Tag Archives: politics

Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Sudan & Algeria will soon disappear in an Arab Spring 2.0 – Why not?

Dear All,

Here you have few comments about the defective nature of structures that only conventionally are called ‘modern nations’ or ‘modern states’; these structures will soon collapse and these realms will follow the path of Somalia, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, etc. I expand on why these developments are inevitable. The motive for these comments was a video uploaded by a friend.

 egypt-sudan.png

Comments on the video about Bernard Lewis and the Arab Spring

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REUYfdOi1qo

 

References made to Maxime Rodinson, the Laws of the Himyarites, and John Chrysostom’s Eight Speeches against the Jews

 

Some guys plan the elimination of several countries, and the countries disappear, vanishing into everlasting chaos.

 

After all, what is a country? 

Its minimum common multiplier.

 

Once you realize this, you don’t need to study anything more, except only to reconfirm the veracity of your conclusion. Knowing this for Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Sudan, and all the rest, including Israel, I can easily, safely and accurately anticipate the end of these structures.

815.jpg 

That’s why they cannot oppose the plans of Bernard Lewis whom I met once personally when in postgraduate studies in France. Among other professors’ seminars I attended two seminars of Maxime Rodinson, the friend of Jean Paul Sartre and the famous author of a book ‘Mahomet’ and of another ‘Islam et capitalisme’.
https://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/1968/03/FLORENNE/28292 
http://www.seuil.com/ouvrage/mahomet-maxime-rodinson/9782020220330 
https://www.contretemps.eu/discussion-sur-islam-capitalisme-maxime-rodinson/ 

716.jpg

The seminars that I attended were on Pre-Islamic Yemen, Red Sea navigation and trade, Ancient Abyssinian History, and Abyssinian Language (Ge’ez). Rodinson was also the friend of Bernard Lewis, and once, when the latter visited Paris, he invited him in the seminar. 
 
However, as there are many Ancient Greek and Medieval Greek sources about the History of Pre-Islamic Yemen, I had personally the chance at those days to find how biased Maxime Rodinson was against valuable historical sources that refuted his fake Jewish, Ashkenazi identity and world view.

I could write a book about him; he liked me, but I did not reveal my back thoughts to him, because I already knew that he was a fake Jew and a Freemason. I learned much thanks to him, but I also spent time, after I left France, reexamining and reconsidering my notes, and rejecting many of his points and sayings.

xx.jpg

As you know, the Israelis consider these countries properly speaking as technical entities.

egypt.png

The Israelis are very right indeed.

621.jpg

From Morocco to Pakistan and from Uzbekistan to Mozambique: Technical Entities, not States, not Nations!

All the countries that were detached from the Ottoman Empire, Safevid Iran, and Mughal India are technical entities.

They are not proper states.

In 2014, I published an article that I wrote in a very simple manner so that all can read and understand, skipping the enormous amount of associated details that could help an entire team come up with an encyclopedia to duly and fully illuminate the topic.

It is available here:

https://www.academia.edu/26064731/Why_Former_Ottoman_Provinces_cannot_become_Proper_States_-_By_Prof._Muhammad_Shamsaddin_Megalommatis

This is in the section Leading Articles of my account in that site, so you understand that I highlight it to the rest.

I explain the phenomenon only in one dimension, the easier one, namely ‘state’.

If I wrote this article under a slightly different title, changing the word ‘states’ with the word ‘nations’, I would need three or four times the size of the article.

As long as they were subjects of the Ottoman Empire, they were something. The entire Muslim world was progressively collapsing after the 15th c., but they all had an identity.

Useless to state that they were not asked about their detachment from the Ottoman Empire; their independence is therefore totally illegal, and in addition, it is well known that the early generations tried to reverse the detachment/colonization.

What you have afterwards is the formation of the illegal, criminal colonial classes; these are the filthy trashy people, who either in Algeria or in Egypt or elsewhere were treacherous and docile enough to work with the colonial masters in order to extract material profit and obtain significant position professionally, socially and politically. To do so, they diffused chains of lies and enormous volumes of falsehood.

