HAK&KAK | Blog

Nuclear personality before nuclear plant i don't charge for being fair

blog

Introduction

Those seeking salvation in Islam (the right path) must first admit to the University of Islam. The application form of this university is in chapter 1 of the Quran. The first and most important condition for the admission to the University of Islam is the sincerity of intent. The students then need to successfully, unconditionally and orderly complete the approved curriculum, being the other 113 chapters of the Quran. In return, the University guarantees you the right to question, research and to constructively criticize the curriculum within the limits of reason and honor, as the angels and prophet Abraham (ﷺ) did with the Creator the Almighty, when they sincerely and respectively questioned the wisdom in his creation of mankind and how he revived the dead as in the following two verses:

“And [mention, O Muḥammad], when your Lord said to the angels, "Indeed, I will make upon the earth a successive authority."1 They said, "Will You place upon it one who causes corruption therein and sheds blood, while we exalt You with praise and declare Your perfection?"2 He [Allah] said, "Indeed, I know that which you do not know." Quran chapter 2 verse 30.

" And [mention] when Abraham said, "My Lord, show me how You give life to the dead." [Allah] said, "Have you not believed?" He said, "Yes, but [I ask] only that my heart may be satisfied." [Allah] said, "Take four birds and commit them to yourself.1 Then [after slaughtering them] put on each hill a portion of them; then call them - they will come [flying] to you in haste. And know that Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise." Quran chapter 2 verse 260.

After the admission, the students begin their onboarding program with the first class of the first course, which is chapter 2 (Al-Baqarah) verses 1 to 5. During the onboarding program, verse 2 reassures the sincere students of the confidence, integrity and perfection of the university and its adopted curriculum, while the other skeptic students are challenged with the best of wisdom as follows:

“This is the Book about which there is no doubt, a guidance for those conscious of Allah” Quran chapter 2 verse 2.

Then, verses 3 to 5 introduces the students to the attributes and behaviors necessary to successfully search for the straight path. Verse 2 in particular says:

“Who believe in the unseen, establish prayer, and spend out of what We have provided for them”

Faith in the divine unseen knowledge (الغيب) is a behavior that develops the necessary sense of reality and disbelief in the impossible. Simply, Islam does not believe in the ‘impossible’ but believes in the ‘divine unseen knowledge’. This behavior moderately and rationally unleashes student’s perception and imagination. It also emphasizes on the need for patience while acquiring knowledge, as there will always be certain facts that remain hidden in a universe that is continuously expanding at the speed of light. The curriculum deals only with the principles and pillars that guide to the straight path (the fundamentals). The absence of certain sciences, such as cosmic facts, should not prevent the student from practicing things that will benefit him and his society, such as praying and giving out alms. This attribute emphasizes that a student seeking the straight path should be patient, calm, balanced, useful, constructive and not troubled, puritanical, hurtful and destructive.

Similarly, I am sure that this study does not answer all questions that could come to the mind of my pious readers, although while writing, I have done my best to put myself in my readers shoes and answer their possible questions. But I am confident that the study has adequately covered the fundamentals, which are the most important. Fundamentals are our yardstick that enables us to answer our own questions. I simply beg you to be patient while reading and trust that your questions would be answered before you carefully finish reading the book for the second time. If not, I will be pleased to address all your questions. After all, the first revelation of Quran mentions twice the word (ٱقۡرَأۡ), which means read or recite, as in Chapter 96 verses 1 to 4:

“Recite in the name of your Lord who created, Created man from a clinging substance. Recite, and your Lord is the most Generous, Who taught by the pen”.

My dear reader, I know that your right, but you could be wrong, and I know that I am wrong, but I could be right. So, stay beautiful as usual!

The Unceremonious Generosity

Why did they leave so ‘generously and unceremoniously’?

Because they never did. One doesn’t leave by ‘generously and unceremoniously’ serving cheese on a mouse trap. Does he?

Basically, the older military presence simply got transformed into a new, soft, human, smart, knowledge-based, legal, and invisible form. The new sexy look allows the Western Christendom to remotely continue the crusade, exploiting the world and weakening its competitors, without leaving a trace. It allows them to dominate the foolish game, without jeopardizing the reputation of the West and the Christianity, using the following smart tools:

‘Set to fail the radical and over-ambitious’, or the foolish in mind.
‘Act as a fool’.

Paradoxically, evidence shows that these smart tools can’t guarantee success. These tools are smart but could often become pharaonicaly over-smart and fallible. Unlike a proper strategy, the long-term effectiveness of such tools (policy) is not as wished for. Understandably, this must be quite disturbing to the Western Christendom.

Don’t be puzzled, be patient and allow me to explain by elaborating on the following three case studies, where the ‘radical over-ambitious’ were ‘set to fail’ to indirectly harm an enemy and/or weaken a competitor:

The radical over-ambitious Zionists of the Jewish world.
The radical over-ambitious Islamists of the Islamic world.
The radical over-ambitious Hindus of the Asian world.

But, before examining the above three case studies, let us better understand the above-mentioned smart tools.

The First Smart Tool

‘Set to fail the radical and over-ambitious’

جدم الغشيم و الحقه

It’s a famous proverb that means “Let the fool lead and follow him”. It’s a ‘set to fail the radical over-ambitious’ strategy, or better ‘Set the malign to fail the benign’. In other words, let the ‘radical over-ambitious’ lead and take the bullet on your behalf; or better, help your ‘radical over-ambitious’ enemy or potential competitor to lead, knowing he will be unconsciously strengthening you by weakening himself or others.

It takes well-funded Centers for Strategic Studies and Research to identify and invest in the right ‘radical over-ambitious’ and if he did not exist, to foster one. Ignorant, fractured, damaged and volatile minorities are normally the best ‘radical over-ambitious’ types that a competitor could wish for. The Collective Psychological Structure of such minorities is founded on complexities and not dogma, as it appears to be. Such damaged minorities feel severe fear of conspiracies against their very existence, that often makes them suicidal and ready to be triggered and blown-away!

Indeed, its commendable how the Western Christendom have mastered the use of these tools, but I commend more those very few third world countries who have mastered the art of dealing with it. Hats off for both.

The Second Smart Tool

‘Act as a fool’

الكيل بمكيالين

It’s another proverb that means ‘Double Standard’, or in this case, to conveniently ‘act as a fool’ just like Mr. Fuji’s foolish referees. Mr. Fuji was presented to the world as a corrupt Japanese WWF wrestling star who entertained many of us back in the 80s with his salt trick. I will never forget our cook sarcastically saying with a smiling face “Here comes the salt man” every time Mr. Fuji walked his way to the wrestling ring. Honestly, our uneducated cook was not the only one who knew that Mr. Fuji is hiding some salt in his underwear to sprinkle it into his opponent’s eyes whenever he was losing. Mr. Fuji never failed to carry some salt and the referees never failed to fail noticing his salt. Basically, those referees could conveniently see no evil, hear no evil and say no evil. It was really frustrating to watch Mr. Fuji fooling all referees and use the salt trick against the good guys without being caught. Rest in peace Mr. Fuji.

Indeed, its commendable how the Western Christendom could conveniently ‘act as a fool’ and miss the obvious and the ugly reality. Napoleon Bonaparte said, “Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake”. Hats off!

So, you may rightly ask my dear reader, are there enough historical evidences to back the above? Can you prove that the ‘set to fail radical over-ambitious’ and ‘act as a fool’ are not simply another conspiracy theory adopted by the jealous to target the successful?

Of course, we can prove it. We simply need to look back into the recent history spotting such ‘radical over-ambitious’, who were successfully ‘set to fail’ and how ‘act as a fool’ was conveniently used by the Western Christendom to let the ‘radical over-ambitious’ do the required ugly.

There are three reasonably obvious examples in the recent history, covered by the following three case studies.

Case Study 1

The Radical Over-Ambitious Zionists Of The Jewish World

Were the Zionists Jews ‘generously and unceremoniously’ set to fail as a ‘radical over-ambitious’ minority by the Western Christendom to tarnish Jewish reputation and weaken the Islamic competition?

Until the early modern period, Jews were looked at inferiorly by the Christians in the Western Christendom. Historically, Judaism and Christianity have failed to coexist in the holy land of Jerusalem. In the last 1000 years, Western Christendom subjected the European Jews to different sort of abuse, discrimination and elimination. Such clashes between the lovers and the killers of Jesus Christ (ﷺ) were unavoidable. Please refer the following article link titled “Relations between Jews and Non-Jews” written by Antony Polonsky.

https://yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Relations_between_Jews_and_Non-Jews/Historical_Overview

Then on November 2^nd, 1917, the United Kingdom foreign secretary, Arthur Belfour, issued a Declaration to the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland, an organization that was brought into being by Theodor Herzl in 1897, announcing support for the establishment of “national home for the Jewish people” in the Palestine, that had a small minority Jewish population. This harmony between the lovers and the killers of the Jesus Christ (ﷺ) was abnormal and unpredictable.

Interestingly:

In 1896, Theodor Herzl wrote in the preface of his book Der Judenstaat (The State of the Jews): “Everything depends on our propelling force. And what is our propelling force? The misery of the Jews.” This sounds like the Creative Anarchy!
Arthur Balfour acted anti-Semitic when he promulgated the 1905 Aliens Act, to stop the immigration to Britain of Jewish refugees fleeing the vicious anti-Semitic pogroms in the Russian Empire.
Edwin Samuel Montagu, the only Jewish member of the cabinet headed by David Lloyd George, to which Belfour belonged, considered the Balfour Declaration anti-Semitic. In a memo to the Cabinet, Montagu considered the Declaration a tool to free Europe from Jews and wrote:

"I assume that it means that Mahommedans [Muslims] and Christians are to make way for the Jews and that the Jews should be put in all positions of preference and should be peculiarly associated with Palestine in the same way that England is with the English or France with the French, that Turks and other Mahommedans in Palestine will be regarded as foreigners, just in the same way as Jews will hereafter be treated as foreigners in every country but Palestine."

Hence, isn’t it safe to question Jesus Christ (ﷺ) lover’s decision to ‘generously and unceremoniously’ offer support to the killers of Jesus Christ (ﷺ)?

Zionism is a secular nationalist ideology that exists to support the return of Jews to the promised ‘Land of Israel’. The borders of the ‘Land of Israel’ are defined based on the Old and the New Testaments. Different interpretations of the biblical verses have made the boarder a disputed topic among the Christian and Jewish Zionists. But the most radical borders of the ‘Land of Israel’ include Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Egypt and the entire Arabian Peninsula. Obviously, this involves a quite radical change to the geopolitics of the middle east. No wonder why the Belfour Declaration was issued to the ‘radically over-ambitious’ Zionists and not to Montagu. Please refer the following Wikipedia link titled “Land Of Israel”.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_of_Israel

Hence, isn’t safe to say that the 'radical over-ambitious' Zionists were perfect for being ‘set to fail’ by the Western Christendom? Isn’t safe to say that the intentions behind the Belfour Declaration wasn’t benign? Isn’t the Declaration another cheese on a mouse trap?

The Orthodox Jews, who formed most of the European Jewish community, were against Zionism’s secular nationalist ideology. Orthodox Jews viewed that it was forbidden for the Jews to re-constitute Jewish rule in the ‘Land of Israel’ before the arrival of the Messiah (ﷺ). Due to this and other various reasons, Belfour Declaration failed to cause mass migration of the European Jews to the Palestine.

In the following clip, Rabbi Shapiro Reacts to President Trump referring to Jerusalem as "the eternal capital of the Jewish people". As a religious expert, Rabbi Shapiro states that there is no political relationship between the Jewish people and the Jerusalem, as it's merely a holy city. He adds that countries have capitals but Jewish people don't have a capital, as by definition the Jewish people are not a region but a community. Jewish people relate to the Jerusalem as a holy city but not as a political city. He adds that because it's holy, it doesn't matter who has sovereignty over it and that Jerusalem will remain to be holy whether it's under the control of Turks, Romans, British or whoever. Rabbi Shapiro informs that Jewish people became Jewish in a desert, the day they were given the Torah and accepted the Jewish religion. He believes Zionists are the ones who came up with the idea of Jerusalem being the capital of Jewish people and he believes such an idea goes against the religious teachings. He says that Israeli prime ministers from Ben-Gurion to Netanyahu have used the Bible as an excuse for ownership of the land and he quotes Ben-Gurion saying "The mandate is not our Bible but the Bible is our mandate". Rabbi Shapiro explains that the restorationists (the evangelical Christians) existed centuries before the Jewish Zionists and that Zionists use the evangelical Christian's interpretation of the Bible. Such interpretations cannot be found in any other Jewish sources. Rabbi Shapiro considers such a unilateral claim by the Zionists as being hostile to his religion. He considers such a claim by Zionists transforms Jewish people from a religious identity to a national identity. He concludes that Jerusalem’s holiness has nothing to do with who owns it. Honestly, what rabbi Shapiro says also applies to Mecca and Medina, which are the two holiest cities to all Muslims but not the political capital of Muslims as Imam Ali (the fourth pious Caliph of the Islamic world) moved the capital from Medina to Kufa in Iraq. Please refer the following YouTube link titled “Rabbi Shapiro Reacts to Jerusalem Announcement”.

https://youtu.be/rzYqimDCyjs

It was the 1941 to 1945 World War 2 Nazi German’s genocide of the European Jews, known as the Holocaust (the misery of Jews and Theodor Herzl’s propelling force), that caused the mass migration of the European Orthodox Jews to the Palestine. We know that during this genocide, Nazi Germany and their collaborators systematically and viciously murdered around 6 million innocent Jews, that's around two third of the Europe’s Jewish population. We further know that Western countries repeated what Belfour did back in 1905 and closed their boarders in the face of desperate Jewish migrants, resulting in some of them returning to Nazi Germany to face the genocide. We also know that the Western countries were aware of the ongoing Nazi Germany genocide but conveniently decided to ‘act as fools’ and turned a blind eye, just like Mr. Fuji’s referees, to let the Nazi Germany do the ugly.

Hence, isn’t it safe to conclude that the Western Christendom allowed for the genocide of the European Jews? Isn’t it safe to conclude that the Western Christendom’s Holocaust left no option for the majority anti-Zionist, damaged, fractured and volatile European Orthodox Jews but to migrate to the Palestine?

Historically, no clash ever took place between the Jewish and the Muslim communities in the holy land. To the contrary, history recalls that whenever Muslims administered the holy land of the Palestine, Jewish communities were invited back to Jerusalem after being exiled by the Western Christendom forces.

Hence, isn’t it safe to conclude that Belfour Declaration smartly turned the historic Jewish-Christian conflicts into a fake Jewish-Islamic conflict over the holy land? Isn’t safe to conclude that Belfour Declaration succeeded to ‘set Muslims and Jews to fail’? Isn’t it safe to say that this would not have happened without the ‘radical over-ambitious’ Zionists?

In the Palestine, clash between Zionist Jews and non-Jews was inevitable and predictable. On one side, backed by the Western Christendom, was the damaged, fractured, volatile and anti-Zionist European orthodox Jews (the Holocaust survivals) lead by the ‘radical and over-ambitious’ Zionists. On the other side were the defending, weak, desperate, frightened and emotional non-Jewish Arabic communities (Muslims and Christians).

The systematic exodus of non-Jewish Arabs from their hometowns, their genocide, occupation of their lands, the apartheid (as Edwin Samuel Montagu predicted) and violation of many United Nation resolutions are examples for crimes against humanity and violations to international law that were orchestrated and executed by the damaged, fractured, volatile and anti-Zionist European Jews lead by ‘radical over-ambitious’ Zionists. But the Western Christendom continued to conveniently ‘act as a fool’ to let the Zionists do the ugly acts that clearly violated the 1917 Belfour Declaration, which required that:

“nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil rights of the non-Jewish communities in Palestine”.

Please refer the following YouTube link titled “Jimmy Carter: PALESTINE - PEACE NOT APARTHEID”.

https://youtu.be/b3rytiINiUo

Hence, isn’t it safe to say that the Western Christendom was satisfied letting killers of Jesus Christ (ﷺ) getting their hands dirty with innocent non-Jewish blood? Isn’t it safe to conclude that the ‘set to fail radical over-ambitious’ Zionists tarnished the reputation of the Jewish community in subjecting the non-Jews to different sort of abuse, discrimination, elimination and apartheid? Isn’t it safe to conclude that Zionists proved that Jews act no better than the Nazis? Isn’t it safe to conclude that complexities were driving the fractured Jews and not the Jewish or the Zionism dogmas? Isn't this exactly what the Western Christendom desires?

