Ramadan Reflections – 1 Iraq
Allah the Exalted has said in Sura Nuh (71, 1-20):
We sent Nuh to his people: ‘Warn your people
before a painful punishment comes to them.’
He said, ‘My people, I am a clear warner to you.
Worship Allah, have taqwa of Him and obey me.
He will forgive you your wrong actions
and defer you until a specified time.
When Allah’s time comes it cannot be deferred,
if you only knew.’
He said, ‘My Lord, I have called my people night and day
but my calling has only made them more evasive.
Indeed, every time I called them to Your forgiveness,
they put their fingers in their ears,
wrapped themselves up in their clothes
and were overweeningly arrogant.
Then I called them openly.
Then I addressed them publicly
and addressed them privately.
I said, “Ask forgiveness of your Lord.
Truly He is Endlessly Forgiving.
He will send heaven down on you in abundant rain
and reinforce you with more wealth and sons,
and grant you gardens and grant you waterways.
What is the matter with you that you do not hope
for honour from Allah,
when He created you by successive stages?
Do you not see how He created seven heavens in layers,
and placed the moon as a light in them
and made the sun a blazing lamp?
Allah caused you to grow from the earth
then will return you to it
and bring you out again.
Allah has spread the earth out as a carpet for you
so that you could use its wide valleys as roadways.”’
From the beginning to the end it must be understood who is responsible for the anarchy, civil war, and insurgence in Iraq. This heavy responsibility cannot be laid on the occupying forces. The U.S. and U.K. presence in the land is an effect, but must not be mistaken for the cause.
In the great hall of the Café Rachid of Damascus, on 7 April 1947, a christian orthodox Syrian, one Michel Aflak, declared the launching of the Ba’ath (resurrection!) Party. He declared: ‘Either our contribution will be creative, audacious, and able to transform the life of all Arabs, allowing them to pass from decadence to progress, or else we will experience a complete failure.’ Educated in Paris, he had been trained in the thinking of the vitalist jewish philosopher Bergson as well as Marx and Lenin. His doctrine declared that Arab nationalism, together with socialism, could unite the Arab world. He rejected communism and Islamic Law, and saw the role of Islam as being a psychological and passive force of that unification.
On 30 July 1968 the Army strengthened the Ba’athist hold on Iraq. Firstly, on 17 July, they overthrew Abdelrahman Aref with the help of right-wing officers. This was a rejection of Nasserite socialism and Syrian Ba’athism. Into the foreground came the two leading Iraqi Ba’athists, Ahmad Hasan el-Bakr and Saddam Hussein. They claimed that they were restoring the Party to its original Aflaki line. In confirmation of this, Michel Aflak joined them in Baghdad. So it was that the two greatest and most highly educated Arab nation states plunged into an epoch dominated by christian socialist doctrines, Nasser’s socialism a neo-communist secularism for Egypt, and Saddam’s socialism a neo-fascist secularism for Iraq.
It must never be forgotten how enthusiastically Ba’athism was received by the western powers. From the Pope downwards (or upwards), annual good wishes poured in to Saddam Hussein, viewed unanimously as the liberator of the Arabs from the Deen of Islam. The first great wave of persecution was on the ‘ulema and institutions of Islam. This happened immediately on the Ba’athist victory. The second wave of religious persecution fell on the Shi‘a religion following the implied menace to Iraq of the Iranian Revolution. This second purge took on ghastly proportions at the point that Iraq invaded Iran.
It must not be forgotten that Saddam’s Iraq was not only admired but envied in its neighbouring Arab countries. During the Iraq-Iran War, the U.A.E. had agreed to host the Fiqh Conference which I had initiated in series in Norwich, Granada, and Tunis. The most prestigious ‘ulema, expert in the Madhhab of the Ahl al-Madinah, had been gathered in Abu Dhabi. On the second day of the Conference Shaykh Zayed suspended the hearings, silenced these great scholars, and obliged us to listen, aghast, to speakers who had been flown in from Iraq and Syria. The event was turned into a propaganda exercise glorifying the Saddam regime, its war on Iran, and its social philosophy. Of that disastrous event, one retains an image of the Iraqi foreign minister (white suit, black shirt, white tie) standing alongside Shaykh Kuftaro in his flowing robes, who was flushed with his recent success in christian-muslim dialogue—a work climaxed in 1993 with his praying “Hail Mary, Mother of God,” in public with Cardinal Keeler of Baltimore (astaghfirullah!).
Perhaps more distressing than the hijacking of Islamic scholarship was the fact that this brother Arab nation would in the shortest time offer its bases to bomb yesterday’s Arab brothers and leader. After betrayal there only remains decadence, and now Dubai is plunging into a social programme to make its territory a macabre mix of Las Vegas and a telecommunications ideology whose moral content makes freemasonry seem an exalted pan-religious excellence in comparison.
On the day the American President declared that the second Gulf War was over, of course, the Iraqi War began. This insurrection has resulted in a Double Bind.
