Category Archives: Current Events

REVIVAL OF EEMAAN AND RECTIFICATION OF ‘AAMAAL …Need of The Hour

ALLAH determines who rules us. Just look at the mongol hordes. After the Ummah collapsed under the rampage of these savage barbarians, the ummah finally started reforming themselves on a significant scale. Then, ALLAH opened the hearts of the kings of these savage barbarians to Islam. One by one, all of Genghis Khan’s grandsons & subsequent generations accepted Islam & they eventually became the biggest propagators of Islam. That is only the handiwork of ALLAH, the like of which HE bestows to an Ummah who deserves such a bestowal.

We do not need to be perfect. We just need to try our best, do Taubah for our mistakes & stop making excuses for our sins. Just look at how many so-called practising brothers today indulge & soothe their conscience over kabeerah sins such as videography which used to be regarded unanimously as kabeerah by the most pious Ulama of the previous generation.

Can one really delude themselves that all the Akabireen Ulama were wrong unanimously & the modernists of their time were all along correct, & escape divine retribution..?

Just because we want to believe something to be Halal will not make it so on day of judgement. And of course the punishment starts in this dunya with ALLAH granting our worst enemies power over us.

It’s not chicken & egg situation. Khilafah will obviously accelerate the process of reformation of society, but according to hadith,

“your deeds are your rulers”

and many others, khilafah will not take place until first a good fraction of us do Taubah & reform ourselves.

If enough of the ummah strive to take care of the matters within their control (eg their sins), then ALLAH will take care of the matter which is largely beyond our control – political dominion. That is the Sunnah of ALLAH for which there is no change.

HOW LONG WILL THAT TAKE..?

That’s like asking how long would it have taken for enough people to accept Sayyiduna Nuh’s (‘alaihissalaam) perfect dawah, for that Ummah to have been granted political dominion. Or why did it take so many years for Sayyiduna Musa’s (‘alaihissalaam) Ummah to accept his perfect & sublime Dawah & do Taubah, only after which ALLAH created the circumstances for firawn’s downfall & the instant changing of political dominion.

It can happen overnight or it can take more than 900 years. Or it can take till the era of Imam Mahdi. But Imam Mahdi will not disrupt the Sunnah of ALLAH. A good portion of the Ummah will already have reformed themselves & be waiting for ALLAH’s Help, for them to deserve the long awaited saviour of the Ummah.

It’s up to us (individually first & collectively next) to determine how long will it take for the Ummah to deserve political power again.

 

Shia Iran Allied with Israel and their Quest for ‘Super-Iran’

By Javadi ibn Tauseef al-Hashimi

Iran Allied with Israel

  • Introduction
Since the dawn of the so-called “Islamic Revolution” of Iran, the Iranian government has had spiritual relevance to the Shia.  Ayatollah Khomeini claimed, using the doctrine of Wilayat ul-Faqih, that he was the sole representative of the Imam Mehdi in his absence.  Most Shia alive today revere Ayatollah Khomeini as well as his successors.  The question must be asked:  are these Iranian leaders such as Khomeini using the Imam Mehdi to help the Muslims as they claim or are they actually enemies of Islam who exploit the imaginary memory of Mehdi for their own political gain?

 

The truth is that the Iranian military is allied with Israel.  Of course, the Shia lay-person will scoff at this statement and think it absurd.  At first glance, we’d be tempted to agree.  Admittedly, on the surface it does seem that Iran is a country full of anti-Israeli propaganda.  The Iranian Ayatollahs speak out against the Zionist Jews frequently and with full vigor.

However, those in the intelligence community realize that this is a simple cover.  The Ayatollahs are making use of the doctrine of Taqiyyah, which is a part of Shia faith.  Taqiyyah is a Shia concept which allows the Shia believer to lie and use deciet in order to further his life or, in this case, his religion.

Despite what the Ayatollahs claim, the Iranian government is most definitely allied militarily with Israel, and we shall provide the irrefutable proof in this article.  Both Israel and Iran are non-Arab states surrounded by “hordes” of Sunni Arabs;  this is the uniting element between the two countries, both of which cannot see their neighbors, namely the Sunni Arabs, rise to power and question their hegemony.  As such, both Israel and Iran act as satellite nations for the United States, which also fears the rise of an Islamist Sunni rise to power in Arabia.  The two non-Arab countries, Iran and Israel, are thus used by the United States to prevent this from happening.  To hide this nefarious Iran-Israel-US alliance, public officials on both sides (Iran and Israel/US) have engaged in public diatribes against the other.  While their words may seem like their swords are drawn against each other, their actions show that they are indeed allied at the hip.

  • London Observor

The London Observer estimated that Israel’s arms sales to Iran total $500 million annually. This is by far a conservative estimate, and this was in the 1980’s. Over time, with inflation, that number has increased. Current estimates range in the billions of dollars.

  • Global Security

Let us now provide the irrefutable proof. Here is an article from the Global Security website, the respected think tank organization the United States government relies on:

After the Revolution, Iranians continued to buy arms from the United States using Israeli, European, and Latin American intermediaries to place orders, despite the official United States embargo. Israeli sales, for example, were recorded as early as 1979. On several occasions, attempted arms sales to Iran have been thwarted by law enforcement operations or broker-initiated leaks. One operation set up by the United States Department of Justice foiled the shipment of more than US$2 billion of United States weapons to Iran from Israel and other foreign countries. The material included 18 F-4 fighter-bombers, 46 skyhawk fighter-bombers, and nearly 4,000 missiles. But while the department of Justice was attempting to prevent arms sales to Iran, senior officials in the administration of President Ronald Reagan admitted that 2,008 TOW missiles and 235 parts kits for Hawk missiles had been sent to Iran via Israel.