Such crimes committed by the ‘radical over-ambitious’ Zionist Israeli government have led the international community to gradually and systematically question the merits of the European Jewish’s historical grievances. Israeli government’s apartheid policies and unlawful occupation of the Palestine lands have been fueling the worldwide rise of anti-Semitism, hostility, prejudice and discrimination against Jewish communities. The worst part is that the racist acts of the ‘racial over-ambitious’ Zionist Jews in Israel are justifying all the unfair sufferings and the abuses Jewish communities endured from the Western Christendom over the past 1000 years. Please refer to the following YouTube link titled “Miko Peled Seattle. Oct. 1, 2012”, wherein this Israeli criticizes the apartheid behavior of his government.

https://youtu.be/TOaxAckFCuQ

The link referred below is for an article published on October 3^rd, 2020, by the Israeli newspaper HAARETZ titled "Jewish Soldiers and Civilians Looted Arab Neighbors' Property en Masse in '48. The Authorities Turned a Blind Eye". The article describes how masses of civilian Jews looted houses, shops and farms of their Arab neighbors across the street, despite all being part of a shared social civil fabric. The looting was verbally rejected yet allowed by the Israeli politicians to create a particular political and social reality that aimed to prevent Arabs' return. The moment you enter your neighbor’s building and remove the property of the Arab family that had been living there until the day before, you have less motivation for them to return in another month or another year.

But what grabbed my attention the most in this article is not Jewish neighbors looting their Arab neighbors, but an eyewitness’s description of the events that echoes my thoughts and confirms how their actions as Israeli Jews embarrassed her and questioned the merits of the European Jewish’s historical grievances. Netiva Ben-Yehuda says:

“Such pictures were known to us. It was the way things had always been done to us, in the Holocaust, throughout the world war, and all the pogroms. Oy, how well we knew those pictures. And here – here, we were doing these awful things to others,”

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium.highlight.MAGAZINE-jews-looted-arab-property-en-masse-in-48-the-authorities-let-them-1.9201926

Furthermore, the following article from the Haaretz dated August 16th, 2021, titled “Amid Opposition to Polish Law, Israel Must Recognize Theft of Palestinian Property” also reports about the Polish government approving a law that prevents Jews from receiving restitution for property that was stolen from them during the Holocaust. In this regard, the writer correctly recognizes Israeli government’s weak position and their ethical obligation to recognize being as wrong as Nazis when he writes:

“Poland is not alone in opposing restitution. Israel also stole property from many innocent Palestinians who were forced to flee in 1948, and since then their homes and land have been expropriated without compensation through the absentee property law. The events of World War II and Israel’s War of Independence are of course not identical, but the result – innocent victims losing all their property, which was given to other people without any compensation – exists here too.”

https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/editorial/amid-opposition-to-polish-law-israel-must-recognize-theft-of-palestinian-property-1.10120851

Hence, isn’t it safe to conclude that over the past 100 years, using the smart tools, the Western Christendom was successful to demonize the Jews, justify the Western Christendom’s pogroms/Holocaust, demonize Muslims/Arabs and to weaken both Jews and Muslims as competitors?

Absolutely, but!

A harmful Could Be Fruitful

رب ضارة نافعه

It’s another Arabic proverb that means “A harmful could be fruitful”. How?

Well, as mentioned before, evidence shows that ‘set to fail the radical over-ambitious’ and ‘act as a fool’ smart tools can’t guarantee success. These tools are smart but often pharaonicaly over-smart and fallible. Like any other non-strategic firefighting tool, its long-term effectiveness is not as wished for.

For example, Pharaoh of Egypt killed every Jewish male newborn because he was told that a Jewish boy will end his kingdom. Ironically, the one he spared and raised was the one who ended him. Pharaoh failed for being over-smart. Similarly, today and 100 years after the Belfour Declaration, I could confidently say that creation of Israel by the Western Christendom was a pharaonicaly over-smart plan that saved Islam in the Arabic world, if not in the entire Islamic world. I am convinced that without Israel (a painful Western Christendom dagger in the back of the Arabic and Islamic worlds), majority of Arabs and Muslims would have naturally converted to the Christianity religion.

History proves that nations get culturally influenced by the more advance nations and civilizations. The less developed nations often heartedly and blindly copy the culture of the more advance ones. For example, the expansion of trade among West Asia, India and Southeast Asia helped the spread of the religion of Islam, as credible Muslim traders, impressed the hosts and convinced them to follow the Islamic culture and convert to the religion of Islam heartedly and blindly. Islam spread due to the INTIGRITY of its civilization and not militarily.

How come then the magnificent, majestic, extraordinaire and most advanced culture of the Western Christendom hasn’t led to conversion of Muslim Arabs to Christianity?

No doubt that the advanced Western Christendom culture has significantly influenced the Arabic and Islamic culture’s exteriors, but it has failed to influence their hearts and minds. It has hardly caused any conversion of Arabs and Muslims to Christianity, despite decades of efforts put in by the Christian missionaries.

Imagine if the more advanced Western Christendom had built trust with the Arabic and Islamic worlds instead of issuing the Belfour Declaration and establishing Israel. Imagine if there was no Western Christendom dagger called Israel, stabbed in the back of Arabic and Islamic worlds. Imagine if there was harmony instead of conflicts in the holy land of Jerusalem. Imagine if there was no apartheid in the Palestine. Imagine if there was trust between the advanced Western Christendom, the Arabic and the Islamic worlds. Imagine if the Western Christendom had demonstrated INTIGRITY and kept their promises to Arabs.

Can you imagine how much more impact the magnificent, majestic, extraordinaire and magically advanced Western Christendom culture would have had on the Arabic and Islamic worlds? Isn’t it safe to say that such an enormous impact would have had a much more significant influence on the Arabic and Islamic worlds? As a result, isn’t it safe to conclude that if it was not for the Belfour Declaration and the creation of the Israel, majority of Arabs and the Muslims would have converted to Christianity?

“Never will the Jews or Christians be pleased with you, until you follow their faith” Quran chapter 2 verse 120.

I am confident that the Western Christendom would have done different if they could see that the long-term effect of their policy (smart tools) was going to save Islam in the world. I am confident that the Western Christendom would have neither issued the Belfour Declaration nor helped to establish Israel. As I said, “A harmful could be fruitful”. There is no such thing as a perfect crime. You can’t defeat an enemy by killing them, as you will only make them stronger. To defeat your enemy, you must defeat his principals, and one can’t fight principals without INTEGRITY.

But why the Western Christendom haven’t been able to deal with the Islamic world with integrity?

The fact that the Western Christendom has tried hard to deny the originality of the Islamic Science (the Golden Age of Islam) or turning a blind eye to the contributions of that Golden Age and sometimes even falsely claiming the title-ship of certain scientific achievements of that Golden Age, are all clear signs of the Western Christendom being totally out of touch and reality. Indeed, this is a field that deserves greater and further self-assessment, or better an independent investigation to identify to which extent such a destructive history of denial has damaged the Collective Psychological Structure of the Western Christendom’s personality. Clearly, that destructive history has inherited complexities and lack of confidence to the Western Christendom that has resulted in seeing the Islamic world as a superior competitor and a prominent threat. The historical chemistry between the scientific communities of these two different worlds (as is the case with all the scientific communities) shouldn’t mislead us, as by default, the political and religious communities in the Western Christendom have systematically alienated the Islamic world or any other world. This is clearly demonstrated in the systematic hate that the modern Western “Judeo-Christian” far right groups express towards Islam and Muslims. In this regard, please refer the following YouTube links titled “History of Science - Islamic and Early Medieval Science - 7.2 Islamic Science” and “The House of Wisdom and the legacy of Arabic Science”.

https://youtu.be/iojISmRrTq0

https://youtu.be/EFK8Ruc1lSQ

Remember Dear Reader:

Western Christendom’s ‘Set to fail the radical over-ambitious’ and ‘act as a fool’ are Win-Lose/Integrity-Free policies of the unconfident.
Win-Lose/Integrity-Free is a short term and a fire-fighting policy of the hesitant that can’t defeat principals.
The Western Christendom could achieve much better results by following the strategy of the confident that is based on integrity.
The Arabic and the Islamic worlds should watch out for Unceremonious Generosities.

Case Study 2

The Radical Over-Ambitious Islamists Of The Islamic world

Were the Islamists ‘generously and unceremoniously’ set to fail as ‘radical over-ambitious’ to tarnish Islam’s reputation in the West and bankrupt the Arabic and Islamic worlds?

When embarking on such studies, one must adhere to what Bertrand Russell, the British philosopher and historian, wisely advised in his message to the future generations:

“When you study any matter or considering any philosophy, ask yourself only what are the facts and what is the truth that the facts bear out. Never let yourself to be diverted either by what you wish to believe or by what you think could have benefits and social effects if it were believed”.

Please refer the following YouTube link titled “Bertrand Russell - Message To Future Generations”.

https://youtu.be/ihaB8AFOhZo

By now, I won’t be surprised if my dear reader wisely questioned: Mr. Khalid, it’s easy to agree with Mr. Russell’s philosophy but it’s equally hard to comply with it. So, why should I believe that you are able to adhere to it as required by such sensitive case studies?

Well, perhaps I should let my LMR Culture Active test results answer this genuine question. This internationally recognized model is developed by another British genius named Sir Richard Lewis. He divides humans into 3 categories, based not on nationality or religion but on behavior. For more information, I refer you to his exceptional book ‘When Cultures Collide”. My test results, as shown below by the black spot, revealed that my profile suites more the Linear-Active because of my Engineering temperament, that relies on logic, facts, order, and control. Therefore, my profile is more of a typical western Linear-active rather than the expected typical UAE Multi-active. I trust such temperaments are compliant with Mr. Russell’s expectations.

But I must admit, it’s not easy for a proud Salafist-minded Muslim to see the truth that is beyond the inherited cultural and the taught national barriers. It's like retreating to the fundamentals that lies in the unbearable Sunshine after perforating the darkest clouds. From a helicopter view, I had to dive deep and examine details of known historical events and determine the FUNDEMENTALS before drawing the following unorthodox conclusions.

While the first case study concluded that:

Win-lose/integrity-free is not a strategy but a firefighting policy of the hesitant, unable to defeat principals and has inherited challenges to the Western Christendom’s descendants.
Integrity is a Win-win/sustainable strategy of the confident that can defeat principals and inherit stability to its descendants.

This case study concludes that:

The Western Christendom is seriously concerned of losing its global lead to the Asians.
The Western Christendom's cutting of the Islamic world into smaller countries in 1922 has backfired.
The Sunni Islamists of the Islamic world are off-track the fundamentals adopted by their successful elders.
The Sunni Islamists are unconsciously helping to enable a second and greater global Holocaust that will lead to the murder of two third of the world's Muslim population as the first Holocaust murdered two third of the world's Jewish population. The second Holocaust intends to shrink Islam into its Arabian Peninsula’s origin as the first one intended to shrink the Judaism into its Levant’s origin.
The Sunni elders considered STABILITY more important than being pious or corruption free.

But before looking into why and how the Western Christendom has been using our pious to bring chaos to the Arabic and the Islamic worlds, we need to surf the history and identify the fundamentals adopted by the successful Sunni elders in the eighth century and use them as a yardstick to measure the degree of compliance of today's Islamist’s, as elaborated below.

Back To The Fundamentals

So, fundamentally, what is most important for any civilization, being corruption-free or stable? Which one of them is a priority?

Well, a helicopter and holistic look will reveal that the win-lose/integrity free efforts put in by the Western Christendom over the last 100 years to weaken their Islamic competitor, not only has saved Islam, but has also stabilized an ever-boiling region.

Fundamentally, the Islamic Caliphate, like much of the world, was internally unstable, except for the capital cities where the Caliphs were based. The Islamic Caliphate was always ruled by a group that was greatly strong in the capital, but restlessly quashing internal pious-lead coups and fighting foreign forces on the boarders. There was always at least someone within the Caliphate who threatened its stability by promoting coups using the same good old anti-corruption slogans. The Islamic Caliphate was always boiling internally due to men who threatened its stability by calling for a more pious and corruption-free Caliphate. Islamic Caliphs were always busy defending their thrones all over the Caliphate, until the Western Christendom showed up and unconsciously stabilized the Islamic world!

Obviously, people have been divided in answering the above critical questions (corruption-free vs. stability). Traditionally, those in power have always prioritized stability and unity, while the oppositions have mostly prioritized being pious and corruption free over the stability and unity.

So, is there a perfect answer? Which one of them is a priority, being corruption-free or stable?

Well, that’s what we will try to study and conclude next.

Stability And The West

Looking over the recent history and in particular the last 100 years, one can see how the Western Christendom's partnerships, and not their 300 years old Democratic establishments, have been the corner stone of their stability and prosperity. It’s the 100 years old partnerships that effectively transformed the chaotic competition between many hostile Democratic Kingdoms and Dukedoms into a productive coexistence. During the first 200 years, the Democratic establishments could not put an end to such chaotic competitions until smart partnership initiatives such as the Bilderberg Group, the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Group managed to transform the Western/Western competitions into a Western/Non-Western competition. The main objective of these partnerships is to maintain the Western Christendom’s global lead by keeping it stable, through splitting and exploiting the non-Westerners (excluding Japan and South Korea).

However, since West is still divided into many independent countries with their distinct languages and cultures, the threat of the Western/Western competition returning and bankrupting the Western Christendom still exists. We can see how Democracy is fueling their differences and failing the European Union. The 2020 Covid-19 global pandemic further showed how fragile their union is and that they are partners in profits but not in losses.

Unlike the Islamic Caliphate's Totalitarian and Consultative Establishment led by one Caliph, the Western Christendom's democratic and majority ruled establishment is led by many independent governments. While the Islamic totalitarian and consultative establishment offered the Caliphate 1300 years of stability and prosperity, the younger or the sexier Western Christendom’s democratic and majority ruled establishment is already showing signs of weakness. Perhaps it's too early to judge how successful the modern democratic establishment is in sustaining a long-term stability, but the following examples demonstrate how the sexier democratic establishment is being destructive and destabilizing. It's a shining star that is naturally ageing and turning into a Black Hole that is swallowing the stability of the Western world:

Tough environmental regulations are not promising, choking the economy and the industry.
Constructive criticism has turned into a toxic OPPOSITION-PHOBIA that seeks to deform and not reform.
Being self-critical, which is the corner stone of any healthy establishment, is being misused. Competing political parties suffer from opposition-phobia, act alien to the mother land and tend to criticize everything at any cost, including the stability of the countries.
Some of the democratic establishment in the West, such as the United States and Britain, are on the verge of a civil war between the conservatives and the liberals.
The establishment dwarfs the elected president and effectively rejects him. It's not a secret that the democratic party in USA never accepted the result of their 2016 presidential elections, never recognized Trump as the elected president and continued to fail him.
The establishment has failed to face a real competition. The Western Christendom's inability to face the Chines Totalitarian and Consultative Establishment's competition on its own field is a testimony.
Rapid rise of the dismayed radical far-right (totalitarian minded political parties) followers all over the Western Christendom.

In his book "Against Election", David Van Reybrouck denounces the outdated Western voting system. Without changes, Reybrouck fears the collapse of the European Union due to a democratic fatigue syndrome. He considers the 200 years old Democratic invention is unable to cope with the freedom offered by the social media. Reybrouck believes that there is no more trust in the democratic system. He believes that people are no longer satisfied to have a day every four years to only choose 'who' should represent them, but people also expect the opportunity during those four years to also say 'what' represents them. Reybrouck advocates that political parties today are losing power, and that without change they will continue to do so. He believes the detachment of people and politicians is giving rise to the populist far-right nationalist parties. He believes the rise of populist parties is due to justifiable anger and frustration of people who are no longer satisfied with having political parties, television debates and elections. Reybrouck is disappointed with the European Union's inability to accept conflict or change, which he considers going against the European process and the purpose for reaching consensuses. He calls for inviting others (populists) rather than demonizing them. The host of the program expects such changes to be chaotic. Well, I can't agree more with both of them. It's a crisis, indeed. Please refer the following YouTube link titled "Author David van Reybrouck on why elections are outdated"

https://youtu.be/k5hdt1xTc_Y

The only obvious and historical benefit of the Western Christendom's democratic establishment is in the separation between the government and the Church. Otherwise, the Islamic Totalitarian and Consultative Establishment has so far been more effective than the sexier Western Christendom's Democratic and majority ruled establishment.

It’s safe to conclude that partnership between benign Totalitarian and Consultative Establishments should be more effective and prosperous than partnership of malign Democratic and Majority Ruled Establishments. Having said that, it's extremely healthy to continuously benchmark against the Western Christendom’s experience and learn from their many best practices. But in doing so, it’s important to remember:

The objective is to improve the stability.
The democratic establishment is still in a pilot stage.
To reflect and not to copy blindly.

