{"id":68538,"date":"2016-01-04T12:00:43","date_gmt":"2016-01-04T12:00:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=68538"},"modified":"2016-01-04T11:53:47","modified_gmt":"2016-01-04T11:53:47","slug":"the-origin-of-jihadism","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2016\/01\/the-origin-of-jihadism\/","title":{"rendered":"The Origin of Jihadism"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"islam<\/a>25 Dec 2015 – <\/em>The origin of jihadism is prohibited from being reported truthfully \u2014 this truth is prohibited by all of the Establishment \u2018press,\u2019\u00a0 including almost all \u2018alternative news\u2019 sites \u2014 in the West, because it challenges all of the \u201csensitive\u201d buttons (all of the bigotries, to put the matter in plain terms); and, though this fact (the Establishment\u2019s bigotries, and its hypocrisy to preserve and protect their bigotries even while condemning those of other people) will prevent almost all of the news-media that I send this to from publishing it, nothing prevents me from writing it; so, here it is (in whatever media are gutsy enough to publish this Western cultural and political samizdat):<\/p>\n

First, here\u2019s what the origin of jihadism isn\u2019t:<\/em>\u00a0 It\u2019s not<\/em>\u00a0 the \u201cArab-Israeli conflict,\u201d nor is jihadism a response to the West\u2019s support of the barbarous way that Israel\u2019s apartheid government (and the vast majority of Israel\u2019s Jews) treat, and historically have treated, Palestinians. (And it\u2019s not a result of America\u2019s donating to Israel over $3B annually from U.S. taxpayers to do that, as the illegal \u2018settlements\u2019 of Jews into Palestine continues.) Even without that Israeli-Jewish barbarism and its support by Western countries<\/a>, jihadism would exist, not much different than it today is. Jihadists are no response to, nor result of, the West\u2019s barbarisms supporting the apartheid nation of Israel.<\/p>\n

In order to understand where jihadism really comes from, what\u2019s necessary first is to understand the relationship that the Sauds, who are the royal family of Saudi Arabia, have with their clergy, who are\u00a0the Wahhabist Islamic preachers<\/a>, a relationship between the aristocracy and clergy in that area, which began in 1744, and which was subsequently combined with the oil-for-weapons trade and an alliance with the United States, that began in 1945, and that then was ignited by the petrodollar after Richard Nixon\u2019s de-dollarization of gold in 1973. That\u2019s what laid the ground for today\u2019s jihadism. (Here is a brilliant 22-minute documentary<\/a> on the key role that the replacement of the gold-based dollar by the oil-based dollar played in the rise of jihadism; but the chief focus in the present article will be on the history of Islam before 1945, which is essential to know in order to be able to understand why that change in the value-base of the dollar ended up producing the jihadist explosion we\u2019re all seeing today.)<\/p>\n

\"isis\"<\/a><\/p>\n

And, then, U.S. President Jimmy Carter\u2019s National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski<\/a>, a born Polish nobleman whose family hailed from the most anti-Russian part of Poland, and who was also a prot\u00e9g\u00e9e of the oil-and-banking baron David Rockefeller, advised Carter in 1978 to import pro-Saudi fighters or \u201cmujahideen\u201d (later called \u201cTaliban\u201d) into the then-Soviet-allied Afghanistan, in order to create there a wave of terrorism that would drain Soviet resources necessary to preserve the Soviets\u2019 Afghan ally, and thus help to bring down the Soviet Union.<\/p>\n

It is, in short, an anti-Soviet operation that the West subsequently continued as an anti-Russian operation<\/a> (especially in Chechnia but also in other predominantly Muslim parts of Russia), but which got out of control, and now bites the hands that fed<\/a> and that continue<\/a> to feed it.<\/p>\n

Here<\/a> is a video of Brzezinski, in 1979, in Pakistan, telling the Wahhabist Taliban<\/a> encamped there, who had recently been driven out from Afghanistan by the new secular and Soviet-allied government there, to go back into Afghanistan, this time with U.S. weapons and support, to fight again as mujahideen there, because \u201cGod is on your side.\u201d<\/p>\n

