الشرق الأوسط ضحية النفوذ الأميركي وتسييس الدين

ديسمبر 20, 2019

د. وفيق إبراهيم

هاتان سمتان عامتان تسيطران على المسرح السياسي في بلدان الشرق الأوسط وتضبطه في تخلف متواصل، يجعله ألعوبة أميركية ومسرحاً سهلاً لسيطرتها الاقتصادية.
هذا الاهتمام الأميركي ذهب في اتجاه اختراع آليات صراع غير حقيقية لا تعكس حاجات شعوب المنطقة بقدر ما تُلبي إصرار الأميركيين على ضبط شعوبها في تناقضات تنتج المزيد من التخلف.

فبعد استهلاك الخلافات القبلية والعشائرية بين آل سعود والهاشميين وخليفة وأئمة اليمن وآل ثاني وزايد؛ هذه الصراعات التي أنتجت معظم الدول العربية المعاصرة، برعاية فرنسية بريطانية؛ نسج الأميركيون على منوال اختلاف تعارضات اخرى مكرسين ذعراً اسلامياً من الغرب المسيحي ليستفردوا به باستبعاد اوروبا وريثة الصليبيين والرومان والفرنجة، ومقدمين أنفسهم وكأن لا علاقة لهم بهذا الإرث التاريخي ذي الواجهة الدينية السطحية والعمق الاستعماري الاوروبي الحقيقي لا المسيحي.

للإشارة بان الولايات المتحدة هي أوروبية التأسيس إنما على اراضي الهنود الحمر أي أن لها حصة بتكوينها الشعبي من الاستعمار الاوروبي الذي شمل العالم بأسره في القرنين الماضيين.

وعندما بدأ العصر الأميركي فعلياً نقل اصحاب البيت الأبيض طبيعة الصراع في الشرق الأوسط الى دائرة العداء الإسلامي ـ الشيوعي، الإسلامي ـ الاشتراكي، او بين انظمة قبلية في الخليج وقومية في سورية والعراق ومصر.
هنا شكل الاتحاد السوفياتي نموذجاً “للكفار” الذين أرادوا ضرب الاسلام وإلغائه، على حد زعمهم، متوصلين الى بناء سد بين معظم المنطقة العربية وروسيا أدرك مستويات العداء. وكان المستفيد بالطبع هي الهيمنة الأميركية الاستراتيجية ـ الاقتصادية على الشرق الاوسط النفطي والاستهلاكي.

هذا السيناريو جابه ايضاً الفكر القومي العربي، فبالتعاون بين الأميركيين وانظمة الخليج، أطلقت هذه الانظمة مقولة تتهم مصر وسورية والعراق بأنها تروّج لفكر عنصري معادٍ لأممية الإسلام الذي يساوي بين كل الأمم التي ينتمي اليها المسلمون في العالم، متوصلين الى إعادة القوميين الى دوائر ضيقة.

لكن الأميركيين ومعهم أنظمة الخليج، أخذوا يبثون مواد إعلامية تتحدث عن الديانتين اليهودية والاسلامية ومعهما المسيحية هي ديانات سماوية متآخية لا يجب على الخلافات السياسية أن تدفع بها الى حالات الاحتراب والاقتتال، وكأنهم أرادوا منذ ذلك الوقت إنهاء القضية الفلسطينية بتفكيك التأييد العربي والاسلامي، وحتى المسيحي لها.

لتأكيد هذا المدى الواسع الذي يلعبه النفوذ الأميركي في تسييس الاسلام عبر وكلائه الخليجيين في المنطقة، اخترع صراعاً بين سنة وشيعة للتعامل مع الصعود الإيراني في الجمهورية الاسلامية، مستغلين شيعة إيران، فليس بمقدور الأميركيين التهاون مع ايران التي تمكنت من اختراق هيمنتهم على الشرق الأوسط، عبر تأييد القضية الفلسطينية بالتمويل والتأييد السياسي والتسليح، ودعم الدولة السورية في وجه الإرهاب الكوني، والعراق ايضاً مع مد يد العون لليمن المستهدف أميركياً وخليجياً.

ايران هذه اخترقت ايضاً افغانستان في الهزارة وطالبان وأمنت مواقع في باكستان والهند وماليزيا، ما استجلب عليها، غضب الأميركيين واستياءهم في الحدود القصوى.

لذلك جاء الردّ على شكل محاولة تطويق ايران بعداء سني لها عبر إحياء الفتنة الشيعية ـ السنية او الفارسية ـ العربية، حسب المطلوب أميركياً.

ولولا التأييد الفلسطيني لإيران لكانت السياسة الأميركية ـ الخليجية أفعل في مجابهتها. هذا يكشف مدى تمكن النفوذ الأميركي من تسييس الاسلام عبر الانظمة العربية المحلية. فالأزهر الشريف اعلى موقع اسلامي تاريخي تُمسِك بقراراته الدولة المصرية منفردة، وتتدخّل لتصبح ملائمة لمصلحة التنسيق الخليجي الأميركي. وكذلك حال المراكز الدينية في المدى الإسلامي الموالي للأميركيين، بما يكشف العلاقة البنيوية بين النفوذ الأميركي في العالم الإسلامي وبين المراكز الإسلامية الكبرى.

أما لمذا تسييس الدين؟ لا يزال الدين العنصر الاساسي في الإقناع والتأثير على الناس، وتشكيل المحاور الكبرى. وهذه تبدأ من الخلافات الفقهية والتاريخية لتشكل تحشيداً يرتحل من الدين الى السياسة والخلافات المذهبية والطائفية والقومية.لبنان واحد من ضحايا هذه المعادلات الأميركية ـ الإسلامية ـ المسيحية، حتى أن مراكزه الدينية الكبرى السنية الشيعية والمسيحية والدرزية مرتبطة بشكل كامل بمواقع القوة السياسية في طوائفها، فتستجيب لكل ما تحتاجه من تأييد شعبي للتحشيد حول مصالحها، وهذا يشمل كل طوائف لبنان، ألم يصدر المفتي دريان حظراً يمنع فيه على أي سني بقبول رئاسة الوزراء باستثناء رئيس الوزراء المستقيل سعد الحريري؟ أهذا من الدين أو من السياسة؟
وهذا للأمانة، يشمل كل المراكز الدينية لطوائف لبنان التي تضع الدين في خدمة قواها السياسية في الداخل ـ وهذه بدورها تخدم المشاريع الكبرى للأميركيين ومنافسيهم في الاقليم.

فهل من مؤشرات على اقتراب موعد القطع مع تسييس الدين لخدمة المشاريع الخارجية؟ الدلائل متواضعة، ويحتاج الأمر الى انتصار اكبر على المشروع الأميركي في الشرق الأوسط، من إيران إلى لبنان، وهذا أصبح ممكناً.

Related Articles

The Rise and Fall of ISIS صعود وسقوط داعش

August 10, 2019

by Ghassan Kadi for The Saker Blog

A year or two ago, I would have never imagined that I would be writing an article with this title, at least not this soon; but things change.

If anything, my previous articles about ISIS which I wrote back between 2014 and 2017 were very alarming and predicted the worst, but again, things change, and back then there were many reasons to feel alarmed.

I have reiterated in that era of the past that the ISIS ideology had deep roots in fundamentalist Islam, and I still have this view. I have professed many times that this fundamentalist doctrine had been in place long before Christopher Columbus set a foot on American soil and that we cannot blame the CIA, Israel, the UK, or the West in general for the creation of this ideology, and I am not retracting. I have also said that those fundamentalist views do not represent real Islam, and there is no change in heart on this aspect either. So what has changed?

In this context, we are talking about the ideological rise and fall of ISIS. We are not talking about the political aspects and the horde of players who helped create, manipulate and employ ISIS for different reasons and agendas. With all of those players however, ISIS needed the support base, and that support base was the Muslim youth who are disenchanted by world events and the manner the world views Islam. Furthermore, they are disgruntled by the governments of the Muslims World and their links to the West: links they consider as treasonous and shameful. It was this mindset that was the recruitment base for ISIS; not the Pentagon.

So for the benefit of clarification, I must herein emphasize that there has always been a perverted version of Islam that founded itself on violence; in total contradiction to the Quranic teachings that clearly forbid coercion and oppression. This version was finally committed to a written doctrine, written by Ibn Taymiyyah; the founding doctrine of the Wahhabi Saudi sect.

When the West “discovered” this doctrine, it tried to employ it to its advantage, and this was how Al-Qaeda and ISIS were created, with Al-Qaeda’s role to hurt the USSR in Afghanistan, and ISIS to topple the legitimate and secular Syrian Government.

The not so funny thing about ISIS was that when the proclamation of creating the Islamist state back in mid-2014, the Caliphate passion became something easy to grow and self-nurture in the hearts and minds of many Sunni Muslims across the globe; including moderate ones.

Harking back at what happened back then; one honestly cannot blame them much. After all, many of the then Iraqi ISIS commanders and fighters were former Saddam-era Iraqi Army personnel. Many of them have even actually walked away from the “dictator” in the hope that the “regime change” was going to be for the better, only to soon realize the state of mess and mayhem that the American invasion created.

Before ISIS “had the chance” to show its ugly face, may moderate Muslims thought that this new force emerging out of Mesopotamia, one that does not recognize the border lines that Western colonialists have drawn between Sham (Syria) and Iraq, one that wants to unite Muslims, is perhaps “the one” to go for and support.

Ironically, most of those Muslims today look back at those days and either forget or wish to forget that at one stage, at some level, deep down in their hearts they supported ISIS, albeit not fully knowing what it stood for.

It was this subtle and covert support for ISIS by some elements of the global Sunni rank-and-file that gave ISIS a fertile ground for luring in recruits and that was the major cause for concern.

If anyone looks for evidence that supports this statement, then he/she need not go further than looking at the recent history of terror attacks in the EU (especially France) and the UK.

After the horrendous Bastille Day attack in Nice in the summer of 2016, a new direction for terror was established, and the perpetrator proved that one does not need a weapon to kill. His weapon was a truck, and he didn’t even need to buy it. He rented it.

After this infamous attack and what followed it, I among many others, predicted more of such events, and they continued for a while, and then suddenly they stopped. Why? This is the question.

For ISIS to be have been able to keep its momentum and growing support base, it needed to gain the hearts and minds of Muslims. But to do so, it needed to score victories and be able to revive Muslim nostalgia. Both are equally important.

In the beginning, it boasted its victories and the biggest of which was the takeover of Mosul; Iraq’s second largest city. This was how the ears of many Muslims worldwide pricked up and poised themselves to hear more. Some jumped on the band wagon straight away, but the majority braced and waited for more evidence that ISIS in general, and Baghdadi in specific, are the right ones to trust and follow.

Image result for isis crimes

What followed the capture of Mosul by ISIS however was nothing short of disgrace for ISIS; one that exposed its true inner ugliness. And instead of being able to capitalize on its initial momentum and promising to achieve more of it by adopting at least some of the virtues of Islam, ISIS turned its inability to achieve further military victories into a blood bath, looting and a sex slave market.

Image result for isis crimes

Before too long, even some of the most ardent Muslim supporters of ISIS turned away from it, and then against it, to the degree that they now even forget or deny that they once supported its baby steps.

What is interesting to note is that the move from secularism to Islam has not changed in the Muslim world. An increasing number of Muslim girls are wearing the Hijab with or without ISIS, but ISIS itself has lost its sway with the general Sunni Muslim populace.

What is interesting to see is that the definition of what is a “real Muslim” is changing, and changing quickly. And whilst the move towards Hijab and all what comes with it is still going full steam ahead, there seems to be a growing trend in the Muslim World towards moderation.

The ISIS fundamentals of black and white doctrine seem to be becoming increasingly tolerant of certain shades of grey. Even some personal Facebook friends and friends of friends who have brandished their photos performing Pilgrimage at Mecca don’t seem to be at dis-ease posting other photos brandishing a Heineken. To someone outside the Muslim Faith this may not sound like a big deal, but in reality, it is.

This all sounds good, but what has happened here really?

ISIS has definitely lost the plot. Fortunately for the world, irrespective of who are/were the people “behind” ISIS, its recruitment base had to come from Muslims; especially the youth. Having lost the ability to draw more recruits and enthusiasts who pledge their actions and lives to Baghdadi without even having to be formal ISIS members, ISIS as an organization and a name is now a spent force, and dare I say a figment of the past.

This however does not mean that the Muslim community has “immunized” itself against potential new ISIS-like organizations and agendas.

The initial rise of ISIS could have well been the result of a nostalgic remnant of a certain belief system that many Muslims did not even want to investigate and study properly to see if it really and truly conforms with the Teachings of Islam and all other religions. The fall of ISIS however heralds a new unprecedented era in the Muslim mind, and this calls for great optimism.

Perhaps for the first time in the history of Islam ever since its inception, Muslims are now beginning to examine some teachings they inherited. Even Saudi Arabia and its infamous Saudi Crown Prince Mohamed Bin Salman (MBS) seem to be sick and tired of the old rules and dogmas that allow this and prohibit that; based on no foundation at all. I have never been a fan of MBS, but having lived in Saudi Arabia for a while, I had always thought that this country would never allow women to drive, never ever. The fact that he changed this is a great step in the right direction. This does not take away from MBS’s genocidal activities in Yemen of course, but on the dogmatic side of things, this is a huge step towards reform. In Saudi Arabia there is also a call to have a second take on the Hadith (the spoken word of Prophet Mohamed) in an attempt to identify certain teachings that promote violence and that are incompatible with Islam. The rationale behind this is that they were never the words of the Prophet to begin with and that they might have been injected into the huge discourse by others with political agendas. Such an initiative was totally unfathomable only up till a few years ago.

Does this mean that we are seeing the end of Muslim fundamentalist-based violence? Hopefully we are, but the real answer to this question is for the whole Muslim community to answer.

The truth is that ISIS may be done and dusted, but the ideology behind lives on.

It is hoped for that the actions of ISIS will be remembered for eternity. It is hoped that Muslims realize that if they truly want to pursue the fundamentalist dreams of conquest and world dominion, then they cannot distance themselves from the legacy of ISIS. It is hoped that they look forward to a new world that is open to all religions and doctrines.

I am a firm believer that God created man in His own image, and part of this image is goodness and love of goodness; and Muslims are part of this creation. After all, Muslims, all Muslims believe in the Hadith that says: “The best people are those who most benefit to other people”. Russia and Syria might have won the military war on ISIS, but it is Muslims who have won the spiritual fight. Muslims: 1, ISIS: 0.

ِArabic Translation 

By UP

صعود وسقوط داعش

غسان كادي

 ، لم أكن أتخيل منذ عام أو عامين أبداً أنني سأكتب مقالًا بهذا العنوان؛

في ذلك الوقت كانت هناك أسباب كثيرة للشعور بالقلق، لكن الأمور تتغير.

في مقالاتي السابقة حول داعش التي كتبت في الفترة ما بين 2014 و 2017 كانت مقلقة للغاية وتوقعت الأسوأ ،  لكن الأمور تغيرت .

في تلك الحقبة الماضية كررت أن أيديولوجية داعش لها جذور عميقة في الإسلام الأصولي ،وقلت أيضًا أن تلك الآراء الأصولية لا تمثل الإسلام الحقيقي ولا يزال لدي هذا الرأي. فالعقيدة الأصولية كانت موجودة قبل فترة طويلة من اكتشاف الأرض الأمريكية وعليه لا يمكننا اتهام وكالة الاستخبارات المركزية أو إسرائيل أو المملكة المتحدة أو الغرب عمومًا بإنشاء هذه الأيديولوجية، وأنا هنا لا أتراجع. إذن ما الذي تغير؟

 في هذا السياق، نتحدث عن الصعود ولسقوط الأيديولوجي لداعش، ولا نتحدث عن الجوانب السياسية واللاعبين الذين ساعدوا في إنشاء وتوظيفها لأسباب وجداول أعمال مختلفة. لأنه مع توفر كل هؤلاء اللاعبين، كانت داعش بحاجه إلى بيئة حاضنة وقاعدة الدعم، وكانت البيئة الحاضنة وقاعدة الدعم هي الشباب المسلم المحبط بالأحداث العالمية والطريقة التي ينظر بها العالم إلى الإسلام والاستياء من حكومات العالم الإسلامي وروابطهم الخائنة والمخزية بالغرب. هذا الاحباط والاستياء مكن البنتاغون من التوظيف السياسي لداعش.

لذلك لا بد أن أشدد هنا على الوجود الدائمً لنسخة منحرفة من الإسلام تأسست على العنف ؛ في تناقض تام مع التعاليم القرآنية التي تمنع بوضوح الإكراه والقمع. نسخة كتبها ابن تيمية ؛ العقيدة المؤسسة للطائفة الوهابية السعودية.

عندما “اكتشف” الغرب هذه العقيدة المنحرفة، حاول أن يوظفها لصالحه ، وهكذا تم إنشاء القاعدة وداعش، القاعدة لإلحاق الأذى بالاتحاد السوفيتي في أفغانستان، وداعش لإسقاط الشرعية والعلمانية الحكومة السورية.

 لا شك ان إعلان داعش عن إنشاء الدولة الإسلامية في منتصف عام 2014 ، أيقظ الحنين والأمل بعودة الخلافة في  قلوب وعقول العديد من المسلمين السنة في جميع أنحاء العالم ؛ بما في ذلك المعتدلين. وبصراحة لا يمكن إلقاء اللوم عليهم كثيرا. بعد كل شيء ، فإن العديد من قادة ومقاتلي داعش العراقيين كانوا في السابق من أفراد الجيش العراقي في عهد صدام. لقد ابتعد كثير منهم عن “الديكتاتور” على أمل أن يتم “تغيير النظام” للأفضل ، لكنهم انضموا لداعش يسبب حالة الفوضى التي أحدثها الغزو الأمريكي.

قبل أن تظهر داعش وجهها القبيح ، ربما اعتقد المسلمون المعتدلون أن هذه القوة الجديدة الخارجة من بلاد ما بين النهرين ، والتي لا تعترف بالحدود التي رسمها المستعمرون الغربيون بين الشام (سوريا) والعراق ، هي القوة التي تستطيع توحيد المسلمين، والتي يجب دعمها .

ومن المفارقات، أن معظم هؤلاء المسلمين عندما ينظرون اليوم إلى الوراء، إما ينسون أو يودون أن ينسوا أنهم في مرحلة ما، في أعماق قلوبهم، أيدوا داعش ، وإن كانوا لا يعرفون تمامًا معنى ذلك.

هذا الدعم الخفي والسري لداعش من قبل بعض التيار السني العالمي هو الذي أعطى داعش أرضية خصبة لجذب المجندين وكان ذلك هو السبب الرئيسي للقلق.

إذا كان أي شخص يبحث عن أدلة تدعم هذه المقولة، فلن يحتاج الا إلى أبعد النظر في الهجمات الإرهابية في الاتحاد الأوروبي (وخاصة فرنسا) والمملكة المتحدة.

في الهجوم المروع الذي وقع يوم الباستيل في نيس في صيف عام 2016 ، أثبت مرتكب الجريمة أنه لا يحتاج إلى سلاح ليقتل. كان سلاحه شاحنة ، ولم يكن بحاجة لشرائها. فقد استأجرها.

وبعد هذا الهجوم المشين وما تلاه ، توقعت من بين أشياء كثيرة أخرى حدوث المزيد من هذه الأحداث ، التي استمرت لفترة، ثم توقفت فجأة.

لماذا ا؟ هذا هو السؤال.

لتتمكن داعش من الحفاظ على دعم بيئتها الحاضنة المتنامية ، كانت تحتاج إلى كسب قلوب وعقول المسلمين. وللقيام بذلك ، كان من الضروري تسجيل الانتصارات لإحياء حنين المسلمين للخلافة.

في البداية ، تفاخرت داعش بانتصاراتها وكان أكبرها الاستيلاء على الموصل. ثاني أكبر مدن العراق. وهكذا أصبحت آذان العديد من المسلمين في جميع أنحاء العالم تستعد وتهيئ نفسها لسماع المزيد. قفز البعض على عربة داعش مباشرة ، لكن الغالبية استعدت وانتظرت للحصول على مزيد من الأدلة على أن داعش بشكل عام ، والبغدادي على وجه الخصوص ، هما الشخصان المناسبان للثقة والمتابعة.

لكن ما أعقب استيلاء داعش على الموصل لم يكن أقل من وصمة عار كشفت عن قبحها الداخلي الحقيقي. وبدلاً من أن تتمكن داعش من الاستفادة من زخم انتصارها الأول ووعدها بتحقيق المزيد من ذلك من خلال ابراز من فضائل الإسلام على الأقل ، حوّلت داعش عجزها عن تحقيق المزيد من الانتصارات العسكرية إلى حمام دم ونهب وسوق للاسعباد الجنسي.

قبل مضي وقت طويل ، حتى ابتعد بعض أكثر المؤيدين الإسلاميين المتحمسين لداعش عنها ، ثم تحولوا  ضدها ، لدرجة أنهم الآن نسوا أو أنكروا أنهم أيدوا ذات مرة خطواتها الاولى .

 ما يثير الاهتمام هو ان فقدان داعش سيطرتها على عامة المسلمين السنة لم ينعكس على عملية الانتقال من  العلمانية إلى الإسلام لم يتغير في العالم الإسلامي. فعدد يرتدي عدد الفتيات المسلمات المحجبات يزداد

وما يثير الاهتمام هو أن تعريف “المسلم الحقيقي” يتغير ويتغير بسرعة. وبينما لا يزال ارتداء الحجاب وكل ما يأتي معه في تزايد ، يبدو أن هناك اتجاهًا متزايدًا في العالم الإسلامي نحو الاعتدال.

يبدو أن أساسيات مذهب داعش الأسود والأبيض أصبحت أكثر تسامحًا مع بعض ظلال الرمادي. حتى بعض الأصدقاء الشخصيين على وأصدقاء الأصدقاء قاموا بتلوين صورهم وهم يؤدون رحلة الحج في مكة المكرمة ،و لا يبدو أنهم لا يرغبون في نشر صور أخرى تحمل علامة هاينكن. بالنسبة لشخص من خارج الديانة الإسلامية ، قد لا يبدو هذا أمرًا كبيرًا ، لكنه في الواقع كذلك.

كل هذا يبدو جيدا ، ولكن ما حدث هنا حقا؟

بالتأكيد فقد فشلت مؤامرة داعش لحسن الحظ بالنسبة للعالم ، وبغض النظر عمن يكون / كان “وراء” تنظيم “داعش” ، كان المسلمين خاصة الشباب قاعدة التجنيد؛ فقدت داعش القدرة على جذب المزيد من المجندين والمتحمسين الذين نذروا أفعالهم وحياتهم للبغدادي دون الحاجة حتى إلى أن يكونوا أعضاء رسميين ، وأصبحت  داعش كمنظمة واسم الآن قوة مستهلكة ، وأتجرأ على القول، صورة من الماضي

لكن هذا لا يعني أن المجتمع المسلم “قام بتحصين” نفسه ضد المنظمات وجداول الأعمال المحتملة الجديدة المشابهة لداعش.

كان من الممكن أن يكون الصعود الأول لداعش هو  بقايا حنين لنظام معتقد معين لم يرغب الكثير من المسلمين حتى في دراسته بشكل صحيح لمعرفة ما إذا كان يتوافق حقًا مع تعاليم الإسلام وجميع الأديان الأخرى. لكن سقوط داعش يبشر بعهد جديد لم يسبق له مثيل في العقل الإسلامي ، وهذا يستدعي تفاؤلًا كبيرًا.