Stability And Abu Baker

Even Prophet’s soul mate and the first Caliph, Abu Baker Al Siddiq, had to safeguard the unity and stability of his people and the state respectively, by controversially quashing disobedient Muslims. He fought a rebellion of factions right after the death of the prophet (ﷺ), a rebellion of detached oppressors that intended to divide the nation and destabilize the fragile Islamic state. The decision to fight the disobedient and deviant Muslims who witnessed ‘There is no God but Allah’ but refused to pay taxes was controversial and challenged by the pious companions of the prophet (ﷺ), including Abu Baker’s soul mate Omar Ibn Al Khattab!

Perhaps it was his dialogue with Abu Baker that opened Omar’s eyes to the risks that the elites and the unregulated freedom of speech could pose on the unity and the stability of the Caliphate (A significant risk that we need to carefully mange today, due to the threat of the unregulated freedom of speech that the Social Media offers). Perhaps it was this dialogue that led him to the discovery of the secret recipe to the Golden Governing Model. Alas, this recipe was unappreciated by the majority of the prophet’s (ﷺ) pious companions and this lack of appreciation lead to bitter consequences as we will see. Omar did a remarkable job managing his stakeholders and regulating the freedom of speech, but fundamentally, it was the visionary Abu Baker who paved the way for Omar’s Ten Golden Years. It was Abu Baker, not Omar, who was the first to recognize safeguarding the unity and the stability of the Caliphate as the most sacred objective of a Caliph and the only objective that justifies fighting your own Muslim brothers for, as clearly called for in Quran verses 9 and 10 of chapter 49:

“And if two factions among the believers should fight, then make settlement between the two. But if one of them oppresses the other, then fight against the one that oppresses until it returns to the ordinance of Allah. And if it returns, then make settlement between them in justice and act justly. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly. The believers are but brothers, so make settlement between your brothers. And fear Allah that you may receive mercy.”

Stability Before And After Omar

But there are two exceptions to the ever divided, unstable and boiling condition experienced throughout the life of the Islamic Caliphates. The first and the obvious exception being the ten stable and golden years that the second Caliph Omar Ibn Al Khattab ruled the Caliphate. The second and the unobvious exception being the stability experienced after the bitter collapse of the Turkish Ottoman Caliphate and cutting of the Islamic world into many sovereign countries by the Western Christendom. It’s not a rocket science to notice that the Islamic Caliphate before and after Omar Ibn Al Khattab was substantially unstable, until the Western Christendom appeared with their win-lose/integrity-free policy. Thanks to the Western Christendom, the Islamic world after the bitter collapse of the Turkish Ottoman Caliphate turned into many smaller but relatively and significantly more stable countries lead by relatively less pious rulers, if compared to Omar Ibn Al Khattab.

Of course, following the collapse of the Othman Caliphate, most of these newborn countries did experience some instabilities that were not initiated within. While the apparent causes of such instabilities were either revolutions or military coups, they were mostly triggered by the following hidden foreign factors up until late 1950s, when USA dominated its global control and stabilized the region for two good decades of achievements that alarmed the Western Christendom:

Liberation and independence struggle from colonialism.
The global and sexy Socialist and Marxist ideologies.
Competition between Britain, France and USA.

Stability In The History

History does prove that stability is the promised land of a civilization. Meaning, a stable but corrupt society can still build a civilization, but the opposite is not true. Vast majority of the Islamic Caliphs were not an exception and were relatively corrupt when compared to the pious Caliph Omar Ibn Al Khattab, yet those less pious Caliphs succeeded to establish and maintain one of the most advanced civilization known to history. Fundamentally, stability is the promised land of a civilization and not being pious or corruption free.

Note how the relatively corrupt Islamic Caliphates and Caliphs were still successful to establish the most advanced civilization known to history. Note that neither the Caliphates nor the Caliphs who lived in guarded castles and dressed well were respectively comparable to the pious Caliphate of the pious Caliph Omar Ibn Al Khattab who slept unguarded under a tree and wore patched clothes. Yet, those less pious Caliphs were exceptionally successful in establishing the most advanced and prosperous civilization in the world, while the Western Christendom was experiencing its dark ages.

Can you imagine how much more advancement those less pious Caliphs would have achieved if they didn’t have to waste so much attention, fortune, and blood to squash internal rebellions led by unrealistic Islamists, who were ready to risk Caliphate's stability for the dream of a more pious and corruption-free Caliphate?

Just like the today’s Islamists, earlier Islamists simply failed to understand and appreciate the secret recipe of Omar’s Golden Ruling Model. Omar offered stability and unity in a Golden Ruling Model and not a Creative Anarchy noodle!

Stability And The Creative Anarchy

Unfortunately, even today’s enlighteners and reformists agenda’s do not account for stability at all. Their reform programs only call for fighting corruption but care less about stability of their own countries. Surprisingly, most of them believe in the CREATIVE ANARCHY, where loss of stability is an acceptable price for reestablishing a pious and corruption-free Caliphate.

In the following clip, Dr. Tariq Suwaidan who is an Islamist and a prominent Muslim Brotherhood leader from Kuwait, says in a disappointing tone that change in the Arabian Peninsula is not foreseen because change is dependent on the degree of pain and in absence of a great pain no root changes could be expected. He continues saying that the Arabian Peninsula nations lack such economical and security pains, hence he does not foresee a root change in the coming 10 to 15 years. Ironically, Dr. Tariq is echoing Theodor Herzl’s beliefs who wrote in 1896 “Everything depends on our propelling force. And what is our propelling force? The misery of the Jews.” Alas, it’s obvious that somebody has smartly convinced both of them to wish pain and misery for their people through a Creative Anarchy, so that change takes place!

No doubt that pain and misery are forces that could initiate change, but desiring misery and great pain for the sake of a change is radically absurd. Strangely, people like Dr. Tariq who call for great pain (creative anarchy), cry loud in protest when the government considers imposing taxes as a form of a benign pain, that aims at generating some change in the society. Please refer the following YouTube link titled “طارق السويدان يتحدث عن مؤامرة الإخوان لإسقاط دول الخليج” meaning “Tariq Suwaidan speaking about Muslim Brotherhood’s conspiracy to over through the Arabian Peninsula government”.

https://youtu.be/i8_04KswP70

This is unrealistic and historically squint. Fundamentally, creative anarchy only creates chaotic and unstable nations that are best for being split, exploited and used by their stable competitors. It’s not a rocket science to recognize that civilizations could never rise in an anarchy.

Questions

By now my dear readers are probably seeing a potential contradiction in this proposition and could be rightly asking: Mr. Khalid, how do you explain such unstable and boiling Islamic Caliphates succeeding to establish the most advanced civilization known to history, when you stress so much on the stability being the promised land of any civilization?

That’s a good question and the answer is simply that, despite the unstable and boiling nature of the Caliphates, their capital cities, such as Baghdad, remained stable enough to house the scientific organizations and advancement centers such as The House of Wisdom. That’s why, when the Western Christendom divided the Islamic world into 45 Totalitarian Islamic countries, they effectively created as many stable capital cities as possible, each potentially capable of being a promised land for a new civilization and a scientific advancement, just like the Baghdad’s eighth century House of Wisdom.

By now my dear readers could be also genuinely asking: Mr. Khalid, who said that the Islamic Caliphates housed the most advanced civilization known to history? How do I know that you’re not being an emotional and a biased Muslim?

That’s another good question, but this time I will let Bernard Lewis be the judge. Bernard was a renowned Jewish historian, and a proud pro-Israel Zionist, who was specialized in Islamic and Middle Eastern history. I will simply quote Bernard’s response to a question asked by an academic Israeli audience. From the heart of Israel, Bernard surprised his audience when he spoke highly of the Islamic civilization and testified to its originality and uniqueness, when he responded to the following question:

What is the crisis for Islam?

"I think the Muslim world (not Islam) has reached a point when most Muslims are aware of the fact that their society has taken a wrong turn somewhere. There is a growing awareness, thanks specially to modern media, that they have fallen behind the rest of the world. They know that for many centuries their's was the most advanced civilization in the world, indeed the most advanced civilization known to history. Then they suddenly fall disastrously behind. What they have become aware of recently is that not only they have been falling behind the advanced countries of the west, but even newcomers to the scene like Korea for example. Not more than half a century ago, Korea was just emerging from middle ages. Now Korea’s standard of living and achievement in almost every significant field is vastly better than in the Muslim world. They look at the difference between India and Pakistan. They look at the difference in the fate of Hong Kong and Singapore on one side of the world or Eden on the other.”

Please refer to ‘Conversation about Islam With Bernard Lewis Part 2’, Mi GG, You Tube, minutes 06:57 to 08:19.

https://youtu.be/-eDnaEMF0oE

The Core And The Luxury Values

STAR is a human performance tool used in industries sensitive to safety, such as the aviation and the nuclear. STAR helps organizations to minimize human errors and it’s a short for Stop, Think, Act and Review. Perhaps it’s time for us to STAR by recalling history and asking ourselves:

Instead of fighting corruption, shouldn’t stability of countries be the priority number one on the enlightener’s agendas?
Is it unfair to define genuine and responsible enlighteners as those whom stability tops their agendas of change?
Shouldn’t reform mean preserving our stability, while taking calculated steps towards being a more pious nation?
Is it unfair to conclude that historically, it’s corrupt, unrealistic, in genuine and misleading of Islamists to call for the restoration of the Islamic Caliphate that lasted 1300 years by selling the golden Omar Ibn Al Khattab’s version of it that lasted only 10 years, when we know that during the other 1290 years, most of the Islamic Caliphs failed to meet Omar Ibn Al Khattab’s standards?
Is it unfair to conclude that Islamists suffer from the Western Opposition-Phobia and turn a blind eye to the Islamic fundamentals, just to fail the existing Muslim rulers?
Isn’t fair to call such reformists Region’s Worst Investors (RWI)?

Based on history, we could safely conclude that:

The pious Omar Ibn Al Khattab's Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphate is a testimony that integrity is a low-cost soft power that builds trust, helps to sustain both unity and stability in a self-critical multi-cultural nation, without the need for factions or opposition parties.
The other less-pious Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphates proved beyond any doubt that an iron fist is a high-cost power that can’t build trust but helps to sustain enough stability to build a civilization in a divided multi-cultural nation, with many factions or opposition parties.
Omar Ibn Al Khattab’s type of pious Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphate is rare and almost a fairytale that doesn’t qualify to be a SMART objective. On the other hand, the other less-pious type of the Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphates are quite common, hence do qualify as a SMART objective.
Insisting to adopt Omar Ibn Al Khattab’s pious and PERFECT model of Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphate could have catastrophic consequences on the stability, such as the assassination of Uthman Ibn Affaan, the third pious and elected Caliph in Islam. It’s not a secret that adopting a leadership style different than that of Omar Ibn Al Khattab’s was the main excuse used by factions or opposition parties to spread doubt in the society and turn naive Muslims against their pious Caliph Uthman and assassin him unlawfully.
The prophet (ﷺ) stressed on stability being the core value and also stressed on the lawfulness of stable and less pious Totalitarian Caliphates, Caliphs and rulers.

Fundamentally, as the case is now in the Western Christendom, stability of the Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphate has been Abu Baker and Omar’s core value, while piousness has always been their desired luxury or soft power. In this regard, if we consider how the prophet (ﷺ) and his companions talked and walked, we will find that Islam happens to be fundamentally compliant with Omar’s Consultative and Pro-Stability Golden Ruling Model, as elaborated below.

Stability In The Quran

Like history, a helicopter and holistic look will reveal that fundamentally the Islamic literature teaches to prioritize stability over piousness (fighting corruption), by means of:

Promoting unity among the Muslims.
Promoting peace with the non-Muslims.

It’s not a rocket science to note that Islam and civilizations flourish most in peace. Therefore, Quran verse 103 of chapter 3 clearly calls for stability by means of peace and unity among the Muslims:

“And hold firmly to the rope of Allah all together and do not become divided. And remember the favor of Allah upon you - when you were enemies and He brought your hearts together and you became, by His favor, brothers. And you were on the edge of a pit of the Fire, and He saved you from it. Thus, does Allah make clear to you His verses that you may be guided.”

Quran even prioritizes unity and stability among Muslims over fighting Shirk! Any learned Muslim knows that Shirk, which in Islam means associating partners with Allah, is an unforgivable sin or the worst and eldest type of corruption known to humanity. Yet, Quran verse 94 of chapter 20 prioritizes unity and stability among believers over fighting the corruption of Shirk, when Aaron (ﷺ) wisely justified his decision to opt for a limited verbal and non-physical resistance towards his people’s act of Shirk:

“[Aaron] said, "O son of my mother, do not seize [me] by my beard or by my head. Indeed, I feared that you would say, 'You caused division among the Children of Israel, and you did not observe [or await] my word.' "

Quran continues to stress on unity and stability among the Muslims by promoting patience in verse 46 of chapter 8 that says:

“And obey Allah and His Messenger, and do not dispute and [thus] lose courage and [then] your strength would depart; and be patient. Indeed, Allah is with the patient.”

Quran further prioritizes stability over fighting Shirk (the worst corruption) by means of promoting peace with non-Muslim nations who perform Shirk. Quran is fundamentally clear about the need to enforce peace with non-Muslim nations in the world by means of:

A deterrent mighty military power.
Making fighting Muslim’s last resort.

Quran prioritizes stability over war and makes it mandatory on Muslims to cease fighting as and when their enemy inclines to peace. See Quran verse 61 of chapter 8:

“And if they incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah. Indeed, it is He who is the Hearing, the Knowing.”

As a matter of fact, Sharia Law has always promoted peace and stability by offering non-Muslim nations conquered by the Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphate 3 choices:

Peace, by denouncing their religion and converting to Islam.
Peace, by signing a treaty with the Caliphate and paying tax. In return, the Caliphate offers them security, allows them to continue practicing their beliefs and to elect a ruler of their choice among them to govern them, as per their own sharia (governing laws).
Only if the first two choices were rejected, fight and face the risk of becoming slaves or be executed, as was the practice globally until very recent (in fact still it is today to great extent but unofficially).

Fundamentally, stability of the Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphate has been Quran and sharia's core value, while piousness has always been its desired luxury. In this regard, the Hadith has been also fundamentally compliant, as elaborated below.

“And whoever opposes the Messenger after guidance has become clear to him and follows other than the way of the believers - We will give him what he has taken1 and drive him into Hell, and evil it is as a destination.” Quran chapter 4 verse 115.

So, what is the ‘way of the believers?’

That is what we will know next by examining the Hadith.

Stability In The Hadith

Evidence shows that Hadith, or the authentic teachings of the Prophet Mohamed (ﷺ), also fundamentally prioritizes unity and stability among Muslims over piousness or resisting corruption. But before offering examples, let me explain that any learned Muslim knows that sharia is divided into two major parts, worships (العبادات) and transactions (المعاملات), where a transaction is any act other than worship. We also know that by default, all types and shapes of worshiping is forbidden (Haram) by sharia except for those supported by clear and unequivocal proof from Quran or the authentic Hadith. On the other hand, and by default, all types and shapes of transactions are allowed (Halal) by sharia except for those specifically forbidden by clear and unequivocal proof from Quran or authentic Hadith. This shows how strict and sensitive sharia is about worshiping, which gives importance to the following incident reported in Hadith about Abd Allah Ibn Masoud, one of the most pious and prominent companions of the prophet Muhammad (ﷺ). Note that on a knowledge scale, with Ibn Masoud being on one side of the scale and the entire modern-day Islamists on the other side, Ibn Masoud will definitely weight more. Therefore, what Ibn Masoud teaches overrides whatever the modern-day Islamists such as Dr. Yousuf Al-Qaradawi teach.

In the following Hadith, Ibn Masoud clearly prioritizes unity and stability among the Muslims over authentic form of worshiping (prayer in this case), when he wisely and politically decides to publicly pray different than how the prophet (ﷺ) prayed but as his Caliph Othman prayed, just to offset the threat of rumors spreading and destabilizing the Caliphate. Ibn Masoud made such an informed decision because he considered “Dissension evil” as detailed in the following Hadith. Meaning, Ibn Masoud prioritized the stability of the Caliphate over piousness and resisting religious corruption (something that most of the Islamists would neither understand nor agree to):

“'Uthman prayed four rak'ahs at Mina. 'Abd Allah (b. Mas'ud) said: I prayed two rak'ahs along with the Prophet (ﷺ) and two rak'ahs along with 'Omar. The version of Hafs added: And along with 'Othman during the early period of his caliphate. He ('Othman) began to offer complete prayer (i.e. four rak'ahs) later on. The version of Abu Mu'awiyah added: Then your modes of action varied. I would like to pray two rak'ahs acceptable to Allah instead of four rak'ahs. Al-A'mash said: Mu'awiyah b. Qurrah reported to me from his teachers: 'Abd Allah (b. Mas'ud) once prayed four rak'ahs. He was told: You criticized 'Othman but you yourself prayed four? He replied: Dissension is evil.” Sunan Abi Dawud 1960, Book 11, Hadith 240.