Despite official denials, it is believed that Israel has been a supplier of weapons and spare parts for Iran’s American-made arsenal. Reports indicate that an initial order for 250 retread tires for F-4 Phantom jets was delivered in 1979 for about US$27 million. Since that time, unverified reports have alleged that Israel agreed to sell Iran Sidewinder air-to-air missiles, radar equipment, mortar and machinegun ammunition, field telephones, M-60 tank engines and artillery shells, and spare parts for C-130 transport planes

Source: Global Security Article(http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iran/intro.htm)

We urge our readers to actually view the original articles themselves by clicking on the links above, since no doubt this is a hard idea to pallate.  This is not a conspiracy theory.  This is a well-documented fact that is known in the intelligence community.  The alliance between Iran and Israel is an undeniable fact.

  • TIME Magazine

Here is an article from TIME Magazine about the military alliance between Iran and Israel:

Or it could be said that the drama started in 1981, just after Reagan came into office, when U.S. officials learned that Israel was ignoring the 1979 American ban on the sale of arms to Iran. At the time Iran badly needed spare parts for the American-made weapons it had acquired during the Shah’s reign. In their hour of need the Iranians looked to Israel, which had also supplied weapons to the Shah.

The Israelis reportedly set up Swiss bank accounts to handle the financial end of the deals. Despite its embargo, the U.S. appeared to look the other way. Administration officials seemed interested in Israel’s notion that the arms sales would help foster ties with leaders in the Iranian military…

…In late August, Israel sent a planeload of arms to Iran. The cargo consisted mostly of Soviet-made weapons that the Israelis had captured in Lebanon

In the fall of 1985 Iran was presumably making payments to Israel through the Swiss bank accounts set up to handle Israeli-Iranian arms sales in the early 1980s. At the same time, Israel was demanding that the U.S. replace the items that had been taken from Israeli stockpiles and sold to the Iranians. But Washington reportedly grew suspicious about the finances. In asking for fresh weapons, Israeli officials claimed that they could not pay full price, but Washington suspected that Iran was paying the Israeli dealers far more than the arms were actually worth. The U.S. urged Israeli officials to drop the arms merchants from the Iran deal and allow Jerusalem to take over the operation…

Israel sold Iran $12 million worth of weapons at a price that included a markup as high as 250%, or $42 million…

Source: TIME Magazine Article, (http://www.time.com/time/europe/timetrails/iran/ir861208.html)
TIME Archives:
http://www.time.com/time/archive/preview/0,10987,963021,00.html
time-proxy.yaga.com/time/archive/preview/0,10987,963021,00.html

The Russians sold the Lebanese weapons which were used against Israel.  Israel seized these weapons and then gave them over to Iran.  What an irony, considering that this was the same time that the Ayatollahs were making public statements lambasting the Israeli presence in Lebanon.

  • MSNBC

Here is an excerpt from MSNBC:

Reagan would wait and disclose his intentions in private. So it was with the disputed decision in August 1985 to condone arms sales by Israel to Iran. “He called and said, ‘I think we ought to get on with that. Let’s go ahead with that,” McFarlane told the commission.

Source: MSNBC Article,
(http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5165237/site/newsweek/)

This is all very strange, because at this exact same time, the Ayatollahs are publically condemning both Israel and America. And yet, they were actually having heavy arms dealing with their supposed enemies? In fact, we often see Israel publically decrying Iran and then Iranian leaders retorting back, but this is all one big facade to hide the truth: Israel and Iran are very much allied militarily, with the Zionist Jews providing advanced weaponry to the Shia in the hopes of empowering them against the Sunni Arabia.

  • History

Historically, the Kufaar (infidels) have always sought alliances with the Shia nations against the Sunni majority.  During the Crusades, the Shia Fatimids were providing material aid to the Crusaders against the Sunni majority which held the Holy Land.  The Shia Fatimids thus facilitated the take-over of the Holy Land (al-Aqsa) by the Crusaders.  Then arose Salahuddin Ayyoubi (Saladin), the great leader of the Ahlus Sunnah, who first had to crush the Shia Fatimids before he could focus on the Crusaders and liberate the Holy Land.

The Shia also helped the Mongols, allowing the Mongol hordes to loot and pillage the Muslim lands.  The Mongols were invited to attack the Sunnis by the Shia, and the sack of Baghdad consequently ended the Golden Age of the Muslims and heralded the rise of Europe.  When the Ottoman Empire rose to power, again the Shia plotted and planned against the Muslims;  the Safavid Empire was backed by the Western powers who sought to keep it as an ally against the more powerful Ottoman Empire.  Once again, the Shia were allied with the West against the bulk of the orthodox Muslims.

This alliance between the Kufaar and the Shia continued with the Shah of Iran. He was no doubt an agent of America, and Iran became a key ally of Zionist Israel against the majority Sunni Arab countries. Many people thought that this status of Iran as Israel’s stooge ended with the Iranian Revolution and the rise of Ayatollah Khomeini. But the truth is, Iran’s alliance with Israel continued in full force.