ربما لأول مرة في تاريخ الإسلام منذ نشأته ، بدأ المسلمون الآن في دراسة بعض التعاليم التي ورثوها. حتى في المملكة العربية السعودية وولي العهد السعودي الأمير محمد بن سلمان  يبدو أنهما سئموا من القواعد والعقائد القديمة التي تسمح بهذا وتحظر ذلك ؛ بدون أي أساس على الإطلاق.

لم أكن من عشاق محمد بن سلمان، ولكني كنت أعيش في المملكة العربية السعودية لفترة من الوقت ، وكنت أظن دائمًا أن هذا البلد لن يسمح أبدًا للنساء بقيادة السيارات، لكن هذا حدث وهو خطوة كبيرة في الاتجاه الصحيح و خطوة كبيرة نحو الإصلاح يجب ان لا تنسينا الإبادة الجماعية التي تقوم بها السعودية في اليمن بالطبع.

في المملكة العربية السعودية ، هناك أيضًا دعوة لإعادة النظر في الحديث (الكلمة المنطوقة للنبي محمد) في محاولة لتحديد التعاليم المنسوبة للنبي التي تروج للعنف والتي تتعارض مع االقرآن واعتبارها احاديث منحولة تم حقنها من قبل الآخرين لتبرير اجندات سياسية. مثل هذه المبادرة لم تكن ممكنة على الإطلاق قبل بضع سنوات.

هل هذا يعني أننا نشهد نهاية للعنف الإسلامي القائم على الأصولية؟ نأمل أن نكون ، لكن الإجابة الحقيقية على هذا السؤال هي برسم المجتمع المسلم بأسره.

والحقيقة هي أن داعش يقد هزمت ولكن الأيديولوجية الكامنة ورائها ما زالت مستمرة.

من المأمول أن يتذكر  المسلمون أفعال داعش إلى الأبد وأن يلفظوا إرث تنظيم الدولة الإسلامية وأحلامها الأصولية المتمثلة في الفتح والسيطرة على العالم ، من المأمول أن يتطلعوا إلى عالم جديد مفتوح لجميع الأديان والمذاهب.

أنا من أشد المؤمنين أن الله خلق الإنسان على صورته ، وجزء من هذه الصورة هو الخير ومحبة الخير ؛ والمسلمون جزء من هذا الخلق. بعد كل شيء ، المسلمون ، جميع المسلمين يؤمنون بالحديث الذي يقول:  “خير ا النَّاس انفعهم ” للنَّاس

ربما تكون روسيا وسوريا قد ربحت الحرب العسكرية على داعش ، ولكن المسلمين هم الذين فازوا في المعركة الروحية. المسلمون: 1 ، داعش: 0.

From Khashoggi to Nicki Minaj: the immoral misadventures of MBS

Source

July 13, 2019

by Ramin Mazaheri for The Saker Blog cross posted by permission with PressTV

(Ramin Mazaheri is the chief correspondent in Paris for PressTV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Iran, Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. He is the author of “I’ll Ruin Everything You Are: Ending Western Propaganda on Red China”.)

Last month I was in Tehran for the end of Ramazan, and the night before Eid e-Fitr my family and I went to a public street food festival downtown.

It might surprise many non-Iranians, but the array of live music included electric guitars and rock and roll. The rockers did not draw a bigger crowd than an excellent, traditionally-dressed Sufi singer playing the daf (a Middle Eastern hand drum).

It will likely not surprise non-Iranians, however, that there was not any performer who resembled Nicki Minaj.

Saudi Arabia provoked indignation across the Muslim world by inviting Minaj, an American rapper known for her nearly-naked live performances and profanity, to perform in public at a cultural festival in Jeddah.

Saudi women fairly complained: How can the government (and probably also their grandmothers) compel them to wear modest clothing in public, but then give a stage to Minaj?

Saudi women who support their dress code – and credible polls show that Saudi women overwhelmingly support both the code as well as the most modest forms of female Muslim dress – fairly screamed that Mohammad Bin Salman is helping Minaj break a rule which they truly treasure.

Minaj’s concert would have come just ahead of the annual Hajj pilgrimage, adding another layer of democratic disapproval at home and shock across the Muslim world. The Minaj invitation provided yet another reason why Muslims are openly boycotting Hajj like never before: The Saudi monarchy clearly does not respect the values of Islam, and they are committing horrific crimes against Muslims.

Minaj has just pulled out of the concert, saying that she did not want to perform in a country where “women have no rights”, adding that her decision was not intended to “disrespect” the Saudi government. Minaj shows her lack of political modernity by declaring her respect for the reactionary and outdated form of government of monarchism, but MBS is sure to be very sad-faced about her decision – this puts him at odds with the average Saudi person’s morality, yet again.

Our headline does not equate the death of (psuedo-dissident) Jamal Khashoggi with the now-cancelled performance of a stripteasing rapper – it points out how both are cases of the Saudi monarchy evincing no respect for humanity nor for the democratic will of Saudi Arabians.

Minaj and her values are embraced and encouraged in the US, and that is their decision – it is not for Saudi Arabia to impose their choices on the US, any more than the average Saudi wants the US to decide how they should live. However, it seems rather obvious that the average Saudi woman and man absolutely disagrees with Minaj’s values, and it is the obligation of rulers (we cannot use the phrase “civil servants” in the Saudi context) to respect their own people (subjects, in the Saudi context).

Yet we should never be surprised that MBS – or any Arab monarch – so blatantly defies public opinion, because these Western-propped governments lack anything resembling modern democratic structures. Who knows what whim possesses them to do anything? What is certain is that they act with zero accountability, zero democracy, zero notions of post-aristocratic ideals, and in a manner which is totally unbecoming of the custodians of Islam’s most important sites.

The goal of the Minaj invitation seemed obvious, and we see Israel do the same thing: it was an attempt to whitewash the regime’s crimes within the Western public: By slavishly showing the West that they embrace Western pop culture, they are trying to “normalise” reactionary, murderous and apartheid-like conditions.

This is why the Saudis promised fast-tracked electronic visas for international visitors: they want the West’s 1% taste-makers to visit, and then return home saying,

“Saudi Arabia is just like us – our Western government is right to support them.”

Their governments are not right.

The show would have been broadcast by MTV, which would have furthered the reach of this attempt to normalise an abnormal government. MTV would have surely billed Minaj’s performance as a “step forward for female empowerment in Saudi Arabia”, which is preposterous.

If Minaj truly wanted to empower the average Saudi Arabian woman she could have considered performing in local clothing – that would say, “Saudi women have a culture worthy of admiration, emulation and respect.” Minaj performing in an abaya could show young, impressionable MTV viewers that Islamophobia is wrong, and that the anti-hijab laws across Europe are racist, anti-democratic and produce violent attacks on Muslim women. But fighting Muslims – not fighting Islamophobia – is the goal of the West’s leadership, from their political leaders to their cultural elite.

The Saudi monarchy is also not right in supporting Minaj’s brand of rap. I reviewed some of her lyrics, as I am unfamiliar with her music: her lyrics openly glorify her pride in exchanging her beauty for money and luxury; they glorify criminality and drug-dealing; they are ragingly capitalist and obsessed with asserting her self-importance and your inferiority.

When I read Minaj’s lyrics I don’t see an artist, but I do occasionally see an attempt at art: Minaj deserves credit for also talking about how her African-American community has been absolutely devastated by the incredibly racist policies of the United States at all levels of their government.

It is no wonder that the vast majority of Minaj’s lyrics are so debased – she is from a community which has been degraded for 400+ years simply because of their color. The recognition of this degradation is why during the occupation of the US embassy in 1979 the modern Iranian leadership freed not just the embassy’s women but also the African-Americans.

But, excepting their slave era, it is now worse than ever for African-Americans: Since 1980 their imprisonment rates have skyrocketed by well over 300%, a community-crushing experience which may only be paralleled by Palestinians. This has devastated African-American families, and thus gutted their culture and music of peace, hope, harmony and love.

Compounding this sadness is the fear and violence they live with – guns and gang warfare are permitted to flourish in the African-American part of town, whatever town that is, and this is expressly by American cultural design. The US government, at all levels, has no interest in providing African-American citizens and taxpayers with safety or law and order. Even Europe’s Roma don’t live with such violence, at least.

Adding to all that: The economic and political power redistribution efforts finally begun in the 1960s were killed by the Democrat Bill Clinton, and thus endemic poverty in the African-American community adds yet another level of hardship and tremendous suffering to their daily lives.

Therefore, considering how often she has seen her fellow African-Americans die young, and spend their lives in prison, and spend their lives in poverty, then I can understand why Minaj’s lyrics are so unconcerned with consequences and so concerned with immediate, greedy acquisition. After all, acceptance of these degraded concepts have been been violently forced upon the African-American community, just like drugs, guns, poverty and familial dissolution.

Minaj is thus just another raging American capitalist – with all the depravity that implies – because African-Americans are given no other way out. She sells her body just as violently as a Black American football player from the ghetto does in the hope of acquiring a university education.

Given this reality, when Washington’s officials and NGOs try to lecture Iran about human rights, I wonder if they have ever even set foot inside the entire African-American-majority cities of Gary, Indiana, or Flint, Michigan, or most of the west side of Chicago, or any of the thousands of “American Apartheid” towns and neighbourhoods. The systematic oppression of African-Americans may be ignored by them, but it is not going unnoticed by the rest of the world. When Iranian officials say that the values of Washington make diplomacy impossible – and this was heard long before the JCPOA – this is certainly one of the situations they are referring to.

All these things cannot be admitted in the United States. The oppression, delusion and total hypocrisy in the US regarding this abomination is so extreme that I find it hard to conceive that African-Americans could acquire justice before Palestinians do.

Minaj has certainly not been elevated by their mainstream media for her prideful lyrical defences of her besieged community, although I can imagine that does explain part of her popularity among the African-American community. No, Minaj is elevated as a “liberator” and “model example” by the Western 1% expressly because of her vulgarity, both romantic and ideological.

Minaj actually serves an important function: she injects this culture of desperation, violence and self-centeredness – which is required to survive in a US ghetto – into the culture of the middle and upper classes, which have no need to resort to such desperate tactics, and this helps perpetuate US neo-imperialist culture at home and abroad. US capitalism-imperialism first requires, of course, domestic indoctrination of their own people.

But the problems of the African-American community are not the responsibilities of MBS and the Saudi monarchy – reflecting the moral standards and public opinion of the Saudi people is.

Minaj victimises everyone with her lyrics, probably because she doesn’t realise that she has been victimised herself by US culture. While it technically could depend on the song she chooses to rap and the manner in which she would have appeared on stage to rap it, barring some sort of immediate and drastic conversion she would have certainly victimised impressionable Saudi Arabians as well.

I personally respect Nicki Minaj a great deal – she is a human being and a woman, and she deserves much better than being paid to gratify a leering, murderous sheik.

I also personally respect the people of Saudi Arabia and their wishes for democratic empowerment – I hope they finally realise that their reactionary monarchy do not, and never will.

‘Israeli’ Journalist Quits TV Debate to Protest against the ‘Saudi King’s Abuse’

By Staff, Agencies

Advisor to Zionist Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office and ‘Israeli’ political analyst Eddie Cohen withdrew from a television debate in protest against the ‘blasphemy of Saudi King Salman bin Abdul Aziz al-Saud.’

This incident happened during a daily debate on the Zionist “i24news” screen, with the guest Hassan Merhej, a Middle East expert who insulted the Saudi monarch, saying that the king cursed the Saudi red line prompting Cohen to withdraw.

Cohen also claimed that the positions of the King of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the rulers of the UAE represent true Islam, and that they do not practice a policy against the interests of their country.

The debate also dealt with the imposition of sanctions by the United States against Hezbollah Members of the Lebanese Parliament.

Former Qatari PM: Most of ISIL Fighters Are Saudi

June 8, 2019

TELEMMGLPICT000199860092_trans++hPEGQT2fTiR-cA2EWkGOkdrURlqrZJBRknYITkYQ5JE

The former Qatari prime minister Hamad bin Jasem denied all the Saudi accusations about his country’s involvement in supporting terror, stressing that most of ISIL fighters are from Saudi Arabia.

In an interview with the British newspaper, The Telegraph, bin Jasem said that all the Saudi allegations are unproven, adding that neither the United States nor the European countries have supported them.

Bin Jasem also said that Saudi supports the terrorist groups for its own interests, reminding that 15 out of the 19 terrorists who carried out the September 11 attacks are Saudi.

Source: Al-Manar English Website

Related Videos

Related News

ISIL’s Baghdadi Refers to Syria Defeat in First Video in Five Years

AlManar

April 30, 2019

ISIL Leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi

The ISIL Takfiri group’s elusive supremo Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi made his first purported appearance in five years in a propaganda video released Monday, acknowledging ISIL’s defeat in the Syrian town of Baghouz while threatening “revenge” attacks.

The world’s most wanted man was last seen in Mosul in 2014, announcing the birth of ISIL’s “caliphate” across swathes of Iraq and Syria, and appears to have outlived the proto-state.

In the video released by ISIL’s Al-Furqan media arm, the man said to be Baghdadi referred to the months-long fight for ISIL’s final redoubt Baghouz, which ended in March.

“The battle for Baghouz is over,” he said, sitting cross-legged on a cushion and addressing three men whose faces have been blurred.

He referred to a string of ISIL defeats, including its onetime Iraqi capital Mosul and Sirte in Libya, but insisted the Takfiri terrorists had not “surrendered” territory.

“God ordered us to wage ‘jihad.’ He did not order us to win,” he said.

In a segment in which the man is not on camera, his voice described the April 21 Easter attacks in Sri Lanka, which killed 253 people and wounded nearly 500, as “vengeance for their brothers in Baghouz.”

The man insisted ISIL’s operations against the West were part of a “long battle,” and that the Takfiri group would continue to “take revenge” for members who had been killed.

“There will be more to come after this battle,” he said.

On Monday ISIL terrorists claimed their first attack in Bangladesh in more than two years, saying they had “detonated an explosive device” on a group of police in Dhaka, wounding three officers, the SITE Intelligence Group reported.

Source: AFP

Soros color revolution in Syria?

October 07, 2018

by Ghassan Kadi for The Saker Blog

As the observers and analysts of events in the Middle East were busy looking at the aftermath of the downing of the IL-20 and the deployment of the S-300 in Syria, a great new danger is now looming.

President Assad issued a legislative decree (Decree No 16) and which is intended to reform the ministry of Awqaf (Religious Endowments). The “Awqaf” is a Sunni Muslim tradition that has been around for centuries, and its role is to manage the funds of family trusts. After the dismembering of the Ottoman Empire, the new states separated their own “Awqaf” and established their own religious bodies to manage these affairs and funds.

Much has been said in the Arab World about Presidential Decree No. 16, but in reality, nothing has been said about its actual contents and context. When I began reading criticisms of it, they gave the impression that the Decree is handing over the executive authority of Syria to the Sunni Clergy. Videos made and posted by Syrian activists expressed grave concern about Syria following the footsteps of Saudi Arabia in imposing Shariah law on the streets of Syria. There are countless posts reiterating that they are against the imposition of Shariah dress on Syrian women and other similar concerns and linking this to the Decree. There was also confusion about the origin of the Decree and a great deal of criticism of the Minister of Awqaf as the man allegedly being behind it all.

This soon developed into a wave of paranoia and fury that dragged in many normally sombre and serious analysts and activists into supporting the outrage and expressing deep concern and even anger against the government.

I observed all these developments with great concern, not knowing if they were based on any reasonable foundations because I did not really see the actual wording of the Decree in question. The confusion relating to the origin of the Decree, among other things, made it difficult to Google, however I finally managed to find it.

To begin with, and contrary to the statements of many its critics, it is a Presidential Decree and not one originating from the Minister as these critics claimed. It is a 37 page document comprised of 7 sections and each section is divided into chapters. As I sat down to read it, I began to doubt if it was the actual document that the whole uproar was about. I therefore decided to write an Arabic extract of the main and relevant points it mentioned. The extract was quote-unquote based so that I do not use my own words. The emphasis was on matters of political power and religious power, whilst matters relating to financial management and the like were skimmed through very briefly. The link provided herein is for the Arabic post I made. https://intibahwakeup.blogspot.com/2018/10/3-october-2018.html I am not going to translate this to English and I apologize for that. Those who are interested in an English translation can use online translators and whilst these services have their limitations, they are nonetheless good enough to relay the main underlying context.

In brief, the Decree does not separate the State from the Sunni Muslim institution, this is true. However, it puts the religious institution under the hand and authority of the Civil Government. This, in my humble view, is a bold Presidential step towards full secularism.

The Decree imposes regulations on religious activities, teaching, preaching and other related matters, to ensure that extremism namely Wahhabism and the Muslim Brotherhood are kept out and that Muslims are taught that they can be good Muslims and good Syrian citizens at the same time.

Sadly, experience has taught us that if Sunni religious institutions are left alone, they can be infiltrated by prejudiced fanatic zealots who can in the future, potentially reignite the fire. If anything, Decree no. 16 takes precautionary measures to ensure this doesn’t happen.

I did not see in the Decree any allusion to the imposition of Shariah code dress on women, and quite frankly, I did not see anything in it that justifies the outrage.

As I was in the beginning wondering if I was reading the actual document that had caused the outrage, I ended up wondering if the ones doing the outrage have read it at all or even bothered to try to Google it and find it.

The War on Syria has not finished and, over the years I have written many articles about directions that the enemies of Syria took it in order to morph the war and reshape it in their favour. What Syria now needs is rationality and education. It’s a good start to have faith and confidence in the leadership and Decrees of the President, but this trust can be further bolstered by actually looking at facts and discussing the Decree for what it says and not by attributing it to the words of some extremist clerics and making judgements made on totally irrelevant criteria.

However, the current voices of dissent in Syria are led by supporters of the Syrian Government in its war, they are led by alleged “reformers” and scholars, who are twisting facts and feeding the public with disinformation alleging that the said decree is a sell out to the Islamists. With the great help of Intibah (my wife) I have caught them out, and was able to demonstrate that they are either lying deliberately, or that they have issued statements about the decree without reading it.

Those stirrers are trying hard, and very hard, to give the educated secular youth the impression that the government is intent to allow their sacrifices to go in vain. The campaign is spearheaded by some scholars and a member of the Popular Assembly (Parliament) by the name of Nabil Saleh. Saleh is an independent MP who has placed himself against the war on Syria, but not in support of the politics of the Government. He identifies himself as a reformer, a fighter for justice and rationality. However, the campaign of disinformation he is leading does not seem to be based on any rationality at all, but rather on deliberate twists and misinterpretations of Decree No 16. All the while the Grand Mufti Hassoun seems to be keeping silent.

The campaign is splitting the victors of the war on a very basic issue. Even the grass-root constituencies that have supported the Assad legacy for decades are getting inflamed and angry. What is really dangerous here is that as this campaign is giving the false impression that fundamentalist Sunni Islam is winning the battle of government legislation, confused members of other religions are now asking what is in it for them and why did they make all those sacrifices?

My fear is that if this wave of disinformation grows, it will (God forbid) produce the real civil war that Syria did not have. In my Arabic writings, I have been urging readers to develop informed views and asking for calm, but my voice does not travel as far and as loud as the voices of the stirrers.

Now, Syrians have been “asked” to wear red at 4 pm on Tuesday (the 9th of October) in protest to the Decree. Sounds familiar?

Everything about this current hysteria, beginning with disinformation, fearmongering and ending with “Red Tuesday”, are all hallmarks of a Soros-sponsored colour revolution. Did the Western infiltrators who penetrated Syria’s security defences (and whom I and others have warned about repeatedly) establish sleeper cells that have been now activated? Incidentally, the colour red is considered by fundamentalist Muslims as lustful and provocative for women to wear. The choice of the colour perhaps underlies a subtle statement to this effect.

This is spiralling out of control, and the way I see it, President Assad has a few options:

  1. Charge the provocateurs with maliciously spreading disinformation and causing civil strife. This option will however turn Saleh and others in living martyrs and may intensify the situation further.
  2. Ignore the public anger in the hope that it will recede and go away, but such an action may anger the protestors even more and push them to escalate their action.
  3. Or simply to withdraw Decree No 16 even though it is a very good piece of legislation. Such a withdrawal will hopefully absorb the current hysteria and provides the Government with time to deal with whom and what was behind it.

The S-300 may now be giving Syria security in the skies, but those who are stirring the mud are creating a new grave danger on the streets.

Saudi Arabia Rejects Human-Rights Criticism, Then Crucifies Someone

Krishnadev Calamur

Even as it excoriated Canada for scolding it over human rights, Saudi Arabia beheaded a man Wednesday in Mecca, then put his body on public display, for allegedly stabbing a woman to death. The method of punishment is known in Saudi Arabia as a crucifixion, which the government says is sanctioned by Islamic law, and is reserved for only the most severe crimes in the kingdom.

The suspect in this case was a man from Myanmar who was accused of breaking into the home of a Burmese woman and repeatedly stabbing her until she died, according to Bloomberg. He was also charged with weapons theft, the attempted murder of another man, and the attempted rape of another woman. King Salman endorsed the execution. The crucifixion practice is a gruesome one and is employed sparingly; most capital crimes in Saudi Arabia are punished through beheadings alone.

But as recently as 2013, Amnesty International reported that Saudi authorities executed and crucified five Yemenis in the city of Jizan after they were found guilty of armed robbery and the murder of a Saudi man.

“Pictures emerged on social media appearing to show five decapitated bodies hanging from a horizontal pole with their heads wrapped in bags,” Amnesty International said in a statement at the time. “In Saudi Arabia, the practice of ‘crucifixion’ refers to the court-ordered public display of the body after execution, along with the separated head if beheaded. It takes place in a public square to allegedly act as a deterrent.”

Saudi Arabia, which became a country in the 1930s, has employed beheading as a means of execution for decades—though the practice itself is centuries old and was once widely employed throughout the Muslim world and beyond…

Saudi Arabia executes more people than any country except China and Iran—and it does so for a variety of crimes.

News of the latest execution came amid a bitter diplomatic dispute between Saudi Arabia and Canada over a Canadian government statement that called on Saudi authorities to “immediately release” civil-society and women’s-rights activists detained in recent days and weeks. As my colleague Sigal Samuel wrote in response, Saudi Arabia declared the Canadian ambassador persona non grata and recalled its envoy to Ottawa. It froze all trade and investment deals, canceled educational-exchange programs, and suspended flights to and from Canada.

The flare-up occurred at a pivotal time for Saudi Arabia. Its crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, or MbS, has cast himself as a reformer who is seeking to wean the Saudi economy away from its long overreliance on cheap oil and foreign labor. There have been other developments as well, which may look normal for the rest of the world but are potentially transformative for the kingdom—most significant among them, the government granting women the right to drive last September; the origins of the ban, as I noted at the time of the announcement, were murky, but the restriction appeared to be more cultural and religious than legal. But, as Samuel noted, “that win has been bookended by losses.” Women’s activists and human-rights campaigners continue to be detained. Torture remains rife in Saudi prisons, and executions continue apace.