Furthermore, the following Hadith is extremely important as well, as the prophet (ﷺ) clearly emphasizes and prioritizes unity and stability among the Muslims over piousness and resisting corruption. To establish stability, the prophet (ﷺ) is encouraging to coexist with a society that didn’t follow his tradition (something that most of the Islamists would neither understand nor agree to)! But the Hadith is clear and says:

“The people used to ask Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) about good, but I used to ask him about evil for fear that it might overtake me. Once I said, "O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)! We were in ignorance and in evil and Allah has bestowed upon us the present good; will there be any evil after this good?" He said, "Yes." I asked, "Will there be good after that evil?" He said, "Yes, but it would be tained with Dakhan (i.e. Little evil)." I asked, "What will its Dakhan be?" He said, "There will be some people who will lead (people) according to principles other than my tradition. You will see their actions and disapprove of them." I said, "Will there by any evil after that good?" He said, "Yes, there will be some people who will invite others to the doors of Hell, and whoever accepts their invitation to it will be thrown in it (by them)." I said, "O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)! Describe those people to us." He said, "They will belong to us and speak our language" I asked, "What do you order me to do if such a thing should take place in my life?" He said, "Adhere to the group of Muslims and their Chief." I asked, "If there is neither a group (of Muslims) nor a chief (what shall I do)?" He said, "Keep away from all those different sects, even if you had to bite (i.e. eat) the root of a tree, till you meet Allah while you are still in that state." Sahih Al-Bukhari 3606, Book 61, Hadith 113.

The following Hadith further proves unity and stability among Muslims being more important than piousness and resisting corruption. It reports the prophet (ﷺ) informing of the future Caliphs or rulers giving advantages to their close circle and not giving people their rights, yet the prophet (ﷺ) advises to be patient and obedient to such corrupt leaders (something that most of the Islamists would neither understand nor agree to)! But the Hadith is clear and says:

“Narrated Junada bin Abi Umaiya: We entered upon 'Ubada bin As-Samit while he was sick. We said, "May Allah make you healthy. Will you tell us a Hadith you heard from the Prophet (ﷺ) and by which Allah may make you benefit?" He said, "The Prophet (ﷺ) called us and we gave him the Pledge of allegiance for Islam, and among the conditions on which he took the Pledge from us, was that we were to listen and obey (the orders) both at the time when we were active and at the time when we were tired, and at our difficult time and at our ease and to be obedient to the ruler and give him his right even if he did not give us our right, and not to fight against him unless we noticed him having open Kufr (disbelief) for which we would have a proof with us from Allah." Reference Sahih al-Bukhari 7055, 7056 in book 92.

The following Hadith further proves unity and stability among Muslims being so important to Omar, to the extent of accepting suggestions of other companions (his learned and noble advisors) cautioning him of what he should say, when he should say and to whom he should say to avoid misunderstandings and misinterpretations (A significant risk that we need to carefully mange today, due to the threat of the unregulated freedom of speech that the Social Media offers). This Hadith also calls for permitting the killing of those Muslims who cause division and instability by electing a Caliph without adequately consulting Muslims. Just imagine how differently and recklessly most of the Islamists act nowadays, when they criticize publicly on social media addressing the riff raff and the rubbles, just as Western world unwisely does (something that most of the Islamists would neither understand nor agree to)! But the Hadith is clear and says:

"Narrated Ibn Abbas. I used to teach (the Qur'an to) some people of the Muhajirln (emigrants), among whom there was `Abdur Rahman bin `Auf. While I was in his house at Mina, and he was with `Umar bin Al-Khattab during `Umar's last Hajj, `Abdur-Rahman came to me and said, "Would that you had seen the man who came today to the Chief of the Believers (`Umar), saying, 'O Chief of the Believers! What do you think about so-and-so who says, 'If `Umar should die, I will give the pledge of allegiance to such-and such person, as by Allah, the pledge of allegiance to Abu Baker was nothing but a prompt sudden action which got established afterwards.' `Umar became angry and then said, 'Allah willing, I will stand before the people tonight and warn them against those people who want to deprive the others of their rights (the question of rulership). `Abdur-Rahman said, "I said, 'O Chief of the believers! Do not do that, for the season of Hajj gathers the riff-raff and the rubble, and it will be they who will gather around you when you stand to address the people. And I am afraid that you will get up and say something, and some people will spread your statement and may not say what you have actually said and may not understand its meaning, and may interpret it incorrectly, so you should wait till you reach Medina, as it is the place of emigration and the place of Prophet's Traditions, and there you can come in touch with the learned and noble people, and tell them your ideas with confidence; and the learned people will understand your statement and put it in its proper place.' On that, `Umar said, 'By Allah! Allah willing, I will do this in the first speech I will deliver before the people in Medina." Ibn `Abbas added: We reached Medina by the end of the month of Dhul-Hijja, and when it was Friday, we went quickly (to the mosque) as soon as the sun had declined, and I saw Sa`id bin Zaid bin `Amr bin Nufail sitting at the corner of the pulpit, and I too sat close to him so that my knee was touching his knee, and after a short while `Umar bin Al-Khattab came out, and when I saw him coming towards us, I said to Sa`id bin Zaid bin `Amr bin Nufail "Today `Umar will say such a thing as he has never said since he was chosen as Caliph." Sa`id denied my statement with astonishment and said, "What thing do you expect `Umar to say the like of which he has never said before?" In the meantime, `Umar sat on the pulpit and when the call makers for the prayer had finished their call, `Umar stood up, and having glorified and praised Allah as He deserved, he said (O people!) I have been informed that a speaker amongst you says, 'By Allah, if `Umar should die, I will give the pledge of allegiance to such-and-such person.' One should not deceive oneself by saying that the pledge of allegiance given to Abu Baker was given suddenly and it was successful. No doubt, it was like that, but Allah saved (the people) from its evil, and there is none among you who has the qualities of Abu Baker. Remember that whoever gives the pledge of allegiance to anybody among you without consulting the other Muslims, neither that person, nor the person to whom the pledge of allegiance was given, are to be supported, lest they both should be killed. And no doubt after the death of the Prophet (ﷺ) we were informed that the Ansar disagreed with us and gathered in the shed of Bani Sa`da. `Ali and Zubair and whoever was with them, opposed us, while the emigrants gathered with Abu Baker. I said to Abu Baker, 'Let's go to these Ansari brothers of ours.' So we set out seeking them, and when we approached them, two pious men of theirs met us and informed us of the final decision of the Ansar, and said, 'O group of Muhajirin (emigrants) ! Where are you going?' We replied, 'We are going to these Ansari brothers of ours.' They said to us, 'You shouldn't go near them. Carry out whatever we have already decided.' I said, 'By Allah, we will go to them.' And so we proceeded until we reached them at the shed of Bani Sa`da. Behold! There was a man sitting amongst them and wrapped in something. I asked, 'Who is that man?' They said, 'He is Sa`d bin 'Ubada.' I asked, 'What is wrong with him?' They said, 'He is sick.' After we sat for a while, the Ansar's speaker said, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,' and praising Allah as He deserved, he added, 'To proceed, we are Allah's Ansar (helpers) and the majority of the Muslim army, while you, the emigrants, are a small group and some people among you came with the intention of preventing us from practicing this matter (of caliphate) and depriving us of it.' When the speaker had finished, I intended to speak as I had prepared a speech which I liked and which I wanted to deliver in the presence of Abu Baker, and I used to avoid provoking him. So, when I wanted to speak, Abu Baker said, 'Wait a while.' I disliked to make him angry. So Abu Baker himself gave a speech, and he was wiser and more patient than I. By Allah, he never missed a sentence that I liked in my own prepared speech, but he said the like of it or better than it spontaneously. After a pause he said, 'O Ansar! You deserve all (the qualities that you have attributed to yourselves, but this question (of Caliphate) is only for the Quraish as they are the best of the Arabs as regards descent and home, and I am pleased to suggest that you choose either of these two men, so take the oath of allegiance to either of them as you wish. And then Abu Baker held my hand and Abu Ubaida bin al-Jarrah's hand who was sitting amongst us. I hated nothing of what he had said except that proposal, for by Allah, I would rather have my neck chopped off as expiator for a sin than become the ruler of a nation, one of whose members is Abu Baker, unless at the time of my death my own-self suggests something I don't feel at present.' And then one of the Ansar said, 'I am the pillar on which the camel with a skin disease (eczema) rubs itself to satisfy the itching (i.e., I am a noble), and I am as a high class palm tree! O Quraish. There should be one ruler from us and one from you.' Then there was a hue and cry among the gathering and their voices rose so that I was afraid there might be great disagreement, so I said, 'O Abu Baker! Hold your hand out.' He held his hand out and I pledged allegiance to him, and then all the emigrants gave the Pledge of allegiance and so did the Ansar afterwards. And so we became victorious over Sa`d bin Ubada (whom Al-Ansar wanted to make a ruler). One of the Ansar said, 'You have killed Sa`d bin Ubada.' I replied, 'Allah has killed Sa`d bin Ubada.' `Umar added, "By Allah, apart from the great tragedy that had happened to us (i.e. the death of the Prophet), there was no greater problem than the allegiance pledged to Abu Baker because we were afraid that if we left the people, they might give the Pledge of allegiance after us to one of their men, in which case we would have given them our consent for something against our real wish, or would have opposed them and caused great trouble. So if any person gives the Pledge of allegiance to somebody (to become a Caliph) without consulting the other Muslims, then the one he has selected should not be granted allegiance, lest both of them should be killed." Refer Sahih Al-Bukhari 6830. The Hadith was summarized to reduce its length.

As elaborated above, fundamentally, stability of the Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphate has been history, Quran, Hadith, Abu Baker, Omar, and Sunni’s (“People of the traditions and majority) core value, while piousness has always been their desired luxury. However, like post Omar Islamists, the post 1922 Sunni Islamists are fundamentally off such tracks and Shiite-in-mind as elaborated below.

Stability And The New-Shiite

A Sunni Muslim is not a person who simply places his right hand over his left on his chest during the prayers, as a Shiite Muslim is not a person who simply drops both his hands to his sides during the prayers. History informs how adopting two different methodologies while dealing with events resulted in the creation of these two contrary denominations of Islam. Each of these two dominations have been accurately named by our elders, depicting denomination’s distinct fundamentals and approach to the political events, as described below.

The names of the two denominations:

Shiite means a ‘faction’ and it is the right and accurate name that describes all Shiites, such as the 12 Imami Shiites, while the right and accurate name of Sunni is “Ahlu-U-Sunnat Wal-Jama’a” which means “People of the traditions and the majority”. Fundamentally, while the term 'faction' depicts division, the term 'majority' depicts stability.

As people of the majority, Sunnis believe that following prophet’s (ﷺ) death, consultation is the process to assign the Caliphate's leadership to whoever the majority of learned Muslims elect as their most qualified Caliph; more or less, that’s how Muslims offered pledge of allegiance to the first four Caliphs. On the other hand, Shiites believe that consultation is a false process to appoint a Caliph since prophet’s (ﷺ) Cousin Ali Ibn Abi Talib and his descendants are the Godly heir of the Caliphate's leadership. Therefore, the Shiite literature depicts the first three elected Caliphs as Ali’s worst nightmares and who usurped the Caliphate's leadership from Ali. That’s why the faction’s literature teaches significant amount of hate towards:

The first three elected Caliphs who preceded Ali, may Allah bless them all.
The companions of the prophet (ﷺ) who elected those three Caliphs, may Allah bless them all.
The entire Sunni community who adopts election through consultation as a process to choose their Caliphs before offering the chosen Caliph the pledge of allegiance.

As for Sunnis, Jama’a (the majority) is an accurate political term driven from their understanding of Sunna (the religious traditions of the prophet ﷺ) that calls for unity and stability. Similarly, the Shiite or the faction is an accurate name describing a group that is religiously and politically detached from the majority (the mother nation) as an ever-lasting opposition group that seeks to deform the regime instead of reforming it. But unlike today’s Shiites, history tells that originally and right after the assassination of the third pious Caliph (Othman), there were two different Shiites or factions with different political views but religiously aligned, being the two politically competing Shiites of the 4^th Islamic Caliph (Ali) and the Shiites of the 5^th Islamic Caliph (Muawiya).

Muawiya’s political Shiite did offshoot a radical religious faction called the ‘Nawaasib’ which luckily ceased to exist, as they pleased God by hating the pious Imam Ali. On the other hand, Ali’s political Shiite also did offshoot many radical religious factions, such as today’s 12^th Imami Shiites, who still pleases God by hatting the vast majority of the prophet’s (ﷺ) pious companions and their Sunni followers. As the case with any defeated political faction and over time, some of Imam Ali’s Shiites continued to grieve their failure in isolation and turned into radical religious factions that are totally alien to the original mother nation. Hence, it’s not unlikely that over time, today’s isolated and defeated political opposition groups, such as Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaida, offshoot new radical and grieving religious factions, totally alien to the Sunni denomination. Yes, politics could give birth to new religious factions that only weakens the Islamic fabric. Perhaps, that’s why, as reported earlier, the prophet (ﷺ) fundamentally advised and warned to:

Stay united under the Caliph if there was a Caliphate, even if he didn’t respect their rights or didn’t strictly follow the teachings of the prophet (ﷺ).
Stay united under a Ruler if there was no Caliphate.
Stay away from different sects and follow the rulers, even if the Rulers didn't adhere strictly to the prophet’s traditions.

But are post 1922 Islamists paying attention to such clear warnings and advices from the prophet (ﷺ)?

Of course not! This could explain why the Islamic Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphate continued to face pious lead coups throughout its 1290 years lifetime. Let’s remember, oppositions that intend or prefer regime change are fundamentally following Shiite methodology, even if they claim to be Sunnis.

The religious methodology:

Sunni’s approach to prophet’s (ﷺ) traditions (The Hadith) has been fundamentally transparent, structured, factual, and significantly consistent. That’s why, Sunni’s ninth century scholars, such as Bukhaari and Muslim, were able to sift prophet’s traditions in a well-documented and structured approach that produced substantially credible books known today as ‘Sahih’ or the ‘Authentic’ teachings of the prophet (ﷺ).

However, Shiite’s approach has been ambiguously occult, flexibly philosophical, emotional, and significantly contradicting. That’s why, Shiite have not embarked on a similar and serious sifting of their literature to produce credible books that contains and teaches the authentic traditions of the prophet Mohamed (ﷺ), Imam Ali and that of his descendants. Instead, Shiite’s unfiltered literatures are still filled with mixture of true, false, and contradictory sayings attributed to the prophet (ﷺ), Imam Ali and his descendants. Shiite scholars have known that sifting their contradictory literatures will eliminate most of their denomination. That’s why, Shiite’s approach remains to be mainly ambiguous, occult and contradictory.

To overcome the threat of the undisputable and undeniable historical events on their denomination, Shiite have come up with two major philosophies, being ‘The Taqeyyah’ and ‘The Bidyah’. That’s because, contrary to Shiite’s bitter and hateful teachings, the overwhelming number of historical evidences depict respect, trust and harmony being the norm that defined the relations of Imam Ali with the rest of prophet’s (ﷺ) companions.

Shiite resorts to ‘Taqeyyah’, which means pretending (dissimulation), to interpret the undeniable historical events, such as Imam Ali’s strong family ties, cooperation and services extended to the first three Caliphs. To site few examples, history informs how Imam Ali served loyally under the Caliph Omar as his chief Judge and Imam Ali agreeing to his daughter’s marriage with the Caliph Omar. Furthermore, history informs of Sophronius, the patriarch of the Jerusalem in 630s, conditionally agreeing to surrender Jerusalem only to the Muslim’s Caliph. Omar agreed to Sophronius’s condition and travelled thousands of kilometers from Medinah, the capital of Islamic Caliphate, to peacefully receive Jerusalem’s key from Sophronius. Interestingly, history also tells that Omar sat on this historical journey after consulting his advisers (companions of the prophet ﷺ) in the Medinah. While some of his advisors warned him about the risks associated with this adventure, others such as Imam Ali encouraged him to go ahead with it. Omar accepted Imam Ali’s advice but before leaving for Jerusalem, Omar wisely deputed Imam Ali to act in his absence as his successor in the capital of Islam.

Would Omar choose Imam Ali as his successor during his risky journey to the Jerusalem, if they were not in good terms, as claimed by the Shiite scholars and the literature?

Would Imam Ali agree to marry his daughter to Omar, if they were not in good terms, as claimed by the Shiite scholars and the literature?

Would Imam Ali have named two of his sons after Abu Baker and Omar, if they were not in good terms, as claimed by the Shiite scholars and the literature?