Here<\/a> is Brzezinski, in 1998, bragging that he had done that, and saying: \u201cRegret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border [into Afghanistan, to defend the new secular government in that land], I wrote to President Carter: We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war.\u201d The interview continued:<\/p>\n

Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?<\/em><\/p>\n

B: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?<\/em><\/p>\n

Q: Some stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today.<\/em><\/p>\n

B: Nonsense! <\/em><\/p>\n

\"Brzezinski<\/a><\/p>\n

It wouldn\u2019t exist without the ideology, which is distinctly Wahhabist, known as \u201cSalafist\u201d<\/a> outside of Saudi Arabia.\u00a0But whatever it\u2019s called, this Sunni branch of Islam is the religion that is held by all jihadists. The U.S. built upon that Saudi base (and the very term \u201cAl Qaeda\u201d means \u201cthe base\u201d). And so, this ideology must be understood, because it is significant not only within Saudi Arabia, but wherever jihadists carry out their war against \u201cthe infidels\u201d \u2014 against anyone who fails to adhere to all of the rituals and commands of this very severe faith. (The petrodollar has simply ignited that particular religious ideology.)<\/p>\n

Here<\/a>\u00a0is from the U.S. Library of Congress\u2019s 1992 book Saudi Arabia: A Country Study<\/em>, by Helen Chapin Metz:<\/p>\n

The Saud Family and Wahhabi Islam<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Al Saud <\/em>[dynasty] originated in Ad Diriyah, in the center of\u00a0<\/em>Najd<\/em><\/a>, close to\u00a0the modern\u00a0capital of Riyadh. Around 1500 ancestors of Saud ibn Muhammad\u00a0took over some\u00a0date groves, one of the few forms of agriculture the\u00a0region could support, and\u00a0settled there. Over time the area developed\u00a0into a small town, and the clan that\u00a0would become the Al Saud came to be\u00a0recognized as its leaders.<\/em><\/p>\n

\"saudi<\/a><\/p>\n

The rise of Al Saud is closely linked with Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab\u00a0(died\u00a01792), a Muslim scholar whose ideas form the basis of the Wahhabi\u00a0movement.\u00a0He grew up in Uyaynah, an oasis in southern Najd, where he\u00a0studied with his\u00a0grandfather Hanbali Islamic law, one of the strictest\u00a0Muslim legal schools. While\u00a0still a young man, he left Uyaynah to study\u00a0with other teachers, the usual way to\u00a0pursue higher education in the\u00a0Islamic world. He studied in Medina and then went\u00a0to Iraq and to Iran.<\/em><\/p>\n

To understand the significance of Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab\u2019s ideas,\u00a0they\u00a0must be considered in the context of Islamic practice. There was a\u00a0difference\u00a0between the established rituals clearly defined in religious\u00a0texts that all Muslims\u00a0perform and popular Islam. The latter refers to\u00a0local practice that is not universal.<\/em><\/p>\n

\"islam<\/a><\/p>\n

The Shia practice of visiting shrines is an example of a popular\u00a0practice. The Shia\u00a0continued to revere the Imams even after their death\u00a0and so visited their graves to\u00a0ask favors of the Imams buried there.\u00a0Over time, Shia scholars rationalized the\u00a0practice and it became\u00a0established.<\/em><\/p>\n

Some of the Arabian tribes came to attribute the same sort of power\u00a0that the Shia\u00a0recognized in the tomb of an Imam to natural objects such\u00a0as trees and rocks.\u00a0Such beliefs were particularly disturbing to\u00a0Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab. In the\u00a0late 1730s he returned to the Najdi\u00a0town of Huraymila and began to write and\u00a0preach against both Shia and\u00a0local popular practices. He focused on the Muslim\u00a0principle that there\u00a0is only one God, and that God does not share his power with\u00a0anyone\u2014not Imams, and certainly not trees or rocks. From this unitarian principle,\u00a0his students began to refer to themselves as\u00a0muwahhidun\u00a0(unitarians). Their\u00a0detractors referred to them as\u00a0\u201cWahhabis\u201d\u2014or followers of Muhammad ibn Abd al\u00a0Wahhab,\u201d which had a pejorative connotation.<\/em><\/p>\n