The European Saudi Organization for Human Rights, a human-rights group, said 146 people were executed in 2017, slightly less than the 154 executed in 2016. “Such a level of executions has not been witnessed since the mid 1990s,” the group said in a report released this week. The group said that as of April 2018, Saudi authorities had executed 47 people and were on pace to meet last year’s figure. Dozens more, it said, continue to face the death penalty, including some under the age of 18.

Jeffrey Goldberg, now The Atlantic’s editor in chief, wrote about one of these people, Ali al-Nimr, in 2015. Al-Nimr, the nephew of a prominent Shia leader in Sunni Saudi Arabia (who himself was executed), was sentenced to death by beheading and crucifixion, and, despite international appeals, is still awaiting execution for alleged crimes committed when he was a minor during the Arab Spring protests that rocked the region.

Saudi Arabia employs the death penalty, which sometimes is carried out by gunfire, and usually in public, in response to a wide variety of transgressions, including murder, adultery, atheism, and sorcery and witchcraft. Despite this, it has in recent years found itself on various UN panels that oversee human rights and women’s rights around the world. (The country is hardly alone in its punitive practices—or its membership on elite UN panels… The United States is among the few Western nations that conducts executions, though it is mostly carried out by lethal injection.)

Saudi Arabia’s practices have been widely condemned by the international community and human-rights groups, but given its angry response to Canada’s alleged “interference” in its internal affairs, the kingdom looks unlikely to change the way it metes out its punishments. Saad al-Beshi, a Saudi executioner, said in a 2003 interview that he was “very proud to do God’s work.”

“It doesn’t matter to me: two, four, 10—as long as I’m doing God’s will, it doesn’t matter how many people I execute,” he said, according to the BBC. He added: “No one is afraid of me. I have a lot of relatives, and many friends at the mosque, and I live a normal life like everyone else. There are no drawbacks for my social life.”

Source: The Atlantic, Edited by website team

 

The ’Israelis’ of the Kingdom Are Present

Latifa al-Husseini

In April, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman declared his position on the normalization of ties with the Zionists during his tour to the United States. He openly told the US magazine, The Atlantic, “The “Israelis” have the right to have their own land. … Our country doesn’t have a problem with Jews. … There are a lot of interests we share with “Israel”.”

This is what is useful to the “young prince”; the gradual normalization of ties, which he actually intentionally expressed through meetings, statements and media platforms launched to promote his position. His various methods work and strive to create and convince public opinion of the usefulness of appeasing the enemy to the point of allying with it. The goal is to confront Iran and portray it as the greatest threat to the kingdom.

Bin Salman relays on a group of writers and broadcasters to spread the concepts of “peace” and harmony with the Jews. Some of those are former Al-Arabiya channel director Abdel Rahman Al-Rashed, as well as writers Ahmad Al-Arfaj, Ahmed Al-Faraj, Turki Al-Hamad, Mohammed Al-Sheikh, Hamza Al-Salem, Saud Al-Fawzan, Suad Al-Shammari and last but not least Daham Al-Enezi who called for the establishment of a Zionist embassy in Riyadh.

In addition there are those who are fluent in Hebrew. They compete on social networking sites to attract Zionist activists from within the occupied territories and interact with them under the title of “electronic peace”, at least until now. They have the absolute freedom to court figures within the usurping entity and its axis as long as they agree on attacking the Islamic Republic and inciting against it.

Because tweeting in Hebrew is not a crime in Saudi Arabia, the Saudi writer and programmer, Louay Al-Sharif, addresses the Zionists all the time through his Twitter account. He chooses to tweet in Hebrew to comment on local or even regional news. A few months ago, he recorded a video clip in which he said that “Saudi Arabia has never threatened any of ‘its neighbors’.” He also called on ” the ‘people of “Israel”’ to read the news accurately.” This message was well received by Tel Aviv, so much so that it took care of broadcasting it.

Al-Sharif, who is known for his strong relationship with the royal court and for his role in the Saudi Crown Prince’s “MiSK” Foundation, allocates his [Twitter] account to acquaint his more than 150,000 followers to the “people” of “Israel” and their history. He claims to interact with Zionist tweeters based on his interest in “Jewish heritage”.

Similarly, Abdul Rahman al-Qahtani, who presents himself as a person interested in Hebrew and is fond of Bin Salman, is also active. Al-Qahtani’s posts highlight his focus on attacking Iran and resistance movements in Palestine and the region. He even retweets Zionist and American activists who attack Hamas and glorifies the crown prince. He is keen to use the flag of “Israel” in most of his Tweets that are related to the usurper entity and Saudi Arabia.

In turn, the phenomenon of tweeting in Hebrew has begun spreading among Saudi activists on Twitter. One of them, Abu Omar, identifies himself as having a BA in Hebrew. His account might be real or fake. However, its content centers on his “easy” experience in learning Hebrew, the idea of “peace” with the enemy and criticizing the Palestinians. Another Saudi tweeter (the centrist) says: “The time has come to learn Hebrew!”

Meanwhile, Mohammad al-Ghalban pioneers the Saudi figures that master the enemy’s language. He has a PHD in Hebrew. He is a professor of Hebrew and Jewish studies at the Department of Modern Languages ??and Translation at the College of Languages ??and Translation at King Saud University in Riyadh. He has an MA and a PHD in Philosophy from the Faculty of Arts, the Department of Near Eastern Languages ??and its Cultures in the Indiana-Bloomington University, USA. His general specialization is Hebrew, and his secondary one is in Jewish studies. He has more than 20 years of experience in Modern Hebrew and translation. Not only that, but King Saud University presents him as someone who has extensive knowledge of what appears in Zionist media, is well-informed in “Israeli” and Jewish studies and abreast with the provisions of Jewish religious laws and cultures. He is even fluent in “Yiddish” which is the language of Ashkenazi Jews.

Al-Ghabban believes that the negative attitudes in Saudi Arabia towards the study of Hebrew will change, noting that “a decade ago it was seen as an enemy’s language, but now it is the language of the other,” as he puts it.

The Hebrew Language Program is one of the programs of the Department of Modern Languages and Translation at the College of Languages and Translation at King Saud University. It was activated when the Language and Translation Institute was transformed into a College of Languages and Translation at King Saud University under the 1994 Royal Decree. It is the only program in the Gulf region in general and in the Kingdom in particular that grants a bachelor’s degree in translation from and to Hebrew.

Saudi Arabia is not likely to stop these activities but rather expand them and perhaps open more institutes that teach Hebrew. In this context, Louay Al-Sherif spoke about the allocation of an educational platform for the teaching of languages, including Hebrew that will be launched soon in the Kingdom. Will Bin Salman be the first to join or will there be no need for it in light of the full understanding and harmony with the Zionists?

It can be said today that Saudi Arabia is unable to surprise Arab public opinion in general and the Saudi one in particular, as it placed it at the heart of its normalization policy. It is only concerned about its hostility towards Iran, and nothing else. Originally, it derives from the former Mufti Abdul Aziz bin Baz’s fatwa regarding reconciliation with the Jews.  Justifications for the ratification of the upcoming agreement of humiliation with Tel Aviv derive from this fatwa. But the question is why was the announcement delayed, especially since the popular base is ready for it? What is the Royal Court waiting for following the secret meetings between Bin Salman and Zionist officials in the occupied territories and before that in the United States in March and April, according to leaks by “Israeli” and American media?

Source: Al-Ahed

هل يُحاكَم قابيل بتهمة قتل هابيل؟

مارس 10, 2018

د. عصام نعمان

نشرت صحيفة «القدس العربي» قبل أيام أنّ نقابة المحامين في النجف أجرت محاكمة للخليفة الأموي هشام بن عبد الملك انتهت بالحكم عليه بالإعدام بتهمة قتل زيد بن علي بن الحسين.

الخبر طريف ومخيف في آن. طريفٌ لوجود ناس في كوكبنا الأرضي ما زالوا يجدون رغبة ومتعة في الاقتصاص من شخص لارتكابه جرماً قبل نحو 1400 سنة. مخيفٌ لاحتمال أن تتفشّى هذه التقليعة في أوساط البشرية المعاصرة، فينبري أشخاص أو جماعات من فرط ولعهم بإحقاق الحق ونشدان العدالة إلى إجراء محاكمة لقابيل بتهمة قتل أخيه هابيل!

تصوّروا لو تحوّلت هذه التقليعة الى نزعةٍ أو تقليد جارفٍ عابرٍ للأمم والشعوب، فينبري بعض المسيحيين إلى إجراء محاكمة لكلّ مَن يثبت التحقيق قيامه أو اشتراكه أو تدخله في جريمة صَلب السيد المسيح. ثم تصوّروا لو أنّ بعض المسلمين انبرى إلى إجراء محاكمة لكلّ من يثبت التحقيق قيامه أو اشتراكه أو تدخّله في جرائم اغتيال كلّ من الخلفاء الراشدين: عمر بن الخطاب وعثمان بن عفان وعلي بن أبي طالب والخليفة الأموي عمر بن عبد العزيز الذي يعتبره الفقهاء خليفةً راشدياً بالتقوى والفتوى والممارسة وسيّد الشهداء الحسين بن علي وغيرهم كثيرون من القادة والأعلام والأفذاذ المظلومين. تخوّفي أنه إذا ما جرت هذه المحاكمات ومثيلاتها، فتكون البشرية قد استحضرت ماضيها وأعادت اجتراره في الحاضر وربما في المستقبل إلى نهاية التاريخ.

هل مِن مسوّغ لتخوّفي هذا؟

نعم، لأنّ بعض العرب والمسلمين ما زال يعيش في الماضي ويقوم، بشكلٍ أو بآخر، باستحضار بعض واقعاته وحكاياته وأحداثه وحوادثه ويُعيد اجترارها أو محاكاتها في الحاضر.

نعم، الماضي يحتلّ قسماً كبيراً من حاضرنا. ونحن نعيشه يومياً ونعيد إنتاجه، بوعي أو بغير وعي، في شتى مناحي حياتنا. كلّ ذلك لأنّ الماضي في ثقافتنا ما زال المثل والمثال والقدوة والأسوة. فنحن لا نتذكّر واقعاته وأحداثه لأخذ العبرة والاتعاظ بل للاجترار والمحاكاة.

ما سبب هذه الظاهرة المرَضية؟

إنني من القائلين إنّ الإنسان في قوله وفعله هو إبن ثقافته. كما تكون ثقافته يكون. صحيح لأنّ جملة عوامل وحاجات وتطلّعات تكوّن ثقافة الإنسان، وقد يكون لبعضها دور في تكوينها أكثر من غيره، ومع ذلك فإنّ حضورها في عقل الإنسان وقلبه وأعصابه يبقى حضوراً متكاملاً ومؤثراً.

من الواضح أنّ للماضي حضوراً واسعاً وفاعلاً في ثقافة معظمنا التي هي ثقافة ماضوية، إنْ صحّ التعبير. معظمنا يفكّر بلغة الماضي وصِيَغه وقيمه وحتى مصطلحاته، ويستسيغ استحضاره وإعادة تجسيده في الحاضر. نحن، بهذا المعنى، ماضويون. أجل، ماضويون في التفكير والتدبير ونجد، غالباً، ضالتنا وفخرنا في ماضينا التليد، ونصبو إلى محاكاته في حاضرنا.

لكن، هل ماضينا كله تليد؟ هل كله صحيح، وصحي وحقيقي ومتألّق وجدير، تالياً، بأن يُحاكى ويقلّد؟

لا شك في وجود جوانب بهيّة وباهرة في ماضينا، لكن ثمّة جوانب أخرى مظلمة وبائسة. لذا لا يجوز قبول أو تقبّل الماضي كله بعجره وبجره. من الممكن، بل من الضروري، اكتناه قيمَه وجوانبه الحيّة، لكن من الضروري أيضاً اطّراح قيَمه الشائخة وجوانبه المظلمة.

بعض الماضويين، وربما السلفيين أيضاً، موغل في التعلّق بالماضي حتى حدود الشغف. الماضي كله أفضل من الحاضر. الماضي كله جدير بأن يُعاد فرضُه على الحاضر والمستقبل. الماضي، في مفهوم هؤلاء، هو المقدّس بالمقارنة مع الحاضر المدنّس.

لعلّ السبب الرئيس لسطوة الماضي على الحاضر هو اقتران الحاضر في معظم مراحل تاريخنا بسطوة الغير المعادي أو المختلف ونزوعه إلى فرض نفسه، وبالتالي ثقافته علينا. رفض الجديد والحديث كان جرّاء مجيئه أو اقترانه مع الآخر المستعمِر أو العدو أو، أقلّه، المختلف.

هكذا كانت، في الغالب الأعمّ، ردة فعل عامة الناس من ذوي الثقافة الماضوية. غير أنّ قلّة فينا، على مرّ التاريخ، تجاوزت أطر ثقافتها الماضوية وتطلّعت إلى ما هو خارجها واستطاعت، تالياً، أن تقف موقفاً نقدياً من الثقافة الماضوية السائدة ومن التراث عموماً.

سببٌ آخر فاعل لتمسّك عامة الناس بالماضي وتقديمه على الحاضر. إنه الدين من حيث هو مصدر الإيمان. الدين موجود ونابع من الكتب الدينية المقدّسة التي تعود بتاريخها الى الماضي ما يجعل المؤمن متمسّكاً بالماضي لكونه مصدر الإيمان العزيز على قلبه ومشاعره ووجدانه.

قلائل من الناس، مفكّرون عقلانيون ومصلحون شجعان، تمكّنوا عبر التاريخ من الخروج من الماضي نحو الحاضر والمستقبل من دون أن يسيئوا إلى تمسك المؤمنين، ولا سيما الماضويين منهم، بقيَم الماضي التي يعتبرونها مقدّسة. هؤلاء لاحظوا أنّ الإيمان بالله ورسله لا يتناقض مع ثقافة الانفتاح العقلاني على الحاضر والتشوّف المتوازن الى المستقبل. بل إنهم لاحظوا ظاهرة مدمّرة هي أنّ عبادة السلطة التي يمارسها معظم الحكّام تتعارض مع عبادة الله. لذا دعوا إلى فصل السلطة عن الدين. هذا الفصل بين الاثنين لا يسيء إلى الدين بل يحصّنه ضدّ أخطاء أصحاب السلطة وخطاياهم. كما أنه يجنّب أهل السلطة سلوكيات بعض أهل الدين المتزمّتة وأحياناً المتعارضة مع مصالح الناس عامةً.

كيف الخروج من الماضي وثقافته المغلقة إلى الحاضر وثقافته المنفتحة والمستقبل وثقافته المغايرة؟

ثمّة مسالك وطرائق عدّة، لعلّ أفعلها في زماننا وسائل التواصل الاجتماعي التي قرّبت بين الأفراد والجماعات، وأتاحت للفرد فرصاً كثيرة لإطلاق قدراته وإيصالها الى الملأ، وجعلت الانشغال بقضايا الحاضر ومتطلّباته متقدّمة على قضايا الماضي وأحداثه الدموية وأَوْلى بالاهتمام من محاكمة قاتلي الناس في أرواحهم وأرزاقهم وطموحاتهم، وأوْلى بالتحقيق من محاكمة قابيل قاتل أخيه هابيل وأمثاله من قَتَلة العظماء على مرّ التاريخ!

Recommended  for Muslim readers

Video No 2 will follow and so on

 

Brotherhood, Wahabism: Two Faces of the Same Coin

 

Apr 13, 2012

نارام سرجون:بعد النصر .. استعدوا لخوض الحرب الأصعب والأقسى؟؟ .. اللحم سيقاتل العظم

“لانعرف حتى اللحظة كيف سيمكننا اجراء عملية فصل الاسلام عن التراث وفصل المسلم عن التراث دون أن نفصل المسلم عن الاسلام …… انها عملية تشبه فصل اللحم عن العظم .. فالتراث المنقول هو لحم الاسلام الذي يحمله هيكل عظمي هو فكر الاسلام .. ولحم التراث مليء بالاسرائيليات والمتناقضات ومليء بالطفيليات وبالعداء للتفكير والمنطق والفلسفة والعقل ..”

تعليق المحرر على المقالة

اتفق مع الكاتب بان الحرب مع مع داعش واخواتها من الحركات الاسلاموية (الوهابية واخوان الشياطين وحزب التحرير الاسلاموي…… الخ الخ) ، تنتهي بانتصار ناجز لا لبس فية، بدون “فصل المسلم عن الثراث المنقول لكني  لا اتفق مع مقولته عن “لحم الاسلام الذي يحمله هيكل عظمي هو فكر الاسلام” لأني ازعم ان الهياكل العظمي التي حملت لنا التراث المنقول ( العنعنة، وتابعه علم الرجال وعلم الناسخ والمنسوخ والاصول والمعلوم من الدين …..) هم  “علماء” و”فقهاء ” السلطان الاموي والعباسي و… و  والعثماني، والازهر وأم القرى وحميع حركات الاسلام السياسي الذين هجروا القران واعتبروا التراث المنقول وحيا ثانيا لا يمكن ان نفهم التنزبل الحكيم بدونه

وهنا لا بد من لفت انتباه الكاتب بان المشكلة لا تقتصر على العقل العربي المسلم فقط وانما العقل العربي “الداعشي” المسلم المسيحي والعلماني والملحد وكل عقل يدعي امتلاك الحقيقة المطلقة ويكفر الآخر

قال تعالى

وَقَالَ الرَّسُولُ يَا رَبِّ إِنَّ قَوْمِي اتَّخَذُوا هَٰذَا الْقُرْآنَ مَهْجُورًا 

وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمُ اتَّبِعُوا مَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ قَالُوا بَلْ نَتَّبِعُ مَا أَلْفَيْنَا عَلَيْهِ آبَاءَنَا ۗ أَوَلَوْ كَانَ آبَاؤُهُمْ لَا يَعْقِلُونَ شَيْئًا وَلَا يَهْتَدُونَ

قال تعالى:

قُلْ مَن يَرْزُقُكُم مِّنَ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ ۖ قُلِ اللَّهُ ۖ وَإِنَّا أَوْ إِيَّاكُمْ لَعَلَىٰ هُدًى أَوْ فِي ضَلَالٍ مُّبِينٍ

 [الجزء: ٢٢ | سبأ ٣٤ | الآية: ٢٤]

 في الآية يخبر الله رسوله أن الرزق للمؤمن والمشرك  من الله

وويقول له ان الحقيقة الآنسانية نسبية ولا احد يمتلك الحقيقة المطلقة سوى الله

 : قل يا محمد:  “….. ۖ وَإِنَّا أَوْ إِيَّاكُمْ لَعَلَىٰ هُدًى أَوْ فِي ضَلَالٍ مُّبِينٍ

اي : وانا (محمد) او اياكم (المشركين )

قال (او)  ولم يقل (و)

اي انا او انتم علي هدى

او انا أو انتم على ضلال مبين

هذه رسالة امر الله عزوجل رسوله الاعظم ان يبلغها ليس للمشركين فقط وانما للناس وخصوصا للذين نصبوا انفسهم ناطقين باسمه وباسم نبيه فحددوا من يدخل النار واختصروا الطريق الى الجنة بتلاوة كذا او كذا ووزعوا صكوك الغفران وبوالص التامين النبوي:

الدعوة الى سبيل الله

قال تعالى

ادْعُ إِلَىٰ سَبِيلِ رَبِّكَ بِالْحِكْمَةِ وَالْمَوْعِظَةِ الْحَسَنَةِ ۖ وَجَادِلْهُم بِالَّتِي هِيَ أَحْسَنُ ۚ إِنَّ رَبَّكَ هُوَ أَعْلَمُ بِمَن ضَلَّ عَن سَبِيلِهِ ۖ وَهُوَ أَعْلَمُ بِالْمُهْتَدِينَ

 [الجزء: ١٤ | النحل ١٦ | الآية: ١٢٥]

قال: بالحكمة ولم يقل بالحكمة الحسنه لنفهم ان الحكمه حسنة بالضرورة ولا وجود لحكمة سيئة

وقال: بالموعظة الحسنة لنفهم ان الموعظة قد تكون حسنة وقد تكون سيئة

كلمة (الحسنة) ليست زائدة وليست حشوا

اذا هناك موعظة سيية

والدليل الحاسم هو فضائيات التكفير على اختلاف تلاوينها

وقال: وجادلهم بالتي هي احسن

اي لا تجادلهم بالتي هي اسوأ

اي  الجدال قد يكون سيء وقد يكون حسن وقد يكون احسن

والمطلوب هو الجدال الاحسن

وهل هناك احسن من يتواضع نبي ورسول ومبلغ رسالة لا تنطق عن الهوى فيقول للمشركين:

وانا او اياكم على هدى او في  ضلال مبين؟

وقال

وَلَا تَسْتَوِي الْحَسَنَةُ وَلَا السَّيِّئَةُ ۚ ادْفَعْ بِالَّتِي هِيَ أَحْسَنُ فَإِذَا الَّذِي بَيْنَكَ وَبَيْنَهُ عَدَاوَةٌ كَأَنَّهُ وَلِيٌّ حَمِيمٌ

 [الجزء: ٢٤ | فصلت ٤١ | الآية: ٣٤]

قال ادفع ولم يقل ادفش والدفع هنا لا يعني تسديد الدين

بل يعني الدفاع عن حرية الرأي والتعبير ليس بالسيف والتكفير والاتهام بالنفاق  واقامة الحجة بالتي هي أحسن وأخير ماهو سبيل الله وما هي كلمة الله التي سبقت

قال تعالى

وَلَوْ شَاءَ رَبُّكَ لَجَعَلَ النَّاسَ أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً ۖ وَلَا يَزَالُونَ مُخْتَلِفِينَ – إِلَّا مَن رَّحِمَ رَبُّكَ ۚ وَلِذَٰلِكَ خَلَقَهُمْ ۗ وَتَمَّتْ كَلِمَةُ رَبِّكَ لَأَمْلَأَنَّ جَهَنَّمَ مِنَ الْجِنَّةِ وَالنَّاسِ أَجْمَعِينَ (119)

 صدق الله العظيم انظر حولك فالناس مختلفين كما اخبرنا الله في تنزيلة الحكيم باستثاء من رحم ربي وهم الانبياء   ،  والرسل، وهو يخبرنا انه خلق الناس أحرار ليختلفوا بارادتهم الحرة، وباختلافهم تمت كلمته التي سبقت. وعلية فحيث يكون النسان حرا تكون كلمة الله هي العليا

Related videos

عن ازمة العقل العربي انصح الكاتب والقراء بقراءة كتب المفكر الاسلامي الدكتور مهندس محمد شحرور ومشاهدة سلسلة المقابلات الرمضانية التالية  – 30 حلقة – حول قرائته المعاصرة للتنزيل الحكيم

=====

نارام سرجون:بعد النصر .. استعدوا لخوض الحرب الأصعب والأقسى؟؟ .. اللحم سيقاتل العظم

وكالة أوقات الشام الإخبار ية

دعونا نتوقف الآن لالتقاط الانفاس ونقول ان هذه الحرب مع التيارات الاسلامية في المنطقة ستنتهي سريعا بانتصار ناجز لالبس فيه .. ولكن على هونكم ياسادة .. فلا تستعجلوا قرع الكؤوس والأنخاب وتبادل التهاني .. ولاتسترخوا .. لأنها فقط احدى جولاتها وهي الجولة الاطول والاقسى والاعنف وستتلوها هدنة طويلة الامد ولكن الحرب سجال ويجب على المنتصر الأن ان لايرقد مسترخيا بل أن يبدأ في الاعداد للحرب القادمة .. وهي الأقسى والأصعب ..