  • Irangate: The Israel Connection

The book “The Iran Contra Connection” discusses the relationship between Iran and Israel:

The Israeli Interest in Iran

… Though Israel, along with the United States, suffered a grievous loss with the fall of the Shah, its leaders concluded that lasting geo-political interests would eventually triumph over religious ideology and produce an accommodation between Tel Aviv and Tehran. The onset of the Iran-Iraq war in 1980 gave Israeli leaders a special incentive to keep their door open to the Islamic rulers in Iran: the two non-Arab countries now shared a common Arab enemy. As Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon told the Washington Post in May 1982, justifying Israeli arms sales to Tehran, “…we hope that diplomatic relations between us and Iran will be renewed as in the past.” Four months later he told a Paris press conference, “Israel has a vital interest in the continuing of the war in the Persian Gulf, and in Iran’s victory.” Such views were not Sharon’s alone; Prime Ministers Itzhak Shamir (Likud) and Shimon Peres (Labor) shared them too…

The Arms Channel Opens

Israel lost no time supplying the new Khomeini regime with small quantities of arms, even after the seizure of the U.S. embassy. The first sales included spare parts for U.S.-made F-4 Phantom jets; a later deal in October 1980 included parts for U.S.-made tanks…

Notes Ha’aretz correspondent Yo’av Karny “The cloak of secrecy that surrounds Israeli arms exports is so tight that one can compare it to the technique for smuggling hard drugs.” When caught in the act, Israeli officials maintained they were simply selling domestic arms, not embargoed U.S. weapons. “Whenever we would get word of shipments,” one American official explained, “the State Department would raise the issue with Israel, and we would get the standard lecture and promises that there were no U.S. weapons involved.”

…[The Israelis] signed a deal with Iran’s Ministry of National Defense to sell $135,842,000 worth of arms, including Lance missiles, Copperhead shells and Hawk missiles…

In November 1981, Israeli Defense Minister Sharon visited Washington, shopping for approval of similar arms sales [to Iran]. His U S. counterpart Caspar Weinberger, flatly turned him down. Sharon then went to Haig, hoping for acquiescence from the State Department. Again, McFarlane handled many of the discussions with Sharon and Kimche; this time Haig unequivocally opposed any violation of the embargo.

Yet as in 1979-80, Israel pursued its policy anyway, in flat violation of its arms re-export agreements with the Pentagon. In a May 1982 interview with the Washington Post, Sharon claimed that Israeli shipments had been cleared “with our American colleagues” months earlier and that details of all the shipments were supplied to the administration. Later that year, Israel’s ambassador Moshe Arens declared that Israel’s arms sales were cleared at “almost the highest levels” in Washington…

And those shipments would continue to be enormous in size, estimated by experts at the Jaffee Institute for Strategic Studies in Tel Aviv at $500 million in value from 1980-83. Other arms market experts have put the total value at more than $500 million a year, including aircraft parts, artillery and ammunition.

(Source: p.169, “Irangate: The Israel Connection” excerpted from the book The Iran Contra Connection by Johnathan Marshall and Peter Dale Scott, South End Press, 1987, paper)

  • Today 

Iran continues to recieve support from Israel.  On the one hand, the Iranian Ayatollahs make vociferous condemnations of Israel, but on the other hand, they are secretly allied with the Israelis.  This all in the name of religion, in the name of Taqiyyah, and in the name of some Hidden Imam who has made the Ayatollah his sole representative on earth, who has made him the Absolute Authority of Allah Himself.

Ayatollah Khomeini and his government were allied militarily with the likes of such Zionists as Ariel Sharon, the killer of Muslims in Palestine.  The truth is that the Shia have always been allied with the enemies of Islam, which gives away their origins from Abdullah ibn Saba who supposedly converted to Islam from Judaism.  Abdullah ibn Saba sought to create a group that would forever fight the Muslims from the inside, and we see this role being fulfilled by the Shia who claim to want unity with the Ahlus Sunnah but then they betray the Ahlus Sunnah whenever and wherever they can.  The Shia fear that if the Ahlus Sunnah awakens to this threat, then they could easily crush the Shia everywhere due to the overwhelming numbers of the Ahlus Sunnah.  So the Shia have adopted the policy of publically asking for unity and privately waging a war against the Ahlus Sunnah.

It is a huge fraud that the Iranian government claims to be enemies with Israel and yet is supplied arms from this same enemy.  The Shia may claim to be allied with the Muslims, but they are secretly allied with the Zionist Jews and the Crusading Christians.  The Quran says:  “Of the people there are some who say: ‘We believe in Allah and the Last Day,’ notwithstanding their unbelief. Fain would they deceive Allah and the believers, but they only deceive themselves, and realize it not. In their hearts there is a disease, and Allah permitted this disease to increase. Grievous is the penalty they incur, because they are false.”  (Quran, 2:8-10)

Super Iran

  • Introduction
During the Iran-Iraq War, Iran aspired to annex the land of Iraq and thereby expand its borders to form a “Super Iran.”  Publically, the United States declared that it wanted an Iraqi victory;  however, the CIA secretly supported an Iranian victory.  Thus began the ever famous Iran Contra debacle, in which the United States was caught red-handed supplying weapons and arms to Iran.  It was indeed very embarassing to both the United States and Iran that they were publically declaring one thing and privately doing something completely opposite.  During this entire time period, the two-faced Iranian government was publically condemning Israel but recieving billions of dollars worth of military armaments from America via Israel.

The United States had long ago recognized the importance of keeping Persian and Shia Iran as an ally against the Arab and Sunni Arabia.  Both Israel and Iran felt surrounded by “seas of Arabs” and this was the unifying factor between Israel and Iran.  During the Iran-Iraq War, Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon (future Prime Minister of Israel) told the Washington Post in May 1982, justifying Israeli arms sales to Tehran, “…we hope that diplomatic relations between us and Iran will be renewed as in the past.” Four months later he told a Paris press conference, “Israel has a vital interest in the continuing of the war in the Persian Gulf, and in Iran’s victory.”

However, Iran was unable to conquer Iraq and instead the war ended in a draw in 1988.  But the United States quickly came to Iran’s aid and invaded Iraq in 1990.  Once, Iraq had been the strongest force in the region next to Israel.  Slowly, after years of war and sanctions enacted by the US government, Iraq was greatly weakened.  Finally, the United States occupied Iraq, using September the 11th as a pretext.  The US forces then turned a blind eye to the influx of Iranian influence in occupied Iraq.  By allowing their cohort Iran to manage a puppet government in Iraq, the United States would give legitimacy to the new government since Iranian-backed Shia would seem more indigenous than foreign Westerners.

