularly critical moment, a date that can be taken as the turning point in the down spiral, from Civilization to Barbarism within Islam. This can be safely and accurately determined; it is 1580. Why this date is so important and what happened then in Istanbul are essential for the entire world to know, because today’s tragic events and terror attacks are only a mere reproduction of that ominous day.

 

(to be continued)

 

 

 

Brussels Terror Attack: Due to Western Ignorance of Evil Theological Systems – Part II

Brussels Terror Attack: Due to Western Ignorance of Evil Theological Systems – Part II

By Prof. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis

 

In an earlier article published under the title “Brussels Terror Attack: Due to Western Misperceptions – Part I” (https://megalommatiscomments.wordpress.com/2016/03/23/brussels-terror-attack-due-to-western-misperceptions-part-i/), I highlighted the Western ignorance of the Muslim World and more specifically of the fact that the extremist way of life, mindset and belief are approved and shared by many hundreds of millions of Muslims in countries other than the evil cradle of Salafism / Wahhabism, i.e. Saudi Arabia; I called that dimension of Western misperception of the Islamic World ‘sociopolitical’. In the present article, I will expand on the historical – theological dimension of the problem.

 

WESTERN MISPERCEPTION OF ISLAM – HISTORICAL / THEOLOGICAL DIMENSION

 

In fact, there is an even worse, overwhelming, and terrible deception imposed on all those in West who have no background in Islamic History, Islamic Philosophy, and Islamic Theology. It pertains to the use of the terms ‘Wahhabi’ and ‘Salafist’.

 

Several investigative analysts have already questioned a few important points, such the inextricable relationship between the Islamic terrorists’ ideology, i.e. Wahhabism, and Saudi Arabia’s official and totalitarian dogma, which is again Wahhabism.

 

It would look as if Saudi Arabia cultivated and exported the evilness of Wahhabism, and this is true indeed, but unfortunately, this conclusion covers only a tiny part of the problem. To understand the extent of the problem and why it does involve the greatest part of the Islamic World, one has to go back to History.

 

THEOLOGY vs. RELIGION

 

Meanwhile, one must manage to avoid traps that only help the terrorists continue their evildoing, because precisely these traps mislead the Western statesmen, military headquarters, academia, mass media, and public opinion in their evaluation of the present situation. The trap is that of accusing Islam itself as a religion of terror. Extensive historical research would easily and plainly prove the opposite, namely that the peak of the Islamic Civilization (and all the thousands of historically known Muslim polymaths, philosophers, erudite scholars, scientists, poets, artists, historians, authors, etc.) was totally devoid of any inclination toward violence, let alone terrorism.

 

Where does this trap hinge on?

 

The answer is simple; there is a subtle and yet enormous difference between two words that play here a determinant role: ‘Religion’ and ‘Theology’. All the religions – when systematized as dogma, doctrine and cult – are, usually, essentially transformed into theological systems that can be at times identified as very distant from the original religion.

 

Christianity offers many examples in this regard; the word ‘Trinity’ does not exist in the New Testament. Early Christians practiced Christianity without conceptualizing what later became the Trinity dogma of Christianity. It is only after St. Basil, Bishop of Caesarea of Cappadocia, wrote his lengthy theological treatise On the Holy Spirit (374 CE), which was accepted as doctrinal pillar of Christianity, that 4th century Christians were able at last to contextualize the third person of their religion.

 

Similar situations occurred in Islam, a religion that is based on one holy book, the Quran, and prophetic explanations and narratives usually called ‘traditions’ (Hadith in Arabic) that determine not only the aspects of spiritual life and human morality but also the details of socioeconomic life. In this regard, theological systematization and recorded application of the Islamic Jurisprudence ended up to an interminable typolatry (“the worship of the types of the religion”) very similar to what Jesus accused the Pharisees of (“Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.”; Matthew 23:24). This attitude was proven unable to hinder the free development of Philosophy, Letters, Arts, Sciences, and Spirituality in the first six – seven centuries of the Islamic Era, but when the Islamic Civilization collapsed, typolatry prevailed overwhelmingly bringing forth putrefaction.

 

THREE THEOLOGICAL LAYERS THAT COMPOSE TODAY’S ISLAM

 

If you go to the Wikipedia, you will read that the terms Salafi and Wahhabi are almost synonymous and that Wahhabi means the follower of Muhammad Ibn Abdulwahhab (18th c.); they are categorized as Sunni, even by people like Karen Armstrong, but this is very, very false.

1. Muhammad Ibn Abduwahhab adhered to the evil theological system of Ahmed ibn Taimiya (13-14th c.). Today’s Salafists or Wahhabis adhere to that system too.

2. Ahmed ibn Taimiya adhered to the evil theological-jurisprudential system of Ahmed ibn Hanbal (8-9th c.).

3. Now, Ahmed ibn Hanbal is – today – considered as the founder of one of the so-called four (4) schools of Islamic Sunni Jurisprudence (Fiqh – you have to pronounce both, -q and -h).

All the sheikhs and all the muftis of Islam will tell you today that the four schools of Sunni Jurisprudence are: Hanafi, Maliki, Shaffi’i, and Hanbali – all terms are established after the names of several theologians (in chronological order: Abu Hanifa, Malik ibn Anas, Al-Shafi‘i, ibn Hanbal) who lived in the 8th and the 9th c. Indicatively: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiqh

This is a shameful lie.

fiqh.png

Certainly, in terms of present sociopolitical conditions, one can find followers of each of the above systems. If one consults existing maps closely, one will soon notice that Hanbalis are to be found – only – in Saudi Arabia!