The indigenous populations were thus disconnected from the state that gave them their identity. Even worse for them, they cared too much for their material lives (which is evil) and they did not fight to death against the colonials; their rebellions were therefore gradually quenched. Last, the detached local people of the colonial lands progressively accepted the entire falsehood diffused by their miserable, trashy and fake elites – i.e. the execrable criminals who ‘ruled’ as local slaves of the locally present colonial masters and as real shoeshine boys of the criminal colonial states of France and England.

All this ends in the transformation of the human subjects of the Ottoman Empire into the nationless, History-deprived, culturally empty, baseless, and utterly useless monkeys of Egypt, Algeria, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Uzbekistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria, etc., etc., etc.

These useless people, their futile and world-destructive existence, are the only obstacle that prevents Real Islam from appearing again as Human Civilization in the world and prevailing at last.

This is the reality: the Israelis must destroy all these countries to ….. bring Prophet Jesus and Mahdi closer!

The Zionists are blind and don’t see that what they try hard to achieve only brings their worst enemies to the forefront of the world politics.

The Freemasons are far smarter and more intelligent and they understand this; that’s why they try to make the Zionist plans fail and in the meantime they prepare their own Anti-Christ.

The Jesuits want to allow the two other organizations to self-ruin in their clash, so that they remain stronger at the end. What is too bad for all is that in their clash they annihilate parts of their plans and harm one another in irreversible manner. Before two months, I published this:
https://www.academia.edu/33381068/Zionist_-_Freemasonic_-_Jesuit_Agendas_in_Conflict_or_Superposition_End_Times_Sequence_and_Trajectories
It sheds light on what projects the three organizations intend to carry out in the next few years and how it all interacts.

So, all these monkeys of today’s Islam, who failed to either hit back and achieve the re-establishment of the Ottoman Empire or become proper nations and organize for themselves as pertinent and effective states, will now pay their disregard for their path with their unprecedented destruction, bloodshed, and disappearance. Although born as human, they did their best to insult God by becoming degraded, materialistic beings. This is an inexcusable sin.

The Laws of the Himyarites, Maxime Rodinson, & Today’s Biased, Fake Academic Establishment

To give you an example related with Bernard Lewis and Maxime Rodinson, I will only mention the Medieval Christian Greek text “Laws of the Himyarites” (in Greek: Νόμοι Ομηριτών). Search in Google and in brackets to see how many times you can find this 6th c. Greek text that details the Christianization of the North Yemenite state Himyar of Yemen, just few decades before and around the time of Prophet Muhammad’s birth!

Just 10 results!

Yet, this text has been published within a major, leading academic publication of the 19th c.! Plus, one Greek researcher prepared his thesis on this text in 1991. This means that an invisible hand wants this text to remain unknown to the entire world. Hhhhmmm!

Long before that Greek person prepared his very wrong PhD, I studied this text even before moving to France for postgraduate studies in 1978. Then, in Paris, every week, I attended ca. 70 hours of classes (during six working days), and of course among them I participated in the seminars by Maxime Rodinson.

At a certain point, in my second postgraduate year, we were discussing something in class, and I interfered saying that about this point, there was valuable information in the Laws of the Himyarites. Maxime Rodinson (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxime_Rodinson) became pale and confused, spoke against that text as if the text ….. were a man who killed his father (!!!), all the other attendees (of whom none had read the text and some even did not know its existence – although the seminar was for exclusively postgraduate-doctoral level) were taken by surprise because of this inexplicable wrath against a …. text! Here you can see many pictures of Rodinson: https://www.google.ru/search?q=maxime+rodinson&num=100&newwindow=1&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwihzPKW7b7VAhXI2xoKHVd8DeAQ_AUIDCgD&biw=1053&bih=631#imgdii=xbnbx8bzvz5msM:&imgrc=yi2Zl0zVso2s4M: He has a certain face similarity with Bernard Lewis – both are Ashkenazi Khazarians.

I opposed him very strongly, because I remembered parts of the texts and I summarized them in French. He then tried to discredit the text, which -by the way- was written by the great Christian bishop Gregentius dispatched from Alexandria to Yemen (Himyar) to help expand Christianity there (No English wikipedia entry on this person; still there is an entry in the French wikipedia:

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gr%C3%A9gence_de_Safar).

Rodinson had become as red as tomato in his face and asked me to either stop or go out of the seminar. I said that I did not need to speak more about it, and that I only mentioned it, because I thought it could shed light on the point we were discussing. I concluded that it is inevitable that many books about that text will be published to show its veracity and great value and kept silenced.