ان منتهى الخيال أن نعتقد أننا خضنا المعركة الأخيرة مع الاسلام السياسي الذي انطلق مع غياب آخر الخلافات وهي الخلافة العثمانية .. وظل الشغل الشاغل للأجيال منذ ذلك اليوم هو اعادة الخلافة أو شبه الخلافة .. لأن العقل الشرقي الاسلامي لايزال مقتنعا أن المؤامرة التي أسقطت الخلافة ستبقى في وجهه لمنع اعادتها وقيامها مجددا .. وعقب كل هزيمة عسكرية وانتهاء جيل من الاسلاميين يقر الجيل اللاحق بأن من سبقوهم أخطأوا التخطيط والتسديد .. ومايجب على الجيل القادم هو تلافي هذه الأخطاء وتطوير التجربة لأن الله سينصر عباده المؤمنين في نهاية المطاف !! .. وهم على موعد مع نصر حتمي قدره الله .. بدليل تعدد نسخ التجارب الجهادية في معظم بلدان المنطقة وكلها تعيد انتاج نفسها وبطرق عنف مختلفة تدل على أنها ليست مأزومة فقط بل مقتنعة تماما ان العنف الداخلي (الذي يسمى جهادا) هو السبيل الوحيد لاعادة الخلافة لأن ماسقط بالحرب لن يعود الا بالحرب .. وليس بالحب .. ولعل أكثر عبارة تدل على أن المعركة انتهت فقط مع هذا الجيل من الاسلاميين وان الجيل اللاحق يستعد هو عبارة يرددها الكثيرون ببراءة وسذاجة مفادها: (هذا الذي رأيناه ليس الاسلام الحقيقي) .. ولكن هذه العبارة هي التي ستشكل الحامل والرافعة للمشروع القادم الذي سيخترع أصحابه نسخة أخرى “حقيقية” جاءت كما ياتي المخلّص .. ويعتبرون ماحدث من هزائم حتى الآن هو جولات وعملية حقن الاسلام بلقاحات متنوعة يتعرض لها الجسم العسكري الاسلامي في سيرته الجهادية الطويلة .. ولذلك فانه من الطبيعي أن يتعرض لطفرات جديدة أو لعملية لقاح بالهزيمة تكسبه مزيدا من المناعة ..

وهنا لاأريد أن يفهم من كلامي انني ارى ان مافعله داعش هو الاسلام الحقيقي لأنني انا فعلا مقتنع أن ماقدمه داعش والنصرة هو برنامج اسلام من قماش تلمودي موسادي ووهابي التطريز .. ولكن العبارة (هذا ليس الاسلام الحقيقي) بحد ذاتها رغم دلالتها الكبيرة على أنها عملية القبول والاعتراف والتسليم بهزيمة المشروع الاسلامي مرحليا فان فكرة الهزيمة النهائية لاتزال غير مقبولة في نظر الاسلاميين بل ينظر اليها لى أن ماحدث مجرد معركة .. مثل معركة (أحد) مثلا لابد ان يتلوها نصر وفتح مبين ..

أبني كلامي واستنتاجي على قاعدة

أن جميع التنظيمات الجهادية اليوم مشتقة من بعضها وهي رغم تفاوتاتها وخلافاتها الفقهية فانها تملك ذات الجذر وذات المراجع الفقهية والرؤية التاريخية والفلسفية فالفرق بين الاخوان المسلمين وداعش يبدو شاسعا في السطح ولكنه في العمق متماه كثيرا من حيث فكرة التكفير والعلاقة مع الأغيار من غير المسلمين أو حتى من المذاهب المنشقة عن مذهب أهل السنة أو حتى المدارس السنية التي تخالفهم الرأي والاجتهاد .. بدليل أن الاخوان المسلمين لايمكن مثلا أن يصدروا بيانا يقولون فيه رأيا يخالف داعش من حيث تكفير الشيعة والدروز والعلويين والمسيحيين وغيرهم .. لأن هؤلاء جميعا كفار في نظر داعش والاخوان المسلمين وجبهة النصرة .. ومافعله داعش فقط أنه وسع دائرة الكفار حتى شملت أهل السنة والجماعة الذين يختلفون عنه .. ولو انه اكتفى بدائرة التكفير الاخوانية التقليدية لما تلعثم الاخوان المسلمون في تأييدهم لخلافة على منهاج النبوة تشبههم ولم يتأتئوا في تعبيرهم عن الانسجام مع أفكارها وبقيت الخلافات الفقهية الأخرى اجتهادات أخطأ فيها الدواعش ولهم فيها أجر واحد فقط لا أجران !!! .. هو ثواب المجتهد ..

وسنكون واقعيين جدا في الاعتراف بأن عملية نزع فتيل الصاعق من القنبلة “الاسلامية” لن تنجح بهذه البساطة لأنهم ببساطة ذخيرة للغرب ورصاص يوجهه الى صدورنا في أية لحظة لأن مفهوم الوطن مغيب لدى الاسلاميين أمام سطوة فكرة الخلافة التي تبتلع الأوطان جميعا وتضعها تحت عباءة خليفة .. فالاسلاميون الوهابيون احتلوا الحجاز ونجد وعطلوا فريضة الجهاد المكي ضد الغرب واسرائيل مما أوقف مليار مسلم عن عملية التطوع لنصرة فلسطين “الا بالدعاء” .. ولكن الغرب أيضا أطلق الاسلام الجهادي ضد الروس والسوفيت وضد الايرانيين وضد البعثيين القوميين العروبيين أيضا في سورية والعراق وضد المقاومة في لبنان ..

أما الاخوان المسلمون فهم النسخة الأخرى للوهابية وهما من ذات فصيلة الزواحف .. والفوارق هي في التكوين والبيئة .. فالوهابيون يشبهون في قسوتهم التماسيح التي تنهش فريستها بوحشية .. أما الاخوان فهم زواحف الدم البارد والأفاعي ذات الجلود الناعمة والتي تحقنك بالسم .. ثم تبتلعك بهدوء .. ولكن كلها زواحف ..

مسؤول “الاخوان” سعيد رمضان مع الرئيس الأمريكي إيزنهاور في البيت الأبيض عام 1953.

وقد جاء الربيع العربي ليثبت أن الاسلاميين على اختلاف مشاربهم ذخيرة عظيمة للغرب لن يساعدنا الغرب على التخلص منها بل سيعيدها الى الحظائر مؤقتا لاجراء صيانة وتزويد خطاباتها بقطع الغيار والملونات والمذاقات التي تخفي خطاب الكراهية ..

ويجب هنا الانتباه الى أن أي محاولة بريئة لاطلاق تيارات اسلامية موازية لامتصاص قوة هذه التيارات وانتزاع الجيل من الانتماء اليها بحجة أن اطلاق الاعتدال سيخفف من التطرف فاننا سنكون واهمين لأن أي خلل في الميزان سيجعل عملية الهجرة الى معسكر التطرف سهلة طالما أن المشتركات الفقهية كثيرة وعملية الانزياح في الاتجاهين واردة جدا وتتبع عوامل متحولة ..

ومانكون قد فعلناه هو اننا هيأنا جيشا رديفا للتطرف سينضم اليه عند أول تلاعب في الخطاب الديني كما حدث اليوم في حرب السنوات السبع عندما كانت المنطقة كلها معتدلة ومضبوطة بفعل العامل القومي الذي ما ان تراجع حتى تسلمت التيارات المتطرفة قيادة جزء من الجماهير المعتدلة بل والجماهير القومية والعلمانية .. لان عملية الانزياح هنا ليست بين دين ودين .. وليست بين مذهبين .. وبين سنة وشيعة .. بل تماه بين اتجاهين في نفس المذهب وعناصر في نفس الاناء ..
وهنا تكمن المعضلة .. لأننا لانريد أن نحاصر الاسلام ولكن في حصارنا للتيارات الفكرية الاسلامية سنجد أننا نبدو وكأننا في مواجهة مع الاسلام وفكر الاسلام وتبدو عملية الفرز والتمييز والفصل مستحيلة بين فكر الاسلام وبين أسلمة الفكر ..
ولذلك فان القطيعة مع الاسلاميين دون التأثير على الاسلام كعنصر هوية للمنطقة وموروث حضاري لايمكن أن تنجح الا بمشروع شامل يبدأ تأثيره من لحظة نزول الوحي في القرن السابع الميلادي وحتى هذه اللحظة .. والحقيقة أننا نقف جميعا حائرين أمام هذه المعضلة في عملية تقطير الاسلام ونزعه من مخالب الحزبية السياسية وتحويله الى كينونة ثقافية مندمجة في مشاريع التطوير الحضاري المتنوعة .. ورغم أن الاسلام الشيعي يعاني من نفس المعضلة الا أنه يبقى في تأثيره محصورا في جزء صغير من الأمة لأن العالم الاسلامي هو عالم سني في غالبيته .. فمهما حدث في الساحة الشيعية فان الهزات الارتدادية التي تصل الى العالم السني ضعيفة نسبيا وتبقى محصورة ..

لاأحد يملك جوابا عن مرحلة مابعد الربيع الاسلامي الأخير .. وكيف سيتم التعامل مع مفرزات هذه المرحلة وأنقاضها الخطيرة ودروسها .. ولانعرف حتى اللحظة كيف سيمكننا اجراء عملية فصل الاسلام عن التراث وفصل المسلم عن التراث دون أن نفصل المسلم عن الاسلام .. انها عملية تشبه فصل اللحم عن العظم .. فالتراث المنقول هو لحم الاسلام الذي يحمله هيكل عظمي هو فكر الاسلام .. ولحم التراث مليء بالاسرائيليات والمتناقضات ومليء بالطفيليات وبالعداء للتفكير والمنطق والفلسفة والعقل ..

اننا أمام عملية هي أصعب من مرحلة الحرب .. وهي استخلاص دروس الحرب التي تقاتل فيها اللحم مع العظم .. لأن الاستنتاجات الخاطئة أخطر مما نتوقع وهي تشبه الهزيمة .. اي خضنا حربا وانتصرنا ولكننا حصلنا على نتائج الهزيمة عندما لم نحول التجربة الى نتيجة وخلاصة .. لذلك يجب اطلاق هجوم معاكس في الحال بالضوء على الظلام .. يبدأ برنامجه في سطور التراث ومن رفوف الكتب وفي عملية التعليم .. ويعمل في قلب المساجد وحلقات الذكر وليس في التلفزيون من بعيد .. ويعتكف المفكرون والتنويريون لايجاد افضل طريقة لتحويل مسار الموجة الاسلامية القادمة على ابنائنا لتكون بردا وسلاما ..

ويجب أن نقوم بتدريس هذه المرحلة من الحرب على سورية بدقة وأمانة في المناهج والاعتراف بكل الأخطاء التي وقعت فيها جميع الأطراف .. ولكن ماهو مهم جدا هو أن يتم تخصيص جهد تأريخي واعلامي متواصل طوال العقدين القادمين لرواية الرواية السورية الوطنية دون انقطاع والاستفادة من جو الهزيمة العسكرية للاسلاميين التكفيريين ومن اعادة اعلام العرب وكلابه الى حظائره .. وأن يكون شرط اعادة العلاقات مع اي دولة عربية ان تعيد تقديم الرواية السورية على حقيقتها في اعلامها وافساح المجال للرواية السورية أن تقدم نفسها لأول مرة من دون تزوير .. لأن الجمهور العربي المغفل لايزال هو ماأنتجته الجزيرة .. فهو باختصار “ضحية” الجزيرة التي أرضعته طوال سبع سنوات ولايزال حليب ثدييها في فمه وفي عروقه .. ويجب أن تغسل أمعاؤه ودماؤه بالماء الصابون ..

ومع هذا فان أفضل علاج برأيي سيكون هو محاصرة و تدمير نموذج الدولة الدينية اليهودية في المنطقة التي قدمت نفسها على أنها الدولة الدينية الأولى ونموذج ملهم للاسلاميين وينظر لها من قبلهم على أنها ثمرة من ثمار سقوط الخلافة .. وأنها مشروع ديني ناجح يمكن تكراره بنسخة اسلامية حتى بطريقة تكوينها العنيفة .. وان اسقاط هذه الثمرة اليهودية لن يكون الا باعادة الخلافة الاسلامية التي أسقطت من أجل تسهيل قيام اسرائيل .. فيعود الاسلاميون كل مرة الى عاصمة عربية يرفعون فيها شعار أن الطريق الى القدس يمر من هنا .ولذلك لاأظن أنه يمكن ايقاف المد الاسلامي الا بايقاف المد اليهودي .. فكلاهما يتلاقحان وبتفاعلان ويتبادلان الخبرات والوجود .. بدليل تكرار تجربة الدولة اليهودية ونموذجها العنيف الارهابي بالتطهير العرقي في تجربة داعش التي كانت نسخة اسلامية عن اسرائيل ..

Related Videos

You Can’t Understand ISIS If You Don’t Know the History of Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia

By Alastair Crooke

July 14, 2017 “Information Clearing House” –  BEIRUT — The dramatic arrival of Da’ish (ISIS) on the stage of Iraq has shocked many in the West. Many have been perplexed — and horrified — by its violence and its evident magnetism for Sunni youth. But more than this, they find Saudi Arabia’s ambivalence in the face of this manifestation both troubling and inexplicable, wondering, “Don’t the Saudis understand that ISIS threatens them, too?”

It appears — even now — that Saudi Arabia’s ruling elite is divided. Some applaud that ISIS is fighting Iranian Shiite “fire” with Sunni “fire”; that a new Sunni state is taking shape at the very heart of what they regard as a historical Sunni patrimony; and they are drawn by Da’ish’s strict Salafist ideology.

Other Saudis are more fearful, and recall the history of the revolt against Abd-al Aziz by the Wahhabist Ikhwan (Disclaimer: this Ikhwan has nothing to do with the Muslim Brotherhood Ikhwan — please note, all further references hereafter are to the Wahhabist Ikhwan, and not to the Muslim Brotherhood Ikhwan), but which nearly imploded Wahhabism and the al-Saud in the late 1920s.

Many Saudis are deeply disturbed by the radical doctrines of Da’ish (ISIS) — and are beginning to question some aspects of Saudi Arabia’s direction and discourse.

THE SAUDI DUALITY

Saudi Arabia’s internal discord and tensions over ISIS can only be understood by grasping the inherent (and persisting) duality that lies at the core of the Kingdom’s doctrinal makeup and its historical origins.

One dominant strand to the Saudi identity pertains directly to Muhammad ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhab (the founder of Wahhabism), and the use to which his radical, exclusionist puritanism was put by Ibn Saud. (The latter was then no more than a minor leader — amongst many — of continually sparring and raiding Bedouin tribes in the baking and desperately poor deserts of the Nejd.)

The second strand to this perplexing duality, relates precisely to King Abd-al Aziz’s subsequent shift towards statehood in the 1920s: his curbing of Ikhwani violence (in order to have diplomatic standing as a nation-state with Britain and America); his institutionalization of the original Wahhabist impulse — and the subsequent seizing of the opportunely surging petrodollar spigot in the 1970s, to channel the volatile Ikhwani current away from home towards export — by diffusing a cultural revolution, rather than violent revolution throughout the Muslim world.

But this “cultural revolution” was no docile reformism. It was a revolution based on Abd al-Wahhab’s Jacobin-like hatred for the putrescence and deviationism that he perceived all about him — hence his call to purge Islam of all its heresies and idolatries.

MUSLIM IMPOSTORS

The American author and journalist, Steven Coll, has written how this austere and censorious disciple of the 14th century scholar Ibn Taymiyyah, Abd al-Wahhab, despised “the decorous, arty, tobacco smoking, hashish imbibing, drum pounding Egyptian and Ottoman nobility who travelled across Arabia to pray at Mecca.”

In Abd al-Wahhab’s view, these were not Muslims; they were imposters masquerading as Muslims. Nor, indeed, did he find the behavior of local Bedouin Arabs much better. They aggravated Abd al-Wahhab by their honoring of saints, by their erecting of tombstones, and their “superstition” (e.g. revering graves or places that were deemed particularly imbued with the divine).

All this behavior, Abd al-Wahhab denounced as bida — forbidden by God.

Like Taymiyyah before him, Abd al-Wahhab believed that the period of the Prophet Muhammad’s stay in Medina was the ideal of Muslim society (the “best of times”), to which all Muslims should aspire to emulate (this, essentially, is Salafism).

Taymiyyah had declared war on Shi’ism, Sufism and Greek philosophy. He spoke out, too against visiting the grave of the prophet and the celebration of his birthday, declaring that all such behavior represented mere imitation of the Christian worship of Jesus as God (i.e. idolatry). Abd al-Wahhab assimilated all this earlier teaching, stating that “any doubt or hesitation” on the part of a believer in respect to his or her acknowledging this particular interpretation of Islam should “deprive a man of immunity of his property and his life.”

One of the main tenets of Abd al-Wahhab’s doctrine has become the key idea of takfir. Under the takfiri doctrine, Abd al-Wahhab and his followers could deem fellow Muslims infidels should they engage in activities that in any way could be said to encroach on the sovereignty of the absolute Authority (that is, the King). Abd al-Wahhab denounced all Muslims who honored the dead, saints, or angels. He held that such sentiments detracted from the complete subservience one must feel towards God, and only God. Wahhabi Islam thus bans any prayer to saints and dead loved ones, pilgrimages to tombs and special mosques, religious festivals celebrating saints, the honoring of the Muslim Prophet Muhammad’s birthday, and even prohibits the use of gravestones when burying the dead.

Those who would not conform to this view should be killed, their wives and daughters violated, and their possessions confiscated, he wrote.

Abd al-Wahhab demanded conformity — a conformity that was to be demonstrated in physical and tangible ways. He argued that all Muslims must individually pledge their allegiance to a single Muslim leader (a Caliph, if there were one). Those who would not conform to this view should be killed, their wives and daughters violated, and their possessions confiscated, he wrote. The list of apostates meriting death included the Shiite, Sufis and other Muslim denominations, whom Abd al-Wahhab did not consider to be Muslim at all.

There is nothing here that separates Wahhabism from ISIS. The rift would emerge only later: from the subsequent institutionalization of Muhammad ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhab’s doctrine of “One Ruler, One Authority, One Mosque” — these three pillars being taken respectively to refer to the Saudi king, the absolute authority of official Wahhabism, and its control of “the word” (i.e. the mosque).

It is this rift — the ISIS denial of these three pillars on which the whole of Sunni authority presently rests — makes ISIS, which in all other respects conforms to Wahhabism, a deep threat to Saudi Arabia.

BRIEF HISTORY 1741- 1818

Abd al-Wahhab’s advocacy of these ultra radical views inevitably led to his expulsion from his own town — and in 1741, after some wanderings, he found refuge under the protection of Ibn Saud and his tribe. What Ibn Saud perceived in Abd al-Wahhab’s novel teaching was the means to overturn Arab tradition and convention. It was a path to seizing power.

Their strategy — like that of ISIS today — was to bring the peoples whom they conquered into submission. They aimed to instill fear.

Ibn Saud’s clan, seizing on Abd al-Wahhab’s doctrine, now could do what they always did, which was raiding neighboring villages and robbing them of their possessions. Only now they were doing it not within the ambit of Arab tradition, but rather under the banner of jihad. Ibn Saud and Abd al-Wahhab also reintroduced the idea of martyrdom in the name of jihad, as it granted those martyred immediate entry into paradise.

In the beginning, they conquered a few local communities and imposed their rule over them. (The conquered inhabitants were given a limited choice: conversion to Wahhabism or death.) By 1790, the Alliance controlled most of the Arabian Peninsula and repeatedly raided Medina, Syria and Iraq.

Their strategy — like that of ISIS today — was to bring the peoples whom they conquered into submission. They aimed to instill fear. In 1801, the Allies attacked the Holy City of Karbala in Iraq. They massacred thousands of Shiites, including women and children. Many Shiite shrines were destroyed, including the shrine of Imam Hussein, the murdered grandson of Prophet Muhammad.

A British official, Lieutenant Francis Warden, observing the situation at the time, wrote: “They pillaged the whole of it [Karbala], and plundered the Tomb of Hussein… slaying in the course of the day, with circumstances of peculiar cruelty, above five thousand of the inhabitants …”

Osman Ibn Bishr Najdi, the historian of the first Saudi state, wrote that Ibn Saud committed a massacre in Karbala in 1801. He proudly documented that massacre saying, “we took Karbala and slaughtered and took its people (as slaves), then praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds, and we do not apologize for that and say: ‘And to the unbelievers: the same treatment.’”

In 1803, Abdul Aziz then entered the Holy City of Mecca, which surrendered under the impact of terror and panic (the same fate was to befall Medina, too). Abd al-Wahhab’s followers demolished historical monuments and all the tombs and shrines in their midst. By the end, they had destroyed centuries of Islamic architecture near the Grand Mosque.

But in November of 1803, a Shiite assassin killed King Abdul Aziz (taking revenge for the massacre at Karbala). His son, Saud bin Abd al Aziz, succeeded him and continued the conquest of Arabia. Ottoman rulers, however, could no longer just sit back and watch as their empire was devoured piece by piece. In 1812, the Ottoman army, composed of Egyptians, pushed the Alliance out from Medina, Jeddah and Mecca. In 1814, Saud bin Abd al Aziz died of fever. His unfortunate son Abdullah bin Saud, however, was taken by the Ottomans to Istanbul, where he was gruesomely executed (a visitor to Istanbul reported seeing him having been humiliated in the streets of Istanbul for three days, then hanged and beheaded, his severed head fired from a canon, and his heart cut out and impaled on his body).

In 1815, Wahhabi forces were crushed by the Egyptians (acting on the Ottoman’s behalf) in a decisive battle. In 1818, the Ottomans captured and destroyed the Wahhabi capital of Dariyah. The first Saudi state was no more. The few remaining Wahhabis withdrew into the desert to regroup, and there they remained, quiescent for most of the 19th century.

HISTORY RETURNS WITH ISIS

It is not hard to understand how the founding of the Islamic State by ISIS in contemporary Iraq might resonate amongst those who recall this history. Indeed, the ethos of 18th century Wahhabism did not just wither in Nejd, but it roared back into life when the Ottoman Empire collapsed amongst the chaos of World War I.

The Al Saud — in this 20th century renaissance — were led by the laconic and politically astute Abd-al Aziz, who, on uniting the fractious Bedouin tribes, launched the Saudi “Ikhwan” in the spirit of Abd-al Wahhab’s and Ibn Saud’s earlier fighting proselytisers.

The Ikhwan was a reincarnation of the early, fierce, semi-independent vanguard movement of committed armed Wahhabist “moralists” who almost had succeeded in seizing Arabia by the early 1800s. In the same manner as earlier, the Ikhwan again succeeded in capturing Mecca, Medina and Jeddah between 1914 and 1926. Abd-al Aziz, however, began to feel his wider interests to be threatened by the revolutionary “Jacobinism” exhibited by the Ikhwan. The Ikhwan revolted — leading to a civil war that lasted until the 1930s, when the King had them put down: he machine-gunned them.

For this king, (Abd-al Aziz), the simple verities of previous decades were eroding. Oil was being discovered in the peninsular. Britain and America were courting Abd-al Aziz, but still were inclined to support Sharif Husain as the only legitimate ruler of Arabia. The Saudis needed to develop a more sophisticated diplomatic posture.