The critical point, which is today concealed by both, the Muslim sheikhs or muftis and the politically correct Western academia, is that the Hanbalis were never truly accepted as genuine Muslims, civilized humans, and people of good faith by any Muslim in the 8-12th c., which was the peak of Islamic Civilization.

At those days, not one Islamic philosopher, erudite scholar, spiritual mystic, scientist, theologian, polymath, architect, artist or poet ever accepted Ahmed ibn Hanbal as an educated person, let alone as an accredited scholar and theologian. The true fact is that he was imprisoned as a barbaric and dangerous heretic and as an ignorant person, who would spread evilness and darkness among Muslims.

His followers were very few, vulgar, miserable, marginal, and disorderly elements. Across the (already then) vast Islamic World, the only location where they were accepted was the most uneducated, most uncivil, and most worthless part of the Islamic territories, namely the Arabian desert (they were not accepted then even in the Hedjaz, the Cordillera that spans from the South of today’s Jordan to the North of Yemen, i.e. where Mecca and Medina are located). One has to bear also in mind the fact that the Hedjaz, although important from a religious viewpoint (as a holy place where the Prophet of Islam lived), has never been in the Islamic Ages a recommended place for Letters, Sciences, Arts, Philosophy, and Imperial Prestige.

Ahmed ibn Taimiya lived outside Arabia and was a Hanbali, and as such he was imprisoned for felony, heresy, and barbarism. When he was free, in his speeches, he used to admonish his followers to attack personally all the Islamic philosophers, scientists, artists, architects, authors, poets and erudite scholars, because they all had absolute contempt and disdain for him, and his ignorance. Ibn Battuta, the illustrious traveler and author of Islamic Ages, describes that the villainous ibn Taimiya exhorted his followers to attack physically the followers of important Islamic philosophical systems who verbally disagreed with the nonsensical and immoral words that he used to utter. This behaviour prevailed among his followers after he died.

Taking into consideration that Ahmed ibn Taimiya was a Hanbali and that Hanbalis were an illegal group (and not an established and accepted school of Islamic Jurisprudence) at the time, one may ask how Ahmed ibn Taimiya managed to influence people in areas like Damascus where there were no Hanbali at all.

Ahmed ibn Taimiya was the ugly and perverse child of his time. During his life, the last Crusaders were kicked out of the Orient. However, the shock they had created was extremely negative and uniquely tremendous among Muslims, Christians, and Jews of the Orient. It was also the time when the epicenter of the Islamic Civilization, Baghdad, was destroyed by the Mongols. This generated a very negative attitude and aggravated introversion, which was at the antipodes of what the Islamic World had been for six centuries before the Crusades.

 

(to be continued) 

To be or not to be. Western Questions about ISIS and Islam reveal the Collapse of Christianity

By Prof. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis

Refutation of Prof. Mark Juergensmeyer’s article ‘Is ISIS Islamic?’

topkapi

This is the Caliphate that France, England and America did not want.

ISIS 1

And this is the ‘Caliphate’ that France, England and America wanted.

Sultan Murad and Safavid embassy

This is the Caliphate that France, England and America did not want.

ISIS 2

And this is the ‘Caliphate’ that France, England and America wanted.

Istanbul Topkapi

This is the Caliphate that France, England and America did not want.

ISIS 3

And this is the ‘Caliphate’ that France, England and America wanted.

In a previous article under title ‘Ottoman Empire, Fake ‘Middle East’, the Pseudo-Christians of the West, and the Forthcoming Tribulation’ (https://megalommatiscomments.wordpress.com/2014/10/11/ottoman-empire-fake-middle-east-the-pseudo-christians-of-the-west-and-the-forthcoming-tribulation/), I analyzed why the Western Christians’ stance towards their governments’ policies against the Ottoman Empire and its detached provinces (the technical entities of the so-called ‘Middle East’) is very wrong, definitely immoral, and in total contradiction with the Christian principles, values and virtues. I concluded that a great number of nominal Christians, who approved of the evil policies and deeds of the Western governments, are in reality pseudo-Christians irrespective of what they may think they are.

In a world engulfed in the worst crisis of identity of all times, it is only normal that doubts are raised as regards the identity of the ‘other.’ Only yesterday, Prof. Mark Juergensmeyer, who specializes in ‘global religion’ – a non-existent entity – questioned in an article the identity of ISIS (Is ISIS Islamic? / http://www.theglobalist.com/is-isis-islamic/).

Quite interestingly, under the title, a motto gives the summarizing idea of the article (“Every religion has its dark sides, but the conflict is about politics.”). This is absolutely irrelevant; dark sides in a religion are what you don’t know of that religion. They don’t exist by themselves. No religion has ever had any dark side whatsoever. And all conflicts about politics cannot be deprived of their own religious dimension, because everything in a human society hinges on the spiritual belief or disbelief. Atheists are religious too; they are slaves of Satan either they understand it or not. Their theory and their rejection of God is a form of Satanic faith.

When one starts with so many preconceived ideas as the global religion theoretician Prof. Mark Juergensmeyer, his approach is doomed to fail, but this does not originate from the lack of knowledge of the ‘other side’. And Prof. Mark Juergensmeyer’s main problem is not his lack of insightful knowledge about both, the Islamic world and ISIS itself. The article reveals a serious problem of Christian identity and for this reason I intended to comment on it. I think that my comments will be useful to both, Christians and Muslims.