In the seminar, half of the attendees were French and the rest were foreigners; there were English, German, Abyssinian (Amhara), Yemenite, and few more participants from other countries. After the seminar ended, many came to me to ask me where they could find it and I told them about the leading publication where they could find it (Patrologia Graeca, ed. Migne); unfortunately, to most of them, this long series of volumes was useless. The monumental publication (more than 160 huge volumes in its totality / Gregentius’ text covers many pages in one volume) was easy to find in some specialized libraries, but it contained Christian Greek texts, so all the texts were in Greek. However, the great publication was a complete bilingual opus indeed; all Greek texts are translated in Latin, Modern Europe’s primary academic international language. But only few among my colleagues had strong knowledge of Latin to attempt to read the translation. I knew Latin but I did not need to go through it, since I could read the original Christian Greek text.

The affair ended there, and I never mentioned the text again. I had very friendly relations with Maxime Rodinson, and even I translated it for him a sizable part of an Ancient Greek text to French for him (although I had no obligation to do this and he was not member in any jury that would bestow upon me any title). I even dedicated to him one of my books (published in 1994), writing a very complimentary reference to his course. I attended his seminars from October 1978 until June 1981, and after that I moved to England, Belgium, Germany and the Middle East. But I kept a continuous contact with him, sent him many letters and photocopies of my articles, printouts of my academic publications, and my books. I also called him several times, before I moved to Turkey in 1994. Maxime Rodinson spoke, wrote, read and understood around 20 languages. He could read and understand Ancient & Christian Greek, but he wanted to be sure of some points and that’s why he asked me to offer him the service of benevolently translating that part of text.

So, what about the great text “Laws of Himyarites”?

Well, it details an extremely nauseating image of the Jewish rule over Yemen at the times of the Himyarite proselyte Jew King Dhu Nuwas. About this evil person there are many other sources, but they pale when compared to this text, which provides a full record of laws that are similar in their nature to post WW II Zionist inhuman legislation and legalized sin, viciousness, and Satanism.

In addition, the text includes the debate between Gregentius and a Himyarite Jew who faced a devastating defeat by the bishop.

This is the reason the world Jewry does not want this text respected, known, referred to, consulted, used as historical source, and thoroughly evaluated.

Yemenite Students Abroad: Fake Studies of Fake Citizens

Now, as I told you, there was a Yemenite student in Rodinson’s class; of course, he knew only Arabic, French and some English. This means that he was quasi-illiterate in an environment where every participant knew at least 5-10 languages.

That guy did not even speak Mahri or Socotri, which are Yemen’s true national languages, since Arabic is a foreign language and very different from Pre-Islamic Yemenite languages that were different in their own writing system of which Arabic is totally irrelevant. Mahri and Socotri are the real survivors of the Ancient Yemenite languages. After much time, I asked him what he did with that text (the Laws of the Himyarites) which he could not read either in Christian Greek or in Latin and of which no other modern translation was available. All that he answered was that since Maxime Rodinson said that the text was false and wrong, he would not further bother about it.

Then, I realized that his sloth and laziness was a sickness and a curse that would hit back at him and at his country. Indeed, he should be interested in the text more than I was, because the text, although written in Greek, detailed his own country’s past. But Rodinson’s words were a great excuse for him. This means that he preferred to rely on those who planned the destruction of his country than to reject his false Islam (which is the reason for his sloth and for his ignorance) and work hard to take his fate in his hands.

This situation was for me one of the early indications of what was about to come!

How could it be otherwise?

Ali Abdallah Saleh should have made of this text, the epitome of his foreign policy. And similarly, with other texts, other fake leaders who vanished or will vanish. You know what Qadhafi, Saddam Hussein, Khomeini, Mubarak, Buteflika, Zin al Abedin and others could have said publicly as arguments to strengthen their position and inform the world community? Thousands of impressive arguments with strong historical support and evidence. And what did they say? Empty words!

But when you have a gun and an enemy and you don’t use the gun, your enemy will eliminate you!

Common background and many divergences – Not One Elite

However, the common Ashkenazi background shared by Maxime Rodinson, the Freemason, and Bernard Lewis, the Zionist, did not prevent a great number of divergences; this is something that most of the people, political commentators, bloggers, analysts, academics, etc. fail to grasp; and yet, it plays a key role worldwide.