The idea of a unitary god was not new. Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab, however, attached political importance to it. He directed his attack\u00a0against the Shia. He also\u00a0sought out local leaders, trying to convince\u00a0them that this was an Islamic issue. He\u00a0expanded his message to include\u00a0strict adherence to the principles of Islamic law.\u00a0He referred to\u00a0himself as a \u201creformer\u201d and looked for a political figure who might\u00a0give his ideas a wider audience.<\/em><\/p>\n

Lacking political support in Huraymila, Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab\u00a0returned to Uyaynah where he won over some local leaders. Uyaynah,\u00a0however, was close to\u00a0Al Hufuf, one of the Twelver Shia centers in\u00a0eastern Arabia, and its leaders were understandably alarmed at the\u00a0anti-Shia tone of the Wahhabi message. Partly as a result of their\u00a0influence, Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab was obliged to leave\u00a0Uyaynah, and\u00a0headed for Ad Diriyah. He had earlier made contact with\u00a0Muhammad ibn\u00a0Saud, the leader in Ad Diriyah at the time, and two of\u00a0Muhammad\u2019s\u00a0brothers had accompanied him when he destroyed tomb shrines\u00a0around\u00a0Uyaynah.<\/em><\/p>\n

Accordingly, when Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab arrived in Ad Diriyah,\u00a0the Al\u00a0Saud was ready to support him. In 1744 Muhammad ibn Saud and\u00a0Muhammad ibn\u00a0Abd al Wahhab swore a traditional Muslim oath in which they\u00a0promised to work\u00a0together to establish a state run according to Islamic\u00a0principles. Until that time the\u00a0Al Saud had been accepted as\u00a0conventional tribal leaders whose rule was based\u00a0on longstanding but\u00a0vaguely defined authority.<\/em><\/p>\n

Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab offered the Al Saud a clearly defined\u00a0religious\u00a0mission to which to contribute their leadership and upon which\u00a0they might base\u00a0their political authority. This sense of religious\u00a0purpose remained evident in the\u00a0political ideology of Saudi Arabia in\u00a0the 1990s.<\/em><\/p>\n

Muhammad ibn Saud began by leading armies into Najdi towns and\u00a0villages to eradicate various popular and Shia practices. The movement\u00a0helped to rally the\u00a0towns and tribes of Najd to the Al Saud-Wahhabi\u00a0standard. By 1765 Muhammad\u00a0ibn Saud\u2019s forces had established\u00a0Wahhabism\u2014and with it the Al Saud political\u00a0authority\u2013over most of\u00a0Najd.<\/em><\/p>\n

After Muhammad ibn Saud died in 1765, his son, Abd al Aziz, continued\u00a0the\u00a0Wahhabi advance. In 1801 the Al Saud-Wahhabi armies attacked and\u00a0sacked\u00a0Karbala, the Shia shrine in eastern Iraq that commemorates the\u00a0death of Husayn.\u00a0In 1803 they moved to take control of Sunni towns in\u00a0the Hijaz. Although the\u00a0Wahhabis spared Mecca and Medina the destruction\u00a0they visited upon Karbala,\u00a0they destroyed monuments and grave markers\u00a0that were being used for prayer to\u00a0Muslim saints and for votive rituals,\u00a0which the Wahhabis consider acts of\u00a0polytheism. In destroying the objects that were the focus of\u00a0these rituals, the\u00a0Wahhabis sought to imitate Muhammad\u2019s destruction of\u00a0pagan idols when he\u00a0reentered Mecca in 628.<\/em><\/p>\n

If the Al Saud had remained in Najd, the world would have paid them\u00a0scant\u00a0attention. But capturing the Hijaz brought the Al Saud empire into\u00a0conflict with the\u00a0rest of the Islamic world. The popular and Shia\u00a0practices to which the Wahhabis\u00a0objected were important to other\u00a0Muslims, the majority of whom were alarmed that\u00a0shrines were destroyed\u00a0and access to the holy cities restricted.<\/em><\/p>\n