The author of the article tries to implement the following simplistic logic: if we hold the Ku Klux Klan in the US and the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda as ‘Christian’, then we can consider ISIS as ‘Islamic’. This sort of approach does not clarify anything, and rather creates further confusion among both, Christians and Muslims. Generally speaking, I understand and accept the approach through analogy, but to implement this method in your text, you’ve got to select very firm examples. Yes, it is correct to say ‘if we hold the New and the Old Testament as holy books for the Christians, then we can consider the Quran as holy book for Muslims’. Beyond the limit of such comparisons, we can achieve minimal result through analogy and at times lose clarity.

There is always a very serious mistake in every approach that avoids a proper, direct definition and attempts to define something through its opposite. If you want to define Christianity, you cannot possibly be as vague as you are when saying ‘Christianity is something other than / different from Ku Klux Klan’ (or the LRA). Ditto for the Islamic World.

It is really gross to try to define Christianity as the antithesis of what the author calls the LRA ‘a terrible terrorist organization’! Who can expect a religion to possibly be ‘a terrible terrorist organization’? No one!

In addition, there are in Uganda hundreds of thousands if not millions of simple people who, if not terrorized, will have the courage to state that the LRA is NOT a terrorist organization – or if you want not as terrorist as the execrable, racist Ugandan government. And who is authorized to speak about ‘terrorism’? The global mass media? Or the defenders of a non-existent ‘global religion’?

But the term ‘terrorism’ (or ‘terrorist’) is an unhistorical fabrication that was composed only recently as a vicious tool of the world’s most evil, most villainous, and most dictatorial regimes, the likes of America, England and France. It has no credibility, and above all, it is used within political context. Why on Earth a scholar and an academic feels the need to confuse his readers so much as to mention a political term when he talks about religion?

Whatever Christianity has been or has not been or may have been, it is certainly something unrelated to modern political terms; even more so if these terms are recently invented as result of scheming and propaganda and therefore fully rejected by vast populations worldwide.

However, the use of brutal manners in order to achieve power that will later consolidate the survival and the propagation of a faith, a religion, a sect or a secret order-organization is widely attested in almost every religion, culture, nation and period.

There are many historical examples in this regard. The Ismailiyah Order of the Shia Muslims, who were also called Hashashin (because their leader, the famous ‘Elder of the Mountain’ administered the proper dose of hashish to his disciples in order to duly instrumentalize and effectively utilize them for his purposes) and were known to Marco Polo (he called them Assassins and this is how this word was first used in European languages), used to send members (their secret knights) to cross incredibly long distances to arrive where their target (a ruler, an military leader, an imam or other) lived and, by treacherously approaching, assassinate them. Should we call them ‘terrorists’? This would be utterly ridiculous.

It is actually always pathetic and ludicrous to project one period’s / civilization’s / culture’s measures, values and criteria onto other periods, civilizations and cultures. One cannot evaluate others through use of one’s own criteria; every civilization, culture, religion, and historical period is an independent entity that no scholar can transform as per his theoretical needs in any way. The reason for this maxim is simple; by slightly transforming (through improper evaluation involving external criteria) a civilization, culture, religion, and historical period, a scholar only modifies and misinterprets it. This scholar is therefore speaking of a false entity that practically speaking never existed (except in his misinterpretation and imagination); thus, he only confuses his unfortunate readers.

Another example is offered by the Christian Catholic Holy Inquisition. It is undisputed that this Holy Office carried out very brutal policies for long. Should we call it ‘terrorism’? This would also be utterly ludicrous.

As the author is continuously avoiding a proper definition for what is ‘Islamic’ and what is not, the article is characterized by a personal, individualistic approach that is both, irrelevant and confusing. Prof. Mark Juergensmeyer implements again the analogy approach, but this time at the very personal level. He, as a Christian, dissociates himself from the Ugandan LRA and the American Ku Klux Klan, and he therefore postulates that, accordingly, ‘this is the same position most Muslims are in now with regard to ISIS’.

This is very irrelevant because scholars are expected to include personal views and experience in their memoirs at the end of the their lives and not as supposedly convincing evidence in their articles and other publications. This style is very arrogant; in addition, it is very confusing because personal approaches do not constitute proper definitions. The sentence he makes is quiet evident: ‘As a Christian, I feel like they have nothing to do with me or with the Christianity that I know’. The last words reveal the extent of the problem; probably the globalist professor and specialist of the non existent ‘global’ religion ( !! ? !! )  does not know the Holy Inquisition, and consequently we can safely claim that he does not know Christianity well. And this is the problem for him and for all the misled and confused Christians of the West.

Many people have been driven to the impasse of assuming a lot; one of their wrong assumptions is to take today’s fallen Christianity as the true Christianity. Similarly, in the Islamic world, there are many Muslims, who assume that today’s fallen Islam is the true Islam. Both groups fail to understand one another because they primarily fail to understand themselves and accurately specify how far they have gone from their respective religions, sailing adrift in the Sea of Relativism and Faithlessness.

After the preliminary part of the article, its inconsistency turns it to a mere worthless piece. As the title obliges the author to give a definition of ISIS, the ‘global religion’ specialist or rather propagandist Mark Juergensmeyer enters into a series of mistakes while giving to his readers unexplained terms that are absolutely meaningless to the non-specialist.

He says: ‘What makes things even more complicated is that ISIS bases its beliefs and actions on a form of Islamic interpretation called Salafism’.