 

All these secret organizations (Jesuits, Freemasons and Zionists) – with their divisions, with their clashes and opposite plans that are in conflict with one another – fail indeed to achieve their targets and to implement their agendas.

Now, about my knowledge of these three organizations, this came progressively and bit after bit after bit. But I am well aware, and in details, of all of their plans and conspiracies, and I have analytically studied point by point the entirety of their falsification agendas in the academic fields that I have been focused on.

Here, I have to point out that the three terms that we use in reality are a very obscure generalization; there are Jesuits against Jesuits, Freemasons against Freemasons, Zionists against Zionists, there is evident cooperation with opponents, and all this happens at all levels from academic-scientific to economic-financial to ideological-political.

So, it is very wrong to think as many do (but I hope you don’t) that there is one worldwide elite, which implements unopposed its agenda; in fact, what we see at the level of world politics is the partly failure of all plans, the compromise among the different elites in conflict, and the ceaseless rescheduling of all the agendas.

 

Have you heard about the preparations for an extra Zionist state in

a) Ukraine (this is by now canceled due to Putin’s invasion of Crimea where they wanted to establish it),

b) Kenya-South Somalia-Uganda-South Sudan, and even

c) Argentine’s Patagonia?

Now, comparing the divergent positions of Maxime Rodinson and Bernard Lewis, one has to go through an enormous bibliography and crosscheck real data; this helps any researcher make sense.

Maxime Rodinson for instance was an Ashkenazi Khazarian who became Freemason. That’s why he was an agnostic, communist (against Khrushchev’s USSR – so this automatically says that Khrushchev was anti-Freemason and anti-Zionist / and similarly for all other cases), but supported a 2-state solution in Palestine. So, he was opposed to Zionist plans providing for one state solution and for Greater Israel (as per Bernard Lewis).

Proceeding in this manner with respect to either my professors or most of the great Orientalists of the last two centuries, I came to understand what were across History the persons, the ideas, the principles, the philosophical systems, the states, the artistic currents (and so on) that the Freemasons, the Jesuits and the Zionists liked (and lauded) or disliked (and discredited or concealed). This does not happen only in politics but in History, History of Religions, Philosophy, Literature, etc.

There are plenty of cases of historical texts duly published that have been concealed or ‘buried’, because of the interests of the above forces; not only the Laws of the Himyarites. What they mostly want about them is to keep them in their original, ancient language that very few individuals learn in the few specialized seminars that exist across the world. Then, those who learn this ancient language, have most probably followed seminars of a Freemason, a Zionist or a Jesuit professor and therefore they have been taught to disregard what disturbs these forces.

One point that I understood very well about the clashes of those powers is that they do occur and at times they are ferocious, but they always happen within a wider ‘modus vivendi’ and they don’t go beyond the limits of a coexistence. The French have a nice description of this sort of fight and class; they call it “le bocal à grenouilles”! You know, when you put some frogs inside a big bottle or jar, they start jumping one upon the other but to no avail.

The World’s Most Important Text in 2017: John Chrysostom’s Speeches against the Jews


Another critically important text that the Freemasons and particularly the Zionist Jews hate is the great summation of John Chrysostom’s speeches against the Jews.

John Chrysostom along with Basil the Great, bishop of Caesarea (Kayseri), is one of the two greatest Fathers of the Christian Church; he mainly lived in the 2nd half of the 4th c. and in the beginning of the 5th c. of the Christian Era.

John Chrysostom wrote more than any other known person in the History of the Mankind. His texts can be found in the 19th c. voluminous publication Patrologia Graeca.

 

{Published by Jacques Paul Migne as continuation of the Patrologia Latina, Patrologia Graeca is a monumental edition that encompasses all Greek Christian texts. Migne’s celebrated publications triggered also the launching of Patrologia Orientalis for Syriac Aramaic, Coptic, Armenian, Georgian, Abyssinian-Ge’ez texts) and Slavonic texts.