A) The Civil War. Bearing in mind that the Iraqi people did not wage war against the regime themselves, except for two groups, the Kurds and the Shi‘a, it was not surprising that the Civil War represented a struggle between the educated and rich atheist/nationalist elite and the formerly oppressed Shi‘a masses, now a menacing majority.
B) The Liberation War. This has pitched the nationalist Ba’athists, who did so well under Saddam, being his technological elite, against occupying invader forces.
This in turn has created a Double View.
A) The Shi‘a consider the invasion as a means to re-instate the Ba’athists, in other words, that educated class able to service the oil industry. At the same time the invaders are determined to avoid a Shi‘a majority rule with the devastating implications of a linkage with Shi‘a Iran. Thus the Shi‘a view the invaders as ironically obliged to stop democracy, i.e. majority rule, in Iraq.
B) The atheist/nationalists consider the interim regime (Shalabi, Alawi, and the elevation of Sistani as a papal figure) as nothing less than a preparation for a Shi‘a take-over.
All this must be seen against another duality, the Double Deen.
A) The Shi‘a religion has played its hand brilliantly, or rather its hands. Its strategy has been based on applying one of the founding doctrines of Shi’ism, Taqiyya.
This has provided the equation of ‘different’ Shi‘a factions, internally at war.
1 — Interim Government personnel. Dr. Shalabi: the cleverest man in Iraq, was perceived as dangerous because of his open intellectual scorn of U.S. subservience to a jewish agenda, that is, not Israel but banking. Dr. Alawi: he is a man of undoubted integrity whose main determination and anxiety is to end the suffering of the poor people of Iraq.
2 — Muqtada As-Sadr, the heroic rebel, and his ‘holy army’. He is the champion of a militant Khomeinism, inevitably linking his military arm with the machinations of the Iranian state.
3 — The Grand Ayatollah Sistani. The western media have fallen for the successful application of Taqiyya, and thus imagine that this exalted figure of holiness somehow represents that calming and unifying force that will unite the factions, because he is ‘above the storm’.
The U.S., so lamentably served by their uneducated intelligence people, believe that from these ‘fighting factions’ they can rescue the middle ground party, that is to say a grouping of Shi‘a in name and loyalty, but agreeable to the atheist doctrine of the separation of state from religion. This is what they call the desired model, the Islamic football team system, each in their colours, the Shi‘a team, the ‘Sunni’ team, the Isma‘ili team—but playing in the stadium of the state.
B) The Deen of Islam is only a phantom presence on the actual field of combat.
Islam was basically wiped out in the early years of Ba’athism as we have previously stated, but must emphasise. The primary perception of Saddam was that he was in power to initiate a new atheist democratic state with an elite of educated technocrats to run the oil industry. Thus, under his regime the expansion of christian missionary activity was supported, since they were already a proven passive force in ‘democracy’. The deep and tragic underlying contradiction of U.S. policy is that what it wants is to reproduce that same Iraq that Saddam had created in the first place, but now, financially under the U.S. oil network. A Saddam regime, minus its dictator and its prison system.
To achieve this it has had to re-fill those same prisons with a new set of inmates, and then submit them to exactly the same humiliation, abuse and torture that was meted out to the previous inmates under Saddam.
Now, the current projected situation in Iraq is as follows: there are three groupings. 1) The Kurds, 2) the Shi‘a, and 3) the ‘Sunni’. Notice this gives us apparently one racial group and two ‘religious’ groups. Imagine the outcry at a proposed division of the U.S.A. as follows: 1) The jews, 2) the christian evangelicals, 3) the hispanics. In order to mask what is in effect the re‑instatement of the Ba’athist regime, these same Ba’athists must be redefined as the ‘Sunni’ Muslims.
The result of this is that the Iraqi War has been waged under a Double Deception:
A) That Saddam had Weapons (did not intend to have but had) of Mass Destruction.
B) That Iraq needed regime-change.
The reality of Iraq today, and it must be said again, is that there has been no Islam permitted in Iraq since Saddam’s coup d’état. Not only were the educated ‘ulema class wiped out, but a terrible silence was imposed on the country’s mimbars, except for adulation of the dictator.
Saddam ruled under the masonic doctrine of ‘tolérance’, claiming all religions equal and in harmony—the opposing voices were, of course, arrested and thrown into the Abu Ghuraib prison. Plus ça change—plus c’est la même chose! (The more things change—the more they remain the same). It follows that if any of the ‘ulema of this new religion, ‘Sunni’ Islam, are alive today it is only because they were the strong upholders of Saddam’s atheist state. The so-called Councils of ‘Sunni’ Muslim ‘ulema are therefore upholding yet again the doctrines of the dictator calling for tolérance, only now it is that of the occupying atheist powers. There is no ‘Sunni’ Islam. There is only the Deen of Islam, so named by Allah the Exalted in His Book: Al-Ma’ida (5,3)
Today I have perfected your deen for you
and completed My blessing upon you
and I am pleased with Islam as a deen for you.