Of course not!

Using ‘The Taqeyyah’, Shiite interpret and claim that Ali was pretending and deceiving the companions of the prophet (ﷺ) by his kind actions, that contradicted with his hidden and hateful feelings towards the other companions. Once again, historically, even this weak description does not fit Imam Ali’s famous and brave character at all. Alas, Shiite is sacrificing Imam Ali’s reputation by depicting him as a coward liar, just to save their contradictory denomination!

This illustrates how much integrity factions lack and how far a detached faction could go in proving a false point to secure people’s loyalty and shape their destiny, in one of Machiavellian’s severest forms. Interpretation and twisting of facts to achieve an objective is an evil act of prejudice that should be avoided. Unfortunately, Sunni Islamists do practice this arrogant method in proving Muslim Ruler's hidden evil intentions! They are always right in attacking the rulers even if the ruler was a practicing Muslim and a successful leader who promoted Quran and built Mosques all over the world. Such a corrupt, blind and arrogant argument was first offered by ‘Satan’ as reported in Quran verse 12 of chapter 7 that says:

“[Allah] said, "What prevented you from prostrating when I commanded you?" [Satan] said, "I am better than him. You created me from fire and created him from clay."

Also, contrary to Shiite teachings, leadership didn’t always move from the twelve Imams to their eldest sons as the religious heir. Once again, Shiite this time resorted to ‘Bidyah’ to interpret and justify contradictions in their denomination. 'The Bidyah' means having a second thought when it appears appropriate, and it’s used by the Shiite to explain that due to Allah the almighty’s second thoughts, leadership sometimes shifted from Imam’s eldest sons to the younger sons as it appeared better to Allah. Alas, once again, to save the denomination, Shiite is grossly attributing change of mind to Allah the almighty! The truth is that having second thoughts is a human behavior and un-Godly.

'The Taqeyyah’ and ‘The Bidyah’ are political tools. Such tools clearly illustrate how much integrity factions lack and how far a detached faction could go in proving a false point to secure people’s support and shape their destiny, in one of Machiavellian’s severest forms. Interpretation and twisting of facts to achieve an objective is an evil act of the prejudice that should be avoided as it endangers stability. Unfortunately, Sunni Islamists do practice it just to prove Muslim Rulers evil.

In support of this doctrine of deception, the Shiite attribute the following to the pious Imam Abu Abdullah (Jaffar as-Sadiq):

“Nine tenths of religion is Taqeyyah (dissimulation), hence one who does not dissimulate has no religion.” Al-Kafi vol.9 p.110.

Alas, the ordinary or common Shiites are being taught that the religion that they should follow is 90% different than the religion adopted by Sunnis, hence need to be kept hidden. I am sure that Islam has more than 10% in common with Christianity or Judaism! Seems to me someone wanted Sunnis and Shiites to remain as two different religions (90% different) and not just two denominations of Islam and that someone faked the above teaching for political reasons and attributed it to Jaffar-as-Sadiq.

That’s what political factions or opposition parties turn into overtime. Such divisions weaken the stability of any establishment. Again, as reported earlier, that’s why the prophet Mohamed (ﷺ) taught not to follow any sect and stay as neutral citizens under the less pious Rulers, even if his traditions were not being strictly adhered to by such rulers. In other words, stability was prophet’s core objective and piousness was his secondary objective.

While the Sunni literature is based on reliable and recorded history, the Shiite literature is based on an occultly recorded history that was secretly taught by Imams to their followers due to ‘Taqeyyah’. This Shiite approach to religious traditions is another malicious political tool that is fundamentally against many of the prophet’s (ﷺ) transparent teachings that calls on judging people by their apparent actions and statements but not by what is in their hearts. The following teaching is a clear example when it says “and then account is left to Allah”:

“Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said, "I have been commanded (by Allah) to fight people until they testify that there is no true god except Allah, and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform Salat and pay Zakat. If they do so, they will have protection of their blood and property from me except when justified by Islam, and then account is left to Allah". Al-Bukhari and Muslim, Arabic/English book reference Book 1, Hadith 390.

The above Hadith is sensitive and requires me to temporarily abort the topic and clarify it, so that the reader does not misunderstand it. This Hadith is often referred to by critics of Islam to prove that Islam is a savage, uncivilized and intolerant cult that forces people to convert to Islam. What troubles the critics in this Hadith is the word “people”, which appears to be meaning fighting ALL PEOPLE ON EARTH until they convert to Islam, which is a false interpretation resulting from not understanding the Arabic language, as explained below. The critics throw this Hadith in your face when you site many tolerant and clear verses from Quran that mean Islam allowing freedom of religious beliefs, such as the following verses:

“Let there be no compulsion in religion, for the truth stands out clearly from falsehood. So, whoever renounces false gods and believes in Allah has certainly grasped the firmest, unfailing handhold. And Allah is All-Hearing, All-Knowing. Allah is the Guardian of the believers; He brings them out of darkness and into light. As for the disbelievers, their guardians are false gods who lead them out of light and into darkness. It is they who will be the residents of the Fire. They will be there forever.” Chapter 2 verses 256 – 257.

“And say, ˹O Prophet, ˺ “˹This is˺ the truth from your Lord. Whoever wills let them believe, and whoever wills let them disbelieve.” Surely, We have prepared for the wrongdoers a Fire whose walls will ˹completely˺ surround them. When they cry for aid, they will be aided with water like molten metal, which will burn ˹their˺ faces. What a horrible drink! And what a terrible place to rest!” Chapter 18 verse 29.

The chapter in particular is recited by Muslims every Friday as recommended by the prophet (ﷺ). I say this so critics of Islam won’t say that I am referring to the abrogated verses of the Quran.

“Say, ˹O Prophet, ˺ “O you disbelievers! I do not worship what you worship, nor do you worship what I worship. I will never worship what you worship, nor will you ever worship what I worship. You have your way, and I have my Way.” Chapter 109.

Now coming to the troubling word of “people”, in Arabic the word people could mean all people (humankind) on earth or a particular group of people, as in this case where the prophet (ﷺ) is specifically addressing the nomad Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula. The proof is in Quran, which is a reference when it come to the Arabic language. Below are three examples from Quran, where the word “people” in the first one means the entire humankind, while the word “people” in the other two examples could not logically mean all humankind:

“Say, ˹O Prophet, ˺ “I seek refuge in the Lord of people (humankind), the Master of people (humankind), the God of people (humankind), from the evil of the lurking whisperer, who whispers into the hearts of people (humankind), from among jinn and people (humankind).” Chapter 114.

“And when they are told, “Believe as people believe,” they reply, “Will we believe as the fools believe?” Indeed, it is they who are fools, but they do not know” Chapter 2 verse 13.

“Those who were warned by people, “Your people have mobilized their forces against you, so fear them,” the warning only made them grow stronger in faith and they replied, “Allah ˹alone˺ is sufficient ˹as an aid˺ for us and ˹He˺ is the best Protector.” Chapter 3 verse 173.

Therefore, the Hadith is not calling for fighting all people (humankind) on earth to convert them to Islam by force and it does not contradict with many tolerant verses of Quran cited earlier. The Hadith is simply recording a special, situational and political decision made by the prophet (ﷺ) to deal with the intolerant non-Muslim Arabs (the following three verses describes them) who were failing to coexist with Muslims. So, the prophet was forced to expel them from the Arabian peninsula, hence creating a safe haven for his Muslim followers:

“The nomadic Arabs ˹around Medina˺ are far worse in disbelief and hypocrisy, and less likely to know the laws revealed by Allah to His Messenger. And Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.” Chapter 9 verse 97.

“And among the Arabs “nomads” are those who consider what they donate to be a loss and await your misfortune. May ill-fortune befall them! And Allah is All-Hearing, All-Knowing.” Chapter 9 verse 98.

“Some of the nomads around you ˹believers˺ are hypocrites, as are some of the people of Medina. They have mastered hypocrisy. They are not known to you ˹O Prophet˺; they are known to Us. We will punish them twice ˹in this world˺, then they will be brought back ˹to their Lord˺ for a tremendous punishment.” Chapter 9 verse 101.

Back to our topic, let’s remember that inconsistency, double standard, deceiving, twisting facts, corrupt arguments, and judging people by what’s in their hearts are norms in Shiite methodology and those who practice them are Shiites in mind, even if they consider themselves Sunnis. Alas, despite such practices being alien to the Sunni's political fundamentals, yet they are being practiced by most of the Sunni Islamists, such as the Muslim Brotherhood.

The political methodology:

Shiite means being an ever-lasting people of faction or a permanent political opposition, while Jama’a means being an ever-lasting people of majority/unity or stability. Hence, unlike the Shiite, the Sunni denomination is built on the foundation of unity and stability and not as alienated factions.

It’s obvious that Shiite elders have promoted the concept of the EXCLUSIVE OPPOTION faction that is meant to be totally alien to the mother nation and seeks to change the Caliphate, not just the Caliph. On the other hand, Sunni elders have warned of such aliened opposing factions but promoted for the concept of INCLUSIVE OPPOSITION that seeks to strengthen their Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphate, in which the individual remains attached and loyal to the mother nation or the majority (The Jama’a). Basically, Shiite’s exclusive opposition targets the collapse of the Caliphate while Sunni inclusive opposition targets to strengthen the Caliphate. In other words, in a way, Shiite's toxic political establishment is similar to the current toxic Western Christendom's democratic establishment, wherein a party criticizes to collapse or deform the other party and not to strengthen or reform it. While the Sunni establishment doesn’t approve such toxic and deforming methodology, it does share other similarities with the Western Christendom’s democratic establishment, such as the process of electing a leader following some sort of consultation (voting).

The detached Shiite school of thought promotes change of the Sunni Caliphate or the government, hence offering productive advices and criticisms is inadequate and counterproductive to their school of though. For alien factions such as Shiite, its either their way or no way. That’s why, Khomeini insisted and made sure that his constitution mandates that the Prime Minister of the Islamic Republic of Iran must be a 12^th Imam Shiite Muslim. In contrast, the consultative Sunni school of thought promotes the inclusive opposition that sincerely offers productive advices and criticisms to the Caliph or the ruler, hoping to strengthen the Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphate or the government. In doing so, offering such consultations is adequate for the inclusive opposition, as they believe the final decision is always that of the Caliph or of the rulers in their Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphate/country.

By default, Shiite school of thought promotes the formation of independent opposition parties that are detached from the mother nation, while the Sunni school of thought promotes the self-critical majority that is attached to the mother nation. Sunni school of thought is fundamentally against formation of detached opposition parties, even if such parties are led by the pious companions of the prophet (ﷺ). The dark and turbulent period of trouble (Fitnah) and unrest must have had a significant role in the crystallization of this Sunni majority and inclusive-opposition political approach.

The turbulent period of 644 to 661 is remembered by Sunnis for its division, trouble, and unrest. The events of this period are as catastrophic as the reckless Western Christendom’s World War one and two events, which almost ended their own civilization. The turbulent period did sadly split the Muslim nation into two hostile Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphates, each led by an independent Caliph, Ali and Muawiya (the later ending up being the first Umayyad Caliph). This period started with the tragic assassination of the second Caliph (Omar) by a Persian Zoroastrian and was ended by Imam Hassan, the eldest son of Imam Ali. Imam Hassan wisely and willingly stepped down as a Caliph and offered the pledge of alliance to Muawiya. In doing so, Imam Hassan practically unified the split Muslim world and the Caliphate under one Caliph. It’s not unfair to consider Imam Hassan as the father of “Ahlu-Sunna-Wal-Jama’a” or the first “People of the traditions and majority”. This reminds me of prophet Mohamed’s (ﷺ) Hadith that says:

“Once the Prophet (ﷺ) brought out Al-Hasan and took him up the pulpit along with him and said, "This son of mine is a Saiyid (i.e. chief) and I hope that Allah will help him bring about reconciliation between two Muslim groups." Sahih al-Bukhari 3629, In-book reference.

As a result of that bitter turbulent period, Sunnis simply decided to follow the SPIRIT of Omar Ibn Al Khattab’s proven approach of governance TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, that offered the Islamic world those 10 golden pious and stable years. It’s obvious that the seventh century Sunni elders had confidently opted for Omar’s political approach that was founded on stability, after holistically analyzing and diagnosing all other approaches tried by other pious Caliphs during the period of trouble and the unrest. It was Omar’s political approach that stabilized the Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphate by UNIFYING ITS VOICE and not just by being pious or corruption free. No one dares to claim that Othman and Ali were less pious than Omar, but their Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphates were substantially less stable than Omar’s.

Basically, being pious is not enough to lead a nation. A leader must be a good listener who is also patient but quick, humble but firm, credible but cunning, visionary but practical, creative and ever learning, such as Omar.

Stability And Omar’s Golden Model

Well, the genius Omar Ibn Al Khattab, the second elected Caliph, was known for casually detaining prophet’s (ﷺ) pious companions in Medina close to him. Reliable history sources referred hereby inform how the pious companions were fed up with staying in Medina and how Omar gently rejected their repeated requests to leave Medina and join the Islamic troops on the boarders of the Caliphate. It’s reported that Omar was worried of the pious companions spreading all over the Caliphate and unconsciously forming opposition parties by innocently thinking loud and expressing their views to their devoted riff raff (new Muslims) gathered around them and eventually causing insurrection against the other companions of the prophet (ﷺ), the Caliph and eventually the Caliphate. Alas, what the pious Omar predicted is exactly what happened after he was assassinated, when his pious and elected successor Othman permitted the pious companions of the prophet (ﷺ) to leave Medina, leading to his own unlawful assassination by few riff raff and foolish-in-mind Muslims. Please check the following link of The Lives Of The Sahaba VOL 2 'Detaining People by Whom Divisions Will be Caused in the Ummah'.

https://books.google.ae/books?id=ti1uDwAAQBAJ&lpg=PA79&ots=Nle61IdWm-&dq=The%20Lives%20Of%20The%20Sahaba%20VOL%202%20'Detaining%20People%20by%20Whom%20Divisions%20Will%20be%20Caused%20in%20the%20Ummah'.&pg=PA79#v=onepage&q=The%20Lives%20Of%20The%20Sahaba%20VOL%202%20'Detaining%20People%20by%20Whom%20Divisions%20Will%20be%20Caused%20in%20the%20Ummah'.&f=true

But why Omar didn’t approve prophet’s (ﷺ) companions’ requests to leave Medina? Why did he insist that they stay around him and close to him?

It’s my humble opinion that Omar must have reached such a conclusion after his dialogue with Abu Baker over the decision to fight the rebellious Muslim factions who refused to pay taxes after the death of the prophet (ﷺ). Omar was not comfortable with the idea of Muslims fighting their Muslim brothers and continued to argue until he felt Abu Baker’s determination and conviction to quash the rebellion, even if the rebellious Muslims did declare that ‘There is no God but Allah’. At that point, Omar retreated and decided to support his Caliph's decision knowing that they didn’t have to always agree on each topic. After all, the Islamic Caliphate is a Totalitarian and Consultative Establishment, and the final word is always that of Caliph's.

Later, when Omar realized that his Caliph had been right, it probably led him to perform STAR and conclude that, if he hadn’t been physically with Abu Baker in Medina, he might have remained opposing Abu Baker’s decision, risking Caliphate's stability. He could have even unconsciously spread instability in the Caliphate simply by thinking out loud and sharing his personal opinion among other riff raff and new Muslims devoted to him, assuming that his audience is matured enough to hear such a criticism without forming a negative opinion about the pious Abu Baker as a failed Caliph and demand that he steps down or else! That’s exactly the scenario that took down Othman and led to his unlawful assassination by new riff raff and foolish-in-mind Muslims.

The following saying of the prophet might be another valid reason for Omar to insist that prophet’s companions (immigrants from Macca specifically) remain in Medina for consultation:

“Indeed, Allah will not gather my Ummah upon deviation, and Allah's Hand is over the Jama'ah" Jami` at-Tirmidhi 2167.

I am neither suggesting that the companions who left Medina after the assassination of Omar had a direct role in the assassination of Othman nor doubting their piety. I am simply stressing that distance and the Chines Whisper phenomenon could cause distortion of facts and misunderstandings by riff raffs and new to Islam Muslims, as cited in one of the Hadiths referred earlier. Inaccurate information reaching the pious companions outside of Medina could also lead them to form and adopt wrong political views that are different than their Caliph's, hence jeopardizing Caliphate's stability. After all, and by Quran’s account, prophet Mohamed’s (ﷺ) companions are trustworthy when it comes to delivering prophet’s religious message, but their personal political views remain to be their own opinions that may or may not be correct. The pious companions are trustworthy messengers of the Prophet's (ﷺ) religious message, but they are not politically infallible.