Iran began the process of demographic change and sent thousands of Iranians over the border and into Iraq.  This included many Ayatollahs (who became the religious leaders in Iraq), as well as hundreds of thousands of fighters belonging to armed militias.

  • The Associated Press
The Associated Press declared:

A resounding Shiite victory in next month’s elections will bring Iraq closer to Tehran, forming a “Super Iran” that could change the face of the Middle East, critics say…

Views vary dramatically over what shape Iraq’s political future will take following nationwide elections scheduled for Jan. 30, but few dispute that this Shiite-majority country’s relations with its eastern neighbor — which is ruled by Shiite ayatollahs — will grow closer…

This may embolden Shiites here and throughout the Middle East, some regional analysts say. But Iraq’s likely political shift is also stirring fears of the spread of an Iranian-brand of Shiite power throughout the Sunni Muslim-dominated region.

Jordan’s King Abdullah, a pro-U.S. Sunni Muslim, this month said Iraq’s elections could lead to the establishment of a hard-line Shiite regime based on the model in Iran…

Iraq’s interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, a secular Shiite running a separate ticket to the al-Sistani-backed one, accuses Iran of opposing Iraq’s postwar reconstruction. His defense minister labels Iran as his country’s “number one enemy” and calls the United Iraqi Alliance the “Iranian list” that would install a rule of “turbaned clerics” in Iran if it succeeds in the polls…

[Many of the Iraqi Shiites] also look to Iran’s Shiite establishment for religious guidance…

Such a scenario worries people like Iraqi-born Mustafa Alani, director of national security at the Dubai-based regional think-tank the Gulf Research Center.

“The nightmare scenario in the region is the election of an Iranian-influenced Shiite government in Iraq will lead to the creation of a ‘Super Iran’ emerging as a regional superpower” says Alani. “We are talking about a huge shift in the region’s power balance.”

(Source:  The Associated Press,
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1103376461734_84/?hub=World)

  • USA Today

Armed Iranian militias are crossing the border into Iraq.  USA Today declared that there are concerns regarding a recent

…buildup of Iranian spies and militants in Iraq…Iran is trying to influence, and possibly disrupt, plans for a transition to Iraqi rule.

Iran is setting up civilian and armed cells in Iraq to intimidate Iraqis and covertly influence elections, says one of the four officials, a high-level officer with the U.S. military command in Baghdad.

Because the topic is so sensitive, U.S. officials won’t discuss it on the record. Iranian officials deny trying to manipulate the transition…

Since the fall of Baghdad in April, Iraq’s 900-mile border with Iran has not been patrolled as strictly as it was under Saddam Hussein. Thousands of Iranians have entered Iraq, apparently with their [Iranian] government’s blessing…

“The Iranians believe their ship is coming in and that Shiite Islamicists will achieve dominance,” Katzman [a Middle East expert at the Congressional Research Service] says…

“The Iranians are setting up an intelligence infrastructure in Iraq,” Tanter [another Middle East expert at the Washington Institute] says. “They can use it for political influence and/or military action…”

[The Iraqi group, the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq] has its own Iranian-trained militia…

(Source:  USA Today, http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-02-12-iran-iraq-usat_x.htm)

The links between the United States and Iran become apparent when we see that the United States actually shut down anti-Iranian radio stations in Iraq.  USA Today says:

Mindful of Iran’s leverage in Iraq…U.S. authorities in Iraq shut down a radio station operated by the Mujahedin el-Khalq (MEK), an Iranian dissident group that had been harbored by Saddam. U.S. authorities also took DNA samples from several thousand MEK members under U.S. guard in apparent preparation to charge some with terrorist crimes.

(Source:  USA Today, http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-02-12-iran-iraq-usat_x.htm)

  • BBC News

Moqtada al-Sadr, Ayatollah al-Hakim, Ayatollah Sistani, and so many more Shia leaders in Iraq are really supporters and citizens of Iran.  BBC News said:

Moqtada Sadr’s popularity partly derives from his links to Iran…The more senior Ayatollah Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, a member of the US-appointed Iraqi Governing Council (IGC), is even more beholden to Iran. He is the leader of the Supreme Council of Islamic Revolution in Iraq (Sciri), which was established in 1982 in Tehran by the Iranian government. He returned to Iraq after spending 22 years in Iran.

Shia militia

Sciri’s 10,000-strong militia, called the Badr Brigades, has been trained and equipped by Iran.

Ayatollah Hakim underscored his continued closeness to Iran on 11 February, the 25th anniversary of Iran’s Islamic revolution. Opening a book fair in Baghdad, sponsored by the Iranian embassy, he praised the Vilayat-e Faqih (ie Rule of Religious Jurisprudent) doctrine on which the Iranian constitution is founded.

Then there is Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, the most senior Shia cleric, who is now being routinely described by the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) as a moderate, even pro-Western…Ayatollah Sistani was born and brought up in the Iranian city of Mashhad…Most of his nine charitable ventures, primarily providing housing for pilgrims and theology students, are in Iran. So too are the four religious foundations sponsored by him…

Increasing influence

Outside official circles, there are signs of growing Iranian influence among Iraqi Shias…Also, Iranian Shias are pouring into Iraq, which has six holy Shia sites, across the unguarded border at the rate of 10,000 a day.

Covert activities

Then there are covert activities purportedly sponsored by Iran.