Yet another complicating factor is that of the Kurds. It is significant that to the occupying powers they are not categorised as simply part of their ‘Sunni’ zone. In the main the Kurds are in the Deen of Islam, although they have two minority wings, one communist and one pagan. The tragedy of the Kurdish people is not the genocide they suffered at Saddam’s hands, horrible though it was. Typical of their agony, however, is the fact that the while the ‘effect’ of the gassing was the criminal responsibility of Saddam, the ‘cause’ was the cynical and basically ignorant policy of the U.S. administration. So today, the agony that the ‘Iraqi’ people have brought on themselves is another crisis from that of the Kurds.
In further contradiction, prior to Iraq’s expansionist policies, no nation treated the Kurds better than Saddam’s Iraq. The true root of all Kurdish persecution is precisely the ruthless application of that same doctrine which is now being visited on the Iraqis by the U.S. system, but which was years ago visited on the Kurds by the last century’s most despicable figure, Mustafa Kemal.
It is time to face up to the realities of today’s Iraqi crisis. It is not about its occupying army which, as they go, in fact, has proved quite benign. It is not about the wicked U.S. and its panicky need to control the world’s oil, to stave off the inescapable collapse of the dollar. What is happening in Iraq is the historical unravelling of the humanist doctrine of democracy which grants governance to those chosen by mass suffrage, while forbidding that governance to have any power over the nation’s currency, or wealth, thus permitting the wealth system to be supra-national and in the hands of a non‑elected elite. The sublime and successful system of Islamic rule by the great Osmanli Sultans was destroyed in the name of the anti-Islamic forces of world banking. In the notorious words of the dictator, Kemal: ‘We took their gold and gave them a bank.’
The Osmanli Islamic system was undoubtedly the highest social achievement of the modern world. It was not militarily defeated, but was brought down by its mistaken and misjudged decision to permit the change from a gold and silver currency to paper money, which thus opened the way to bankism and its universal usury practice. The Osmanli state was non-centralist, while functioning in its full model. It was a welfare state, with vast kitchens attached to the mosques to feed the people. As Professor Maksodoglu has pointed out, the Doctor/Patient ratio in the Osmanli city has never been reached by any modern European state. Its markets, also attached to its mosques, functioned under the just and vitalising rules of trade that are the life-blood of Islam, and without which the Deen collapses. Relevant to us also is that under their Islamic system there was no concept of racialism. Half the Wazirs in Istanbul were Albanian. Many ‘ulema were Kurds. The Osmanli language held in its system Arabic, Turkish, Urdu, Kurdish and Albanian. A British ambassador reported that he had made a serious blunder, offending his hosts by referring to them as ‘Turks’. He wrote that they had reprimanded him, saying, ‘We are not Turks. We are Osmanli.’ Kurdistan was therefore geographic and not political. Osmanli folded into Kurdish both as language and as rule.
Kemal’s invention of the Turkish nation, in his abolition of Islamic unity, meant the persecution of the Kurds, and the elimination of their language and culture as well as their religion, Islam. With the gradual establishment of Kemalism in the area, the Kurds found themselves cut off from one another. The Osmanli Kurdistan, which had once had its own natural autonomy, now found that its people were Syrian, Iraqi, Iranian and Turkish. They also found that as the price of nationhood they had automatically become debtors in each of these lands to their National Banks, unquestioningly owned by people named Cassel, Sassoon, Zaharoff and Goldstein.
It is Kemalism that is being applied to Iraq. It is Kemalism that is about to be applied in Pakistan, by an imposed dictator trained in Turkey by Kemalist experts. It will later be visited on India and Indonesia, which will be divided up into small happy nations, democratic and helpless. Kemalism is that model of governance especially designed by the banking class to abolish Islam during the process of ‘democratisation’. It must be remembered that the wahhabi deviant sect in Arabia joined with Britain in fighting the Khalifate of Istanbul and also opposed that necessary Fiqh without which there can be no Islamic Law.
Today the curse of Kemalism is being visited on Iraq. Our beloved brothers in Turkey must bear in mind that it is also intended to return it to its source in Istanbul. We pray that the skilful leadership of the Prime Minister will protect the country from the planned ‘revised Kemalism’ now being prepared for Turkey. The so-called ‘democratic system’, that can now clearly be seen as dictatorship, which is currently being forced on Iraq, is being imposed at the cost of Iraqi lives. Thousands of men, women and children have been killed by bomb and missile attacks. The Iraqi people have to be slaughtered until completely broken. The survivors, Kemalised, will be allowed to live, to work, to pay the debt incurred in the cost of their liberation. Those survivors must be reminded that in being raised to the status of en-debted citizens of the Iraqi democracy, like the en-debted citizens of Bosnia, owing as they will billions of dollars to the World Bank, the IMF and the many banking institutions now being set up, they have gained this enslavement because they abandoned the Deen of Islam. The U.S.A. and Britain are only secondarily responsible.
The 20th century can now be seen as the epoch in which the whole Arab world abandoned the Deen of Islam in exchange for the Dunya which they were then denied, and the Debt with which they were then rewarded.