Unfortunately, the situation today is not as Omar wished for and the 21^st century enlighteners are scattered around the world, most of them in the Western Christendom, instead of being close to the Muslim ruling elites. Hence, the ruling elites and the enlighteners must account for the risk of distorted information circulating among the riff raffs and causing confusion and instability. The enlighteners must be cautious of forming wrong and premature judgments due to misunderstanding or misinterpreting the sayings and the decisions of the ruling elites who are somehow out of reach. The enlighteners must practice giving the ruling elites the benefit of the doubt as Omar did with his Caliph Abu Baker and Abd Allah Ibn Masoud did with his Caliph Othman. The Islamic centers must develop a clear methodology that is modern and compliant with Omar and Abd Allah Ibn Masoud’s pro-stability school of thought. The methodology shall aim to stabilize the nation by streamlining the relationship and the communication channels between the enlighteners and the ruling elites. We need to responsibly regulate what, how and when we say what we say and to whom we say it. Simply, we need to follow Omar's brilliant and pro-stability Stakeholder and Freedom of Speech Management Strategy (Non-Binding and Condor Consultation).

Let's remember that the Sunni Caliphate is a Totalitarian and Consultative Establishment, where the consultation by the Caliph is mandatory but not binding. Being unsatisfied with such consultative approach that offers nonbinding productive advices and criticisms, or insisting on one’s own way or no way, are Shiite methodology and behavior towards a Sunni Caliphate. Those Sunnis who practice such methodologies are Shiites-in-mind and fundamentally off the Sunni traditional tracks, even if they consider themselves Sunnis.

Stability And Opposition Phobia

Factions and opposition parties have the tendency to develop an opposition-phobia, rejecting everything the government does or says, as is the case nowadays with the Western democratic oppositions. That’s why, Omar kept the inclusive opposition around him as his advisors, to openly express their opinions on different matters relevant to the nation of Islam, at no risk of riff raffs and the Chinese Whisper. In this regard, you may refer how the companions of the prophet (ﷺ) fiercely practiced candor with their Caliph Omar as his sincere advisors, and not as an alien party (exclusive opposition) that seeks to control and deform, when they demanded on Omar to distribute the land of Iraq as a booty among the members of the Muslim army that captured Iraq. Many of the companions, such as Bilal Ibn Rabbah, critically disagreed with Caliph Omar’s intention that opposed what was practiced by the prophet (ﷺ) and the first Caliph Abu Baker. Omar believed that circumstances had changed ever since the prophet (ﷺ) died, hence the land should not be distributed among the army as the prophet (ﷺ) did. Omar believed such lands shall remain with their original owners who will pay taxes to the Caliphate, so that every citizen of the rapidly growing Islamic Caliphate would benefit from it. Of course, eventually and after a long consultation, Omar succeeded to obtain his advisor’s (prophet companion’s) buy-in. Omar acted as a responsible Caliph, who was responsible for offering services to his citizens and such services required funds.

Omar’s Golden Ruling Model was based on consultation and not consensus, in which he always consulted his advisors before making informed decisions. History informs that Omar had no ego and allowed his advisors to candor with him, as he did candor with Abu Baker and the prophet (ﷺ). He was wise enough to expect and allow some heated discussions, every now and then. Like any successful leader, Omar encouraged dialogues to prevent corridor talks that could offshoot unregulated freedom of speech and exclusive oppositions. A system that resists transparency and being self-critical, is simply replacing a regulated opposition (advisory) with an unregulated and toxic oppositions (factions).

Although the Sunni school of thought wisely adopted Omar’s political approach, some pious and non-pious riff raff followers of this school of thought have consciously and unconsciously failed to follow the adopted methodology and formed their own independent opposition parties. Each of them hammered a nail in the Caliphate's body until it kneeled. It was the Sunnis following the Shiite opposition methodology who gradually brought down the Caliphate in 1922 and not the Western Christendom. In fact, the Sunni Islamists are still hammering nails into their dead Caliphate's body by forming factions and following Shiite’s Exclusive-Opposition-Phobia methodology.

In Nutshell

Based on the above, the Sunni Islamists:

Speak like “Ahlu-Sunna-Wal-Jama’a” which means “People of the traditions and majority”, but they clearly behave as a Shiite or a faction.
Don't abide by the traditional Sunni Totalitarian and Consultative Establishment that is based on inclusive opposition that offers nonbinding consultation.
Lack consistency and credibility. Resort to deceiving and twisting of facts, which is a Shiite methodology and those who practice it are Shiites-in-mind even if they call themselves Sunnis.
Speak highly of Omar Ibn Al Khattab but fail to follow his political model or methodology by not being satisfied with a nonbinding consultative role. As such, they are fundamentally Shiites in mind, even if they call themselves Sunnis.
Speak highly of Omar Ibn Al Khattab but fail to follow his consultation style in wisely sharing their opinions with the learned and not openly with the riff raffs on the social media, promoting misunderstandings and misinterpretation that lead to instability.
Speak highly of Omar Ibn Al Khattab but fail to prioritize stability over piousness and fighting corruption.

Fundamentally, the Sunni Islamists are the New-Shiites. The same applies to the Turkish-Arabs as elaborated below.

Stability And Turkish-Arabs

Quran chapter 5 verse 8 clearly requires Muslims to be credible and fair even with their enemies:

"O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm for Allah, witnesses in justice, and do not let the hatred of a people prevent you from being just. Be just; that is nearer to righteousness. And fear Allah; indeed, Allah is Acquainted with what you do."

In spite of credibility being a mandatory requirement in Quran even with our enemies and deception or twisting of facts being obvious contradictions committed by the Shiite, most of the Sunni Islamists commit such a contradiction. In the following clip, Mohamed Abdul Maqsood, a Sunni Islamist and a member of Muslim brotherhood, rightly defends the Turkish president Tayeb Erdogan’s decision to legalize prostitution and support LGBT rights in Turkey. Abdul Maqsood rightly responds to Erdogan’s critics and defends such controversial decisions by referring his audience to the concessions offered by Ibn Taimiyah, wherein this renowned and genius fourteenth century Muslim scholar empowers the rulers to take extraordinary measures as and when necessary. But sadly, the 'radical, over-ambitious and Shiites-in-mind' Islamists such as Abdul Maqsood contradict themselves and lose credibility by addressing the pro-LGBT President Erdogan as a pious leader but demonize the Saudi leadership for permitting musical concerts! They grant President Erdogan the right to legislate Anti-Sharia laws based on Ibn Taimiyah’s Fatwa but demonize other Muslim leaders when they do the same and legislate similar laws based on the same Fatwa. Please refer the following YouTube link titled (لإخوانى محمد عبد المقصود يتحدث عن أسباب فتح أردوغان بيوت الدعاره فى تركيا).

https://youtu.be/BM-bYgTC0k0

Don’t get me wrong, as I said, I see no issues with President Erdogan legislating laws that suites the overall interests of Turkey and its EU membership application, but only if the Islamists loyal to President Erdogan practiced credibility and didn’t deny other Islamic Rulers the right to do the same, which is obviously not the case. Such unfair and contradictory position is politically squint, religiously against the above-mentioned verse of Quran that demands Muslims to be credible and it’s against the Sunni school of thought. A pious and credible Muslim with integrity would never adopt such a contradictory position. This is an example of integrity getting used and abused by alien oppositions to secure people’s loyalty and shape their destiny, in one of Machiavellian’s severest forms. This is an example of Sunni Islamists following Shiite’s opposition-phobia methodology, as elaborated earlier. For political reasons, Turkish-Arabs and Islamists blindly reject everything the Rulers say and discredit everything they do! This is simply not how prophet’s companions practiced constructive and inclusive opposition. As with the Shiite, Abdul Maqsood is clearly following an opposition-phobia methodology and wants to deform and not to reform the Arabic regimes.

The following clip is another example of a Sunni Islamist, Dr. Hakem Al Mutairi, who also follows Shiite’s opposition-phobia methodology. He encourages Arabs to take up arms and topple their governments, even if they had to destabilize their own countries. This is fundamentally against Omar and Sunni elder’s pro-stability approach as explain earlier. In the same clip and following the Shiite methodology, he demonizes Arabic rulers for closing down mosques during COVID-19 pandemic, when demonization is against prophet’s (ﷺ) guidelines that prohibits judging people by what is in their hearts. Al Mutairi is another Sunni Islamist and a Kuwaiti national, who has pledged allegiance to President Erdogan, lives in Turkey and continues to demonize everything the Arabic Rulers say and discredit everything they do. That’s why the clip rightly questions Al Mutairi’s integrity and credibility for his contradictory positions. Al Mutairi does not criticize President Erdogan for rightly closing down Turkey’s mosques due to COVID-19 pandemic but criticizes Saudi Arabia for locking down the holy mosques in Mecca and Medina. This is an example of an unfair and politically squint ‘radical over-ambitious and Shiite-in-mind’ Islamists who lacks integrity, credibility and twists facts. This is another example of integrity getting used and abused by detached oppositions to secure people’s loyalty and shape their destiny, in one of Machiavellian’s severest forms. This is another example of Sunni Islamists following Shiite’s opposition-phobia methodology, as elaborated earlier. They blindly reject everything the Arabic Rulers say and discredit everything they do! This is not how the companions of the prophet practiced productive and inclusive opposition. Just like Shiite, Al Mutairi is clearly following an opposition-phobia methodology and wants to deform and not to reform the Arabic regimes. Please refer the following YouTube and Twitter link.

https://youtu.be/R-2491jpj4A

https://twitter.com/DrHAKEM/status/1275521397272567809?s=19

Why there is no credibility? What could be behind such a Machiavellian and opposition-phobia behavior? Is it the historical master-salve relationship manifesting itself in the way the current Turkish Sultan is dealing with the Arabic dissidents in axil? Are Erdogan's excessive demands driven by the Turkish inferiority complexity, is leading him to sacrifice and burn his loyal Turkish-Arab's integrity and credibility?

I don’t entirely share the above opinion, but it’s probable. The Turkish nation, just like the Iranians, do have a complex and destructive sense of pride that makes them see themselves above others, specially the “nomadic Arabs” (basically all Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula). In fact, such sense of pride weakens and questions their suitability to lead the multi-cultural Islamic nations, while being humble has always been the “nomadic Arab’s” strongest leadership trait. The Turkish and the Iranian sense of ethnic supremacy can potentially deviate them from seeing the truth and the reality (both required by any successful leader). Humbleness, on the other hand, is a necessary leadership trait that is fundamental for maintaining stability of any multi-national and multi-ethnic civilization. The harsh seventh century desert environment not only made great warriors out of the nomadic Arabs, but it also made them entirely humble and down to earth, which is still evident today in the way today’s intelligent and highly educated nomad Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula humbly look up to other nations as their teachers. Humbleness was the most winning characteristic that helped Arabs naturally embrace other culturally diverse nations and to succeed in establishing and leading the greatest multi-national civilization known to history.

The following Hadith demonstrates how such patriotic and humble nomadic Arabs (the companions of the prophet ﷺ) were balanced and able to see the strength of their competitors:

"Mustaurid al-Qurashi reported: I heard Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying: The Last Hour would come (when) the Romans would form a majority amongst people. 'Amr said to him (Mustaurid Qurashi): See what you are saying? He said: I say what I heard from Allah's Messenger (ﷺ). Thereupon he (Amr) said: If you say that, it is a fact for they (Romans) have four qualities. They have the patience to undergo a trial and immediately restore themselves to sanity after trouble and attack again after flight. They (have the quality) of being good to the destitute and the orphans, to the weak and, fifthly, the good quality in them is that they put resistance against the oppression of kings." Please refer Sahih Muslim, the Book of Tribulations and Portents of the Last Hour. Hadith 45.

The superiority complex, on the other hand, lacks integrity, credibility and stability, as such can’t establish and sustain a civilization. Perhaps the rise of arrogance, nationalism and superiority complex are what made the Islamic Caliphate lose sight and fall to its ominous fate. Perhaps what the nomadic Arabs need to focus on is their God-given leadership skills and leave industrialization skills to the other God-given Islamic regions. But the master-slave complexity is not the only reason why the President Erdogan is burning his loyal Turkish-Arab’s cards and its definitely not the strongest reason. There are two other reasons.

Firstly, President Erdogan is simply and naturally being a loyal Turkish leader, who uses any card to make Turky great again, including the Turkish-Arab card. Turky is clearly a priority for President Erdogan and his tendency today in May 2021 to abandon Muslim brotherhood’s grievances by entering into direct peace talks with the Egyptian president Sisi (Muslim Brotherhood’s worst nightmare) is a proof but not the only one. Showing signs of agreement to abandon the Turkish military bases in Libya and to fly back the Syrian/ISIS Mercenaries/Militias in response to the Egyptian government’s demands is another proof. Abandoning Jamal Khashoggi’s grievance by accepting Saudi Arabia’s court rulings, in anticipation of a peace with Saudi Arabia and other Gulf country’s attractive tourism markets is another proof. As revealed by the opposition in the Turkish parliament, abandoning the Uyghur Muslim’s grievances and deporting the Uyghur immigrants to face the Chinese concentration camps, after succeeding to strike a desired economical deal with China is yet another proof. President Erdogan has clearly demonstrated his total loyalty to his country and to Islam within Turkey, as he has used all cards to make Turkey great again and make Islam more acceptable in Turkey (what used to be one of the most vicious forms of secular and Anti-Islamic governments). Compliments!

However, President Erdogan’s expansion foreign policies and his investments in the Muslim Brotherhood-led “New Middle East” plan as a result of his 2003 partnership agreement with USA, did result in the destructive Arab Springs. His investments in the expansion policies proved to be a reckless adventure that scared the foreign investments and negatively affected the Turkish economy/currency, causing Turkey to lose the economical/currency gains it had achieved as a result of smart internal policies that attracted foreign investments. Alas, President Erdogan is another pious and ‘radical over-ambitious’ investor who was “set to fail” to weaken the Turkish and the region’s competitive edge.

Secondly, Islamists perfectly understand and accept that the Islamic form of government is not democratic but a totalitarian, where the Caliph has the power to make any decision that people simply have to obey. As in the case of Al Mutairi, it seems obvious that the Turkish Sultan expects and the Turkish-Arabs agree to use the social media and blindly criticize anything their Arabic governments say or do, while glorifying anything their Caliph President Erdogan says or does. That is because they understand that their Caliph President Erdogan has the last word and they careless about credibility. That’s because the Turkish-Arabs treat their homeland governments as hypocritical puppets of the West, while treating their Turkish Caliph President Erdogan as a pious NATO member! It’s less about the Turkish Sultan looking down at the Turkish-Arabs and more about the Turkish-Arabs themselves looking up to their Turkish Caliph and enjoy being his companions, just like the good old days. Except that, the credible and good old Godly Caliphs of Islam, such as Abu Baker, Omar, Othman and Ali, never expected their companions to cheat their fellow Muslims for the sake of getting to the Caliphate’s throne. Similarly, the credible companions of Abu Baker and Omar never cheated their fellow Muslims for the sake of getting their preferred Caliph to the Caliphate’s throne.

For example, Turkish-Arabs insist on being historically squint and accuse Saudi Arabia of supporting the Palestinian/Israeli Deal of the Century proposed by the American administration, despite Saudis denying that. Such Turkish-Arabs even criticize minimum and necessary security collaborations between some of the Arabic countries and Israel. But the same Turkish Arabs, 'act as a fools' like Mr. Fuji’s referees, turning a blind eye to the following publicly known pro-Israel Turkish policies, as President Erdogan of Turkey in particular:

Has official and full fledge political and economic relations with Israel.
Has an embassy in Tel Aviv.
Has visited Israel officially in 2005. Together with Sharon, President Erdogan visited Yad Vashem (Holocaust Remembrance Center) and placed flowers on Theodor Herzl's grave.
Has signed an agreement with Israel in 2016 that refers to the Jerusalem as the eternal capital of Israel.
Has a consulate in Jerusalem since 2016, that’s before Trump moving the USA embassy to Jerusalem in 2018.
Has been conducting joint military exercises with Israel as two pious members of the NATO organization.
Has continued selling weapons to Israel.
Has been operating the largest number of weekly commercial flights to the Israeli capital.

To support President Erdogan, Turkish Arabs are totally silent on the above pro-Israel/anti-Palestinian Turkish policies as much as they are silent about Saudi Arabia’s pro-Palestinian strategy that caused it to lose the right of hosting 2018 international chess tournament for banning the Israeli players. Such a contradictory and Machiavellian approach could only prove the continuation of the historical relationship between the Caliph Erdogan and the pious Turkish Arabs, wherein the Turkish-Arabs have willingly accepted to give up their free well to their desired Caliph. The traditional Sunni approach is based on integrity, credibility and offering honest consultation to the Caliph, but not the Shiite’s Machiavellian approach of using ‘The Taqeyyah’ and ‘The Bidyah’ strategically to save their fragile denomination. This is another example of integrity getting used and abused by the opposition (the Turkish Arabs) to secure people’s loyalty and shape their destiny, in one of Machiavellian’s severest forms. This is another example of Turkish-Arabs (Sunni Islamists) following Shiite’s opposition-phobia methodology that lacks credibility, as elaborated earlier. This is not how the companions of the prophet (ﷺ) practiced productive, credible and inclusive opposition!