Soon after Saddam’s downfall, some 100 “security specialists” of the Lebanese Hezbollah arrived in Basra, at the behest of the Iranian intelligence agency…Since then two groups of Iraqi Shias calling themselves Hezbollah have emerged, one of them allegedly sponsored by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard, with its headquarters in Amara and branches in other cities. This is widely seen as a move to establish an Iranian intelligence infrastructure in Iraq…

(Source: BBC News, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3629765.stm)

  • The Washington Post

The Washington Post said that there were

fears that Iran will move in as a major player after months of quietly building networks among Iraqi politicians and religious circles…Iran [has] built up its influence, deploying hundreds of personnel and channeling millions of dollars to secure ties that were impossible during Saddam Hussein’s rule…Iran is using all instruments available to interfere and be a very active player in Iraq…

Ironically, U.S. officials said the United States and Iran share the long-term goal…[to] give Shiite leaders a decisive edge.  Iranian analysts agreed.

(Source:  Washington Post,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35283-2004Jun11.html)

  • The International Herald Tribune

That the United States and Iran share the same objectives in Iraq.  The Herald Tribune declared:

Paradoxically, it is in Iraq, where U.S. and Iranian interests coincide…The United States and Iran have many common interests in Iraq…Iran can help U.S. economic reconstruction efforts through its ties to the Iraqi merchant community and its own official aid to Baghdad. As for political stability, the United States may have the boots on the ground, but America’s coercive potential must be backed up by Iran’s soft power.

Iran’s seminaries, clerics, politicians and businessmen hold powerful sway over elites in Baghdad as well as local leaders.

(Source: International Herald Tribune,
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/01/30/opinion/edtakeyh.php

 

  • Conclusion

Details on the increased Iranian influence in post-war Iraq are easily accessible to anyone who has the Internet (and Google) or even a cursory glance at recent newspaper clippings.  In fact, there are too many sources to cite.  The conclusion that is reached is that one of the countries that had the most to gain from the War on Iraq is none other than Iran.  The United States and Iran conspired to take over Iraq;  the United States would conquer the country, and Iran would manage it.  In this manner, the new Iraqi regime would seem to be indigenous, as opposed to being run by a Western power.

Iran has been the historic arch-rival of Iraq and even fought a brutal war that lasted many years and resulted in many millions of Iraqi deaths.  It is thus unprecedented that this same enemy (Iran) is now coming to power in Iraq.

MUSLIMS HACKED TO DEATH – BUT NO ‘CONDOLENCE’’

By Mujlisul Ulama

134 MUSLIMS HACKED TO DEATH – BUT NO ‘SOLIDARITY’, NO ‘CONDOLENCE’, NO SHEDDING TEARS FOR THEM – WHY?

Because there is no aggrandizement, no limelight, no Yahood and Nasaara to bootlick in this case! The victims are poor, illiterate village folk, off the beaten track, hence no disingenuous dust and smoke is kicked up in bootlicking functions for gratifying nafsaani lusts.

More than 130 people were killed in an attack on a village in central Mali on Saturday by armed men wearing traditional Dogon hunters’ clothing.

Gunmen surrounded the village at dawn before attacking people in their homes in Ogossagou in the Mopti region.

The attackers targeted members of the Fulani ethnic community who are accused of having ties to jihadists.

The attack took place while UN ambassadors were in Mali to discuss increased violence.

The Security Council mission met Prime Minister Soumeylou Boubeye Maiga to talk about the increased threat from jihadist fighters in central Mali.

The victims of Saturday’s deadly attack were “killed with guns and machetes”, a local security official told AFP news agency.

Witnesses also told AFP that nearly all the huts in the village had been burned down.

The mayor of the neighbouring village of Ouenkoro, Cheick Harouna Sankare, described the attack as a “massacre”.

Clashes between Dogon hunters and semi-nomadic Fulani herders can occur over access to land and water.

The Dogon also accuse Fulanis of ties to jihadist groups. The Fulanis claim that Mali’s military has armed the hunters to attack them.

Last year, hundreds of people died in clashes between Dogon hunters and members of the Fula ethnic group.

On Friday, a Mali-based al-Qaeda affiliate said it had carried out an attack last week on a military base that left more than 20 soldiers dead.

The militants said it was in response to violence against Fulani herdsmen.

One Ogossagou resident, who asked not to be identified, told Reuters news agency that Saturday’s violence appeared to be in retaliation for the attack on the soldiers. From the BBC (End of report)

While considerable dust has been kicked up regarding Allah’s Punishment for the New Zealand Muslims, the morons who are deriving nafsaani pleasure from their public shows and hollow demonstrations of ‘solidarity’, etc., are ominously silent about the greater massacre in Mali. While this too is an Athaab of Allah Ta’ala, and on a greater scale than the New Zealand massacre, the zindeeq morons do not shed even a teardrop, not open their vile mouths in sympathy with the Muslims hacked to death and countless others injured. There is no nafsaani benefit for them in even thinking of the Mali massacre, hence the silence.

The insincerity of those who sympathize with the New Zealanders, but sweep the Mali massacre under the carpet, is conspicuous and loud. All of these miserable characters have no genuine concern for the suffering Muslims. Their motive is to only promote themselves, aggrandizement and other contemptible nafsaani agendas.

New Zealand and the Fallacies of the International Anti-Islamic Identitarianism

By Umar Rumi

Two elements seem common in this anti-Islamic international we can see getting stronger around the world:

1. From Burma, to Sri Lanka, to China, and especially to Europe (but also among Pakistani or Malay liberals, Iranian and Arab secularists, Central Asian sons of soviets, etc etc), there is a commonality in this idea of Islam being something foreign – specifically linked to Arabs (and reinstating the western European orientalist anti-Arab stereotypes, especially its considering it as something “low” and unworthy to be imitated – differently to anything western-European which instead gets worshipped) -, and of being Muslim as a treachery towards their blood/identity/history/culture.

This identitarian obsession obviously doesn’t grasp the irony of then embracing such a culture (western modernity) which is far more different from any other “traditional culture”, and even the very reason of destruction of European cultures themselves (and from then, going on with cultural genocides all around the world).

While Islam would just change some parts of their cultures and develop new Muslim cultures taking on from anything positive of their background, westernization simply destroy them and uniform everyone into the Monoculture, still, those supposed “defenders of traditional /replace with any actual or fake identity/”, so keen on avoiding being “Arabized/Islamized” (i.e. Being acculturized into something nowadays perceived as “low”), are then the most shameless westernized courtesans aiding in the most lethal threat to the “traditions” they claim to so much love: the western modern Monoculture.

2. It’s somehow funny how those presenting themselves as right-wing and conservatives (from the most different ethnic and national backgrounds) don’t see any issues with embracing typical liberal/leftist/progressive standards when it’s about criticizing Islam.

People who should otherwise respect and look up to Islamic values and ethos due to the relative similarity to their outlook on several issues, instead embrace the most progressive degenerate stances about female emancipation (while theorically opposing feminism), LGBT rights (while allegedly defending “traditional family), “separation of church and state” (while maybe being pro-theocratic traditionalist catholics!), material development and capitalist prosperity (while mumbling old nazi maxims about “blood against gold” and “spiritual against material”), progress and development (while calling themselves “traditionalists” and hating on French revolution), etc etc..

I’ll say it again: being a rightwing/”conservative”/
“traditionalist” who opposes Islam = hating the illness (western modernity), but hating its solution too.

ELECTIONS, VOTING AND MUSLIM PARTICIPATION

By Mujlisul Ulama

WHAT SAYS THE SHARIAH?

Numerous Muslims are writing to us querying the permissibility or impermissibility of participating in the upcoming elections. Is it permissible to take part in the elections? To vote or not to vote? This is everyone’s question.

If Imaan is healthy and strong, the Mu’min will have no need for doubt and uncertainty, and to query this issue. The elements in the kuffaar voting system and the system itself are conspicuous and really are not in need of expert brains nor for much Shar’i knowledge. The glaring conflicts and contraventions which have to be committed by indulgence in the kuffaar system are too apparent and vividly clear and simple to understand. Regarding such glaringly conspicuous and simple issues, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Seek a fatwa from your heart.”

But the heart will issue the correct fatwa only if the Imaan is not contaminated, polluted and darkened with fisq, fujoor, bid’ah and even kufr which are dominantly prevailing maladies of the entire Ummah of this era. The deluges of doubtful food, haraam carrion, cellphone pornography, haraam earnings, etc., etc. have extinguished the inherent nooraani propensity and ability of understanding of Muslims. Thus they are unable to distinguish between Haqq and baatil, vice and virtue, haraam and halaal. To add to this misery, is the villainy of the scoundrel molvils and sheikhs who are promoting fisq, fujoor, bid’ah and even kufr in the name of Islam.

(1) The very system of governance of non-Muslims is in flagrant and wild conflict with the Qur’aan and Sunnah. Whether it is democracy or any other kuffaar-manufactured system of law, it is in conflict with the Qur’aan and Sunnah. Such a system of law is branded the law of Jaahiliyyah by Allah Ta’ala in the Qur’aan Shareef.

(2) Voting for a system which is in total conflict with the Qur’aan and Sunnah is haraam. This is an obvious Shar’i position which no Muslim with any Imaani understanding can deny. Only ulama-e-soo and bootlicking so-called ‘muslim’ politicians have the kufr propensity of denying Qur’aanic truths.

(3) All the candidates without a single exception are either kuffaar, fussaaq and fujjaar. They are crooks, bandits, scoundrels, looters of the public treasury, etc. If the candidate happens to be a professed ‘muslim’, he will, in addition to his fisq and fujoor, be a zindeeq or a munnafiq or a murtad. At the very minimum he will be a faasiq/faajir. Voting for such personnel causes the Arsh of Allah Azza Wa Jal to shudder.

(4) Besides the very concept and the system per se being haraam, the ramifications of participation in voting consist of haraam activities. Intermingling of sexes is the very first major sin a Muslim has to commit when voting. Photography, bootlicking, hooliganism, etc. are all inherent to kuffaar elections.

(5) ‘Muslim’ candidates who manage to win elections as representatives, rather agents, of some non-Muslim political party are constrained to seal their lips on Islamic issues and to promote the values, ethos and every haraam act of the party.

Just one current example of such kufr bootlicking is the campaigning for the elections by one faasiq, Ismail Vadi. He holds some post in the present government. Although he is known as a Muslim, perhaps he performs Salaat and fasts, he is first and foremost an advocate of the law of jaahiliyyah about which the Qur’aan states:

“Those who do not govern according to that (Shariah) revealed by Allah, verily, they are the kaafiroon.”

The Nusoos of the Shariah are numerous to condemn and excommunicate this character and all others of his ilk who masquerade as Muslims. This chap attended or visited the Lord is My Shepherd Church in Lenasia to campaign for the party he represents. He bootlicks the pastor and the politicians. His priority in life is the promotion of kufr law. In diametric conflict with the Qur’aan and Sunnah he calls on all, Muslims and non-Muslims, to indulge in gross Shar’i violations by participating in voting. He lacks understanding of kufr and Imaan. He is in terms of the Qur’aan Majeed: “Summum, Bukmum Umyun” – Spiritually dumb, blind and deaf. The thought of Maut, the Qabr and Qiyaamah is furthest from his mind and the minds of those who participate in the law of jaahiliyyah.

It is haraam to participate in any aspect of non-Muslim governance. Voting is not permissible. Furthermore, there is no imperative need (Shar’i haajat/dhuroorat) for diverging from the Shar’i prohibition. Pork cannot be consumed, even one morsel, when a person is not facing death due to starvation. The same principle is applicable to voting.

May Allah Ta’ala guide this bootlicking, humiliated community of Muslims.

THE DIRECTION WHICH MUSLIMS MUST FOLLOW

By Mujlisul Ulama

“If Allah aids you, there is none to overwhelm you. And if He desists from helping you,then who can help you besides Him?” (Qur’aan)

The country is passing through a phase of political upheaval which is ushering in its wake anarchy and chaos. Anarchists and people supporting political movements spearheading such upheavals regard such developments as forerunners to freedom from oppression. But we view it otherwise. Out of the anarchy and chaos we are observing will not emerge order and safety for people who . are desirous of leading orderly lives. The Muslim community, being a small minority and a religiously concious people, faces a gloomy future.

Although Muslims are concious of their Deen, they are not concious enough to submit to Islam as the Qur’aan and the Sunnah require them to do. They do vociferously proclaim themselves to be Muslims, but due to slack adherence to the precepts of Islam they are  no longer practical Muslims. In consequence they have drifted from the Sunnah and are left to wander rudderless in stormy oceans unleashed, by a variety of political cults and non-Muslim cultures which are exercising great pressures on them.

Weak of Imaan and bereft of A’maal-e-Saalihah, Muslims find it a colossal task to resist the alien influences of ungodly kuffaar. In fact, Muslims have totally lost their Islamic bearings and the question of resistance against kufr, baatil and un-Islamic trends no longer features in their lives. While they have thrown them­selves prostrate at the feet of kuffaar direction, they expect Allah’s aid.

A great many Muslims do not even subscribe to the concept of Divine Aid, hence their gaze is rivetted onto material means, the acquisition of which they feel will grant them succour and ascendency. But, they are miserably deceived in such notions of kufr – notions which they have inherited from a kuffaar community whom they consider to be basking in material, technological and scientific progress. Such mentality exhibited by the reciters of the Kalimah is indeed a great shame and points in the direction of only disaster for us.

SOLUTIONS

For our future safety in this country, different solutions are offered by Muslims and organizations who consider themselves as leaders of the community. When viewed from the Qur’aanic perspective all these solutions are arrant nonsence which will never benefit Muslims in any way.

Some Muslims advocate total participation with some brand of kuffaar politics. Qur’aanic rhetoric is employed in a calculated attempt to stampede Muslims into acceptance of left wing political organizations which utilize methods of anarchy and intimidation to achieve their goals. Some will cite Qur’aanic aayaat and Hadith narrations which condemn oppression to justify their advocacy of participation in left wing kuffaar politics. Others again have chosen the path of flabby acquiescence.

They acquiesce to the vociferous demands made by deviated Muslims following the tracks of the left wing political organizations. In justification of their flabby acquiescence they can do no better than citing examples of some senior Ulama who had in this century joined hands with Hindus in India to oust British rule. Some again propagate entry into governmental politics. They are of the opinion that the solution lies in becoming part and parcel of the governing process which is governed by a constitution of kufr which although the lesser of the evils, cannot come to the rescue of the Muslim community when calamity will strike.

DEVIATION

When the various solutions offered are scrutinized it will become manifest that these opinions are the result of deviated thinking – a thinking which is influenced by fear for the kuffaar – a thinking which takes mundane aspects into consideration, but which has abandoned the direction and the solution commanded by the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. The solutions are put across while its exponents labour under the impression that there is no avenue for Muslims other than these self-thought ideas and solutions which in fact enjoy absolutely no Qur’aanic sanction.

They all are plodding the road of deviation. Their mental faculties cannot perceive the deviation because their Imaani vision is blurred by their emulation of the ways, ideas and norms of the kuffaar. They follow the kuffaar left, the kuffaar right and the kuffaar centre while Islamic Seeraatul Mustaqeem is ignored in entirety.

One of the deviated arguments is that in view of Muslims constitutiing such a small and negligible minority, it is necessary for us to align ourselves with the majority. The thinking in some quarters is that a majority government is imminent, hence it has become expedient for the Muslim community to align itself with left wing political bodies which will tomorrow lead the majority government. Bit this thinking does not take into account that we are Muslims who are required to submit to a Divine Shariah. It fails to take cognizance of the fact that the Final Arbiter and Coniroller of all affairs is Allah Azza Wa Jal. The destiny of the country, of the world and of the small Muslim community in this country lies in the Power and Control of Allah Jalle Shaanuhu, The Sovereign of the Universe. He is Maalikul Mulk.

MINORITY?

Our predicament does not stem from the fact that we are a minority community. Our predicament, fear and weakness are the effects of gross transgression and wholesale discardence of the Deen. Minority and Majority do not form decisive and determining factors in Islamic ideology which is the Sunnah as taught by Muhammadur Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and transmitted to us through the agency of the illustrious Sahaabah. Muslim strength and power–do not require numerical superiority. It requires Divine Aid to sustain it. And, Divine Aid is the consequence of total Muslim obedience–orthodox type of obedience–to the Commands of Allah Ta’ala. Being a minority was never a consideration for Muslims throughout their history in the march to subjugate the world and ensure the dominance of Islam. The Qur’aan Majeed says in this regard:

“There were many a small group which vanquished a large group with the permission of Allah.”

Since Muslims have abandoned Islam in the practical sphere, they cannot comprehend the meaning of Divine Aid, hence their gaze is focussed on their numerical inferiority. But such inferiority was never a weakness in a truly Islamic community.

A community convinced of its Islamic direction which it acquires from the Qur’aan and Sunnah, will not dwell in doubt, uncertainty and fear. Firm Imaani conviction will release Islamic energies which no power on earth can subdue. On the otherhand, the disease of scepticism which is gripping the minds of Muslims has paralysed them.

The sense of dignity and honour in Muslims is so much diminished that they appear to have no qualms in submitting to political doctrines, ideas and methods which kuffaar–the enemies of Imaan– are spewing out. Muslims are hopelessly failing to withstand the impact of kufr political lessons propagated by left wing politicians. The only interpretation for this sad and dismal state of affairs is our abandonement of Islam. Muslims are therefore left to wallow in mental subjection.

The direction offered by avowedly atheistic ideologies are not only accepted without question, but are ludicrously given Islamic sanction by rhetoric couched in Qur’aanic and Hadith terms. 

AFGHANISTAN DEFEAT FOR AMERICA

By Major Danny Sjursen

The U.S. military has been at war in Afghanistan for more than 17 years. There’s a prevailing maxim, both inside the armed forces and around the Beltway, that goes something like this:

“The U.S. can never be militarily defeated in any war,” certainly not by some third world country. Heck, I used to believe that myself. That’s why, in regard to Afghanistan, we’ve been told that while America could lose the war due to political factors (such as the lack of grit among “soft” liberals or defeatists), the military could never and will never lose on the battlefield.

That entire maxim is about to be turned on its head. Get ready, because we’re about to lose this war militarily.

Consider this: the U.S. military has advised, assisted, battled, and bombed in Afghanistan for 17 plus years. Ground troop levelshave fluctuated from lows of some 10,000 to upwards of 100,000 servicemen and women. None of that has achieved more than a tie, a bloody stalemate. Now, in the 18th year of this conflict, the Kabul-Washington coalition’s military is outright losing.

Let’s begin with the broader measures. The Taliban controls or contests more districts — some 44 percent — than at any time since the 2001 invasion. Total combatant and civilian casualties are forecasted to top 20,000 this year—another dreadful broken record. What’s more, Afghan military casualties are franklyunsustainable: the Taliban are killing more than the government can recruit. The death rates are staggering, numbering 5,500 fatalities in 2015, 6,700 in 2016, and an estimate (the number is newly classified) of “about 10,000” in 2017. Well, some might ask, what about American airpower—can’t that help stem the Taliban tide? Hardly. In 2018, as security deteriorated and the Taliban made substantial gains, the U.S. actually dropped more bombs than in any other year of the war. It appears that nothing stands in the way of impending military defeat.

Then there are the very recent events on the ground—and these are telling. Insider attacks in which Afghan “allies” turn their guns on American advisors are back on the rise, most recently in an attack that wounded a U.S. Army general and threatened the top U.S. commander in the country. And while troop numbers are way down from the high in 2011,American troops deaths are rising. Over the Thanksgiving season alone, a U.S. Army Ranger was killed in a friendly fire incident and three other troopers died in a roadside bomb attack. And in what was perhaps only a (still disturbing) case of misunderstood optics, the top U.S. commander, General Miller, was filmed carrying his own M4 rifle around Afghanistan. That’s a long way from the days when then-General Petraeus (well protected by soldiers, of course) walked around the markets of Baghdad in a soft cap and without body armour.

More importantly, the Afghan army and police are getting hammered in larger and larger attacks and taking unsustainable casualties. Some 26 Afghan security forces were killed on Thanksgiving, 22 policemen died in an attack on Sunday, and on Tuesday 30 civilians were killed in Helmand province. And these were only the high-profile attacks, dwarfed by the countless other countrywide incidents. All this proves that no matter how hard the U.S. military worked, or how many years it committed to building an Afghan army in its own image, and no matter how much air and logistical support that army received, the Afghan Security Forces cannot win. The sooner Washington accepts this truth over the more comforting lie, the fewer of our adulated American soldiers will have to die. Who is honestly ready to be the last to die for a mistake, or at least a hopeless cause?

Now, admittedly, this author is asking for trouble—and fierce rebuttals—from both peers and superiors still serving on active duty. And that’s understandable. The old maxim of military in-vincibility soothes these men, mollifies their sense of personal loss, whether of personal friends or years away from home, in wars to which they’ve now dedi-cated their entire adult lives. Questioning whether there even is a military solution in Afghanistan, or, more specifically, predicting a military defeat, serves only to upend their mental framework surrounding the war. Still, sober strategy and basic honesty demands a true assess-ment of the military situation in America’s longest war. The Pentagon loves metrics, data, and stats. Well, as demonstrated daily on the ground in Afghanistan, all the security (read: military) metrics point towards impending defeat. At best, the Afghan army, with ample U.S. advisory detach-ments and air support, can hold on to the northernmost and west-ernmost provinces of the coun-try, while a Taliban coalition overruns the south and east. This will be messy, ugly, and discom-fiting for military and civilian leaders alike. But unless Wash-ington is prepared to redeploy 100,000 soldiers to Afghanistan (again) — and still only manage a tie, by the way — it is also all but inevitable.

The United States military did all it was asked during more than 17 years of warfare in Afghanistan. It raided, it bombed, it built, it surged, it advised, it…everything. Still, none of that was sufficient. Enough Afghans either support the Taliban or hate the occupation, and man-aged, through assorted conven-tional and unconventional opera-tions, to fight on the ground. And “on the ground” is all that really matters. This war may well have been ill-advised and unwinnable from the start.

There’s no shame in defeat. But there is shame, and perfidy, in avoiding or covering up the truth. It’s what the whole mili-tary-political establishment did after Vietnam, and, I fear, it’s what they’re doing again.

Maj. Danny Sjursen / The American Conservative Source : TruthDig – drilling beneath the headlines Published – 01 Dec 2018