Moreover, rule over the Hijaz was an important symbol. The Ottoman\u00a0Turks, the\u00a0most important political force in the Islamic world at the\u00a0time, refused to concede\u00a0rule over the Hijaz to local leaders. At the\u00a0beginning of the nineteenth century, the\u00a0Ottomans were not in a position\u00a0to recover the Hijaz, because the empire had\u00a0been in decline for more\u00a0than two centuries, and its forces were weak and\u00a0overextended.\u00a0Accordingly, the Ottomans delegated the recapture of the Hijaz to\u00a0their\u00a0most ambitious client, Muhammad Ali, the semi-independent commander of\u00a0their garrison in Egypt. Muhammad Ali, in turn, handed the job to his\u00a0son Tursun,\u00a0who led a force to the Hijaz in 1816; Muhammad Ali later\u00a0joined his son to\u00a0command the force in person.<\/em><\/p>\n

Meanwhile, Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab had died in 1792, and Abd al\u00a0Aziz\u00a0died shortly before the capture of Mecca. The movement had\u00a0continued, however,\u00a0to recognize the leadership of the Al Saud and so\u00a0followed Abd al Aziz\u2019s son,\u00a0Saud, until 1814; after Saud died in 1814,\u00a0his son, Abd Allah, ruled. Accordingly, it\u00a0was Abd Allah ibn Saud ibn\u00a0Abd al Aziz who faced the invading Egyptian army\u00a0<\/em>[on behalf of Turkey\u2019s Muslim ruler].<\/em><\/p>\n

Tursun\u2019s forces took Mecca and Medina almost immediately. Abd Allah\u00a0chose this\u00a0time to retreat to the family\u2019s strongholds in Najd. Muhammad\u00a0Ali decided to\u00a0pursue him there, sending out another army under the\u00a0command of his other son,\u00a0Ibrahim. The Wahhabis made their stand at the\u00a0traditional Al Saud capital of Ad\u00a0Diriyah, where they managed to hold\u00a0out for two years against superior Egyptian\u00a0forces and weaponry. In the\u00a0end, however, the Wahhabis proved no match for a\u00a0modern army, and Ad\u00a0Diriyah\u2014and Abd Allah with it\u2014fell in 1818.<\/em><\/p>\n

So: \u201cthe Wahhabis,\u201d who were a Muslim version or mirror-image of Christianity\u2019s Medieval Crusades against Muslims and Jews, were defeated by the Ottoman Turks, which were a liberal branch of Islam.\u00a0Here<\/a>\u00a0is the instruction that the founder of the Ottoman Empire, Osman I, gave to his son; and it could hardly have been farther away from the harsh teachings of Wahhab:<\/p>\n

Last Testament<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

In directing his son to continue the administrative policies set forth by\u00a0Sheik Edebali, Osman stated:<\/em><\/p>\n

Son! Be careful about the religious issues before all other duties.\u00a0The religious precepts build a strong state. Do not\u00a0give religious\u00a0duties to careless, faithless and sinful men or to dissipated,\u00a0indifferent or inexperienced people. And\u00a0also do not leave the state\u00a0administrations to such people. Because the one with fear of God the\u00a0Creator, has no\u00a0fear of the created. One who commits a great sin and\u00a0continues to sin can not be loyal. Scholars, virtuous men,\u00a0artists and\u00a0literary men are the power of the state structure. Treat them with\u00a0kindness and honour. Build close\u00a0relationship when you hear about a\u00a0virtuous man and give wealth and grant him\u2026Put order the political and\u00a0religious duties. Take lesson from me so I came to these places as a\u00a0weak leader and I reached to the help of God\u00a0although I did not deserve.\u00a0You follow my way and protect\u00a0Din-i-Muhammadi\u00a0and the believers and also your\u00a0followers. Respect the right of God and\u00a0His servants. Do not hesitate to advise your successors in this way. Depend on God\u2019s help in the esteem of justice and fairness, to remove\u00a0the cruelty, attempt this in every duty. Protect your\u00a0public from enemy\u2019s\u00a0invasion and from the cruelty. Do not behave any person in an unsuitable\u00a0way with unfairness.\u00a0Gratify the public and save all of their sake.[9]<\/em><\/p>\n