So Wahhabism was forcefully changed from a movement of revolutionary jihad and theological takfiri purification, to a movement of conservative social, political, theological, and religious da’wa (Islamic call) and to justifying the institution that upholds loyalty to the royal Saudi family and the King’s absolute power.

OIL WEALTH SPREAD WAHHABISM

With the advent of the oil bonanza — as the French scholar, Giles Kepel writes, Saudi goals were to “reach out and spread Wahhabism across the Muslim world … to “Wahhabise” Islam, thereby reducing the “multitude of voices within the religion” to a “single creed” — a movement which would transcend national divisions. Billions of dollars were — and continue to be — invested in this manifestation of soft power.

It was this heady mix of billion dollar soft power projection — and the Saudi willingness to manage Sunni Islam both to further America’s interests, as it concomitantly embedded Wahhabism educationally, socially and culturally throughout the lands of Islam — that brought into being a western policy dependency on Saudi Arabia, a dependency that has endured since Abd-al Aziz’s meeting with Roosevelt on a U.S. warship (returning the president from the Yalta Conference) until today.

Westerners looked at the Kingdom and their gaze was taken by the wealth; by the apparent modernization; by the professed leadership of the Islamic world. They chose to presume that the Kingdom was bending to the imperatives of modern life — and that the management of Sunni Islam would bend the Kingdom, too, to modern life.

On the one hand, ISIS is deeply Wahhabist. On the other hand, it is ultra radical in a different way. It could be seen essentially as a corrective movement to contemporary Wahhabism.

But the Saudi Ikhwan approach to Islam did not die in the 1930s. It retreated, but it maintained its hold over parts of the system — hence the duality that we observe today in the Saudi attitude towards ISIS.

On the one hand, ISIS is deeply Wahhabist. On the other hand, it is ultra radical in a different way. It could be seen essentially as a corrective movement to contemporary Wahhabism.

ISIS is a “post-Medina” movement: it looks to the actions of the first two Caliphs, rather than the Prophet Muhammad himself, as a source of emulation, and it forcefully denies the Saudis’ claim of authority to rule.

As the Saudi monarchy blossomed in the oil age into an ever more inflated institution, the appeal of the Ikhwan message gained ground (despite King Faisal’s modernization campaign). The “Ikhwan approach” enjoyed — and still enjoys — the support of many prominent men and women and sheikhs. In a sense, Osama bin Laden was precisely the representative of a late flowering of this Ikhwani approach.

Today, ISIS’ undermining of the legitimacy of the King’s legitimacy is not seen to be problematic, but rather a return to the true origins of the Saudi-Wahhab project.

In the collaborative management of the region by the Saudis and the West in pursuit of the many western projects (countering socialism, Ba’athism, Nasserism, Soviet and Iranian influence), western politicians have highlighted their chosen reading of Saudi Arabia (wealth, modernization and influence), but they chose to ignore the Wahhabist impulse.

After all, the more radical Islamist movements were perceived by Western intelligence services as being more effective in toppling the USSR in Afghanistan — and in combatting out-of-favor Middle Eastern leaders and states.

Why should we be surprised then, that from Prince Bandar’s Saudi-Western mandate to manage the insurgency in Syria against President Assad should have emerged a neo-Ikhwan type of violent, fear-inducing vanguard movement: ISIS? And why should we be surprised — knowing a little about Wahhabism — that “moderate” insurgents in Syria would become rarer than a mythical unicorn? Why should we have imagined that radical Wahhabism would create moderates? Or why could we imagine that a doctrine of “One leader, One authority, One mosque: submit to it, or be killed” could ever ultimately lead to moderation or tolerance?

Or, perhaps, we never imagined.

Part II

Middle East Time Bomb: The Real Aim of ISIS Is to Replace the Saud Family as the New Emirs of Arabia

By Alastair Crooke

ISIS is indeed a veritable time bomb inserted into the heart of the Middle East. But its destructive power is not as commonly understood. It is not with the “March of the Beheaders”; it is not with the killings; the seizure of towns and villages; the harshest of “justice” — terrible though they are — that its true explosive power lies. It is yet more potent than its exponential pull on young Muslims, its huge arsenal of weapons and its hundreds of millions of dollars.

“We should understand that there is really almost nothing that the West can now do about it but sit and watch.”

Its real potential for destruction lies elsewhere — in the implosion of Saudi Arabia as a foundation stone of the modern Middle East. We should understand that there is really almost nothing that the West can now do about it but sit and watch.

The clue to its truly explosive potential, as Saudi scholar Fouad Ibrahim has pointed out (but which has passed, almost wholly overlooked, or its significance has gone unnoticed), is ISIS’ deliberate and intentional use in its doctrine — of the language of Abd-al Wahhab, the 18th century founder, together with Ibn Saud, of Wahhabism and the Saudi project:

Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, the first “prince of the faithful” in the Islamic State of Iraq, in 2006 formulated, for instance, the principles of his prospective state … Among its goals is disseminating monotheism “which is the purpose [for which humans were created] and [for which purpose they must be called] to Islam…” This language replicates exactly Abd-al Wahhab’s formulation. And, not surprisingly, the latter’s writings and Wahhabi commentaries on his works are widely distributed in the areas under ISIS’ control and are made the subject of study sessions. Baghdadi subsequently was to note approvingly, “a generation of young men [have been] trained based on the forgotten doctrine of loyalty and disavowal.”

And what is this “forgotten” tradition of “loyalty and disavowal?” It is Abd al-Wahhab’s doctrine that belief in a sole (for him an anthropomorphic) God — who was alone worthy of worship — was in itself insufficient to render man or woman a Muslim?

He or she could be no true believer, unless additionally, he or she actively denied (and destroyed) any other subject of worship. The list of such potential subjects of idolatrous worship, which al-Wahhab condemned as idolatry, was so extensive that almost all Muslims were at risk of falling under his definition of “unbelievers.” They therefore faced a choice: Either they convert to al-Wahhab’s vision of Islam — or be killed, and their wives, their children and physical property taken as the spoils of jihad. Even to express doubts about this doctrine, al-Wahhab said, should occasion execution.

“Through its intentional adoption of this Wahhabist language, ISIS is knowingly lighting the fuse to a bigger regional explosion — one that has a very real possibility of being ignited, and if it should succeed, will change the Middle East decisively.”

The point Fuad Ibrahim is making, I believe, is not merely to reemphasize the extreme reductionism of al-Wahhab’s vision, but to hint at something entirely different: That through its intentional adoption of this Wahhabist language, ISIS is knowingly lighting the fuse to a bigger regional explosion — one that has a very real possibility of being ignited, and if it should succeed, will change the Middle East decisively.

For it was precisely this idealistic, puritan, proselytizing formulation by al-Wahhab that was “father” to the entire Saudi “project” (one that was violently suppressed by the Ottomans in 1818, but spectacularly resurrected in the 1920s, to become the Saudi Kingdom that we know today). But since its renaissance in the 1920s, the Saudi project has always carried within it, the “gene” of its own self-destruction.

THE SAUDI TAIL HAS WAGGED BRITAIN AND U.S. IN THE MIDDLE EAST

Paradoxically, it was a maverick British official, who helped embed the gene into the new state. The British official attached to Aziz, was one Harry St. John Philby (the father of the MI6 officer who spied for the Soviet KGB, Kim Philby). He was to become King Abd al-Aziz’s close adviser, having resigned as a British official, and was until his death, a key member of the Ruler’s Court. He, like Lawrence of Arabia, was an Arabist. He was also a convert to Wahhabi Islam and known as Sheikh Abdullah.

St. John Philby was a man on the make: he had determined to make his friend, Abd al-Aziz, the ruler of Arabia. Indeed, it is clear that in furthering this ambition he was not acting on official instructions. When, for example, he encouraged King Aziz to expand in northern Nejd, he was ordered to desist. But (as American author, Stephen Schwartz notes), Aziz was well aware that Britain had pledged repeatedly that the defeat of the Ottomans would produce an Arab state, and this no doubt, encouraged Philby and Aziz to aspire to the latter becoming its new ruler.

It is not clear exactly what passed between Philby and the Ruler (the details seem somehow to have been suppressed), but it would appear that Philby’s vision was not confined to state-building in the conventional way, but rather was one of transforming the wider Islamic ummah (or community of believers) into a Wahhabist instrument that would entrench the al-Saud as Arabia’s leaders. And for this to happen, Aziz needed to win British acquiescence (and much later, American endorsement). “This was the gambit that Abd al-Aziz made his own, with advice from Philby,” notes Schwartz.

BRITISH GODFATHER OF SAUDI ARABIA

In a sense, Philby may be said to be “godfather” to this momentous pact by which the Saudi leadership would use its clout to “manage” Sunni Islam on behalf of western objectives (containing socialism, Ba’athism, Nasserism, Soviet influence, Iran, etc.) — and in return, the West would acquiesce to Saudi Arabia’s soft-power Wahhabisation of the Islamic ummah (with its concomitant destruction of Islam’s intellectual traditions and diversity and its sowing of deep divisions within the Muslim world).

“In political and financial terms, the Saud-Philby strategy has been an astonishing success. But it was always rooted in British and American intellectual obtuseness: the refusal to see the dangerous ‘gene’ within the Wahhabist project, its latent potential to mutate, at any time, back into its original a bloody, puritan strain. In any event, this has just happened: ISIS is it.”

As a result — from then until now — British and American policy has been bound to Saudi aims (as tightly as to their own ones), and has been heavily dependent on Saudi Arabia for direction in pursuing its course in the Middle East.

In political and financial terms, the Saud-Philby strategy has been an astonishing success (if taken on its own, cynical, self-serving terms). But it was always rooted in British and American intellectual obtuseness: the refusal to see the dangerous “gene” within the Wahhabist project, its latent potential to mutate, at any time, back into its original a bloody, puritan strain. In any event, this has just happened: ISIS is it.

Winning western endorsement (and continued western endorsement), however, required a change of mode: the “project” had to change from being an armed, proselytizing Islamic vanguard movement into something resembling statecraft. This was never going to be easy because of the inherent contradictions involved (puritan morality versus realpolitik and money) — and as time has progressed, the problems of accommodating the “modernity” that statehood requires, has caused “the gene” to become more active, rather than become more inert.

Even Abd al-Aziz himself faced an allergic reaction: in the form of a serious rebellion from his own Wahhabi militia, the Saudi Ikhwan. When the expansion of control by the Ikhwan reached the border of territories controlled by Britain, Abd al-Aziz tried to restrain his militia (Philby was urging him to seek British patronage), but the Ikwhan, already critical of his use of modern technology (the telephone, telegraph and the machine gun), “were outraged by the abandonment of jihad for reasons of worldly realpolitik … They refused to lay down their weapons; and instead rebelled against their king … After a series of bloody clashes, they were crushed in 1929. Ikhwan members who had remained loyal, were later absorbed into the [Saudi] National Guard.”

King Aziz’s son and heir, Saud, faced a different form of reaction (less bloody, but more effective). Aziz’s son was deposed from the throne by the religious establishment — in favor of his brother Faisal — because of his ostentatious and extravagant conduct. His lavish, ostentatious style, offended the religious establishment who expected the “Imam of Muslims,” to pursue a pious, proselytizing lifestyle.

King Faisal, Saud’s successor, in his turn, was shot by his nephew in 1975, who had appeared at Court ostensibly to make his oath of allegiance, but who instead, pulled out a pistol and shot the king in his head. The nephew had been perturbed by the encroachment of western beliefs and innovation into Wahhabi society, to the detriment of the original ideals of the Wahhabist project.

SEIZING THE GRAND MOSQUE IN 1979

Far more serious, however, was the revived Ikhwan of Juhayman al-Otaybi, which culminated in the seizure of the Grand Mosque by some 400-500 armed men and women in 1979. Juhayman was from the influential Otaybi tribe from the Nejd, which had led and been a principal element in the original Ikhwanof the 1920s.

Juhayman and his followers, many of whom came from the Medina seminary, had the tacit support, amongst other clerics, of Sheikh Abdel-Aziz Bin Baz, the former Mufti of Saudi Arabia. Juhayman stated that Sheikh Bin Baz never objected to his Ikhwan teachings (which were also critical of ulema laxity towards “disbelief”), but that bin Baz had blamed him mostly for harking on that “the ruling al-Saud dynasty had lost its legitimacy because it was corrupt, ostentatious and had destroyed Saudi culture by an aggressive policy of westernisation.”

Significantly, Juhayman’s followers preached their Ikhwani message in a number of mosques in Saudi Arabia initially without being arrested, but when Juhayman and a number of the Ikhwan finally were held for questioning in 1978. Members of the ulema (including bin Baz) cross-examined them for heresy, but then ordered their release because they saw them as being no more than traditionalists harkening back to the Ikhwan— like Juhayman grandfather — and therefore not a threat.

Even when the mosque seizure was defeated and over, a certain level of forbearance by the ulema for the rebels remained. When the government asked for a fatwa allowing for armed force to be used in the mosque, the language of bin Baz and other senior ulema was curiously restrained. The scholars did not declare Juhayman and his followers non-Muslims, despite their violation of the sanctity of the Grand Mosque, but only termed them al-jamaah al-musallahah (the armed group).

The group that Juhayman led was far from marginalized from important sources of power and wealth. In a sense, it swam in friendly, receptive waters. Juhayman’s grandfather had been one of the leaders of the the original Ikhwan, and after the rebellion against Abdel Aziz, many of his grandfather’s comrades in arms were absorbed into the National Guard — indeed Juhayman himself had served within the Guard — thus Juhayman was able to obtain weapons and military expertise from sympathizers in the National Guard, and the necessary arms and food to sustain the siege were pre-positioned, and hidden, within the Grand Mosque. Juhayman was also able to call on wealthy individuals to fund the enterprise.

ISIS VS. WESTERNIZED SAUDIS

The point of rehearsing this history is to underline how uneasy the Saudi leadership must be at the rise of ISIS in Iraq and Syria. Previous Ikhwani manifestations were suppressed — but these all occurred inside the kingdom.

ISIS however, is a neo-Ikhwani rejectionist protest that is taking place outside the kingdom — and which, moreover, follows the Juhayman dissidence in its trenchant criticism of the al-Saud ruling family.

This is the deep schism we see today in Saudi Arabia, between the modernizing current of which King Abdullah is a part, and the “Juhayman” orientation of which bin Laden, and the Saudi supporters of ISIS and the Saudi religious establishment are a part. It is also a schism that exists within the Saudi royal family itself.

According to the Saudi-owned Al-Hayat newspaper, in July 2014 “an opinion poll of Saudis [was] released on social networking sites, claiming that 92 percent of the target group believes that ‘IS conforms to the values of Islam and Islamic law.’” The leading Saudi commentator, Jamal Khashoggi, recently warned of ISIS’ Saudi supporters who “watch from the shadows.”

There are angry youths with a skewed mentality and understanding of life and sharia, and they are canceling a heritage of centuries and the supposed gains of a modernization that hasn’t been completed. They turned into rebels, emirs and a caliph invading a vast area of our land. They are hijacking our children’s minds and canceling borders. They reject all rules and legislations, throwing it [a]way … for their vision of politics, governance, life, society and economy. [For] the citizens of the self-declared “commander of the faithful,” or Caliph, you have no other choice … They don’t care if you stand out among your people and if you are an educated man, or a lecturer, or a tribe leader, or a religious leader, or an active politician or even a judge … You must obey the commander of the faithful and pledge the oath of allegiance to him. When their policies are questioned, Abu Obedia al-Jazrawi yells, saying: “Shut up. Our reference is the book and the Sunnah and that’s it.”

“What did we do wrong?” Khashoggi asks. With 3,000-4,000 Saudi fighters in the Islamic State today, he advises of the need to “look inward to explain ISIS’ rise”. Maybe it is time, he says, to admit “our political mistakes,” to “correct the mistakes of our predecessors.”

MODERNIZING KING THE MOST VULNERABLE

The present Saudi king, Abdullah, paradoxically is all the more vulnerable precisely because he has been a modernizer. The King has curbed the influence of the religious institutions and the religious police — and importantly has permitted the four Sunni schools of jurisprudence to be used, by those who adhere to them (al-Wahhab, by contrast, objected to all other schools of jurisprudence other than his own).

“The key political question is whether the simple fact of ISIS’ successes, and the full manifestation (flowering) of all the original pieties and vanguardism of the archetypal impulse, will stimulate and activate the dissenter ‘gene’ — within the Saudi kingdom. If it does, and Saudi Arabia is engulfed by the ISIS fervor, the Gulf will never be the same again. Saudi Arabia will deconstruct and the Middle East will be unrecognizable.”

It is even possible too for Shiite residents of eastern Saudi Arabia to invoke Ja’afri jurisprudence and to turn to Ja’afari Shiite clerics for rulings. (In clear contrast, al-Wahhab held a particular animosity towards the Shiite and held them to be apostates. As recently as the 1990s, clerics such as bin Baz — the former Mufti — and Abdullah Jibrin reiterated the customary view that the Shiite were infidels).

Some contemporary Saudi ulema would regard such reforms as constituting almost a provocation against Wahhabist doctrines, or at the very least, another example of westernization. ISIS, for example, regards any who seek jurisdiction other than that offered by the Islamic State itself to be guilty of disbelief — since all such “other” jurisdictions embody innovation or “borrowings” from other cultures in its view.

The key political question is whether the simple fact of ISIS’ successes, and the full manifestation (flowering) of all the original pieties and vanguardism of the archetypal impulse, will stimulate and activate the dissenter ‘gene’ — within the Saudi kingdom.

If it does, and Saudi Arabia is engulfed by the ISIS fervor, the Gulf will never be the same again. Saudi Arabia will deconstruct and the Middle East will be unrecognizable.

 

“They hold up a mirror to Saudi society that seems to reflect back to them an image of ‘purity’ lost”

 

In short, this is the nature of the time bomb tossed into the Middle East. The ISIS allusions to Abd al-Wahhab and Juhayman (whose dissident writings are circulated within ISIS) present a powerful provocation: they hold up a mirror to Saudi society that seems to reflect back to them an image of “purity” lost and early beliefs and certainties displaced by shows of wealth and indulgence.

This is the ISIS “bomb” hurled into Saudi society. King Abdullah — and his reforms — are popular, and perhaps he can contain a new outbreak of Ikwhani dissidence. But will that option remain a possibility after his death?

And here is the difficulty with evolving U.S. policy, which seems to be one of “leading from behind” again — and looking to Sunni states and communities to coalesce in the fight against ISIS (as in Iraq with the Awakening Councils).

It is a strategy that seems highly implausible. Who would want to insert themselves into this sensitive intra-Saudi rift? And would concerted Sunni attacks on ISIS make King Abdullah’s situation better, or might it inflame and anger domestic Saudi dissidence even further? So whom precisely does ISIS threaten? It could not be clearer. It does not directly threaten the West (though westerners should remain wary, and not tread on this particular scorpion).

The Saudi Ikhwani history is plain: As Ibn Saud and Abd al-Wahhab made it such in the 18th century; and as the Saudi Ikhwan made it such in the 20th century. ISIS’ real target must be the Hijaz — the seizure of Mecca and Medina — and the legitimacy that this will confer on ISIS as the new Emirs of Arabia.

Alastair Crooke, a former top British MI-6 agent in the Middle East, is author of Resistance: The Essence of Islamic Revolution.

This article was first published by Huffington Post 

See also

U.S. Doubled Support for Saudi Bombing Campaign in Yemen

Saudi Arabia boosting extremism in Europe, says former ambassador

Theresa May buries report feared to show Saudi links to extremism

The West Must Face Reality: Saudi Regime Is the Root Cause of Islamist Terrorism

Thanks to State Department Cables, a Torture Victim Won a Rare $10 Million Settlement

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Information Clearing House.

ISIS Sex Slave Survivor Exposes US Ally for Running Global Sex Trafficking Ring (Video)

 

 

—————————

ISIS Sex Slave Survivor Exposes US Ally for Running Global Sex Trafficking Ring (Video)

Source

An escaped sex slave, once held captive by ISIS, noted that the country Donald Trump just promised billions, is facilitating a massive sex trafficking ring. Conveniently absent from the mainstream media as well as the white house is the Saudi role in modern day slavery.

by Jack Burns, The Free Thought Project: 

Few Americans could hardly have imagined the devastation, destruction, and horror experienced by the Iraqi people when the decision to invade Iraq was made in 2003. And no people, arguably, have endured more suffering than the Yazidi people, an Iraqi minority group.

Nadia Murad knows. The Iraqi Yazidi woman was kidnapped in 2014 and used as a sex slave by the Islamic State (ISIS). Murad has just exposed Europeans, Tunisians and US ally — Saudi Arabia — for their role in this horrific sex slave trade.

Murad eventually escaped her hell on earth and returned to her home village of Sinjar Thursday to the welcoming arms of her people. While sobbing, and standing on the roof of her old school, she addressed those gathered and those around the world who dare to listen to what she has to say.

After just three months of rape and torture, Murad escaped her Sunni Muslim captors, eventually finding refuge in a refugee camp, and later found saftey in Germany. But she didn’t stay there for long, and she’s not staying silent about what she experienced.

Reuters reported she’s now become the Yazidi ambassador to the world;

Murad has taken to the world stage to appeal for support for the Yazidi religious minority, in the United Nations Security Council in 2015 and to all governments globally, earning her a Nobel Peace Prize nomination and U.N. Goodwill Ambassador role.

She was one of nearly 7,000 girls who were taken as sex slaves and traded like used cars to soldiers who’d come to wage Jihad against anyone other than Sunni Muslims. She watched as the men were separated from the women and children. They were later killed and buried in mass graves. The young boys were sent off to ISIS training camps, while the women and girls were used for the sexual gratification of Sunni fighters.

She told Reuters at the time she wanted to die. “We hoped that our destiny would be like the men and be killed, but instead Europeans, Saudis and Tunisians and other fighters came and raped us and sold us,” she said.

Last year, Saudi Arabia, a country President Donald Trump just signed a $300 billion dollar arms deal with, was exposed for not only facilitating the ISIS sex slave trade — but participating in it.

According to eyewitness reports, ISIS sex slaves are being sold in Saudi Arabia.
Jihad Watch reported:

“It isn’t news that the Islamic State has long been abusing and trafficking sex slaves – especially Yazidi girls – but it has been now discovered that the sex slaves of IS are being “sold in horrifying auctions to UK (and US) ally Saudi Arabia.”

An eyewitness reported:

Dozens of women were being held in a large room, and it was not only Iraqis and Syrians trading women but also Saudis and Westerners, whose actual nationality was not clear.

Western women have also been reported to be among the victims in keeping with the Islamic State’s practice of enslaving kafir women:

The Islamic State’s human trafficking operation includes enslaving women who they consider to be ‘kafir’, non-Muslim people like Yazidis and Christians, before selling them for money.  The depraved thugs are also involved in the radicalisation of young women all over the world and try to tempt them to come to their caliphate with false promises of wealth, marriage and forgiveness of sin.

The misdeeds and human rights violations by Saudi Arabia are astonishing, yet Trump had no problem striking a deal with the terrorist regime as well as bowing down to them.

With tears in her eyes, Murad told her village, “I am a daughter of this village.” She then called on the United Nations to, “Open a case for those that lost everything, their parents, people who can not go back to their villages.” She continued, “exhume their loved ones buried around their villages.”