– Why on Earth is now the Salafist nature of ISIS (which is true and beyond any doubt) a problem?

Let me make my position clear. In many articles, I denounced the Wahhabism (the correct term for Salafism) as a deformation of Islam. But Wahhabism (or if you want Salafism) is nothing new to the Western world’s academia and diplomats.

To paraphrase Prof. Juergensmeyer, before any other institution on Earth, Saudi Arabiathe country that America catastrophically chose as its primary ally in the region before …. 70 years or, to put it otherwise, the country that England disastrously conspired with against the Ottoman Caliphate for more than 100 years before the fall of the Ottoman dynasty and continually ever since ‘bases its beliefs and actions on a form of Islamic interpretation called Salafism’.

What is Prof. Juergensmeyer talking about?

If Saudi Arabia did not exist, there would never be an ISIS.

What does Prof. Juergensmeyer want?

Does he want ISIS to disappear and Saudi Arabia to survive?

That’s silly.

Because if Saudi Arabia continues existing, even if ISIS is mercilessly exterminated and all its members and fighters executed ( and this needs at least 50000 US soldiers in a large scale land attack and in coordination with the venerable president of Syria! ), there will be another ISIS, an ISIS bis if you want, or an ISES (Islamic State of Egypt and Sudan), an ISYA (Islamic State of Yemen and Arabia), or any combination of letters you may choose!

As long as Saudi Arabia exists, Wahhabism will be its pseudo-Islamic state dogma, and through the filthy money of the inhuman gangsters who rule from Riyadh, Wahhabism will be diffused among the masses of Muslims from Morocco to Indonesia to the Muslim Diaspora worldwide.

What is even worse is that Prof. Juergensmeyer fails again to either give a definition of Wahhabism (Salafism) or the historical perspective thereof; as a matter of fact, all the filthy and un-Islamic, dark and inhuman ideas that Muhammad Abdel Wahhab (the founder of Wahhabism) shaped and propagated during the 18th c. did not fall from the sky into his idiotic and ignorant mind. There has been an entire historical process within Islam (with heretic theologians preceding Muhammad Abdel Wahhab by 450 and 900 years) that led to this monstrous theological deformation of Islam. All this is unknown to the ‘global religion’ professor who writes about Islam without having a clue of all academic fields pertaining to the study of this historical – spiritual phenomenon.

This is the historical reality, which is quite well known to specialists of Islamic History and Religion in the West, but it remains concealed, because it is politically disturbing and troublesome. If Wahhabism is not uprooted, if all the Wahhabi institutions across the world are not shut down, if a new class of Muslim intellectuals at the antipodes of Wahhabism is not formed, the explosive situation will only turn worse.

First point of conclusion is therefore that Saudi Arabia and the Saudi family itself must be denounced as the only matrix of all evil across the Islamic world for the last 200 years, and an overwhelming attack against it must be undertaken in order to totally eliminate Riyadh and the villainous, heretic elite which from there managed to incessantly spread the evilness of Wahhabism worldwide.

The confusing presentation of Prof. Juergensmeyer is due to the fact that he does not seek the historical, religious, cultural and theological truth, but only writes in order to serve political purposes and needs, preserve strategic alliances, and in the process, effectuate compromises. We saw these compromises in Mosul, in Sanjar and in Raqqah. These compromises are responsible for the evacuation of most of the Yazidis from their homelands; these compromises are the reason for the deracination of all the Aramaean Christians of Mosul; these compromises are the root cause of the hecatomb that the bloodthirsty vampires of ISIS want to deliver.

For one more time, the ‘global religion’ specialist, Prof. Juergensmeyer, attempts a confusing definition through analogy! He writes: “The Salafi movement is similar to an extreme fundamentalism in Christianity”. This is an understatement; in addition, who can specify what ‘fundamentalism in Christianity’ means? This is not called ‘definition’ but ‘anyone’s guess’…

It must however become crystal clear to Western readership that ISIS, Saudi Arabia, and Wahhabism, (Salafism) do not constitute any form of Islamic fundamentalism. They are heretic, so they cannot be held as Islamic in any sense. They are far and out of the foundations of Islam, so they cannot possibly be ‘fundamental’. Muhammad Abdel Wahhab in his days was considered as a heretic and a traitor by the Ottoman administration; the same evaluation concerned also the Ottoman Caliphate’s traitor and founder of the Satanic house of the Saudis.

The two earlier Islamic theologians on whom Abdel Wahhab was based to produce his pseudo-Islamic trash, namely Ahmed ibn Taimiyah and Ahmed ibn Hanbal who lived in the 13th-14th c. and the 8th-9th c, respectively, were also considered as heretic in their times and duly imprisoned. They may be unknown to Prof. Juergensmeyer, but he should then abstain from writing purposelessly on issues he is not relevant of.