Alas, ever since the 19^th century, the Western Christendom has succeeded to “set to fail our foolish-in mind” and our region’s worst investors to “fail the benign” and weaken their historical Middle Eastern competitors. However, unlike the Western Christendom’s previous “set to fail foolish in mind” firefighting initiatives, the latest Arabic Spring initiative is far more vicious and aims at failing countries and not just their governments by replacing governments with militias.

The most generous illustration that I could humbly offer to the region’s ELITES who fell for the Arabic Spring Creative Anarchy is to compare them to the patriotic captain who confidently took the Titanic to its doomed fate. Our region has witnessed many of such Anti-Country, pro-militias and destabilizing springs as in the case of Iran, Somalia, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Libya. Egypt, Saudi Arabia and other Arabic countries barely managed to escape riding the Arabic Spring Titanic.

Let’s remember that Turkish-Arabs and Islamists lack credibility. They respectively demonize and glorify everything that the Arabic Rulers and President Erdogan say or do! This is not how the companions of the prophet practiced productive, credible and inclusive opposition. Such Sunni Turkish-Arabs are FUNDAMENTALLY Shiite-in-mind, even if they call themselves Sunnis!

Stability And The Shiite-In-Mind Sunnis

Turkish-Arabs are not satisfied to offer their governments a consultation or an opinion, as the Caliph Omar expected from prophet’s companions. When it comes to Islamists, it’s either their way or no way, and that has nothing to do with Islam. They act the same as those who assassinated the pious Caliph Othman after he listened and defeated their doubts in an open and free dialogue. As a matter of fact, I believe the only mistake the pious Othman made as a Caliph was being too democratic, may Allah bless his pure soul. The Islamic Totalitarian governing system doesn’t rely on consensus to reach a decision, but it’s rather a Consultative Establishment wherein the elected elites offer non-binding consultation to assist the Caliph make his decision. The Caliph or the Sultan or the Ruler consults his advisors and experts before making an informed and independent decision. Exactly like how corporates work, where the Chief Executive Officer consults his experts and then decides. Like how the United Arab Emirates works, where the government consults its appointed experts and the elected members of the National Council and then decides. Bernard Lewis said:

“The traditional middle eastern order was not democratic in the sense of Anglo-American democratic system. But it was certainly not dictatorial. When the French asked their ambassador to Ottoman empire in Istanbul why it’s taking him so long to finalize an ongoing negotiation, he replied “Here it’s not like in France where the king is the soul master who decides everything and does what he pleases. Here the Sultan has to consult with the holders of the office, he even has to consult with retired holders of the office”.

Please refer the following YouTube link titled “Radical Islam, Israel and West”, Hebrew University of Jerusalem. YouTube, minutes 1:16:49 to 1:22:32.

https://youtu.be/7KePJz28_GY

Where is the integrity and the credibility of the Islamists in all of this? How do their expectations comply with Omar’s golden consultative, credible and inclusive-opposition and anti-faction model? How is their Creative Anarchy comparable to the transparent, credible and pro-stability approach taught by the Sunni elders? How is their reckless and malign use of social media comparable to Omar’s wise and benign stakeholder and freedom of speech management?

Fundamentally, both Turkish-Arab and Islamist’s approaches are contradictory to that of Omar’s and off track the following Sunni mindset and fundamentals:

Never compromise the stability of the Caliphate and that includes the stability of the Uthman Caliphate which shouldn’t have been compromised, despite its political and religious deviations. Those who demonized it and helped to topple it have gone against the Sunni fundamentals taught by the pious Omar and the other companions of the prophet (ﷺ).
Consultation ends with offering consultation to the Caliph or the ruler.
Citizens will respect the final decision made by the Caliph or the ruler.
Candor is a soft power used by the Caliph to manage the consultation process and account for the exclusive-opposition risks.
Freedom of speech is regulated to account for the riff raff risk.

Alas, deviation from the above FUNDEMENTALS is what has qualified the 'radical-overambitious’ Islamists as easy candidates for the Western Christendom’s 'set to fail’ policy. The Western Christendom has been using our pious to bring the chaos to the Islamic and Arabic worlds, as elaborated below.

May The Pious Bring The Chaos

This case study begins exactly where the first one ended, the INTEGRITY (credibility).

The story tells that a wolf got tired of being scary and wished to turn into a kind and loving animal. The king of the jungle advised him to turn into a cute rabbit. The wolf liked the idea, but moments later he returned and asked the lion: “But how? You didn’t tell me how to turn into a rabbit?” The troubled lion said: “My job is only to set the strategy and you must find a way to implement it!”

It’s important to have a SMART plan because a false plan is a plan to fail. That’s exactly what the 1922 win-lose/integrity-free false plan did for the Western Christendom. This hesitant firefighting policy that couldn’t defeat principals, simply inherited challenges to their 1960 descendants.

Such charts, as shown below, must have alerted the Western Christendom in the sixties to the threat of the Sunni Islam dominating much of the Europe. It must have been difficult to helplessly watch the Sunni Spring peacefully spreading all over the world by some of the 45 STABLE and less pious Muslim majority countries that they had earlier created, before leaving the region so generously and unceremoniously. Today we know that the ‘less pious’ leaders of those 45 Muslim weak and divided countries were able to peacefully spread Islam across the world (not just the Western Christendom) and built more than 13,000 mosques in Europe alone. This is an unprecedented achievement, led by the Wahabi-Salafist Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the other oil rich Arabian Peninsula countries, but the damaged and impatient Islamists can’t see such a significant achievement. Today, Saudi Arabia alone is being criticized by the Western Christendom for investing more than USD 130 billion in spreading the Wahabi-Salafism. No other Caliphate or Caliph in the history of Islam was able to peacefully achieve such a remarkable result without any Anti-West “Death to America and Death To Israel” pro-Caliphate slogans. Please refer YouTube link titled “World's Largest Religion Groups by Population 1945 – 2019”.

https://youtu.be/_rZwnJ1cE1s

In addition to the above threat, economic indicators must have further alerted the unconfident Western Christendom in early seventies to the threat of Middle East reviving its scientific advancement. It must have been worrying to watch the industrialization peacefully developing in some of those 45 STABEL and ‘less pious’ countries that the Western Christendom had earlier created through their win-lose/integrity-free policy, such as Iran and Iraq.

Don't you agree that the above two threats were enough to make the unconfident Western Christendom panic and worry about losing their global lead and influence?

How the Islamists, who regard themselves as the Guardians of the Caliphate, have served Islam?

Imagine where would have Sunni Islam been today globally, if the 'radical-over ambitious' Islamists in late 1970s had let Islam grow naturally without a Caliphate?

The Iranian Industry Before And After Khomeini

Until the 1979 Khomeini’s Islamic revolution, Iran and South Korea were both ruled by dictators and strived to become industrial powers, except that the oil rich Iran with its unique geo-political advantages had an upper hand and the capacity for a faster advancement. However, the Iranian King’s realistic projection of becoming among the top 5 economies of the world never materialized, while the South Koreans succeeded to become, as of today, the 4^th largest GDP in Asia and the 11^th largest in the world.

Contrary to the current Iranian government’s claims, the transparency, economic and social indicators show that Iran has underperformed after the 1979 Islamic revolution as summarized below.

Pre 1979 Revolution Economic And Social Indicators (Shah Time)

Indicator

Description

Economical

Education

Women Rights

Reference

Shah of Iran managed to increased oil revenue from USD 555 Million in 1963 to USD 20 Billion in 1976.

Number of students raised from 1.5 million in 1963 to 10 million in 1978.
Total number of schools multiplied by 3.24x.
Education Budget:

1. 1963-1967: 45 Billion Iranian Rials.

2. 1968-1972: 172 Billion Iranian Rials.

3. 1973-1977: 551 Billion Iranian Rials.

The right to vote, run for office and serve as lawyers and Judges.
Increased marriage age to 15

Please refer YouTube link titled “History of US-Iran Conflict Explained”

https://youtu.be/d_htudbaqsk

Post 1979 Revolution Economic And Social Indicators (Khomeini Time)

Indicator

Description

2019 Corruption Perception Index

Reference

South Korea 39/180
Turkey 91/180
Vietnam 96/180
Iran 146/180

Transparency International

https://www.transparency.org/en/countries/iran

GDP Trends

GDP Ranking

Policies

Reference

“In 1950, Turkey’s gross domestic product (GDP) was 22 percent higher than Iran’s, but the GDP of Korea and Vietnam were less than 60 percent of Iran’s. In 1977, the last “normal” year before the revolution—1978 saw the start of unrest and strikes that ultimately brought down the monarchy—Iran’s economy was 26 percent larger than Turkey’s; 65 percent higher than Korea’s, and nearly 5.5 times the size of Vietnam’s. In 2017, Turkey’s nominal GDP was 2.4 and Korea’s 7.2 times larger than Iran’s, while Vietnam is 70 percent of Iran’s and is being touted as an emerging Asian Tiger. For a country that has one of the world’s most abundant natural resources, data suggest that the Iranian economy did not maintain its pre-revolutionary trend and could not keep pace with its comparators.”

“Using GDP ranking as another metric of economic importance, in 1960, Iran was the world’s 29^th largest economy, Turkey ranked 13^th and South Korea ranked 33^rd . By 1977, Iran had climbed to 18^th place, Turkey was 20^th, and Korea 28^th. In 2017, Iran was 27^th, Turkey hovered around 18^th, and Korea had by now become the 13^th largest economy in the world. Vietnam, too, has had a phenomenal rise from 87^th rank to 46^th place—a jump of nearly 40 ranks in less than thirty years. Oil producers such as Mexico and Saudi Arabia rank today among the top twenty economies, a group which Iran could have easily been part of given its vast oil and gas endowments.”

“Domestic policies to promote entrepreneurship could have helped Iran to capitalize on its young and educated population. And a foreign policy geared to regional and global integration could have permitted Iran to benefit much more from its unique economic geography. While it has certainly made progress in the last forty years, it has failed to keep pace with countries which trailed Iran prior to the revolution.”

Please refer the following link titled “Atlantic Council, Iran’s economic performance since the 1979 Revolution. FEB 1^st, 2019, by Nadereh Chamlou.”

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/iransource/iran-s-economic-performance-since-the-1979-revolution/

Unemployment Rates

Inflation

Reference

Young Iranians 27%.
University graduates 40%.

40% as per declared numbers.
At least 250% as per experts.

Please refer the following link titled "History of US-Iran Conflict Explained"

https://youtu.be/d_htudbaqsk

Now, was the King wrong when he predicted being among the top 5 economies of the world? Could you imagine where would have the Iranian economy been today globally, if the Kingdom was not toppled by Khomeini in 1979 and King’s heavy investment in education, industrial and technological advancements were let to peacefully continue?

Obviously, some firefighting needed to be done by the panicking and unconfident Western Christendom due to their inability to:

Defeat the Islamic principles.
Slow down the Middle Eastern economical and industrial advancement.

So, they decided to patch their post 1922 failed policies with another win-lose/integrity-free firefighting policy, aiming to destabilize the region by eating the white bull!

The story tells that in a forest, there lived three bulls, a red bull, a black bull, and a white bull. Among them lived a lion. The lion never felt he was king of the forest. He felt outnumbered by three bulls. One day, the lion said to the red bull and the black bull “That white bull is so large and white and can be spotted easily in through the trees of our forest. My color is like yours. Let me eat the white bull, and the three of us will blend in well together. Then we will be safe in the forest.” The red bull and the black bull said: “Go ahead, eat him.” So, the lion ate the white bull. A few days later, the lion said to the red bull: “You and I look alike, your color and mine are similar. What do you say I eat the black bull, and the forest will be ours?” The red bull replied: “Go ahead, eat him.” And so, the lion ate the black bull. A few days later the lion said to the red bull: “Today I think I will eat you.” The red bull said: “Let me call my friends to rescue me!” The lion replied: “Go ahead, call them.” But the red bull cried out instead in dismay: “I was eaten the day the white bull was eaten.”

The Integrity Game

Now that we know WHY and HOW the Western Christendom decided to destabilize the region, the question is, WHO could possibly do it for them?

Well, who could possibly be better than Region’s Worst Investors (RWI)? So, why not ‘generously and unceremoniously set to fail' an ascetic, pious but politically squint ‘radical over-ambitious’ Islamist, who would in the name of Allah and for the sake of Allah help the lion to eat the White Bull and unconsciously slowdown the advancement of Iran, Islam, and the entire Middle East?

History informs that you can’t always defeat an enemy by killing them as it will only make them stronger, unless you kill them all in a genocide, which is an option that everyone tries to avoid. Of course, you could defeat an enemy simply by defeating their principals, but you can’t fight principals without integrity (credibility), and integrity is what the Western Christendom lacks globally.

In the WAR OF PRINICIPALS:

INTEGRTY (credibility) is the secret weapon used by the internal and external competitors to defeat the ruling principals.
Integrity often gets used and abused by both the internal and external competitors to steal people’s loyalty and shape their destiny by spreading rumors and hiding the truth.
Opposition claims purity and demonizes its competitor, using the corruption stick.
The Machiavellian manifests in its severest forms.

The Islamists Are Not An Exception

Never mind their outer piety, the religious oppositions or Islamists are not an exception to the above unethical rules. Basically, the more 'radical and over-ambitious' they are, the better they play this unethical game. As in the case of Zionists, Islamists have also been “set to fail as radical and over-ambitious” opposition parties. Ironically, they claim integrity by conveniently comparing themselves to the pious companions of the Prophet Mohamed (ﷺ) but refuse to compare the current Muslim Rulers even to so many former and less-pious Caliphs of the Caliphate. Indeed, Islamists have shown professional arrogancy in acclaiming and denying integrity for themselves and the current Muslim Rulers, respectively.

In a war of principals, integrity was the weapon that Khomeini, an Iranian Islamist, used to introduce himself as the pious leader of the 1978 Iranian revolution. Ironically, he was embraced by all political spectrums in Iran, including the Westernized atheists and the esterized communists. Mysteriously and rather easily, Khomeini succeeded to topple the well-established, modern, and the Westernized Iranian Kingdom.

Khomeini’s books and radical thoughts could not have won him integrity, so they mysteriously remind unknown to the reading Iranian nation, until the revolution succeeded. His pious clerical dress earned him integrity as well as his fiery and emotional speeches challenging the King in 1963. The drama associated with his subsequent short imprisonment and the drama associated with his deportation from Iran gained him more integrity. The drama resulted in the vast majority of the Iranians, including the Westernized atheists and the Esterized communists, to follow him, taking bullets blindly and emotionally on his behalf, and loudly chanting “Allah-Hu-Akbar”. He was being promoted as the successor of the pious Imam Ali, the fourth Caliph of Islam.

1978 Belfour Declaration

Khomeini’s success was mysterious, as the entire western media were ‘generously and unceremoniously’ rushing to offer their services and cover his anti-Israeli/pro-Palestinian revolution! The Western Christendom’s media strongly portrayed Khomeini to the entire Islamic world as a benign, pious, strong, and genuine leader with integrity. The media dramatically publicized and illustrated him as a pious man of God, humbly setting on a rugged floor in Paris and apparently managing one of the most complicated and sophisticated revolutions against the malign, spoiled, and arrogant pro-Israel Iranian King, who sat on a luxurious throne.

After all, it’s not a rocket science to realize that even in the Western democracy, the same media charges the voters with positive or negative feelings to control their choices, in what appears to be a free election. However, the Western democratic show uses the media to keep the Western Christendom STABLE, so that it could continue progressing and maintaining its global lead. Whereas the same media is often used as a powerful soft power to DESTABALIZE other regions and bankrupt them, as in the case of Iran.

In 1978, the Western Christendom reissued its Iranian version of the 1917 ‘Belfour Declaration’. Once again, they announced their full support for the establishment of a “Shiite Caliphate” by the minority Shiite Muslims in the majority Sunni world, even at the cost of shedding Christian blood during the 2003’s illegal invasion of Iraq. Mysteriously, the lovers of Jesus Christ (ﷺ) continued to ‘generously and unceremoniously’ support a radical Shiite Caliphate in Iran that chanted “Death to America and death to Israel” as they earlier supported the killers of Jesus Christ (ﷺ) to establish a “Jewish Caliphate” in the Palestine. Ironically, Mr. Belfour keeps reissuing such declarations, but the Americans and the Israelis get cursed for it. But I don't recall hearing anyone in Iran or other pro-Iranian militias in South Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen chant ‘Death to the Great Britain’!