Murad then had harsh words for the world that looked away, including the United States under the direction of Barack H. Obama and now Trump. Reuters said she stated the international community has failed to help free the Yazidi women and children held captive by hoards of rapists. “The international community has not delivered on its responsibility,” she said adding, “I tell anyone that you are being unjust for not supporting a minority like the Yazidis.”

She’s calling for the Yazidi genocide to be officially recognized as such and not treated as a global conflict. Ironically, it wasn’t NATO who liberated the Yazidis, it was the Shia Muslim country of Iran who, alongside Iraqi soldiers pushed all the way to the Syrian border, liberating Yazidis along the way.

The American narrative coming from Washington is that the Iranians aren’t to be trusted. They’re accused of planning to develop nuclear weapons with which to threaten the U.S. The Iranians rule with an iron fist, oppressively stifling dissent. The ancient Persian people are subjected to strict adherence to Islam, but their government’s actions, at least in this instance, demonstrate their desire to stop the Islamic State.

If Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) and Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) are to be believed, the U.S. government has purposefully been funding Islamic militants and supplying arms to terrorist organizations, arms which have made their way into ISIS hands. If their accusations are true, the U.S. is de facto responsible for the Yazidi genocide by not reigning in those factions.

______________________________________________

ناجية من عبودية داعش: السعودية تدير شبكات دعارة ورقيق أبيض

الجمل- بقلم: Jack Burns-

ترجمة: وصال صالح:

هاربة من الاستعباد الجنسي، فتاة كانت ذات يوم أسيرة لدى تنظيم داعش تفضح السعودية- البلد الذي عقد معه ترامب صفقات بمئات مليارات الدولارات- يعمل على إدارة حلقة ضخمة للاتجار بالجنس، وسط تكتم وسائل الإعلام الرئيسية كما البيت الأبيض على الدور السعودي في عبودية ونخاسة العصر الحديث.

قلة من الأميركيين بالكاد يمكن أن يتصوروا حجم الدمار والخراب والرعب الذي يعيشه الشعب العراقي نتيجة اتخاذ الإدارة الأميركية قرار الغزو عام 2003، ويمكن القول، أنه ليس هناك شعب على الإطلاق تحمل المعاناة التي عاناها الإيزيديون، وهم أقلية عراقية.
نادية مراد المرأة الإيزيدية المعروفة، التي اختطفت عام 2014 وتم معاملتها كرقيقة جنس من قبل داعش. كشفت للتو، عن دور الأوروبيين، التونسيين، والسعودية –حليفة الولايات المتحدة- في تجارة الجنس المروعة هذه.

وكانت مراد هربت في النهاية من جحيمها على الأرض وعادت إلى قريتها ومسقط رأسها في قرية كوجو قضاء سنجار، يوم الخميس استقبلها أهالي قريتها مرحبين بها بالأحضان. واقفة فوق سطح مدرستها القديمة والدموع تنهمر من عينيها، خاطبت مراد المجتمعين من أبناء قريتها، ووجهت رسالة إلى جميع أنحاء العالم ممن يجرؤون الاستماع إلى ما ستقوله.

بعد ثلاثة أشهر فقط من الاغتصاب والتعذيب، هربت مراد من خاطفيها الإرهابيين، وفي نهاية المطاف وجدت لها مأوى في مخيم للاجئين، ولاحقاً وجدت الأمان في ألمانيا، لكنها لم تبق هناك لفترة طويلة، وهي لم تصمت إزاء ما عاشته وما عانته.
رويترز ذكرت أنها صارت سفيرة الإيزيديين إلى العالم؛

وهكذا حملت مراد مطالب الأقلية الديية الإيزيدية إلى مجلس الأمن التابع للأمم المتحدة في عام 2015 ولجميع الحكومات على الصعيد العالمي، وحصلت على الترشيح لجائزة نوبل للسلام ودور سفيرة للنوايا الحسنة للأمم المتحدة.

كانت نادية مراد واحدة من بين ما يقرب من 7000 فتاة ممن استخدمهن تنظيم داعش كعبيدات جنس وتم التعامل معهن كسيارات مستعملة لمقاتلي داعش الذين كانوا يخوضون الجهاد. شاهدت مراد كيف كان يتم فصل الرجال عن النساء والأطفال، ليُقتلوا لاحقاً ويدفنوا في مقابر جماعية. بينما يتم إرسال الأولاد إلى مخيمات تدريب داعش، و تؤخذ النساء إلى مقاتلي داعش لاغتصابهن.

في حديث لرويترز، قالت مراد أنها كانت تتمنى الموت، في ذلك الوقت، ” كنا نأمل لو كان مصيرنا مثل مصير الرجال وأن نُقتل، لكن بدلاً من ذلك –جاء المقاتلون الأوروبيون والسعوديون والتونسيون وغيرهم واغتصبونا ثم باعونا”.

العام الماضي، فضح دور السعودية -البلد التي وقع الرئيس دونالد ترامب معها صفقة بمليارات الدولارات- حيث لم تقم فقط بتقديم التسهيلات لداعش في تجارة النخاسة والعبيد –وإنما شاركت وتورطت في ذلك.

وفقاً لتقارير شهود عيان، تنظيم داعش يبيع العبدات في السعودية، وذكر موقع مراقبة أنشطة الجهاد: “إنها ليست أخباراً جديدة، داعش يقوم منذ فترة طويل بالاستغلال و الاتجار بعبيدات الجنس –خصوصاً الفتيات الإيزيديات- لكن الآن تم اكتشاف أنه يجري بيع عبيدات جنس داعش في مزادات مرعبة للسعودية –حليفة الولايات المتحدة وبريطانيا”.

أحد شهود العيان قال:

يتم احتجاز عشرات النساء في غرفة كبيرة، وليست العراقيات والسوريات فقط من يتم الاتجار بهن، وإنما أيضاً سعوديات وغربيات، ممن لم تعرف جنسياتهن الحقيقية. مصادر تحدثت أن نساء غربيات كن أيضاً من بين الضحايا تماشياً مع ممارسات داعش في استعباد نساء “الكفار”:
تجدر الإشارة إلى أن عملية اتجار داعش بالبشر تتضمن استعباد النساء ممن يعتبرن “كافرات”، أي الناس غير المسلمين مثل الإيزيديات والمسيحيات، قبل بيعهن مقابل المال. السفاحون السفلة أيضاً متورطون في تطرف الشابات في جميع أنحاء العالم ويحاولون إغوائهن وإغرائهن للقدوم إلى الخلافة مع وعود كاذبة بالثروة والزواج ومغفرة الخطايا.

الأعمال الشريرة والآثام وانتهاكات حقوق الإنسان من قبل السعودية مثيرة للدهشة. الآن لا مشكلة لدى ترامب في عقد صفقة مع النظام الإرهابي وكذلك بالركوع أمامهم.

بالعودة إلى نادية مراد والدموع تفيض من عينيها، قالت لأهل قريتها ” أنا ابنة هذه القرية” ثم ناشدت الأمم المتحدة “لفتح قضية أولئك الذين فقدوا كل شيء، أهاليهم الناس الذين لا يستطيعون العودة إلى قراهم” .

ثم توجهت مراد بكلمات قاسية للعالم الذي بدا بعيداً، بما في ذلك الولايات المتحدة تحت قيادة باراك حسين أوباما والآن دونالد ترامب. رويترز قالت بأنها أعلنت عن فشل المجتمع الدولي في المساعدة على تحرير النساء الإيزيديات والأطفال المحتجزين و المغتصبين “المجتمع الدولي لم يتحمل مسؤولياته” قالت، مضيفة “أنا أقول أنكم لستم عادلون لأنكم لم تدعموا أقلية مثل الإيزيديين”. ودعت مراد المجتمع الدولي إلى الاعتراف رسمياً بالإبادة الجماعية للإيزيديين والتعامل معها على هذا الأساس وليس كصراع عالمي. من المفارقات، أنه لم يكن حلف شمال الأطلسي –ناتو- من حرر الإيزيديين، إنها إيران، جنباً إلى جنب مع الجنود العراقيين ليدفعوا داعش على طول الحدود مع سورية.

الرواية الأميركية القادمة في واشنطن أنه لا يمكن الوثوق بالإيرانيين. هم يتهمونهم بالتخطيط لتطوير الأسلحة النووية التي تشكل تهديداً للولايات المتحدة، لكنهم الإيرانيون من يظهرون رغبتهم في القضاء على تنظيم داعش.

إذا ما صدقت تولسي غابارد السيناتور الجمهوري عن ولاية هاواي والسيناتور الجمهوري عن ولاية كنتاكي راند بول ، فإن الحكومة الأميركية تمول عن قصد المتطرفين الإسلاميين وتعمل على تزويد المنظمات الإرهابية بالأسلحة. و إذا ما صحت اتهامات السيناتور فإن هذه الأسلحة تقع في أيدي داعش، ما يعني أن الولايات المتحدة هي في الواقع مسؤولة عن الإبادة الجماعية للإيزيديين بسبب عدم سيطرتها وتحكمها في هذه الفصائل.

عن:The Free Thought

 

 

Sheikh Imran Hosein Shares his Vision of Contemporary World

Sheikh Imran Hosein Shares his Vision of Contemporary World

STEPHEN KARGANOVIC | 01.06.2017 | WORLD

Sheikh Imran Hosein Shares his Vision of Contemporary World

Sheikh Imran Hosein is a distinguished Islamic scholar, author of many books, expert in Islamic eschatology, international politics and finance, and contemporary socio-economic and political issues. In his work, the sheikh emphasizes Islamic spirituality, ihsan, in the absence of which all knowledge would be confined to the mere perception of worldly reality. The principal themes upon which he discourses are the nature of being, relationship to God and the interrelationship of the three major monotheistic faiths, the Messenger Muhammed (s.a.v.s.) and his teaching, and the nature of contemporary Western society with its deleterious impact on other civilizations and cultures.

Sheikh Imran Hosein has pioneered revolutionary interpretations of the Kuran and the hadises, paving the way for generations of Islamic scholars to come. With all the instruments at his disposal he attempts to educate not just Muslims and Christians, but everyone, as far and as wide as his voice reaches.

His success is based on the application of the correct methodology that he has received from his teacher, Maulana al-Asnari, which he has developed and applied further to the issues of major concern for the contemporary world.

The focal point of sheikh Imran Hosein’s study is eschatology, the religious teaching about the end-times and the ultimate fulfillment of the respective visions of each of the three great monotheistic faiths, with regard to the conclusion of mundane history. Judaism and Christianity have well-developed and even sophisticated eschatological teachings, but until recently Islam in that regard has been lagging behind. Under the inspiration of his revered teacher Maulana Al-Asnari, sheikh Imran Hosein has laid the foundations of an Islamic eschatological philosophy based, naturally, on the precepts of the Kuran and the relevant hadises. Surprising as it may appear, no Islamic scholar before him had ever approached this important and delicate subject in a systematic manner. Taking into account the sheikh’s numerous books and lectures on this subject, it is accurate to say that he has elevated Islamic Eschatology to the rank of a new branch of knowledge within the broad system of Islamic theology. It would not be extravagant to also add that he is now the world’s leading authority on this fascinating subject.

As a teacher of true, traditional Sunni Islamic doctrine, ennobled with the mystic aura of Sufism, sheikh Imran Hosein has acquired a wide following throughout the world of Islam, and beyond. Islam is an exception among the great monotheistic religions in that it has five vibrant major schools, but no central teaching authority or arbiter in matters of religious doctrine. For that reason, and in order to safeguard his co-religionists from the malevolent enticements of erroneous interpretations of their faith, which are often manipulated to serve purposes opposite to its original inspiration and intent, sheikh Imran Hosein places particular emphasis on the development of a proper methodology of doctrinal interpretation. Methodology may therefore be said to constitute the heart of his approach, as he quite correctly maintains that without proper guidelines, grounded in an intellectually rigorous scrutiny of religious texts, no consistent and viable doctrine can possibly emerge.

Confronting head-on the clash of civilizations narrative and boldly disputing the legitimacy of intolerant and extremist schools of thought within the world of Islam, sheikh Imran Hosein is a strong advocate of solidarity between the followers of the three monotheistic religions, Islam, Christianity, and Torah Judaism.

Based on his reading of the Kuran and certain hadises, sheikh Imran Hosein is, in particular, a champion of «friendship and alliance» between Muslims and Orthodox Christians. Over the centuries, and during the preceding decades with particular brutality, these two religious groups have been victims of the plundering and conquering ambitions of that portion of mankind that is most frequently referred to as the West. The latter’s main tools of oppression, in the sheikh’s mind, are the world banking and monetary system and NATO. He perceives in that part of mankind the operation of the evil forces of Gog and Magog (Yajuj and Majuj), familiar from the Islamic and other monotheistic eschatologies. By contrast, it is in the form of Eastern Christianity, with its historic roots in Byzantium (to which almost certainly reference is made in the thirtieth Sura of the Kuran, Ar-Rum), which is presently established in Russia, that sheikh Imran Hosein perceives the Empire of Ar-Rum. He regards it as a force for the good, with respect to which the Messenger Muhammed prophesied to his followers thus: «You will conclude an alliance with Ar-Rum».

As a student of geopolitics with a keen eschatological perspective, sheikh Imran Hosein is an attentive and approving observer of Russia’s dynamic and increasingly assertive role in international affairs.

Advocacy of friendly relations and alliance between Muslims and Orthodox Christians by an Islamic scholar of such renown and depth of knowledge as sheikh Imran Hosein, and the interest that he has also displayed in the conditions that prevail in Serbia and the Balkans, should have the beneficial effect of facilitating improved relations between Muslims and Orthodox Christians in that volatile part of the world.

The sheikh’s stance as a reconciler and peacemaker – while earning him affection and respect in many quarters – has made him also a figure of controversy elsewhere. Paradoxically, the latter seems to include some segments of the Islamic community because on many points the sheikh’s insistence on unadulterated traditional Islam clashes with key contemporary political agendas.

I had the honor and the pleasure of conducting this conversation with sheikh Imran Hosein at his retreat on the island of Tobago, in March of 2017.

نارام سرجون: هل يهتز عرش الرب وتهتز من تسمى خير أمة ؟؟ الأصنام تكسر النبي

تاريخ النشر : 2017-05-23 12:40:11

وكالة أوقات الشام الإخبارية

نارام سرجون

مهما تحدثنا عن زيارة ترامب الى السعودية فلن يجدي الكلام والشرح فلن يهتز عرش الرب ولن يهتز شعب الرب الذي اختاره ليكون خير أمة أخرجت للناس .. فالرئيس الأميريكي ترامب كان في مهمة سلب ونهب للمال السعودي والخليجي واستيلاء على مفاتيح خزائن قارون التي جرها خلف طائرته وطار .. بل ونهش ترامب اللحم السعودي حتى انكشف العظم العربي ولعقه بلسانه الى أن جرّده من كل لحم .. ولذلك ليس مهما أن نقول للشعب في نجد والحجاز أي حقيقة طالما أنه لايثور منذ مئة سنة وطالما أنه قبل أن يحكمه بضعة آلاف أمير يبذرون كل ثروته بشكل خرافي وهو لايقدر الا على تصنيع مجاهدي القاعدة الذين يقتلون انفسهم وينتحرون خارج المملكة وفي كل مكان .. الملك وابنه يتصرفان وكأن من يعيش في نجد والحجاز هم فقط بضعة ملايين من الأصنام التي لاتضر ولاتنفع .. فلايبدوان مكترثين بردة فعل الشعب ولايعنيهما ان يقول أحد ان هذا الفحش في التبذير في المال والتبذير في العدوانية والكراهية والقتل رذيلة من الرذائل الشيطانية .. ولايهمهما أن تصبح اسرائيل في خطاب المسلمين ضحية من الضحايا كما كل ضحايا العرب .. فليس على أرض الجزيرة الا تماثيل لاتضر ولاتنفع ولاتغضب ولاتنفعل ولاتثور ..


ليست الاهانة فقط في تلك السرقة العلنية بموافقة الملك وابنه .. ولكن الزيارة كان لها طابع الصلف والاستعلاء واحتقار الآخر وعدم احترام معتقده وأبسط مظاهر دينه .. فالكلام المعسول والمجاملات الخطابية للشعب العظيم شيء بروتوكولي ومطلوب .. وقول غير ذلك هو في غير محله خاصة اذا كنت جرار العسل تندلق في بلعوم ترامب وبلعوم الشركات الاميريكية .. ولكن في كل ثقافة تبقى القيم الثقافية والمعتقدات شيئا لايمكن المساس به او المساومة عليه بل ينهض الغضب اذا لم تحترم .. الا أن السعوديين لم يكن يعنيهم الا حماية العرش الملكي .. حتى وان اهتز عرش الله .. واهتز قبر النبي .. وقلبه ..

ولاأدري ماهي الحكمة من اصطحاب ترامب لزوجته وابنته الى الأراضي الاسلامية المقدسة وهما سافرتان ولن تكون باستقبالهما اي امرأة أو أميرة الى جانب الملك طالما أنهما لن تلتزما حتى بالحد الادنى لآداب وتقاليد الثقافة التي تسود تلك الأراضي سواء كانت التقاليد صحيحة أم خاطئة .. فالمفروض أن نساء العرب في الأراضي المقدسة يلتزمن بالاحتشام وغطاء الرأس ..

والمفروض أن الدولة التي تفرض الاحتشام على شعبها لأنها خادمة الحرمين الشريفين يجب أن تلتزم به وتلزم به أي زائرة للأراضي المقدسة مهما كانت عقيدتها .. بوذية أو هندوسية او يهودية أو مسيحية أو ملحدة .. خاصة في حضرة الملك الذي يمثل نظريا ذروة الاسلام وولي امره – كما يدعي – وهو مسؤول عن حماية العقيدة وتراثها وطقوسها وكل تفاصيلها تماما كما ان ملكة بريطانيا مسؤولة عن حماية الكنيسة الانغليكانية بالعرف الملكي البريطاني ..

لكن الملك والأسرة المالكة كان مايؤرقهم أن يحموا العرش وأن يضربوا بكل شيء في سبيل العرش .. ولذلك تغاضوا عن كل الاهانات الرمزية التي جاء بها ترامب .. فلايزال سبب احضار ترامب لزوجته وابنته الى بلد محافظ لايفهم الا على أنه كان بذلك يمعن في اهانة العرب والمسلمين وهو يقول في رسالته: انني في أرض الحرمين الشريفين ولكني أتحدى العرب والمسلمين في عقر دارهم وبقرب قبر نبيهم .. سأرمي بحجاب المسلمين في حضرة نبيهم تحت قدمي .. ولم تعن ايفانكا ولاميلانيا حتى بوضع غلالة من قماش أو وشاح خفيف جدا شفاف في حضرة الملك أو في تجولها في المملكة قرب مرقد النبي والصحابة ..ولكن ترامب في المقابل عندما ذهب ترامب الى اسرائيل احترم مع عائلته العقيدة اليهودية وطقوسها وتفاصيلها الى أكمل وجه ..

بل واضطر الى لبس القلنسوة اليهودية السوداء على رأسه الأشقر امعانا في التواضع والالتزام باحترام عقيدة الآخر .. كما ان ايفانكا التي لم تكترث حتى بوضع وشاح خفيف على رأسها في أرض المسلمين المقدسة لم تظهر في اسرائيل الا وقد غطت شعرها بقلنسوة للاناث احتراما للطقوس اليهودية التي صارت ديانتها .. ولو أنها تصرفت بنفس الطريقة السافرة اللامبالية في اسرائيل لما ظهرت الاهانة للثقافة الاسلامية بشكل فاقع ساطع ..

المسلمون والاسلاميون احتفلوا يوما أن محجبة تركية دخلت القصر الرئاسي في استانبول لتصبح السيدة الأولى .. ولكن عندما داست ايفانكا على الحجاب وغطاء الرأس في الأراضي المقدسة فانهم لزموا الصمت .. واعتبروا ذلك من أبواب فقه المصلحة .. الذي يجيز لولي الأمر أن يفعل مالايغضب الكافر حتى ان داس على استار الكعبة ..

ولو سألتم العرعور عن فتوى ذلك لوجدها وقال لكم ان امرأة لوط وامرأة نوح كانتا كافرتين وهما زوجتا نبيين .. فهو قبل ذلك افتي لأبناء رجال الدين بأن ليس عليهم حرج في ألا يرسلوا ابناءهم للجهاد اذا لم يقبل الأولاد بل الجهاد بل خرجوا للسياحة .. وهذا لايسقط واجب الجهاد عن بقية المسلمين .. لأن ولدي نوح عصياه ورفضا رسالته ولم يركبا معه في الفلك مع الناجين .. فهل يلام نوح على عقوق ولديه؟؟ ولذلك فان على المسلمين ارسال ابنائهم للموت في سورية وألا يسالوا المشايخ أو العرعور أو القرضاوي عن سبب غياب أبنائهم عن الجهاد لأنهم مثل ابناء الأنبياء .. ولايحاسب المفتي اذا لم يستجب ابنه للجهاد .. وهذا طبعا يفسر لنا أنه لايوجد اي مفتي أو شيخ واعظ من أولئك الذين يدفعون الناس الى المحرقة الا وأبناؤه بعيدون عن الجهاد ولكل واحد دنياه وحياته المترفة المليئة بالسيارات والنساء والسياحة والمال .. فهو مثل ابن نوح .. وبقية ابناء الناس أغبياء وخرفان ..

الاهانة ليست في احتقار ايفانكا وابيها للمسلمين بل في الأصنام والتماثيل التي رأت وسمعت ولم تحرك ساكنا ولم تتلفظ بعبارة احتجاج .. ان النبي محمد لم يحطم الأصنام الحجرية كما قالوا لنا .. بل حطم الأصنام البشرية التي كانت ترى الباطل وتسمع الباطل ولاتتحرك ولاتثور ولا تمتشق السيوف لتعيد العدل الاجتماعي وتبعد خطر تجار القوافل الجشعين والسماسرة ..ان الأصنام التي حطمها النبي كانت في البشر التي حرك فيها النبي التفكيروحرك الركود في الرؤوس وأوقد الروح فيها وقادها في اعصار عظيم اقتلع الملوك والأباطرة وشيوخ العزى واللات وشيوخ هبل ..

واليوم للأسف فان كل ماأنجزه النبي اندثر .. واعاد شيوخ العزى واللات وهبل بناء الأصنام في نفوس البشر .. وتحول المسلمون الى أصنام .. مليار صنم في العالم الاسلامي.. سرقهم ملك وابنه .. وراعي بقر وابنته وصهره ..وداسوا على شرفهم ودينهم وكعبتهم .. والأصنام لم تفكر ولم تتحرك .. فالنبي الذي كسر الأصنام .. تكسره الأصنام ..

أما آن للنبي أن ينهض من جديد ويحطم الاصنام ؟؟ وأقصد مليار صنم في العالم العربي والاسلامي يصومون ويزكون ويحجون ويحفظون القرآن ومع هذا يسرق منهم مالهم وبيت مالهم ودينهم ومسجدهم الأقصى ويداس على معتقدهم وتجوب ميلانيا وايفانكا أرض الحجاز بشعر غجري مجنون نكاية بعائشة وآمنة وخديجة وزينب ..