That emphasis upon \u201ckindness,\u201d and upon \u201cGod\u201d providing \u201chelp\u201d to individuals who \u201cdid not deserve\u201d and \u201cto remove the cruelty,\u201d etc., isn\u2019t at all similar to Wahhab\u2019s teachings, but far closer instead to St. Paul\u2019s preachment of the otherwise harsh God\u2019s mercy (e.g., Galatians 2:21: \u201cI refuse to reject God\u2019s mercy. If a person is put right with God by adhering to the [harsh] laws of God, then Christ died for nothing!\u201d) as the very foundation of Christianity. That\u2019s what softened the harshness of the Jewish God, the God in the Torah, the first five books of the Christian Bible. Unfortunately, Paul and his followers who wrote and assembled the New Testament also introduced anti-Semitism, a condemnation of the Jews and not of their horrible Scripture: e.g., Paul\u2019s own 1 Thessalonians 2:14-15 \u2014 \u201cThe Jews killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and persecuted us. They displease God and are everyone\u2019s enemies.\u201d The Paulinists\u2019 accusation that Jews killed God was basic to pogroms and other discriminations against Jews, which only served to increase Jews\u2019 own<\/em> tribalism. All religions encourage bigotry; and, in our still highly religous world (believing even the crackpot biblical \u2018history\u2019 that the Earth is only 6,000 years old, which is scientifically ridiculous but part of the disproven creation-myth), aristocracy and religion remain, even today, as Mankind\u2019s curses, but especially in fundamentalist Sunni countries such as Saudi Arabia, which is the ultimate model of a nation that\u2019s both aristocratic and theocrati<\/em>c \u2014 the most dangerous of all possible combinations for a nation.<\/p>\n

As\u00a0wikipedia further says<\/a>:<\/p>\n

The alliance between followers of <\/em>[Muhammad] ibn Abd al-Wahhab and Muhammad bin Saud\u2019s successors (the\u00a0House of Saud)\u00a0proved to be a\u00a0rather durable alliance. The house of bin Saud continued\u00a0to maintain its politico-religious alliance with the Wahhabi sect\u00a0through\u00a0the waxing and waning of its own political fortunes over the\u00a0next 150 years <\/em>[but actually more like 300 years, inasmuch as it started in 1744, when Saud and Wahhab swore their oaths to each other, right up to the present, and so will be 300 years old in 2044], through to its eventual proclamation of the Kingdom of\u00a0Saudi Arabia\u00a0in 1932, and then afterwards, on into modern times. Today Mohammed bin\u00a0Abd Al-Wahhab\u2019s teachings are state-sponsored and are the official form\u00a0of Sunni Islam[3][22]\u00a0in 21st century Saudi Arabia.[23] \u2026<\/em><\/p>\n

With the help of funding from\u00a0petroleum\u00a0exports[25]\u00a0(and other factors[26]), the movement underwent \u201cexplosive growth\u201d beginning\u00a0in the 1970s and now has worldwide influence.[3]<\/em><\/p>\n

Today\u2019s jihadism is simply oil-and-gas-funded Wahhabism that got out of control in non-Wahhabist-Salafist-led countries. During 1973, U.S. President Richard Nixon de-dollarized gold<\/a>, and quickly petroleum became dollarized (the global commodity-basis for currencies). Saudi Arabia had more of the new gold than any other country did. And, already, the entire Muslim world was bowing to the Sauds\u2019 Mecca; so, they had both Mecca and oil. And the Sauds, as the most oil-rich people, now became the emperors of Arabia, having under them the kings of the other major Arabic Sunni oil sheikhdoms \u2014 or, as I have noted before<\/a>: The controlling entities behind American foreign policies since\u00a0at least the late 1970s<\/a>\u00a0have been the Saud family and the Sauds\u2019 subordinate Arabic aristocracies, which are the ones in Qatar (the al-Thanis), Kuwait (the al-Sabahs), Turkey (the Turkish\u00a0Erdo\u011fans, a new royalty<\/a>), and UAE (its\u00a0six royal families<\/a>: the main one, the al-Nahyans in Abu Dhabi; the other five: the al-Maktoums in Dubai, al-Qasimis in Sharjah, al-Nuaimis in Ajman, al-Mualla Ums in Quwain, and al-Sharqis in Fujairah). Other Saudi-dominated nations \u2014 though they\u2019re not oil-rich (more like Turkey in this regard) \u2014 are Pakistan and Afghanistan.<\/p>\n