The famous, 14th c. Moroccan traveler, explorer and scholar Ibn Battuta encountered in Damascus people who knew personally the evil, villainous and ignorant heretic Ibn Taimiyah who was then imprisoned. This is what the Islamic World’s most illustrious traveler wrote about the progenitor of Wahhabism:

A controversial theologian  

One of the principal Hanbalite doctors at Damascus was Taqi ad-Din Ibn Taymiya, a man of great ability and wide learning, but with some kink in his brain. The people of Damascus idolized him. He used to preach to them from the pulpit, and one day he made some statement that the other theologians disapproved; they carried the case to the sultan and in consequence Ibn Taymiya was imprisoned for some years. While he was in prison he wrote a commentary on the Koran, which he called ” The Ocean,” in about forty volumes. Later on his mother presented herself before the sultan and interceded for him, so he was set at liberty, until he did the same thing again. I was in Damascus at the time and attended the service which he was conducting one Friday, as he was addressing and admonishing the people from the pulpit. In the midst of his discourse he said “Verily God descends to the sky over our world [from Heaven] in the same bodily fashion that I make this descent,” and stepped down one step of the pulpit. A Malikite doctor present contradicted him and objected to his statement, but the common people rose up against this doctor and beat him with their hands and their shoes so severely that his turban fell off and disclosed a silken skull-cap on his head. Inveighing against him for wearing this, they haled him before the qadi of the Hanbalites, who ordered him to be imprisoned and afterwards had him beaten. The other doctors objected to this treatment and carried the matter before the principal amir, who wrote to the sultan about the matter and at the same time drew up a legal attestation against Ibn Taymiya for various heretical pronouncements. This deed was sent on to the sultan, who gave orders that Ibn Taymiya should be imprisoned in the citadel, and there he remained until his death.

At a certain point in his article, Prof. Juergensmeyer makes a totally misleading statement (“So, yes, ISIS is ultimately Islamic – whether you like it or not”), which can have disastrous consequences on anyone who may happen to accept it. A heretic cannot be identified with the religion from which he was rejected. It is not a mere point of accuracy, but a critical issue of false target.

Failing to understand this, he adds perjury to infamy, by completing his sentence with the following: “but it is certainly not the kind of Islam that most Muslims would accept or profess”.

This is a pure lie. And more than a merely false point, it reflects the tendencies of the Western governments to totally conceal the truth from their peoples. First of all, no one has accurate estimates on the subject. Gallup polls in several Muslim countries are prohibited – particularly on a subject this critical -, whereas in the rest no Gallup polls have ever been conducted on issues as troublesome as that.

However, there are many indicators that ISIS does truly reflect in a certain way the kind of false, heretic and decayed Islam that most Muslims accept and profess. If you make a list of what is correct as an act or practice of the Islamic way of both, personal life and social organization, including perhaps 500 detailed points accepted by the followers, the fighters and the leaders of ISIS, and then you submit this list to 1000 average Saudis (without adding that these points are all approved by ISIS members), their responses, homogeneous and ominous, will take you by surprise. Their agreement with the 500 points of the list will deliver a result far above 90-95%.  Similar results, always above 80%, you will collect from countries like Indonesia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Yemen, Sudan, Egypt, Algeria, etc. And certainly the agreement will be lower in other countries, but even in Turkey, it will be as high as 40% due to the vicious Western policies in favor of the AKP party Islamists and against the nationalist military establishment of Ankara (a paranoid policy that allowed the ruling Islamists to widen their basis through a varied set of methods).

How can one be sure of this?

By simply walking in the streets of districts inhabited by middle and lower classes (that total more than 80-90% of the total population of the country in most of the aforementioned cases) and observing what goes around, talking to the people, asking about their ideas, and entertaining comprehensive discussions as to just how they see and how they want to see their lives and their social environment – something that Prof. Juergensmeyer did not do, ultimately preferring the calmness and the security of his office somewhere in the States.

However, the situation is far worse than that. If you now present the same list (of what is correct as an act or practice of the Islamic way of personal life and social organization, including perhaps 500 detailed points accepted by the followers, the fighters and the leaders of ISIS) to a selected group of academics, engineers, businessmen, administrators and high profile functionaries, deputies of ‘parliament’ (this is a non-representative assembly for most of the cases), military, ministers and religious authorities across the Islamic world (without however saying that these points are all approved by ISIS members), you will collect even more surprising results. The outright majority of the elite of these countries (and I don’t mean here only Saudi Arabia but all the aforementioned countries) in majority supports the same points. This is for instance the reason one should view the latest president El Sisi of Egypt as theologically – ideologically – politically far closer to the former president Morsy than to the one time vice president El Baradei.

It would take too long to narrate how this situation has been formed, but I would however like to briefly hint at what I said earlier about the theologians who served as source of inspiration for Muhammad Abdel Wahhab, the founder of the Wahhabism (Salafism), namely the heretics Ibn Taimiyah and Ibn Hanbal. In fact, if Muhammad Abdel Wahhab developed the theological system that constitutes today’s Wahhabists’ doctrine, this is due to the fact that Ibn Hanbal’s and Ibn Taimiyah’s successive and intertwined theological systems gradually prevailed among the Islamic world and eliminated or transformed/altered all the opposite systems.

As a matter of fact, if one Muslim imam, qadi, mufti, minister, general, professor, president or businessman today rejects Wahhabism, he still accepts Ibn Taimiyah’s widespread and fully accepted theological system, which is – metaphorically speaking – the tree that produced the fruit of Wahhabism. There is, practically speaking, little difference or no difference at all between the two systems; simply every posterior system that emanates from an anterior is expected to feature and does actually feature some extra points.

The real difference existed in the past, in Islam’s Golden Era, when totally opposite philosophical systems totally prevailed across the highly educated Islamic World. These are the philosophical systems of Ibn Sina, Qurtubi, Ibn Rushd, Ghazali, Mohyieldin Ibn Arabi, Ibn Hazm, to name but a few; to them is due the Islamic Enlightenment, whereas to the gross, villain, uneducated trash of Ibn Taimiyah is due the complete disfigurement of Islam’s quintessence. However, due to the gradual diffusion of Ibn Taimiyah’s theological nonsense and ignominious darkness, and following its prevalence among ignorant and uneducated masses that it created in a vicious circle mechanism, as it attacked Science, Knowledge, Philosophy, Art and Spirituality, gradually all the philosophical systems of the aforementioned Titans of the Islamic Thought disappeared until the end of the 16th c.

