Researcher of Political Science & Classical Islam. Initiated by the Khwajagan i-Naqshband.
By Gulf Daily News
Global Research, July 16, 2014
The former employee at US National Security Agency (NSA), Edward Snowden, has revealed that the British and American intelligence and the Mossad worked together to create the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
Snowden said intelligence services of three countries created a terrorist organisation that is able to attract all extremists of the world to one place, using a strategy called “the hornet’s nest”.
NSA documents refer to recent implementation of the hornet’s nest to protect the Zionist entity by creating religious and Islamic slogans.
According to documents released by Snowden, “The only solution for the protection of the Jewish state “is to create an enemy near its borders”.
Leaks revealed that ISIS leader and cleric Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi took intensive military training for a whole year in the hands of Mossad, besides courses in theology and the art of speech.
What do you think we can do about terrorism? Both in terms of laymen and scholarly knowledgeable people, what would u advise?
Terrorism is a means to a political objective not the objective itself. The Arab and Muslim world has always been blessed with political and economic grandeur since the era of the Rashidun Caliphs onwards. This demonstrates that historically terrorism is in fact inconsistent with Arab and Muslim history. We have always had states, power, influence, and wealth whereas terrorism is in fact a fallacy, and seen by those who employ it, as a means to those very same things. It is in fact described as “a poor man’s way to war”. Arabs and Muslims have never needed to autonomously “establish” new states. Historically we have had only one dynasty over throw another and all terroritial expansions were carried out by Arab or Arabized Muslim empire states. The Americans and Zionists who esrablished the Jewish State in fact used terrorism to carve themselves out of the British Empire. Terrorism is an American and Zionist philosophy like both Sunnism and Shiitism are originally Arab philosophies. Since the abolishment of the Turkish monarchy and caliphate, the need to “establish” has been artificially created by groups who are backed or linked to America directly or indirectly. These groups, who seek to now “establish” are of two kinds: those who believe in democracy and referendum as the means to establish their goals, and those who believe in terrorism as a legitimate means to what they see as a necessary political objective. America is the global leader of the falsehood referred to as democracy and it, and the Jewsish State of Israel employed and invented modern day terrorism to establish themselves as democratic states. All Islamist groups fall in to these two categories. Islamist Turkey, and the Islamic Republic of Iran are the leaders of the movement towards establishment of a nee world order through democracy. Their followers include Hamas, Ikhwan, Pakistan’s Dr. Tahir ul-Quadri, and other groups they back or backed. The second group, like the Americans and Zionists, believe in terrorism as an acceptable means to the establishment of what they see as a noble end. In tbe cas eof the Americans it was a new democratic “Israel” without the British monarchy while for Islamist terrorist groups it is the establishment of the Islamist caliphate and a new world order. These groups include Al Qaeda, Mahdi Army, ISIS, pre-9/11 Libya under Gaddafi, Syria under the Assads and others. Both groups are actually worng and have no model for political succession, am irony for groups calling towards precisely the smae thing, caliphate, or succession. Historically the caliphate has been exclusive to the bloodline of the Quraysh, hence there has never been room for democracy in the Arab and Muslim world throughout its history. From the era of the forth Rashidun Caliph onwards, until the demise of the Turkish monarchy and caliphate, the model of political succession has always been heriditary and the model for government always a monarchy. All that is required is restoration of monarchy in Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria and empowering of the monarchy respectively. Thereafter, the caliphate must be restored, but it is to remain a monarchy not otherwise. The caliph is both the religious head of the state as well as its king, like David in the Quran who is referred to as both a Prophet-king with kingship and a caliph. The last monarch to occupy the office of the caliphate with absolute power in the Arab Muslim world was Sharif Hussein. He received the title and office from the Ottomans and was a direct lineal descendant of the Prophet Muhammad. Today his great grandson continues to sit on a throne and is legally privileged to inherit both the caliphical style and authority from his ancestor. We have never had perfect kings from the era of the Rashidun Caliphs onwards. According to the Shariat, the office of the caliphate is the Right Divine of the family of Quraysh. Other than King Abdullah II ibn Al Hussein, there are no other kings from the Quraysh bloodline in the entire Middle East. As such, my answer is restoration of the monarchy and Sunni caliph-monarch from the House of Sharif Hussein, rejection of democracy and terrorism and all things which were created to destabilize monarchies both in the East and West. The Turkish and Perisan Muslim monarchy must also return to Turkey and Iran. Tyrants in the Arab Muslim world must be removed and replaced by the respective exiled monarchs. There will be order and prosperity again with peace. Islam would be renovated and the artificial need to “establish” of both Islamists and terrorists would have already been completed. It can start with the rise of His Majesty the Prince of Wales.
Interesting, this is good information. I agree with your point regarding the two groups who seek to “establish. I also understand that they are constructed by Western powers. What you said regarding the history of the Caliphate is also true. Why do you feel stability begins with the Prince of Wales?
My question was actually more specifically regarding what you think scholarly people and lay-people can do to prevent terrorism. Is it a goal that should be pursued?
The media use Islamist like the word cyst, something to be removed so personally would not lump Traditional/ordinary Muslims with that branding.
Also have to say about Pakistan’s Shaykh Tahir ul-Quadri his approach at least seams sincere. The Shaykh did in fact meet with Shaykh Nazim (RA) a few years ago and Shaykh Nazim (RA) said he liked him(sufilive).. His approach is shura/consultative/representative based, by the looks of it so has some cross over with what some would term as democracy – but I suspect when you get into the matter it would end up a battle of semantics…At the moment almost anyone would be better then thr blight that is the corruption spewing government of the opportunist Nawas Sharif.
It was something to not that the so called ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ cohorts in Pakistan the Jamaiti-e-Islami group were recently marching in favour of the Sharif Government (on bbc website) – birds of a feather – the corrupt like sticking together?
Your latter points are well taken and it is a huge shame that traditional Muslims never mention the whole point about bloodlines and rights of succession – I think that point made well, could well solve the problem of youth esp. in the UK finding the ilk of ISIS/ISIL so enticing.
Thank you for your blog – it’s quite edifying 😉