Turkey is a special case: a member not only of America\u2019s 28-nation NATO alliance, but also of Saudi Arabia\u2019s new 34-nation+ Sunni-Islamic global military alliance<\/a>. In 1922,\u00a0Turkey\u2019s non-sectarian General Kemal Attaturk<\/a>\u00a0had ended the liberal Islamic dominance that had earlier been imposed under Osman I, and he established instead the non<\/em>-religious nation of Turkey, which has terminated in recent decades with the increasing penetration into Turkey of Salafist or jihadist (i.e., Wahhabist-Salafist) Islam: aiming for the Caliphate or fundamentalist-Islamic empire, not as pre-1922 \u2014 not as the liberal-Islamic Ottoman Empire \u2014 but instead as a Caliphate (fundamentalist-Islamic empire).<\/p>\n

The \u201cCaliphate\u201d is supposed to be imposed by a descendant of Muhammad himself, the founder of Islam. Only such a descendant may found or start the Caliphate \u2014 go beyond being only a God-authorized national ruler, to become the God-authorized ruler of the world. For example,\u00a0the founder of ISIS (also called IS, ISIL, and Daesh),\u00a0Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, claims to be a descendant of Muhammad.<\/a> (However, there is uncertainty as to whether he actually even exists.<\/a>)<\/p>\n

This can be accurately understood only within the context of understanding the tribalism of all African, including of all Arabic, cultures (as well as of Jewish, and other tribal religions). Tribalism is the same as aristocracy, except it\u2019s the other side of the phenomenon: the mass-side, instead of the elite (i.e., aristocratic) side. Both sides are the belief that ancestors \u2014 or, in Arabic, \u201csalafis\u201d \u2014 determine a person\u2019s status or degree of authority. Aristocracy and tribalism go together, just like heads-and-tails on the opposite sides of a coin do.<\/p>\n

\"obama<\/a><\/p>\n

When Muhammad Ibn Saud and Muhammad Ibn Wahhab created in 1744 what would become Saudi Arabia, it was upon the basis of two things that are at the root of all conservatism: tribalism and religion. The leaders of a tribe are its aristocracy, and the leaders of a religion are its clergy. Consequently, Saudi Arabia might appear to be a perfect<\/em> conservative nation: the aristocracy (the descendants of Muhammad Ibn Saud), and the clergy (the clerics of Wahhabism), are united to control the nation. However, there is a flaw in the Saudi-Wahhabist nation: the aristocratic element in it, the Saud family, are not descended from Muhammad<\/em>. The Sunni ideal is very much the unification of church-and-state; but, in Shiite Islam, such unification between the two isn\u2019t necessary.<\/p>\n

Consequently, only the psychopathy of Saudi Arabia\u2019s aristocracy and clergy can sustain their rule in a tribal-religious culture that violates the basic conservative principle of descent from the Prophet, who was himself a conqueror. (Muhammad, as both the head-of-state and the head-of-church; is the Sunni ideal. Shiia Islam broke somewhat away from that ideal<\/a> of God\u2019s anointment of the leaders via their descent, so isn\u2019t quite as strongly wedded to it.)<\/p>\n

Because Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi (or whomever pretends to be him) claims to be both head-of-state and head-of-sect, ISIS presents a threat to the Sauds that even Al Qaeda (from which ISIS itself descended) avoids: Osama bin Laden didn\u2019t claim to be descended from Muhammad. The Saudi religion didn\u2019t demand he be, any more than it had demanded Muhammad Ibn Saud to be. But, the 100% fundamentalists do<\/em>\u00a0 demand it \u2014 and ISIS is<\/em>\u00a0 100%. (In fact, the Wahhabist \u201cHanbali\u201d system of legislation<\/a> demands everything fundamentalist but<\/em>\u00a0 anointment-by-descent-from-the-prophet.) So: ISIS is a direct threat to the Sauds: it labels them \u201cimpostors\u201d and \u201cinfidels.\u201d<\/p>\n