Of course, there is one more difference between the political elites of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, etc. and the ISIS extremists; the former, although accepting most of Abdel Wahhab’s theories and all of Ibn Tamiyah’s ideas, differ politically and make the necessary compromises to ensure the survival of their regime. Contrarily, the latter reject the compromise of the former, viewing it as a treason of Islam. Political difference is therefore due to mere survival tactics of elites that are theological quasi-identical to ISIS; these elites believe that by making compromises upon compromises with the West, they can prolong their tenure and the ensuing material benefits. But their existence only spearheads new waves of uncompromising Wahhabists. Certainly, there is also an attitudinal difference (but no behavioral difference) between the followers of a guy like al Bashir of Sudan or Ali Abdullah Saleh of Yemen and the fighters of ISIS; the former want to pocket more money and store it in their banks, whereas the latter are ready to die. But none of them would accept his wife to be uncovered (without hejab, the Islamic veil) or his daughter to travel alone on motorbike across Europe.

The best corroboration of the aforementioned is the following tragicomical contrast between Egypt’s last and current presidents; Muhammad Morsy is viewed by some as extremist  whereas the incumbent is considered as a moderate and pragmatist person.

Former Egyptian president Muhammad Morsy’s wife wears hejab (Islamic veil that allows the face to be seen).

Current Egyptian president El Sisi’s wife used to wear a niqab (Islamic veil that covers the face entirely leaving only two small holes for the eyes) and only recently “swapped the niqab for a trendy hijab, hushing up claims that she was dyed-in-the-wool” (http://www.albawaba.com/slideshow/sisi-wife-intisar-amer-581626)!!

Prof. Juergensmeyer goes on saying that the reason for which “world leaders are trying to make in saying that ISIS is ‘not Islamic’.” is that ISIS “is certainly not the kind of Islam that most Muslims would accept or profess”. In the light of the aforementioned this appears to be a very unfortunate consideration and an erroneous evaluation of what is going on in the Islamic world.

Reaching the end of the brief yet mistaken article, Prof. Juergensmeyer says that Islam’s name means “peace” which is very wrong (in reality, it means ‘submission to God’ although it originates from the word ‘peace’).

In the article’s last three paragraphs, Prof. Juergensmeyer makes one more futile effort to dissociate ISIS from today’s prevalent Islamic theological systems and to associate it with politics. This is quite pointless and misplaced. In fact, there is no, and there cannot be any, difference between religion and politics in Islam. So, everything that is religious is also political, and vice versa.

Contrarily to the wrong Western assumption that Islam is the only system whereby religion and politics constitute an indivisible entity of faith and action, it is historically proven that all the major religions were systems in which faith and government were perfectly well interwoven. The same occurred particularly in Christianity either Orthodox or Catholic; one may even ponder that in some cases the phenomenon occurred more emphatically in Christianity than in Islam; extensively discussed terms, such as Papocaesarism and Caesaropapism are quite telling in this regard.

So, Prof. Juergensmeyer’s sentence “Besides religion, it is critical to recognize that all the forms of terrorism that we have seen are about politics. Any act of violence in the public sphere is aimed at trying to claim political space – at taking over power to assume control over regions or peoples. This is certainly true in the case of ISIS” is absolutely irrelevant and completely wrong.

The way one family lives is defined by religion; the way one society is organized is specified by religion; the way the art of rule is exercised is decreed by religion. The aforementioned does not only apply to the Islamic world; it does also to Ancient Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, Iran, etc. It is also valid in Confucian China, Biblical Israel, and Christian Rome or Constantinople. One can enter into details that can fill volumes: the way one fights in battle is determined by religious orders; the way one sleeps is elucidated by religious advice; the way one eats is clarified by religious guidance; the way one has sex is stipulated by religious prescriptions, and so on.

Piety is one of the religious traits and virtues that must be reflected in a person’s life, either this person is Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu or Confucian. I fully agree with Prof. Juergensmeyer that “most people directly involved in ISIS are not pious Muslims”; this is right. But does it really matter?

And what about Prof. Juergensmeyer? Will he agree with me saying that “most people directly involved in Assets Management are not pious Christians”?

When we see vulture-funds in Latin America terrorizing nations like Argentina (which involves populations far larger than Iraq or Syria) and endangering the lives and the well-being of dozens of millions of people, do we still need to focus exclusively on a minor terrorist group and forget worse gangsters and terrorists who are far more perilous than the idiotic fighters of ISIS?

And this concludes the case of this type of confusing presentations and futile approaches that leave the Western readership in mysteries; identifying the true reasons of an explosive situation may help greatly solve and diffuse the crisis. But it entails a real inquiry about the original and the altered, the genuine and the transfigured, the authentic and the corrupt. Instead of searching pretexts and excuses, one should seek the truth.

It is not only greatly comical but also highly perilous for the Western leaders to continue on the same track. Why should they bother whether most of today’s Muslims accept or don’t accept the doctrine and the practices of ISIS? The Western leaders themselves constantly disregard the majority of the population back in their countries, and particularly when the majority is ostensibly opposite to calamitous choices that they make (such as the case of the erroneously conceived and catastrophically carried out attack against, and occupation of, Saddam Hussein’s Iraq). Their disregard for the wishes and the opinions of the majority of their countries’ populations is monumental; they cannot be sensitive for other nations when they are insensitive for their own.