يجب أن تتكسر الأصنام وأن يخرج البشر من هذا الحجر الصلد وكأن ساحرا حولهم الى حجارة

يجب أن يأتي من يكسر الأصنام البشرية الصماء البلهاء الخرساء ويقود اعصارا عظيما آخر .. ويقول: جاء الحق وزهق الباطل .. ان الباطل كان زهوقا ..

 

Dehqan: Miserable Saudi Arabia Conspires With ‘Israel’ against Iran

09-05-2017 | 13:44

Local Editor

Iran’s defense minister Hossein Dehqan said Saudi Arabia, which has a history of teaming up with other regimes against Tehran, has now become so miserable as to ally itself with ‘Israel’ against the Islamic Republic.

 

Dehqan: Miserable Saudi Arabia Conspires With ‘Israel' against Iran


Dehqan made the remarks in an interview fully broadcast on Arabic-language Al-Manar TV on Monday.

Brigadier General Dehqan said that over the past 38 years since the establishment of the Islamic Republic, Saudi Arabia has gone out of its way to interfere in regional affairs to oppose Iran.

He said Riyadh spent lavishly to support the former Iraqi regime and the Persian Gulf littoral states against Iran in the eight-year Iraq-Iran war of the 1980s. He also referred to the Saudi intervention in Lebanese politics and said the Saudi rulers offered massive financial and political support to the groups they wanted in power in Lebanon. The Saudis also offered weapons to such groups.

“Then, let’s looks at what they have done in Iraq and Syria today. At what they are doing in Yemen today,” Dehqan said.

Saudi Arabia has been a known sponsor of extremist Wahhabi groups wreaking havoc in the region and beyond. It has also been leading a group of its vassal states in a war on impoverished Yemen since March 2015.

“Today, what we’re seeing is Saudi Arabia has become so miserable. So much so that it has convinced itself to curry favor with [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu and incite it [the ‘Israeli’ regime] against us,” Dehqan said.

Last Tuesday, the Saudi defense minister, Mohammed bin Salman, claimed in a televised interview that Saudi Arabia would fight what he called Iranian attempts to expand its influence in the region.

Dehqan responded by rejecting the accusation that Iran was after taking over territory.

“We have never been and will never be after occupying any Arab or Muslim country,” Dehqan said.

Responding to a question on how the Yemeni conflict could end, Dehqan said it was easy to think of a solution.

“First [should come] a Saudi withdrawal from Yemen. Second, a Saudi refusal to interfere in the affairs of other Islamic countries. Third, accepting the collective security order in the region, and the pullout of extra-regional forces. Fourth, submitting to people’s rule over their own fate.”

When asked if the ‘Israeli’ regime was capable of launching a war on Iran, Dehqan said he would respond by asking a question of his own.

“I answer your question with a question. Could ‘Israel’ successfully end the 33-Day War [on Lebanon]?” he said.

“Did Hezbollah, in a country limited [in terms of resources] as Lebanon [was], have access to massive financial and arms backup? Did ‘Israel’, in the 33-Day War, have any other means in its inventory not to have used?” he further rhetorically asked.

Once again asked if ‘Israel’ could attack Iran, Dehqan said, “Do not doubt that it would if it could.”

Dehqan said Iran has enough missiles to heavily target any and all aggressors.
Asked about how many missiles Iran had, he said, “Enough to heavily, seriously, and massively target everyone that is standing against us in a short period of time if, God forbid,” aggression is launched against Iran.

He advised ill-wishers, however, not to venture against Iran.

“We advise our enemies, the Americans and their other, feeble servants, not to test us,” Dehqan said.

He further stressed that the United States would not be able to effectively fight Daesh because the US itself “has created it for use as a tool.”

“It has in fact created a mobile ‘Israel’,” he said.

Dehqan said ‘Israel’ was best enjoying the situation.

“Israel is… laying back and does not face any threats. Daesh is fighting on its behalf and is providing it with security. Daesh is destroying the capacities of the Muslim world, which can otherwise be used to confront Israel’s acquisitiveness and aggression.”

Brig. Gen. Dehqan also had some advice for Turkey: “The Turks backed Daesh in a serious manner at first.”

“Their perception was that they could topple the legitimate government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad so that their favorite government would take over there.”

Source: Press TV, Edited by website team

Related Videos

Related Articles

Palm Sunday: 25 Egyptian Coptic Christian killed in Church terrorist attack in Tanta city, Nile Delta

Local Editor

Hezbollah issued a statement denouncing the gruesome crime committed by terrorist Daesh organization targeting number of churches in the Egyptian cities of Tanta and Alexandria, and leaving dozens of innocent civilians martyred and injured. Hezbollah also offered deep condolences to the families of the victims, hoping the wounded would get well soon.

 

Hezbollah Slams Targeting Egypt's Churches: To Find Real Coalition against Terrorists, Sponsors

In its statement, Hezbollah noted that: “the continuous and escalating killing committed by criminal gangs covered with religion is one of the biggest crises our nation has been hit with, planned by major and regional powers that back terrorists and offer them political financial and media support. Such powers further draw the criminal targets represented by defragmenting our societies, implanting discord and disunity among its people who have been living for centuries as brothers sharing the wealth of these countries as well as the tasks to construct them and defend them.”

The statement further noted:

“Targeting believers in their churches in the morning of the feast represents all means of barbarism, and is evidence that those terrorist groups are devoid from any humane characteristic. The crime happened in parallel with the scheme to displace Christians from Sinai and other regions in Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Lebanon. It also opens the door for discord, sectarianism and ethnic division in favor of the Zionist enemy.”
Hezbollah’s statement also stressed that:
“We, in Hezbollah, stand by Egypt and its people in those painful moments, and we call on everybody to mind the big conspiracy targeting our nation, as well as uniting under a true coalition against terrorists and their regional and international sponsors.”
Hezbollah Media Relations, Translated and edited by website team
10-04-2017 | 08:52

WARNING: GRAPHIC IMAGES

Egypt, Nile Delta; at least 25 Egyptian Coptic Christian have been reported killed and 55 others were seriously wounded in a bomb attack target the St. George’s church in the Nile Delta City of Tanta. The attack followed by another one in the Mediterranean City of Alexandria, the second major City in Egypt, where six people killed including a policeman at St Mark’s Cathedral. Today’s attacks against Coptic church come few weeks ahead of a visit to Cairo by Pope Francis scheduled on April 28. Egyptian Christian Minority is encountering series of terror attacks since the ouster of Egypt’s first Islamist President Mohamed Morsi, who has been ousted to Prison in July 3, 2013.

Related Videos

Imran Hosein: Meeting with the Saker in beautiful Tobago by Imran N. Hosein

Meeting with the Saker in beautiful Tobago

by Imran N. Hosein

www.imranhosein.org
inhosein@hotmail.com

I have just spent 10 exciting days with my Russian friend, ‘The Saker’, in the enchantingly beautiful Caribbean island of Tobago. I was born in the island of Trinidad where I now live, and Tobago is located just next to Trinidad in the South Caribbean Sea close to Venezuela:

http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/map/central_america_map2.htm

This was the first time that I ever met with ‘Saker’, and I am happy to report that I succeeded in persuading him to come out in the open with his true identity, while putting his trust in the One God. As a consequence, his identity is now public. He is Andrei Raevsky, but he will continue to use his nom de plume of Saker. If you visit his website: http://thesaker.is/sakers-open-letter-to-the-saker-community/you will even see his photograph. Those who are not familiar with him will get to know him if they visit his website.

I also got him to agree to record a joint video with me in which I interviewed him for half of an hour, so viewers will soon be able to see us together in that interview in Tobago. It will be placed on my website at www.imranhosein.org as well as my You-tube Channel at https://www.youtube.com/user/SheikhImranHosein

We were joined in Tobago by my Serbian friend, the US-trained Attorney, Stefan Karganovic, and by his friend, a Serbian Neurosurgeon. I got to know Stefan a few years ago through the Saker, and we corresponded with each other by email before I travelled to Belgrade in 2015 to meet with him and so many others in what must be recorded as a blessed visit to that historic city. It was a dream come true for me to welcome my friend Stefan to beautiful Tobago.

Stefan has just completed the Serbian/Bosnian translation of my book on ‘Methodology for Study of the Qur’an’, and Prof Branko Rakic of the Faculty of Law of the University of Belgrade has written a long Foreword for the book. It will soon be published in a new edition with Prof Branko Rakic’s Foreword Insha Allah.

Both Saker’s wife, Ana, and my wife, Aisha, were also with us in Tobago.

I took them for an all-day tour all around the island of Tobago – driving from one end of the island to the other, while passing through Roxborough and Speyside where we stopped for lunch at a beachside restaurant with an absolutely stunning view of the Speyside Bay, until we reached the town of Charlottesville located at the other end of the island. Here are some pictures of Speyside Bay and Charlotteville:

https://www.google.tt/search?q=parlatuvier+bay+pictures+tobago&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwji4_zCgozTAhUESiYKHSBTDQgQ7AkIJA&biw=1163&bih=545&dpr=1.65#tbm=isch&q=speyside++bay+pictures+tobago&*

https://www.tripadvisor.com/LocationPhotos-g1463485-Charlotteville_Tobago_Trinidad_and_Tobago.html

We then drove through the rain-forest from the eastern side of the island across to the western side, got stuck in soft mud at the side of the road, and eventually found a rest-shed where we could enjoy our desert – which, inevitably, was pineapple.

Perhaps the most beautiful sight of all was when we looked down at the Parlatuvier Bay (otherwise known as Englishman’s Bay) from high up a hill. My guests were all absolutely amazed by the stunning natural beauty of Parlatuvier Bay. Here are some pictures of the Bay

We also made the trip by boat to Tobago’s Nylon Pool as well as to the archipelago known as No Man’s Land.

https://www.google.tt/search?q=tobagos+nylon+pool+pics&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjBwfW0hozTAhUGKCYKHYMbCd4Q7AkINA&biw=1163&bih=545

https://www.google.tt/search?q=tobago+no+man%27s+land+archipelago+pics&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjA96HehozTAhXqr1QKHXd9B3EQ7AkIMg&biw=1163&bih=545

Captain Phillips, who piloted our boat, assured my guests that whoever took a bath in the Nylon Pool would emerge looking ten years younger. Not only did they all look ten years younger at the end of their visit to Tobago, but Stefan eventually looked quite red. He spent endless hours enjoying himself swimming in the blue/green Caribbean Sea. I do not know why the native people who lived in what is now known as America, were called ‘Red’ Indians, but I am satisfied that Stefan should enter history as the first ever ‘Red’ Serbian who was authentically ‘red’.

Since it was the Christian time of Lent, when Christians have certain dietary restrictions, we bought lots of fresh fish at the Lambeau Fish Market, and took turns in cooking. I had my turn twice, and I was fortunate to escape, despite my somewhat unconventional menus, without any culinary disaster. I took lots of pineapples and two large watermelons to Tobago from Trinidad, and was very relieved when they turned out to be quite sweet. Indeed we ate pineapples so often that some of my guests may even have had dreams of sweet pineapples. I also took a local Indian bread called Dhalpouri Roti. It is soft, round in shape, and large enough for two people to eat one of them. The flour is mixed with yellow lentil called Dhall, which makes it very delicious indeed. My guests loved it.

Despite the time spent in cooking, touring, and bathing in the blue/green Caribbean Sea, we still found time for all four of my Orthodox Christian guests to visit Tobago’s Masjid al-Taubah to attend the congregational prayers known as Salaat al-Jumu’ah.

The Imam invited me to deliver the Khutbah (i.e., sermon) and to lead the prayer, and I delivered a Khutbah on Christian-Muslim relations which was based on verses of the Qur’an. 

Saker responded to the sermon with a declaration that he wanted all of Russia to be able to hear it, and Stefan had the same wish for all of the Balkans.

My sermon was based on verses of the Qur’an which explicitly affirmed faith in some Christians:

كُنتُمْ خَيْرَ أُمَّةٍ أُخْرِجَتْ لِلنَّاسِ تَأْمُرُونَ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَتَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ الْمُنكَرِ وَتُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللّهِ وَلَوْ آمَنَ أَهْلُ الْكِتَابِ لَكَانَ خَيْرًا لَّهُم مِّنْهُمُ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ وَأَكْثَرُهُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ

“You (Muslims) are an excellent community evolved (by divine wisdom) for the sake of mankind, (provided that you) enjoin what is right, forbid what is wrong, and you have faith in Allah. If only the People of the Book (i.e., Jews and Christians) had faith (in Muhammad as a Prophet of the One God and in the latest Book, i.e., the Qur’ān, as His revealed Word), it would have been beneficial for them: amongst them there are those who have faith, but most of (the rest of them) are perverted transgressors.”

(Qur’ān, Ale ‘Imran, 3:110)

In consequence of the above unambiguous declaration by Allah Most High in which He affirmed that amongst the Christians and Jews (i.e., the People who have the Book of Allah as we, Muslims, also have the Book of Allah) there are those who have ‘faith’, while most of them are sinful in conduct, it became necessary for Muslims to make an effort to identify and demarcate the two groupsi.e., those Christians and Jews who act in a manner consistent with a people who have ‘faith’, and those whose conduct is manifestly sinful. A people who have ‘faith’ would not harbor feelings of hatred in their hearts for the believers in Allah Most High. Nor would a people who have ‘faith’ become friends and allies of those whose hearts are filled with hatred for Muslims.

I quoted the verse of the Qur’ān which explicitly identified Jews to be a people whose hearts will display great hatred for Islam and Muslims. While some Jews did not act in this way towards Muslims, most Jews did so. This was manifest in the life-time of Nabī Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم), and has once again manifested itself in the modern age in the conduct of Zionist Jews:

لَتَجِدَنَّ أَشَدَّ النَّاسِ عَدَاوَةً لِّلَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ الْيَهُودَ وَالَّذِينَ أَشْرَكُواْ وَلَتَجِدَنَّ أَقْرَبَهُمْ مَّوَدَّةً لِّلَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ الَّذِينَ قَالُوَاْ إِنَّا نَصَارَى ذَلِكَ بِأَنَّ مِنْهُمْ قِسِّيسِينَ وَرُهْبَانًا وَأَنَّهُمْ لاَ يَسْتَكْبِرُونَ

“Strongest among men in enmity to the believers will you find the Jews and Pagans; and nearest among them in love to the believers will you find those who (openly and publicly) declare, “We are Christians”: because amongst them are priests (who devote their lives to teaching and administering religious rites) and men who have embraced monasticism (and have hence renounced the world), and they are not arrogant.”

(Qur’ān, al-Māidah, 5:82)

Not only did the Qur’ān identify in the above verse the community of Jews as the People of the Book who are without faith, but it also went on to identify those (amongst the People of the Book) who display love and affection for Muslims – and hence display an important sign of faith. They are a people who declare of themselves that: “We are Christians”.

Christians who displayed love and affection for Islam and for Muslims, did appear in early Islam when the Negus of Abyssinia (i.e., modern-day Ethiopia) rejected the request of Makkah to repatriate the Muslims (who were slaves or semi-slaves) who had fled from persecution and oppression in Makkah, and had sought asylum in Abyssinia. Indeed, when the Negus died, and the news of his death reached Nabī Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم) in Madīna, he performed the funeral prayer for him, thus recognizing him as a Christian who had faith in Allah Most High despite some of his Christian beliefs with which the Qur’an had taken issue.

There is absolutely no evidence that the Negus had renounced his belief in Jesus as the son of God, or that he had ceased to worship Jesus as God, prior to his death; nor do we have any such evidence from the community of Christians of whom he was the leader. When there is no such evidence from these two primary sources, dubious evidence from self-serving secondary sources is of no scholarly value. Yet the Prophet offered the funeral prayer for the Negus who was a Christian.

I argued in my sermon that such Christians who will be closest in love and affection for Islam and Muslims will once again emerge in the historical process in a time-frame that will match the contemporary emergence of Zionist Jews who have displayed unprecedented hatred for Islam and Muslims. That hatred is most visible in their barbarous oppression of the innocent people of Gaza in the Holy Land.

The verse of the Qur’ān provided important signs by which such Christians who would be closest in love and affection for Muslims, would be identified:

  1. They would be a Christian people who preserve the institution of priesthood and whose priests, from their Patriarch down to the lowest Priest, will demonstrate genuine love and affection for Islam and Muslims. This most certainly excludes the Vatican and the Roman Catholic faith, the Anglican Church (of England), and all other Christian churches in western Christianity.
  2. They would be a Christian people who preserve the institution of monasticism, and whose monks would display love and affection for Islam and Muslims. This most certainly excludes western Christianity which has almost totally abandoned monasticism and the monastic way of life. Monasteries in the West have almost all been sold, and have now become McDonalds Hamburgers etc.
  3. They would be a Christian people in whose conduct there is no arrogance. This again excludes those Christians who brought modern western civilization into being with an unprecedentedly arrogant agenda of imposing its unjust and oppressive rule over all of mankind at the point of a naked blood-stained sword.
  4. They would be a Christian people who would publicly and proudly identify themselves as ‘Christians’. This would exclude the secularized Christians of modern western civilization whose primary identity is with their nation or State, rather than with their religion.
  5. They cannot be a handful of scattered Christians who worship Allah as prescribed in the Qur’ān, and hence do not worship Nabī ‘Īsa (Jesus (عليه السلام as a third person in a trinity; and do not declare that Allah Most High had a son etc. Rather, they would have to be a community of Christians complete with their priests and monks, and hence can easily be identified. One would not have to search for them in some nook or cranny with a fine-teeth comb!

My sermon identified those Christians, referred to in the Qur’an, with the world of Orthodox Christianity.

When the prayer was over, the entire congregation of Muslims turned around and reached out to the Orthodox Christians sitting on chairs at the back of the prayer hall and greeted them with love and with affection. This first-ever visit to a Masjid was a very moving experience which Saker and his wife, Stefan and the Neurosurgeon, are unlikely to ever forget. No one turned away from them. No one rejected them. No one displayed any negative behavior towards them. I felt confident that they would have received the same welcome in all the Masajid (plural of Masjid) in the neighboring island of Trinidad. The only ones who would have displayed hostility towards them would have been those who took state-of-the-art weapons and heaps of US dollars from Santa Claus to fight their bogus ISIS Jihad in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere.

Unfortunately the sermon was not recorded, so we do not have a video of it which can be viewed.

In the ten days which we spent together in Tobago we had adequate time to engage in religious dialogue, and the remarkable thing about our dialogue was that it was always conducted with profound respect for each other, and for each other’s religion. At no time did our discussions reach a state in which either side was subjected to any deliberate discomfort. There was no hint of rivalry, and no debate, in which one side sought to defeat the other side, and yet, we never compromised in stating the viewpoint of our respective religions. In fact, what we did was to set an example for those who come after us, in engaging in Muslim – Orthodox Christian dialogue in a form and manner which was free from rancor and bigotry. In doing so, we conformed to Allah’s command in the Qur’ān in which He ordered as follows:

وَلَا تُجَادِلُوا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ إِلَّا بِالَّتِي هِيَ أَحْسَنُ إِلَّا الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا مِنْهُمْ وَقُولُوا آمَنَّا بِالَّذِي أُنزِلَ إِلَيْنَا وَأُنزِلَ إِلَيْكُمْ وَإِلَهُنَا وَإِلَهُكُمْ وَاحِدٌ وَنَحْنُ لَهُ مُسْلِمُونَ

And do not argue or dispute with the Ahl al-Kitab (i.e., People of the Book, or followers of earlier revelation who are like us since we also have a Book) otherwise than in a most kindly manner, (or except with means better than mere disputation), – unless it be such of them as are bent on evildoing, (or who inflict wrong or injury) and say: “We believe in that which has been bestowed from on high upon us, as well as that which has been bestowed upon you: our God and your God is One, and it is unto Him that We [all] surrender ourselves.”

(Qur’an, al-Ankabūt, 29:46)

The above verse of the Qur’an has therefore prohibited Muslims from engaging in religious discussions with those who received the Torah, Psalms and Gospel, except in the best way possible. This prohibition did not apply, however, with such Christians and Jews who committed acts of Dhulm, i.e., injustice, oppression, wickedness.

The verse also went on to establish the very foundation of any engagement in religious discussions with Christians and Jews in the declaration that: “We believe in the revelation which has come down to us (i.e., the Qur’an) and in that which came down to you (i.e., the Torah, Psalms, Gospel); Our Ilah (i.e., God), and your Ilah (i.e., God), is One; and to Him we bow (in submission)”.

It is not my intention to write a comprehensive report of all subjects of our dialogue since Saker and I have decided to jointly write a book which will present both Islamic and Orthodox Christian Eschatology while examining the subject of Islam and Russia. Rather I choose to focus on only one subject of our dialogue and, in doing so, offer our readers a glimpse of what is to come when the book is written Insha Allah (God Willing).

Saker already knew that the Arabic word ‘Allah’ was a combination of the definite article (‘the’) and the Arabic word for God (‘ILAH’). Hence the word ‘Allah’ meant ‘The God’ i.e., The One God. Even though the Christian worshiped Jesus as God, he was still insistent that he worshiped One God since the Bible was unequivocal in its declaration: Know Oh Israel that the Lord, Your God, is One! Hence when I repeated to Saker on several occasions that his God and my God were One God, it built between us a solid common foundation for positive dialogue.

There might, unfortunately, be some Muslims who will be uneasy with the above verse of the Qur’an in which Allah Most High ordered Muslims to declare to Christians and to Jews that: Our Ilah (i.e., God) and your Ilah (i.e., God) is One. Their uneasiness would be in consequence of their knowledge that Christians worship Jesus as God. Allah Most High has already responded to such uneasiness by asking them whether they wish to teach religion to the Lord-God (Allah):

قُلْ أَتُعَلِّمُونَ اللَّهَ بِدِينِكُمْ . . . .

Say: “Do you want to teach your religion to Allah? . . . .

(Qur’ān, al-Hujurāt, 49:16)

It is remarkable that we conducted our religious discussions in exactly the opposite way from the boxing matches staged by the late Ahmad Deedat of South Africa which sought to expose several things in the Bible, belligerently so, as false and rancid. Many Christians were enraged by those boxing matches, and those who were not enraged were secretly smiling with Deedat’s Saudi sponsors since they shared a covert agenda of driving such a thick wedge between the two faiths as would preclude any possibility of friendship and alliance ever emerging between Muslims and Christians. I believe that Saker and I were more faithful to the Qur’an than Deedat and his acolytes ever were, and we set the right example of mutual respect and proper decorum for those who will now follow us Insha Allah, in Orthodox Christian-Muslim dialogue.

I asked Saker what were his expectations for the future of Muslim – Orthodox Christian dialogue, and he was very clear and precise in his response in directing attention, first of all, to those matters wherein we differed, and which appeared to him to be beyond resolve. Saker was forthright in his declaration that Orthodox Christianity does not recognize Muhammad as a Prophet of the One God, like unto Abraham and Moses (Allah’s blessings be upon them all), and does not recognize the Qur’ān as a divinely-revealed Word of the One God. However he did go on to explain that Orthodox Christianity does not have a book comparable in absolute authority to the Qur’an. Rather, Orthodox Christianity is dependent on both the Bible as well as the Church, and the collective wisdom of its luminaries through the ages, for an authoritative declaration of what constitute Truth and Faith. And so, it appeared to me that Orthodox Christians have a possible future in which the Church and its luminaries can modify Christian views through new interpretations of Christian religious symbolism and through divine visions etc. I therefore did not close the chapter between us pertaining to the status of the Qur’an and of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah Most High ever be with him).