Therefore, the Islamic State (ISIS by any name, such as ISIL and Daesh) endangers the Sauds in a way that even al-Qaeda did not (and Osama bin Laden had, indeed, turned away from the Sauds, but on account of the U.S.-Saudi alliance, and not because the Sauds were \u201cimpostors\u201d as heads-of-state). IS is even more fundamentalist than Wahhabism-Salafism. It\u2019s unadulterated Islam, like Muhammad\u2019s legendary (and probablly also historical) own original.<\/p>\n

Other than that major distinction between Wahhabism and ISIS, the Sauds\u2019 Kingdom is Islamic.<\/p>\n

For example, just like the Bible \u2014 both its Old and New Testament \u2014 all fundamentalist Islam authorizes slavery (as, indeed, does fundamentalist Judaism, and fundamentalist Christianity<\/a>); and here is how that plays out in the Quranic nation of Saudi Arabia:<\/p>\n

The official Saudi Information Agency issued, on 7 November 2003, a news-report,\u00a0\u201cAuthor of Saudi Curriculums Advocates Slavery,\u201d<\/a>\u00a0which said: \u201cThe main author of the Saudi religious curriculum expressed his unequivocal support\u00a0for the legalization of slavery in one of his lectures recorded on a cassette and\u00a0obtained exclusively by SIA news. Leading government cleric Sheikh Saleh Al-Fawzan is the author of the religious\u00a0books currently used to teach 5 million Saudi students. \u2026\u00a0Al-Fawzan is member of the Senior Council of Clerics, Saudi Arabia\u2019s highest\u00a0religious body. \u2026 According to Saudi liberal writer and scholar Sheikh Hassan Al-Maliki, Al-Fawzan\u00a0threatened him with beheading if he continued in his criticism of the extremist\u00a0Wahhabi interpretation of Islam.\u201d<\/p>\n

That\u2019s remarkably honest reporting, because it\u2019s about their own country. But, in the less-fundamentalist Western world, the presumption that slavery is to be enforced instead of overthrown, isn\u2019t generally accepted<\/a>. If there is a \u201ccultural war,\u201d it\u2019s ancient versus modern: it is religious-aristocratic on the one side, versus secular-democratic on the other.<\/p>\n

The Saudi Arab News <\/em>headlined on 27 March 2006,\u00a0\u201cWhy Is There So Much Hate Inside Us?\u201d<\/a>\u00a0and a columnist, Abdullah Al-Mutairi, wondered, \u201cwhy young Saudis hate foreign workers, particularly Indians, Pakistanis and\u00a0Bangladeshis.\u201d He even wondered: \u201cDo we adult Saudis who sponsor and employ foreigners fulfill the conditions of\u00a0their contracts \u2014 which both we and they have signed? How many housemaids\u00a0never get a day off? I remember a worker in the school where I work who was on the job every day\u00a0and who had not been paid for six months. I remember another unpaid worker\u00a0who asked humbly and politely for his dues and received nothing but curses\u00a0and insults.\u201d Basically, treating the dependent like filth is considered okay. Obligations are only one-way, and that\u2019s the basic principle in any aristocratic culture.<\/p>\n

The Saudi Gazette<\/em> headlined on 29 November 2013,\u00a0\u201cWhat will happen when you allow your employee to keep his identity papers,\u201d<\/a>\u00a0and reported that, \u201cSireen Jamal, owner of a beauty salon, said her driver [a slave] had escaped \u2026 with her car,\u201d because he had identity papers and could therefore get out of the country. \u201cDr. Suhaila Zain Al-Abideen, a human rights activist and a member of the Shoura Council, opposed the idea of giving expatriate workers their identity papers. \u201cWhenever the expat worker has his papers with him, he may not hesitate to escape\u00a0whenever he has the chance,\u201d she said.\u201d And the speaker, Dr. Al-Abideen, was \u201ca human rights activist.\u201d<\/p>\n

And, of course, the Sauds don\u2019t pay only to ISIS head-choppers, but also to their own<\/a>. These are America\u2019s allies, but these ones are Wahhabist-Salafists. The U.S. can be allied with them, but not with Russia. The U.S. aristocracy insists upon taking control over Russia\u2019s natural resources.<\/p>\n