The search for the reasons that brought about the present situation cannot be undertaken by Western academia, intellectuals and diplomats without a deep investigation of the developments that took place in their own countries in the first place. Before bothering to know whether ISIS is Islamic or not, they should care to find out whether the so-called Christian nations of the West are really Christian. Drunken of their colonial successes for many centuries, the Western peoples lived with myths and lies that totally disfigured the true dimensions of their own deeds, choices and policies. Modernity is not Christian but Anti-Christian. Globalism is not Divine but Satanic. And the Homosexual Marriages are not the ‘right of the free’ but the evilness of the slaves – of Satan.

Atheist, materialistic, and despiritualized, the Western world turned out to be the Cemetery of the Christian Faith. That’s why the leaders of the Western countries did not give a damn about the persecution, expulsion and extermination of the Aramaean Christians in Mosul. They face now a nominalist and legalist theological system of despiritualized Muslims, who are partly westernized and deeply materialistic, which means filled with extremely contradictory elements able to explode with uncontainable consequences.

The fallacy, inhumanity and monstrosity of either systems is such that one could simply consider them as the two faces of same coin. So corrupt and eroded this coin is that nothing can save it; it will soon be thrown in the Hell that it deserves. And its two faces, in full discord to one another, are triggering now by themselves the downgrading spiral that will bring their end. To survive one has to dissociate him/herself from the onerous coin as much as possible, as soon as possible, and as irreversibly as possible.

 

 

 

 

Nasr bin ‘Ali Al-Ansi, MEMRI, and the Fake Battle against the the False Caliphate

The Freemasonic predilection for the Elizabethan theater is proverbial. This does not only indicate Freemasons’ artistic choices; it also reveals their secret practices. Their preponderant role in world politics is driven by their obsession to stage manage developments, under the ominous Shakespearean verse – motto ‘The whole world is a stage, and all the men and women merely actors’ (As You Like It; Act 2, Scene 7, Page 6).

 

The current battle against the False Caliphate is merely one Act of the Freemasonic play ‘the End of Islam, Christianity and all the Religions’; in the final act of the play will enter the long-fabricated Freemasonic Messiah.

 

The fake theatrical act has been preceded by many other, starting with Napoleon’s arrival in and invasion / annexation of Egypt. During the 150 years long, mixed French / English colonial control of Egypt, the meticulous and multifaceted preparation of today’s developments took place.

 

Many versions of false Islam were created to first combat the ailing Ottoman Caliphate and then plunge the detached provinces of the Caliphate into socioeconomic stagnancy, educational disorientation, cultural disintegration, religious alteration, and political de-Islamization.

 

In fact, it was a long and huge, coercive scheme the colossal dimensions of which were impossible for its opponents to grasp. As the political stooges of the colonial and post-colonial authorities worked hard in favor of the colonial scheme and eliminated the opponents on many occasions, a type of self-catastrophic blind rejection of the West started being formed in the minds and the spirits of the decayed and altered Muslim societies.

 

Islam was reduced to few practices of cult, and was totally eliminated from the level of Government, History, Culture, Education, and Identity of the alienated Muslim societies.

 

Repeated cultural shocks and miserably low educational systems created a terrible divide within these targeted realms; the socially compromised, technically educated but culturally deformed and ignorant, upper middle classes accepted westernization as the de facto context of life, after they were left with no national identity, no historical continuity, and no intellectual integrity. Contrarily to them, the socially uncompromised, uneducated and uncultured, lower middle classes rejected westernization theoretically but accepted it practically, and made of their attachment to a gravely deformed status of Islam, e.g. a sort of de-spiritualized theology of petty orders and practical directives, the unconditional basis of what they thought very mistakenly as a political system at the antipodes of the Western world.

 

The ensuing catastrophe of Islam is therefore of disproportionate dimensions. Those compromised with the West are not even at the level of Western national integrity and cultural identity standards (as attested in Italy, Germany or Spain), whereas those opposing the West in the name of Islam fail to understand that neither do they oppose the West (they rather serve the secret plans of those who rule the West) nor can they be representatives of Islam – because they simply don’t know it.

 

All extremist fighters, radical followers, extremist sheikhs, uncompromised imams, and unsolicited avatars of the ‘Political Islam’ are so deeply ignorant of Islam, and of the Islamic Civilization, History, Science, Philosophy, Literature, Art History and Culture, that they could offer a most spectacular and unforgettable event to the eyes of the disoriented and misled global public opinion, if caught in a well prepared round table or televised debate.

 

Graduates of theological schools in Egypt ignore names of Turkish Muslim dynasties and their rulers.

Graduates of theological schools in Palestine ignore the most important Islamic monuments in Iran.

Algerian sheikhs have no idea about the History of Islam in Somalia, Yemen and Central Asia.

Bangladeshi imams have no clue about Islamic dynasties across the Sahara and the monuments left from their ages.

The texts of Islam’s greater historian Tabari are not taught (not even in selected excerpts) in any class of a high school in any Muslim country (in great contrast with what happens for instance in Italy and Italian high schools, when it comes to Ancient Roman historians).