 

Migne was much hated by Freemasons and Ashkenazi Zionists alike; these villainous forces burnt his printing house and mobilized the Archbishop of Paris, a Freemason, to stop Migne’s cataclysmic publications that consisted in a straightforward rejection of Modern Literature, Philosophy, and politics as purposeless and deviate. The total war waged against Migne, who is one of the top five most erudite scholars of the last five centuries, involved also an unholy alliance between the Freemasons and the Jesuits! In fact, a great deal was stricken with the Jesuits, who sold Migne for a dish of lentils, and consented that the Freemason Pope Pius IX (1848-1878 / more: http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/biography/pius_ix/freemason.html) issues a particular decree to condemn the use of Mass stipends to purchase books, which effectively called out Migne and his publications.

 

The Spanish wikipedia offers an acceptable and objective entry about Migne; the Russian entry is also good. The rest show the determination of evil forces to conceal vital information about the great scholar and his unique publications:

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Paul_Migne

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%8C,_%D0%96%D0%B0%D0%BA_%D0%9F%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C

https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Paul_Migne

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Paul_Migne https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques-Paul_Migne

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Paul_Migne

 

Patrologia Graeca is an enormous amount of 166 huge volumes in small characters and all texts included are available in Greek (original text) and in Latin translation. The Laws of the Himyarites, as written by Gregentius bishop of Himyar, are included but although they make a sizable modern volume, they cover only a small part of a volume in Patrologia Graeca}.

John Chrysostom’s preserved works alone cover …… 18 volumes (more than 10% of the entire voluminous edition)!! Other Fathers of the Christian Church with monumental works preserved in manuscripts do not exceed 4 or 6 volumes of Patrologia Graeca; so you can get a comparative idea.

John Chrysostom’s Eight Speeches (homilies) against the Jews is the world’s most devastating rejection of the cursed race. No other hand in World History managed to write a so detrimental denunciation of the Satanic nature of Jews. These eight speeches against the Jews can become a vital guideline for all the nations of the world in order to cast this race away; with an enlightening introduction and a comprehensive commentary they may make a great book. This possibility enrages both, the Zionists and the Freemasons to great extent.

John Chrysostom’s Eight Speeches can be found in modern English translation here:

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/index.htm (under John Chrysostom); the portal has posted only few of his works, but thank God they included all eight speeches against the Jews.

Present day Jewry didn’t stop conspiring against this Great Father of the Christian Church who studied their evil nature meticulously. Here’s how:

Open a Google web page! Write “John Chrysostom against the j” and don’t continue! See what suggestion comes automatically from the software! It is …… not ‘against the Jews’ but !!!! ‘against the Judaizers’ !!! This terms means ‘early Christians of non Jewish origin who had in their Christian rites some Jewish traditions’. The Judaizers or Judaizing Christians existed and John Chrysostom wrote against them, but he mainly wrote against the Jews, and this is in Christian Greek the title of his 8 speeches. This is just to show to you a minutious software point related to this subject; due to this detail, you can get an image of how deep the worldwide action of the Zionists is and up to what level of details they think of and they systematically act in order to eliminate what they want to hide from the rest forever. And of course, if this happens for a major historical source, which is part of the Christian Patristic Literature, you can guess that similar attitude and action are displayed and carried out in every single other point.

Look at what happens when an important academic institution, like Fordham University, launches a huge portal to make already published ancient texts and sources available online, and in the process, it happens to normally include the Eight Homilies of John Chrysostom.

The infamous Jews react against the publication, calling names, and characterizing John Chrysostom an ‘Anti-Semite’ (what a laugh!); then, the university authorities feel obliged to open a new web page about the reactions!

http://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/halsall/source/chrysostom-jews6-react.asp

Now, under any normal circumstances, these texts should have become the cornerstone of the formation of all modern nations that happened to have problems with the evil and villainous realm of Israel, namely the Syrians, the Lebanese, the Palestinians, the Iraqis, the Iranians, the Turks, the Pakistanis, the Egyptians, the Libyans, the Sudanese, and all the rest. These texts should have been translated in the local languages and become central in those countries’ educational systems (along with many other texts by other authors in other languages). Did this happen?

No!

So, all these fake, ignorant, idiotic and useless realms will disappear one after the other. There will not be any ‘recovery’ for Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, South Sudan (what a joke of country!!), and Libya. Simply other useless realms will follow in this path. This is what they deserve!

Best regards,

Shamsaddin

 

Advertisements

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.