So: although those oil-kingdoms buy more weapons from the United States than any other country (and Saudi Arabia is America\u2019s biggest-of-all foreign purchaser of weapons), their ethical system is locked back in the years when Muhammad lived. It was basically the same ethical system that existed when Jesus did, and even when Moses did (if Moses even existed at all). But whereas the United States and other Western countries are embarrassed by the barbarism in their \u2018holy Scriptures,\u2019 Saudi Arabia and the other fundamentalist-Sunni countries simply take for granted this barbarism, as the way things ought to be, and even (such as in ISIS) as the way things must become<\/em>.<\/p>\n

And the United States aristocracy and government is allied with it, but puts on the best pretense they can that they oppose it.<\/a> This also means that the United States is backing the jihadists to overthrow the secular Shiite Bashar al-Assad in Syria<\/a>. America is truly extremism\u2019s friend<\/a>. It\u2019s not as important to jihadism as the Sauds are<\/a>, but almost. The U.S.-Saudi alliance is somewhat like the aristocratic-theocratic alliance. Each side of the alliance depends on the other.<\/p>\n

And both of them want to cripple and take control over the world\u2019s second-largest oil-power, Russia<\/a>, which means first overthrowing Russia-friendly leaders such as Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, Viktor Yanukovych, and Bashar al-Assad.<\/p>\n

So: that\u2019s the origin of jihadism. Al Qaeda\u2019s version might be called \u2018moderate\u2019 extremism; ISIS\u2019s would be \u2018extreme\u2019 extremism (sort of like Barry Goldwater\u2019s \u201cExtremism in defense of \u2026 is no vice\u201d; and, if that\u2019s \u201cliberty,\u201d then breakouts from prison constitute no vice). After all, how else could the aristocracy and the clergy fool the public, in a \u2018democracy\u2019<\/a>? The public need to think that the system works for them<\/a>, and that their enemies are mainly foreign, not mainly members of the same nation, and maybe even of the same religion, as themselves.<\/p>\n

Many people who are born Muslims are aware of the threat that their religion is posing. But escaping from it is exceptionally difficult, especially because the world\u2019s most oil-rich country happens to be also the font of it: the biggest promoter, and source of funding, for jihadism.<\/a><\/p>\n

There is nothing unique about Islam in its providing a basis for \u2018holy war\u2019: look, for example, at Christianity\u2019s Crusades<\/a>, and at the Thirty-Years War<\/a> in Europe. What\u2019s unique is the Saudi-U.S. petrodollar alliance, which is spawning wars for both god and greed, which now have blowback that compels both nations\u2019 aristocracies to pump their respective bigotries even harder, the Saudi aristocrats against \u201cinfidels,\u201d and the American aristocrats against Russians. On both sides of the Saudi-U.S. alliance, it\u2019s an aristocracy deceiving and fooling its own public: brainwashing them on the basis of their particular culture\u2019s bigotries.<\/p>\n

When a nation\u2019s aristocracy and its clergy are supporting one-another, it\u2019s like the flame that ignites the fuel. That\u2019s what\u2019s igniting the world.<\/p>\n

________________________________<\/p>\n

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of\u00a0 <\/em>They\u2019re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010<\/a>,<\/em> of\u00a0<\/em>Christ\u2019s Ventriloquists: The Event that Created Christianity<\/a>, and\u00a0of<\/em>\u00a0Feudalism, Fascism, Libertarianism and Economics<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Go to Original \u2013 strategic-culture.org<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

There is nothing unique about Islam in its providing a basis for \u2018holy war\u2019: look, for example, at Christianity\u2019s Crusades, and at the Thirty-Years War in Europe. What\u2019s unique is the Saudi-U.S. petrodollar alliance, which is spawning wars for both god and greed. When a nation\u2019s aristocracy and its clergy are supporting one-another, it\u2019s like the flame that ignites the fuel. That\u2019s what\u2019s igniting the world.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[66],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-68538","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-middle-east-north-africa"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68538","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=68538"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68538\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=68538"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=68538"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=68538"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}