The greatest Islamic philosophers are known (not all) only as names to 99.9% of the imams who lead Friday prayers {and give a speech (khutbah) before the prayer} in all the mosques of the Islamic World, and the texts of the Islamic philosophers, which could help today’s Muslims greatly improve in every sense (moral, religious, intellectual, mental, attitudinal, behavioral, educational, cultural), are kept unknown because the majority of these imams know that their ignorance would be revealed in the daylight if all Muslims start studying what they themselves have never read.

 

Under such circumstances, it becomes ludicrous for Islamists, extremists, False Caliphate fighters, and all other political activists to pretend that they fight for Islam, because simply by definition you cannot fight for something you don’t know or you know for less than 1% of its entirety. However, their fake faith, worthless commitment, and overall deception are the West’s best tools in the effort undertaken to uproot Islam from the central part of what has been known as the Islamic World (Dar al Islam).

 

That’s why Freemasonic and Zionist outlets, statesmen, intellectuals, journalists, publications and mass media do not present these ‘fighters’ in their true dimensions, but take them as true Muslims ( ! ) because this suits the existing plan.

 

One of these fake Muslims is Nasr bin ‘Ali Al-Ansi, supposedly the spokesman of a CIA / Mossad-promoted scheme named Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. This worthless and ignorant person specifies that “the head of the snake is America” and calls Muslims to join forces in fighting the US. What does Nasr bin ‘Ali Al-Ansi know of Ibn Sina, Ibn Hazm, Qurtubi and Ibn Rushd? Most probably only the names, but not the moral prerogatives.

 

And what does Nasr bin ‘Ali Al-Ansi know of Western History? Absolutely nothing. Otherwise he would call Muslims to support the struggle of the persecuted indigenous Amer-Indians who have been martyred for many long centuries due to the criminal and racist attitude of the European colons. Or, alternatively, he would call Muslims to join forces with Hindus, Buddhists, Africans and others to reclaim all the historical and archaeological treasures that the Orientalist gangsters of France, England and America looted from Mesopotamia, Egypt, Anatolia, Iran, Central Asia, India and Africa and gathered in their ‘theft showcases’ that they euphemistically call ‘museums’.

 

A real Muslim would care more about the dozens of thousands of Islamic manuscripts that have been smuggled from different lands of Dar al Islam to the West. But then, the Zionist publication MEMRI would not write anything about him! The danger would be real, and silence would be imposed against such a troublemaker.

 

That’s why Nasr bin ‘Ali Al-Ansi is not a troublemaker but a useful puppet.

 

MEMRI JTTM: AQAP Official Calls For Attacks On American Targets Everywhere: ‘The Head Of The Snake Is America’

 

The following report is a complimentary offering from MEMRI’s Jihad and Terrorism Threat Monitor (JTTM). For JTTM subscription information, click here.

On September 29, 2014, Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) released a new video message from one of its spokesmen, Nasr bin ‘Ali Al-Ansi, in which he called for attacks on American and Western targets everywhere in response to the attacks launched by the U.S.-led international coalition against the Islamic State and Al-Qaeda in Iraq and Syria. Al-Ansi said that the U.S. was the main culprit in the war against the Muslims, and therefore must be attacked. He added that the U.S.’s allies would also “pay a heavy price” for supporting it in its efforts.

9301.jpg
Nasr bin ‘Ali Al-Ansi

Following is a translation of the main points in Al-Ansi’s message:

Al-Ansi says that the U.S. and its allies have launched a second global war against the Muslims. The Israeli war in Gaza was the first move in this war, he says. He addressed the situation in Yemen, in which the Houthi rebels took over large swaths of the north and forced the government into concessions, as another part of this war. The final part of his message is dedicated to the ongoing campaign of airstrikes led by the U.S. against targets of the Islamic State and Al-Qaeda in Syria and Iraq. He said:

“As for the Crusader alliance that bared its teeth in Iraq and Syria: In the face of this scheme and deceit, the Muslims have no choice but to forget their disagreements, unite their efforts, and solidify their ranks against their crusader enemy. They must create an alliance to strike the leader of falsehood and the head of unbelief. Allah said: ‘Fight against the unbelievers collectively, as they fight against you collectively. [Koran 9:36]’ Repelling the invading enemy is unconditional, as the scholars have said.

“[Jihad groups in] every front must attack America and its interests everywhere. We know who the main enemy is. For decades, America has been supporting the Jews, the occupiers of Palestine. American drones bombard Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia, Pakistan and Yemen. They killed many mujahideen and their commanders and many among the general Muslim population, destroyed homes, and frightened women and children. It should be known that the head of the snake is America. It is the one that agitates and acts against the mujahideen and their Islamic project.

“As for the states participating in the coalition alongside America, they will pay a heavy price for [participating in] this coalition, and America will eventually abandon them and leave them on their own, undoubtedly. If the head [the U.S.] falls, so will the tails [its allies], so it will be easy for us to take our revenge against them.

“This American folly is the final nail in its coffin. It experienced the mujahideen’s might in Iraq, and left it disappointed, confused and defeated. It now returned [to Iraq] to relive the experience all over again… The Shi’ites, who rode upon their tanks yesterday, are now preparing the ground for [America] to take power, in order to carry out the same crimes against the Sunnis. The White House did not learn the lesson and did not learn from the experience. Playing with the card of sectarianism did not benefit America in the past, and it won’t benefit it today, either.”

Al-Ansi added that the Arab states that came to the aid of the U.S. in its current effort in Iraq and Syria will be harmed as well. He concluded his message by promising Muslims that victory is near.

Source: Youtube.com, September 29, 2014.