I was familiar, of course with our own Islamic view that while whatever is clearly and explicitly stated in the Qur’an is eternally binding on all Muslims, there are other verses in the Qur’an which have to be interpreted, and hence that new knowledge would constantly keep on flowing from the Qur’an.

I did address the matter of Christian worship of Jesus as God, and as Son of God, and put the matter to rest between us when I quoted a passage of the Qur’an in which Allah Most High addressed Jesus on the subject:

وَإِذْ قَالَ اللّهُ يَا عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ أَأَنتَ قُلتَ لِلنَّاسِ اتَّخِذُونِي وَأُمِّيَ إِلَـهَيْنِ مِن دُونِ اللّهِ قَالَ سُبْحَانَكَ مَا يَكُونُ لِي أَنْ أَقُولَ مَا لَيْسَ لِي بِحَقٍّ إِن كُنتُ قُلْتُهُ فَقَدْ عَلِمْتَهُ تَعْلَمُ مَا فِي نَفْسِي وَلاَ أَعْلَمُ مَا فِي نَفْسِكَ إِنَّكَ أَنتَ عَلاَّمُ الْغُيُوبِ

AND LO! Allah said: O Jesus, son of Mary! Did you say unto men, `Worship me and my mother as deities beside Allah?” [Jesus] answered: “Limitless art Thou in Thy glory! It would not have been possible for me to say what I had no right to [say]! Had I said this, You would indeed have known it! You know all that is within myself, whereas I know not what is in Yourself. Verily, it is You alone who fully knows all the things that are beyond the reach of a created being’s perception.

مَا قُلْتُ لَهُمْ إِلاَّ مَا أَمَرْتَنِي بِهِ أَنِ اعْبُدُواْ اللّهَ رَبِّي وَرَبَّكُمْ وَكُنتُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيدًا مَّا دُمْتُ فِيهِمْ فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي كُنتَ أَنتَ الرَّقِيبَ عَلَيْهِمْ وَأَنتَ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ شَهِيدٌ

Nothing did I tell them beyond what You did bid me [to say]: `Worship Allah, [who is] my Lord-God as well as your Lord-God.’ And I bore witness to what they did as long as I dwelt in their midst; but when you took me (i.e., took my soul and hence made it appear that I was dead, and then returned my soul and raised me into the Samawat or parallel universes), You alone has been their keeper: for You are witness unto everything.

إِن تُعَذِّبْهُمْ فَإِنَّهُمْ عِبَادُكَ وَإِن تَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ فَإِنَّكَ أَنتَ الْعَزِيزُ الْحَكِيمُ

If You punish them – verily, they are Your servants; and if You forgive them – verily, You are Almighty (and) Wise!”

(Qur’an, al-Maidah, 5:116-118)

I argued that this response implied that the matter of the worship of Jesus as God, and as the Son of God, should not become a subject of dispute and debate between Muslims and Christians. The Qur’an has advised the Muslim to let the matter rest until Allah Most High deals with it Himself on Judgment Day. This Divine wisdom seems to have escaped the attention of those misguided Muslims who ignore the Qur’an whenever they take up their boxing gloves to do religious battle with Christians and with the Bible.

This brief report does not record all the matters discussed between us, since there is a book coming, Insha Allah, which Saker and I will jointly write. He and I will endeavor to set the example, as well as the stage, for future such dialogue between Muslims and Orthodox Christians so that we can advance the cause of friendship and alliance between our two persecuted peoples.

Saker has already set the example of faithfulness to his Orthodox Christian creed, and I too will endeavor to ensure in my dialogue with Saker that I remain faithful to the Qur’an and faithful Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him) who personally received in Madina a delegation of about 60 Byzantine Christians (including many religious scholars) who travelled from their native Najran in Yemen to meet with him. He not only welcomed them warmly and kindly, but offered them the Masjid itself as their place of residence and rest, as well as a place for them to pray, during their stay of approximately 3 days in Madina. The inter-religious dialogue did not yield any break-through regarding the central issues which divided the Christians and the Qur’an, but also did not result in bitter and acrimonious exchanges. Before saying good-bye and returning to Najran in Yemen, the delegation of Christians even requested of the Prophet that a learned and trustworthy Muslim be sent to them in Najran so that, among other things, the lines of communication for continuing dialogue could remain open. Despite all that has since occurred between our two peoples, and which unfriendly critics will now rush to relate, Saker and I are doing precisely that – we are continuing that Orthodox Christian – Muslim dialogue that was initiated in Madina in the presence of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and upon all the messengers of Allah Most High).

——-

Small post-scriptum by The Saker: with all due respect and love for the Sheikh, I don’t believe that he is correct when he writes that “it appeared to me that Orthodox Christians have a possible future in which the Church and its luminaries can modify Christian views through new interpretations of Christian religious symbolism and through divine visions etc.“.  The problem here is that for a teaching to be considered “Orthodox” it has to meet two criteria:

  1. It has to be the expression of the consensus patrum, the agreement of all the Church Fathers, and thus is cannot contradict the past position of the Church.  Saint Vincent of Lérins (5th century) expressed it in the following words when he said that is true that “which has been believed everywhere, always and by all” .  Thus, it cannot be the opinion of only some, contemporary, Church Fathers.
  2. It has to be “upward compatible” with what has been taught in the past.  Saint Athanasios (4th century) expressed this idea in the following words that the Orthodox faith is the faith “which the Lord gave, was preached by the Apostles, and was preserved by the Fathers. On this was the Church founded; and if anyone departs from this, he neither is nor any longer ought to be called a Christian“.  Thus no new teaching can be accepted if it contradicts what was taught in the past.

The Church having refused to recognize Muhammad as a prophet of God and having refused to accept the Quran as a divine book, She cannot under any circumstances change Her point of view.  On issues of faith and dogmatics the Church, being the Theandric Body of God filled with the Holy Spirit, She is infallible.

However, and as long as their is no compulsion in religion and as long as everybody recognizes the absolute right of each human being to follow his/her conscience, I totally agree with the Sheikh when he writes “the matter of the worship of Jesus as God, and as the Son of God, should not become a subject of dispute and debate between Muslims and Christians. The Qur’an has advised the Muslim to let the matter rest until Allah Most High deals with it Himself on Judgment Day“.

As long as our differences are not obfuscated or otherwise minimized, I do believe that it makes little sense to engage in disputes about them. What we all have to do is the explain our beliefs and make sure that the other is not mislead/misinformed about them.  But once that “informational” phase is over, there is simply no point in engaging in disputes.  Finally, we all have to recognize that the other is following his/her conscience with as much honesty, zeal and purity of faith as we do.  While we do not have to agree with the other, we do have to respect this quest for the truth in by the other.

These are my humble comments to the wise and kind words of the Sheikh.

The Saker

من حلب الى الجليل والتخلص من نفايات الربيع العربي .. “كعب” اسرائيل في ديمونا

بقلم ارام سرجون

أعترف ان ماأنجزته تكنولوجيا الايديولوجيا في مخابر الموساد وال سي آي ايه كان باهرا في أن ينقل العقل العربي في خلال سنوات قليلة من عقل عدو الى عقل خادم للموساد ومشاريع الغرب ..

تكنولوجيا الايديولوجيا الرهيبة حولت النصر الالهي لحزب الله الى غضب الهي على المسلمين عندما صار العرب والمسلمون لايرون في ذلك الانتصار انجازا لهم بل انجازا لايران .. و”للشيعة “.. حتى بعض الفلسطينيين الذين لاتزال سكين اسرائيل على أعناقهم نسوا اعناقهم النازفة ونسوا السكين وصاروا مقلاعا بيد داود ليقتل به صاحب النصر الالهي وحلفاءه ..

واعترف أكثر أن حقن كل التراث في جرعة واحدة مكثفة قدرها خمس سنوات لاشك سيجعل عملية التخلص من سموم التراث غير المنقّى في العقل والقلب عملية تشبه التلوث باليورانيوم والمواد المشعة لاتزول آثارها الا بعد مئات السنين .. فالتراث الروحاني دوما عميق في أعماق التاريخ وهو مثل العناصر الكيماوية المشعة تبقى متوهجة شعاعيا ولاتنطفئ .. وتعيش آلاف السنين .. والتراث الديني يستحق أن يسمى يورانيوم التاريخ لقدرته على البقاء كعنصر مشع لايخمد ..

ونحن كجيل حل به هذا البلاء الذي استخرجته ورشات وحفارات السلفيين من بين رمال الصحراء لايجب أن نترك هذا اليورانيوم الذي تسرب ولوث المياه والتربة وستسقى منه الخلايا .. لايجب ان نتركه هائما على سطح الأرض فاما اما ندفنه من جديد في الأعماق أو نبطل مفعوله ..

 المعضلة ببساطة هي الثقافة المذهبية المعمدة بالدم والمجازر وعملية كي الروح التي ستلوث كل الثقافة القادمة لأنها لوثت مياه الثقافة الراهنة التي ستشرب منها الثقافة القادمة فكل الثقا فة العربية تلوثت بالمذهبية لان الدافع وراء الثورة السورية لم يكن الا ايديولوجيا المذاهب التي صنعتها تكنولوجيا الايديولوجيا الغربية .. فكيف اذا نختصر الزمن ولاننتظر مئات السنين حتى تنجلي هذه اللوثة المذهبية التي تشبه كارثة مفاعل تشيرنوبل الذي تسرب منه الاشعاع السام وتسبب بكارثة .. ونحن لدينا مفاعل (تشيرنوبل المذاهب) في العراق والشام حيث تلتقي العناصر المشعة التراثية المسيحية والاسلامية بشقيها السنية والشيعية .. لأن مرجل المذاهب والأديان ومفاعلها الكبير الذري وانشطارات الاسلام الكبرى ونهوض كل الديانات الأخرى السماوية وقعت في العراق وبلاد الشام وليس في المغرب أو ماليزية .. في هذه البلاد تكمن الطاقة الخلاقة الهائلة للعرب والمسلمين وتنتج الطاقة المشرقية في هذا المفاعل العملاق .. الذي تشقق في الزلزال الأخير وتسرب من الشقوق والتصدعات المذهبية الاشعاع القاتل اذي بدأ بتسميم الشرق .. ولايتوقف التسرب الا باغلاق الشقوق المذهبية

كيف نوقف التسرب الاشعاعي المذهبي؟؟ هل نوقفه بتدمير السعودية التي تضرب على هذا المفاعل كي ينفجر وينفجر معه الشرق كله؟؟ أم نوقفه بتدمير تركيا التي عبثت به وتسللت اليه وكانت تريد للمفاعل ان ينتج لها الطاقة العثمانية ..؟؟ والجواب سيكون: لايقتل المذهبية الا ان تقاتل المذاهب عدوا واحدا ..

الحقيقة أن أي حرب هنا أو هناك لن تحل المشكلة المذهبية الراهنة التي ستنتقل ان تركناها لتعيد انتاج كل أنواع التفاعلات المشعة المؤذية .. العرقية والدينية والعشائرية .. ولكن ربما هناك حل وحيد لهذه الحرب المذهبية .. ولايملك مفتاحه الا حزب الله .. ومفتاحه هو الجليل أو ديمونة .. ولاشيء سيعيد النصر الالهي الا عملية بقياس تحرير الجليل او قصف ديمونة الذي سيكون بمثابه كعب أخيل أو كعب اسرائيل .. فهل يقدر حزب الله أن يقدم على تحرير الجليل أو قصف ديمونا لهدم الربيع العربي وهدم الوهابية وهدم التسرب الاشعاعي المذهبي؟؟ .. واذا مااهتز الجليل أو ديمونا اهتزت القبائل العربية .. وأفاقت الشعوب التواقة للنصر .. وغاصت سقيفة بني ساعدة في الرمال ودخل “الجمل” الذي نسبت له معركة الجمل الى متحف الديناصورات .. ولكن هل هذا واقعي أم حلم طوباوي؟؟

وهنا دعونا نتحدث عن الواقعية التي تفترض أن اقتحام الجليل أو ضرب ديمونا خياران خطيران لان اسرائيل والعالم كله لن يسمح لحزب الله أن يفعل هذا دون رد عنيف .. ولايبدو هذا السيناريو واقعيا في ظل الظروف الراهنة .. ولا يجب تضخيم التصورات والامكانات للقيام بهذا المشروع الضخم وتكليف حزب الله به وهو لايملك حتى المبرر للبدء به .. لأن حزب الله في هذه الظروف لايمكن أن يقدم على المبادرة نحو اقتحام الجليل الا في حالة واحدة تمنحها له القيادة الاسرائيلية بيدها وهي أن تبادر اسرائيل بالهجوم على حزب الله .. فان حدث هذا فان حزب الله لايجب أن يفوّت فرصة ذهبية تأتي مرة في العمر كما حدث عام 2006 (عندما أعطت اسرائيل دون قصد الذريعة لحزب الله لامطارها بالصواريخ واذلالها) تنقله لتنفيذ الخيار “الضرورة” الذي قد تقدمه له اسرائيل نفسها هذه المرة أيضا ويمكنه عندها أن يحول الفخ الاسرائيلي لتدميره الى فرصة لاتفوّت لتدمير المفاعل المذهبي الطائفي التي تشغله اسرائيل في المنطقة وتلوثها بنفاياته التكفيرية الوهابية ..

ان من يحلل كلام السيد حسن نصر الله عن تحرير الجليل في احد الخطابات فانه يلاحظ أنه ربطه “بظرف ما قد تطلب فيه قيادة المقاومة من المجاهدين في حزب الله بالتحرك لتحرير الجليل” .. وهذا يعني أن الظرف المنتظر هو ظرف تقدم فيه المبررات الكاملة لتبرير التحرك أمام العالم وهذا سيكون في حال اطلاق اسرائيل عملية عسكرية عنيفة وشاملة ضد حزب الله او سورية أو ايران .. وتبدو اشارة السيد حسن نصرالله الى خيار ديمونا على أنها كلام رادع يحمل الانذار لاسرائيل التي يمكن ان تحرض ترامب على التحرش بايران أو مساندتها لتدمير حزب الله .. ويرى كثيرون ان كلام السيد نصرالله ليس لحماية ايران من تصريحات وخطط ترامب ونتنياهو العسكرية لأن ترامب قد يلغي الاتفاق النووي أو يعطله لكنه لن يهاجم ايران عسكريا على الأغلب .. الا أنه قد يساند عملية اسرائيلية ساحقة لتدمير حزب الله تتلو سقوط الاتفاق النووي .. لأن اسرائيل تدرك أن ايران من غير حزب الله يقل تأثيرها كثيرا على اسرائيل فتصبح مثل ليبيا أو الجزائر مؤيدة لفلسطين وعاجزة بحكم البعد والفاصل الجغرافي .. فاذا وقعت اسرائيل في غواية الثأر من حزب الله بعد اسقاط الاتفاق النووي فان هذا سيجعل ايران وحلفاءها غير ملزمين بأي ضبط للنفس وستطلق يد حزب الله في الجليل لتنفيذ الخيار الضرورة .. وسيكون التهديد الذي أعلن مؤخرا بضرب ديمونا سببا في ردع أي تدخل غربي أو ناتوي لحماية أو استرداد الجليل من حزب الله الذي أطلق معادلة ديمونا الرادعة ضد جنون وانتقام غربي من أجل اسرائيل في حال تحققت معادلة تحرير الجليل .. الضرورة تأتي من حقيقة أن حزب الله يجب أن يفكر في حرب تحرير الجليل عندما تتحول الحرب عليه الى فرصة له .. لا يستعيد بها الجليل فقط بل يستعيد موقع الحزب المقاوم الجليل ذي الشرف الرفيع الذي لايضاهيه أي شرف الذي عملت على تجريده منه ماكينات الاعلام الوهابي والاخواني .. شرف انجاز تحرير أول قطعة من فلسطين منذ احتلالها .. ودفن كل نفايات التلوث الوهابي والتكفير التي لوثت العقل العربي والمسلم ولوثت حتى الخلايا والدماء والمياه في الشرق ..

لاأعرف كيف تفكر الأقدار ولكنها ليست حمقاء بالتاكيد .. بل ان الحمقى هم الاسرائيليون الذين اعتقدوا في حساباتهم أن الربيع العربي سيطلق الربيع الاسرائيلي لأن الحرب السورية ستكون خاطفة واياما معدودات وينتهي كل شيء .. وتبدأ بعدها تصفية الحساب مع حزب الله ومع كل من قاوم يوما لاسدال الستار على نهج الممانعة التي بدأت بعبد الناصر ووصلت الى زمن السيد حسن نصرالله والرئيس بشار الأسد .. وكانت معركة القصير مفصلا وخبرا سيئا لاسرائيل لأنها أظهرت أن حكاية الأيام المعدودات لن تكون واقعية أبدا وأن اقتحام القصير أثبت تماسك محور المقاومة في أحلك الظروف .. ولكن لم يكن القادة الاسرائيليون يتصورون سيناريو أسوأ من سيناريو تحرير حلب بعد أن اعتقدوا أن حلب ربما تقصم ظهر النظام وان لم تسقطه .. لأن التوقعات المتفائلة والسعيدة كانت تتحدث عن معركة قاسية جدا وطويلة ستنهك الجيش السوري وحزب الله الذي قد يموت هناك بعيدا عن الجليل .. لأن خبرة العسكريين في اقتحام المدن سيئة ومريرة .. ولاتنتهي الا بصعوبة وطيف هزيمة بعد دفع ثمن باهظ .. ولكن الجيش السوري فعلها مع حلفائه ..

الاسرائيليون استفاقوا على حقيقة لم يضعوها بالاعتبار بعد معركة حلب وهي ان حزب الله سيتمكن من استعادة قسم كبير من قواته التي شاركت في تلك المعركة .. وقد تكون قريبا وجها لوجه مع الجليل تنتظر نهاية الحرب السورية .. ورغم الاختلاف البيئي والجغرافي بين جبهة حلب وجبهة الجليل الا ان الحقيقة التي لابد من الاقرار بها هي أن اقتحام الجليل اكثر سهولة بكثير من اقتحام حلب .. حيث ستوفر الأحراش والغطاء النباتي للمقاتلين تمويها ومظلات ممتازة عند الاختراق كما أن الاقتراب من المستعمرات سيحيد فاعلية سلاح الجو خاصة أن المساحة في شمال فلسطين ضيقة ومحدودة بالقياس الى معارك الحزب في سورية حيث الانتشار الواسع للجغرافيا المترامية التي تشتت قوى وكتائب الحزب الذي سيتكثف ويتركز بكامل قوته في جبهة ضيقة شمال فلسطين .. ناهيك عن أن التفوق في حرب المدن سيعطي حزب الله التفوق بلا منازع عند اقتحام هذه المستعمرات والمستوطنات الشمالية ..

ضرورة حرب الجليل تأتي من حقيقة ان حزب الله قد آذته الحرب المذهبية المفروضة عليه أكثر مما أوجعته حرب تموز وكل مواجهاته مع اسرائيل .. ويدرك الحزب أن اسرائيل كانت موفقة في اختيار المواجهة غير المباشرة معه عبر وكلاء المذهب الوهابي الذين سعّروا الصراع المذهبي واضطر حزب الله لكي يدافع عن نفسه وعن منظومته وسمعته وعن تاريخه الذي حاولت اسقاطه الحرب المذهبية .. ولكن لايمكن للحرب المذهبية أن تنتهي أو تتحرك بسرعة الا بحرب أخرى تلغيها .. مثل حرب تحرير أو مواجهة قومية تجعل الهم الطائفي أقل أهمية .. والحزب يرى أن من مصلحته تدمير الحرب المذهبية البشعة التي تشن عليه التي لن تتوقف من داخل لبنان ومن دول النفط التي تحقن الجمهور بالكراهية المذهبية بشكل متواصل .. فكما صار معروفا فان نصر تموز هو الذي جعل حزب الله متفوقا ومدرسة ملهمة للشعوب العربية التي اذهلها النصر الالهي ولم تفتش عن مذهب الحزب الذي انتصر لأنها نسبت الانتصار اليها واعتبرت الحزب جزءا من تركيبتها وثقافتها الاسلامية لأن مالدى الحزب من خلفية دينية لاهوتية له امتدادات وتماهيات مع الثقافة المنتشرة في العالم الاسلامي عموما .. كما أن نصر 56 المصري ضد العدوان الثلاثي الخارجي جعل الجماهير العربية ميالة لأن تنتسب الى النصر المصري لأنه واجه عدوا مشتركا للجميع وانتصر فانتمت الجماهير بعواطفها الى فكر المنتصر وهذا مانشر الدعوة القومية الناصرية بسرعة الى أن منيت بالهزيمة فانفض الناس عنها والتفوا حول أوهام كثيرة لاستبدالها ..

ان الأكاديميين العسكريين الاسرائيلييين لديهم قناعة ان حزب الله لن يجد طريقة اسرع لاستعادة مكانته الممانعة التي شوهتها المرحلة الاعلامية الحالية في الربيع العربي الا بنصر مبين وساحق ومذهل على اسرائيل يتوق اليه ويتحرق لانجازه اذا ماتلقف الفرصة .. نصر يضعه في مقدمة القوى العربية التي ستنال المجد وتكون انتصاراته سببا في تراجع المرحلة المذهبية لأن ايقاظ النصر على اسرائيل هو الوحيد الذي يرقأ الجراح ويسكت الأصوات التي تشوه الروافض المتهمين انهم يتآمرون مع الصهاينة والفرس على الاسلام وأهل السنة وفق المنطق الوهابي ويغسل اسم حزب الله مما ألصق به زورا من أنه لايريد تحرير فلسطين بل نشر المشروع الفارسي الشيعي بدليل انخراطه في الدفاع عن سورية التي سوقت عربيا واسلاميا على أنها دفاع عن طائفة ونظام حكم وهلال اخترعه ملك الأردن الذي ينتمي الى أم يهودية ..

الاسرائيليون يؤمنون بهذا الكابوس .. ومن يتابع المناورات الاسرائيلية يلاحظ أنها تتضمن عمليات اسعاف في المدن وعمليات اخلاء سريعة للمناطق المأهولة بسبب صواريخ أو تعرضها للاقتحام من قبل “ارهابيين” .. لكن هناك نشاطا محموما في الشمال لرفع السواتر والشراك وحقول الألغام .. يبدو أن المناورات القادمة ستكون من أجل اخلاء المدن المستهدفة بسرعة قصوى كي لايبقى مدنيون لتمكين سلاح الجو من ابادة القوات المهاجمة وتحطيم كل شيء على رؤوس المقاتلين ..

هل يمكن أن يحول الحزب أي هجوم اسرائيلي من ورطة الى فرصة؟؟ وهل هناك فرصة افضل من هذه؟؟ جيش تمرس على أقسى أنواع حرب المدن والاقتحام .. ومقاتلون منظمون وشرسون ومدربون تدريبا عاليا ولايفصل بينهم وبين الجليل الا سياج .. وحاجة ماسة لاطفاء حرب مذهبية تطهرهم من نفايات الاتهام والتزوير التي ألقيت عليهم .. انه السفر الى الجليل .. والمعراج الى النقاء الجهادي .. في رحلة بدأت من حلب الى ديمونا .. مرورا بالجليل ..

%d bloggers like this: