The regime in Saudi Arabia continues to cause enormous damage to the unity and fabric of the Ummah. This is precisely what the imperialists and Zionists want.
Some schoolboyish solitudinarian sophists tell us that Sunni-Shi‘i relations throughout history have always been within a circumference of managed differences. There were times when these relations were tense and there were times when they were relaxed. So, they tell us, everyone got along without ever reaching a total break in relations. Sunnis and Shi‘is, we are told, stood together in their opposition to historical invasions, military assaults, and recent colonialist and Zionist attacks.
But, then, in the minds of these tinker thinkers all of this history took a turn for the worst when the US invaded Iraq. In this Saudi financed line-of-thinking, the Shi‘is in Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan among other places became accomplices to the American occupation. They keep on recounting how Shi‘is worked their way into America’s “constructive chaos” policies of the neo-conservative decision makers in Washington. Then comes the whopper: this whole Shi‘i subservience to American fiat severed all the historical affinities and coexistence between Sunnis and Shi‘is.
Are we to believe that these American-Shi‘is come-latelies are more dangerous to Sunni-Shi‘i relations than the Saudi Sunnis who have talked the talk and walked the walk on kowtowing to American domination and hegemony?
We have no difficulty confessing to the fact that there were and there are Shi‘is who either tagged on to the American occupation or, even worse, were themselves active participants in that abominable occupation. And they should be called out for what they did or what they continue to do. And from there on, let the truth take its course. We have difficulty, though, with this Saudi financed propaganda simply because it seeks to lump American-obliging Shi‘is with Shi‘is who are and have been confronting US hegemony and intrigue for 30-plus years. Are we to believe that these American-Shi‘is come-latelies are more dangerous to Sunni-Shi‘i relations than the Saudi Sunnis who have talked the talk and walked the walk on kowtowing to American domination and hegemony? Yes, there are some (Shi‘i) personalities in Iraq who are doing a political dance with American officials. And justice will catch up with them if they are deceiving the Muslims to satisfy the Americans. And the truth will eventually surface if they are wearing down the Americans so that they will one of these days pack up and leave: from foot-soldier to spy.
Let us open up this matter so that everyone may understand the difference between Saudi sponsored Islam and Islamic obligations that come with identifying with the merits of an Islamic state in Iran.
Firstly, the people’s Islamic governance in Iran has built its nuclear technology into advanced stages — scaring Israel, and unnerving America; and this is understandable, but Saudi Arabia and its Gulf clones themselves are scared!? Scared of what? Why would Saudi Arabia and its littoral next-of-kin be suffering from fear-induced diarrhea! Islamic Iran assures them in the spirit of husn al-jiwar (good neighbors) they have nothing to fear, but imperialist America tells them they have everything to fear! And who would you think they believe? Their historical next-door neighbors in Islamic Iran? Of course not. They believe and trust America… Now, let us determine, who is in violation of Sunni-Shi‘i brotherly and neighborly relations; is it Saudi Arabia and its khlaliji twins who fall for the scare-mongering of the Washington devil and choose not to listen to their denominational cousins and physical neighbors in nearby Tehran? Or is it their denominational kindred across the Gulf in Islamic Iran?
Secondly, why are we to condemn Shi‘i politicians in Baghdad for their gaming the Americans so that in good time Iraq will eventually break out of US control and join its big brother in Tehran, against the Tel Aviv-Washington axis of ungodliness?
The inability or inadmissibility of Saudi Arabia and its Sunni Islamic-movement clerks to find a working relationship with Iran is helping the Americans and Zionists to open the gates of sectarian hell for all Muslims — whatever their denomination. Say whatever you want about Iran, but as a Muslim you cannot put the Islamic leadership in Iran on par with the warmongering and cruelly rapacious leadership in Washington. No thanks to the Saudi style of Islam that has turned this whole picture upside down. An Islamic resistant strain of fanaticism is beginning to break out on the fringes of both Sunnis and Shi‘is with the hush-hush endorsement of Washington’s political class. If the Sunni portion of the global Islamic movement continues its capitulation to Saudi largesse and influence, this fanaticism will become a full-blown jihad. How about that for an American-Israeli success story: Muslims incapable of having a jihad against Zionism but very capable of having a self-annihilating jihad against themselves.
The sectarian lovechild of American Israeli politics is being baptized in fire throughout Syria and Iraq. When this sectarian bastard reaches the age of adulthood it will have marginalized what was hitherto the common enemy: Zionist Israel.
The American-Israeli-Saudi alliance in this context is meant to divert the Islamic-versus-Zionist political and military clash into an internecine “religious” and sectarian war of attrition among Muslims.
The bloodshed in Syria and Iraq is meant to turn people into an insanity of revenge that no longer responds to common sense and ethical motives. Who can say with authority that there is no drone warfare in Syria and Iraq? Both the Syrian and Iraqi governments have no means of countering drone warfare; and there is all the reason in the world to use this type of warfare to heighten the tension and to expand the paranoia of both Sunnis and Shi‘is toward each other. If cooler heads do not prevail within the Islamic movement the takfiri fanatics (Sunnis) and their counter takfiri reactionaries (Shi‘is) will dominate and have it their way.
Thirdly, in this carefully crafted controlled chaos who is it who can say with proof and authority that suicidal operations are not planned by Zionists and their imperialist enablers and then sub-contracted to Muslim or non-Muslim mercenaries? These suicide missions by necessity need a cover; and wouldn’t you know it — there is al-Qaeda, al-Nusrah, and other pseudo-salafis who are ready and willing to take credibility for killing civilians, targeting the innocent, and assassinating figures who are conveniently the immediate or strategic enemies of both Washington and al-Riyadh (you can almost hear the Zionists giggling all the way to the bank).
Finally, official America, official Saudi Arabia, and official Israel — all of them — have a strategic common denominator: Iran is the enemy. They all play up the following scare scenario about Islamic Iran: Iran is going nuclear, Iran supports Hizbullah, and Iran is sectarian. Hizbullah and the bomb occupy the front line of threats in Tel Aviv and Washington. Shi‘ism occupies the front line in Riyadh.
Remember that part of Islamic history when about 800 years ago the Muslim political map was diced into Tafarruqistans and Tawa’ifistans.
Remember that part of Islamic history when about 800 years ago the Muslim political map was diced into Tafarruqistans and Tawa’ifistans. One instance will illustrate how a ruler at that time had plenty to teach the Saudi flunkies of our time. In the shattered political map of al-Andalus a king by the name of al-Mu‘tamid ibn ‘Abbad was caught between a rock and a hard place: he either had to become a toady of Alfonso X, King of Castile (1252–1284), which would mean he would have to become a political slave of Alfonso (very much like the Saudis today are political slaves of the White House occupant), in exchange for Alfonso’s protection and tutelage, or he would have to seek the guardianship and aegis of the Muslim ruler Yusuf ibn Tashfin, the leader of the Murabiteen. Yusuf ibn Tashfin was dreaded and revered by all the non-Muslim petty rulers in al-Andalus. Al-Mu‘tamid consulted the jurist Ibn Adham who advised him with words that should reverberate in the power chambers of today’s lilliputian Arabian kings. Upon listening to the words of wisdom from an Islamic scholar al-Mu‘tamid said (and listen here you Arabian rulers with your waist-level heads), “I [al-Mu‘tamid] tending as a shepherd to the camels of Ibn Tashfin in Morocco is better for me than tending as a shepherd to the pigs of Alfonso of Castile.”
This person in the strategic sense of the word was centuries ahead of the Arabian slaves of America. Can you imagine a Saudi king having the brains to think strategically and say the equivalent statement today: I’d rather tend as a shepherd to the sheep of Khamane’i than to the pigs of Obama? Imam Khamene’i today, in a sense, is like Ibn Tashfin of centuries ago: the Euro-West dreads and reveres him. But the Arabian rulers of today are not like the Arabian rulers of centuries ago. Centuries ago, kings would consult ‘ulama (and with all the corruption around, when it came — in this instance — to strategy versus ego the kings of old had the wisdom to opt for strategy over ego. Today’s kings choose ego instead of strategy.
If today’s Arabians gamble on the White House Alfonso against the Iranian Yusuf ibn Tashfin, the best possible outcome would be for them to corral the hogs of Obama, and for all practical purposes the hogs of Netanyahu. And in the worst case scenario, if and when Islamic Iran wins this contest of wits and will, these Arabians shall round up the sheep of Persia.
Not all kings are created equal…
[Ask them], “Would you, perchance, after having turned away [from Allah’s authority and power, prefer to revert to your selfish ways, and] spread corruption on earth, and [once again] cut asunder your ties of kinship?”
It is such as these whom Allah condemns, and whom He makes deaf [to the voice of truth and reason], and whose eyes He blinds [to His guidance]! Will they not, then, ponder over this Qur’an — or are there locks upon their hearts? (47:22–24).