Have you?

The One-Billion-Dollar Question

Why did the Western Christendom take the risk of helping the anti-Israel Khomeini to establish a Shiite Caliphate?

The answer is because they never did! As in the case of Zionists, one doesn’t help by ‘generously and unceremoniously’ serving cheese on a mouse trap. Does he?

Fahmi Al Huwaidi, the Egyptian political analyst and a writer, visited Iran shortly after the 1979 revolution and published his findings in his 1987 book “Iran From Inside”. In its 1991 fourth edition and on pages 13, 85, 94, 142 and 168 of the book, Huwaidi mentions how Khomeini in 1965 deviated from the orthodox Shiite silent opposition approach (just like Theodor Herzl breached the silent orthodox Jewish approach). Huwaidi mentions how Khomeini taught in Iraq, while in exile, the obligation to replace existing stable governments with another under the guardianship of the ascetic Islamic Jurists, who acted on behalf of God the almighty. Huwaidi mentions how content Khomeini was to just preach a theory that he expected to slowly mature and materialize in the next two to three centuries. Khomeini never dreamed of personally deploying his own theory in less than 15 years, a theory that lacked establishment!

Huwaidi correctly describes Khomeini’s revolution as a mysterious jump of the premature to power, that should have raised curiosities and questions! In other words, the Western Christendom invested in Khomeini as one of the Region’s Worst Investors and politically squint, who would most probably and unconsciously bankrupt and destabilize not just Iran, but the Arabic and the Islamic worlds as well, and so he did!

Khomeini’s Occult Policies

On page 45, Huwaidi quotes Khomeini’s response to question 2834 while in exile, where he called for boycotting any country that had economic and political ties with Israel and called on Muslims to object to such relations, in every possible way and form. He called those who dealt with United States and Israel as traitors and enemies of Islam and Muslims. The Western Christendom’s media ‘generously and unceremoniously’ supported the spreading of such fiery and dramatic slogans, that not only touched the hearts and souls of the naive Iranian enlighteners, but also the hearts of many emotional Sunni Muslims. Ironically, in 1987 and during the Iran Iraq war, Khomeini permitted his government to secretly purchase required American weapons that arrived in Tehran on board of cargo planes that flew directly from Tel Aviv, the capital of Israel, in what was later known as the Iran-Contra scandal. The United States of the America (USA), rather the Central Intelligent Agency (CIA), used the funds from Iran’s arms deal to support armed conflict in Nicaragua.

Don’t get me wrong, as I see no issues in Khomeini desperately purchasing required weapons to support his war. The problem is that like most of the Islamists, Khomeini allowed himself to secretly deal with the Americans and the Israelis that he calls demons but continued publicly demonizing the deposed Iranian king and other regional and Islamic leaders for reluctantly dealing with the same demons. In other words, its ok when he does but not the others!

This contradictory and occult policy is still practiced by the Iranian regime as well as other Islamists and oppositions (hidden and apparent) in the region who claim integrity. In the war of principals, this is an example of integrity getting used and abused by oppositions to steal people’s loyalty and shape their destiny, in one of Machiavellian’s severest forms.

Death To America And Israel

Surprisingly, the drama associated with the emotional slogan “Death to America and Israel” is still able to deceive some in the region and convince them to turn a blind eye to the bitter reality. The drama associated with such slogans have remarkably succeeded to convince many in the Arabic and Islamic worlds to stop listening fairly and freely to those who disagree with the Iranian regime, even though Quran requires Muslims to judge after listening to all sides:

"So give good tidings to My servants. Who listen to speech and follow the best of it. Those are the ones Allah has guided, and those are people of understanding." Quran chapter 39 verses 17 and 18.

Nevertheless, over time, such Machiavellian acts have scratched Khamenei’s integrity and made him no better, if not worst, then the former Iranian King. Exactly as similar Machiavellian acts of the apartheid have scratched Israel’s integrity and made them no better than the Nazis. The recent, repeating and countrywide anti-regime protests in Iran with people chanting 'Long live Shah' and 'Death to Khamenei' confirms that fake media can’t deceive for long. Iranians have learned that their former King was far more transparent with them and the Islamic world when it came to his open relations with the Western countries and Israel. A person with integrity wouldn’t selectively decide to hide his weaknesses while publishing that of his competitors, as Khomeini did, and his regime continues to do so. The Western Christendom could not have found anyone better than Khomeini as the Region's Worst Investor!

The Region’s Worst Investors (RWIs)

When the unconfident Western Christendom ‘generously and unceremoniously’ seemed to support democracy in Iran through Khomeini, in reality they were supporting one of region’s worst investors who could weaken and bankrupt not only Iran, but the entire Middle East. They did so seamlessly, without leaving a trace or jeopardizing the reputation of the West and the Christianity (the Western Christendom).

Just like the ‘radical and over-ambitious’ Zionists, the Western Christendom smartly chose the disturbed Khomeini from a damaged community with a Collective Grievant & Psychological Structure and ‘generously and unceremoniously sat him to fail’ as Region’s Worst Investor Islamist, who will economically drown Iran by wrongly investing in exporting his Shiite revolution instead of investing in Iran’s ongoing industrial revolution. Khomeini’s investment in the wrong revolution will lead to:

An exhaustive war with Iraq.
Fostering sectarian violence to create and lead radical Shiite oppositions worldwide.
Fostering Creative Anarchy to create and lead radical Sunni oppositions worldwide.
Proxy wars that bleed the Shiite and Sunni.

Khomeini And The Cinema Rex Fire Crisis

The 1917 Belfour declaration failed to cause mass migration of Jews from Europe to the Palestine, but the Holocaust did. Similarly, Khomeini failed to cause a mass demonstration and strikes until Cinema Rex mysteriously burned in the southern city of Abadan, leaving behind 377 innocent casualties. The same night and without any investigation, the revolutionary voices immediately accused the King of being behind the tragedy. Next day, Khomeini from Paris also accused the King, causing a nationwide outrage that toppled the regime in few months. Of course, the Iranian King’s denial of such accusation didn’t convince the angry demonstrators, as the Saudi denial of their support of the “Deal of Century” has not convinced the deceived and dramatic riff raffs in the Islamic world.

In spite of the Cinema Rex being a turning point in the history of the Iranian revolution, unlike other revolutionary events that are being remembered and celebrated yearly, Khomeini’s regime downplays this particular incident. Executing few officials of the previous regime by the revolutionary kangaroo courts, that denied the accused access to lawyers, has neither convinced nor satisfied the devastated families of those perished in the cinema. As a matter of fact, the regime silently building Cinema Rex’s monument in a hidden corner behind the cinema convinced the devastated families that the ousted King wasn’t behind the incident. It was evident to them that Khomeini’s regime was not interested in exploring facts related to this incident.

As of today, Hussain Tak-Ba-Ali Zadeh remains to be the main accused of burning the Cinema. He was arrested before the revolution for his role in the incident. He was released by the revolutionary forces when King’s regime collapsed. Pressure from the devastated family of those perished in the incident resulted in the new regime reluctantly re-arresting Tak-Ba-Ali and sentencing him to death following a three-day kangaroo court that denied him the right to access legal help. Tak-Ba-Ali confessed that in coordination with senior revolutionary figures, he and three others burned the cinema to help the revolution by bad-mouthing King’s regime, but they didn’t intend to kill people. They though people will be able to escape the fire.

This is an example of Khomeini regime’s ability to jeopardize innocent lives by fostering violence that radicalizes people to achieve an objective. There is nothing pious in falsely accusing the King of a crime without any investigation. There is nothing pious in burning people to death to achieve an objective. This is not Islam but it’s the Machiavellian in its worst forms.

Khomeini And The Gulf Crisis

Iraq sheltered Khomeini after being deported by the Iranian King. Alas, Iraq was politically using Khomeini to pressurize it's neighboring monarch as Iran politically used the Iraqi Kurdish and Shiite separatist movements to pressurize the Iraqi regime.

Shortly after the revolution, a war with around two million casualties broke out between Iran and Iraq in September of 1980. It ended in August of 1988 with a cease-fire followed by signing of a formal peace agreement in August of 1990. It was the Iranian media that started the cold war by exporting its revolution and publicly calling for an end to what Khomeini named the infidel Socialist Baath regime of Iraq. Furthermore, using the Iranian backed Iraqi Hiz-bul-Allah Shiite forces, Iran started a proxy war that involved few but serious acts of violence within the Iraqi territory leading to Iraq’s defensive and offensive invasion of the Iranian territories. Not only Iraq intended to protect its security, but it also used the opportunity to change the 1975 Algerian Iran-Iraq Border Agreement signed with the King of Iran, which Saddam considered ‘unfavorable’.

It’s worth mentioning that Khomeini’s revolutionary kangaroo courts executed most of the previous regime’s officials, among them was Iran’s former foreign minister Mr. Abbas Khal-At-Bari, who orchestrated the 1975 Iran-Iraq Border Agreement. Khomeini regime’s kangaroo revolutionary court accused Khal-At-Bari of betrayal for the corrupt agreement he formulated in 1975 and executed him. Ironically, in 1988 one of Khomeini’s conditions for peace with Iraq was for Saddam to recognize Khal-At-Bari’s 1975 Iran-Iraq Border Agreement, something that Iraq was ready to accept shortly after the war started! (اللي ما يعرف الصقر يشويه) it’s another Arabic proverb that means “Those who don’t appreciate a Falcon will barbecue it”! Huwaidi was right when he described Khomeini’s revolution as a mysterious jump of the premature to power.

During the first Gulf war, Iran accused Kuwait of supporting Iraq. As a result, they targeted Kuwait’s oil tankers by deploying naval mines in the Gulf waters. After few incidents, Kuwait had to sign a military agreement with the United States to protect its oil tankers. To avoid a conflict with the Americans, Iran stopped bothering oil tankers that officially raised both the Kuwait and the American flags.

The following are the results of Iran’s investment in the wrong revolution:

The war contributed to the world oil market's volatility and helped to undermine OPEC's cohesiveness and market control, resulting in price cuts. While the Iranian King’s policies succeeded to raise the price of oil from USD 1.32/b in 1968 to USD 12.79/b in 1978 (an increase of 850% in 10 years), Khomeini’s policies initially raised the price of oil to eventually settle at USD 14.24 in 1988 (an increase of 111% in 10 years), due to region’s bleeding post-war economy. The initial rise of prices was associated to the natural risk of the war on oil supplies, but the global arms industry was the real beneficiary of such rise in prices and not Iran or region’s economy. Meaning, the King used the Petro-Dollars to invest in Iran, while Khomeini used it to infest militias outside Iran. Please refer the below link for the average annual OPEC crude oil price from 1960 to 2020 (in U.S. dollars per barrel).

https://www.statista.com/statistics/262858/change-in-opec-crude-oil-prices-since-1960/

1. Since the 1970s, USA was awaiting an opportunity to fill the vacuum created by the British forces. The Iranian adventure in the Gulf partly fulfilled the United States’s Longley-awaited consent of the region to navigate the warm waters of the Gulf and establish its first military base. Iraq’s 1990 adventure and invasion of Kuwait further materialized the United States’s Longley-awaited consent of the region to walk the warm lands of the Arabian Peninsula and establish military bases. That’s what a wrong investment could result into.
This example demonstrates how the Iranian regime's policies diverted attentions, destabilized the region and damaged its economy, instead of investing in industrialization and development. Nevertheless, Khomeini continued to invest in exporting his revolution and fixing his 'Shiite Caliphate’s' feet elsewhere, while the radical Shiites enjoyed attending, singing and dancing in this Shiite wedding and anxiously waiting to grab the bride’s flower bouquet. In the meantime, the pious Western Christendom band conveniently continued playing the Iranian music in this religious Shiite wedding, wishing them happiness and the expansion of their Anti-American and Anti-Israeli ‘Shiite Caliphate’. Hallelujah!

Khomeini And The Lebanon Crisis

Hailed by most of the Lebanese factions, the Israeli forces invaded Southern Lebanon in 1982 and forced the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) forces out of the country. As a result, the organization had to move its base for the second time to Tunisia, after being forced out the first time from the Jordan in 1971 as a result of their armed clash with the hosting Jordanian government forces in what is known as the Black September. Surprisingly, Israel didn’t mind the vacuum created to be filled by the radical pro-Khomeini Shiite militant group called Hiz-Bu-Allah that still chants “Death to America and death to Israel”!

The outcome of the 2006 Israel vs. Hiz-Bu-Allah war that lasted two months also came as a surprise as Hiz-Bu-Allah became stronger and the Lebanese government weaker, since Israel conveniently targeted many Lebanese Government’s military bases and civilian infrastructures that never called for the war! As a matter of fact, ever since PLO left south Lebanon, other than “Death to Israel” chants, there has been no serious attacks by Hiz-Bu-Allah on the Israeli territories. This has led many analysts to conclude that Hiz-Bu-Allah has been practically securing Israel’s northern borders, despite all the Israeli and Hiz-Bu-Allah flirting media wars. As a matter of fact, such fake media wars have further added credit to Hiz-Bu-Allah’s integrity. As a result, Hiz-Bu-Allah has succeeded to win mass’s sympathy in the Arabic and Islamic worlds, highjack Lebanon’s authority and command. Their leader Hassan Nasr-U-Allah has openly declared pledge of allegiance to the Iranian supreme leader. In fact, this qualifies the Israeli and PLO war of 1982 as the Lebanese version of the Belfour Deceleration!

Never mind the “Death to America and Israel” chanting, the chemistry between the Western Christendom and the Shiite minority didn’t stop at ‘generously and unceremoniously’ offering support to the birth of a ‘Shiite Caliphate’ in Iran and birth of a radical pro-Iran Shiite militant group in Lebanon, but it expanded further to Iraq, when USA came to Khomeini’s rescue, invaded Iraq, toppled the Iraqi Government and replaced it with a pro-Iranian militants who also chant ‘Death to America and Israel’. Hallelujah!

This is how the Iranian regime leads proxy wars that destabilizes the region and bleeds the Iranian and Arabic economies.

Khomeini And The Iraqi Crisis

Even though the United Nations considered the 2003 war on Iraq illegal, USA together with Britain and Australia did lead and used direct military force to barbarically occupy Iraq and remove Saddam. Although the USA-led coalition declared Iran as part of the Axis of Evil, practically they didn’t mind the vacuum created by them in Iraq to be filled by a pro-Iranian government and many radical pro-Iran Shiite militant groups that also chants “Death to America and Israel”. In fact, up until recently, USA didn’t mind paying the salaries of such militants and the pious militants’ intern didn't mind being paid by its enemy. The United States congress has recently (after 18 years) started looking into stopping such financial supports. So, in spite of the verbal conflicts and the occasional clashes between the pro-Iran militants and USA forces in Iraq, in reality, there seem to be a lot of chemistry between them. Again, fake media is turning such slogan wars into and a huge publicity for the pro-Iranian militants.

Then came the 2006 turning point of Al-Askari Shiite Shrine Bombing in Iraq. The bombing was considered a sectarian violence between the Iraqi Shiite and Sunni communities. USA president George Bush suspected Al Qaida, but Al Qaida officially denied responsibility for such acts while the Iranian officials accused USA. However, the following two testimonies of George Casey, the US commander in Iraq, and Tariq AlHashimi, the Iraqi Sunni politician, do complement each other and strongly suggest Iran being the orchestrator of the Shiite shrine bombing and other sectarian violence against Iraqi Shiite community. The bombing intended to divide and rule the homogenous Shiite-Sunni Iraqi fabric. AlHashimi’s reveals details of his meeting with Qassim Soleimani in Iran, wherein Soleimani reluctantly confirmed Iran being behind many sectarian bombings in Iraq and also confirmed Iran’s collusion with radical Sunni groups, such as ISIS, to disturb United States’s plans for Iraq! This reminds us to Cinema Rex fire, orchestrated by Khomeini’s revolutionary forces to cause mass demonstrations that toppled down the King. Indeed, Al-Askari bombing did succeed to burn the strong Iraqi Sunni-Shiite fabric, but not for long.

This is an example of the Safavid-Shiite Iranian regime fostering sectarian violence to create and lead radical Shiite oppositions worldwide. This has nothing to do with Islam. It’s the Machiavellian in its worst form. This is the result of the Iranian regime's investment in the wrong revolution that is destabilizing and bankrupting Iran, the Arabic and the Islamic worlds.

Please refer the following YouTube link titled “General George Casey speaking in Paris about Iran terrorism in Iraq-June2014”.

https://youtu.be/NsGeCgSBHxg

Tariq AlHashimi: Please refer the following YouTube link titled “طارق الهاشمي: إيران هي من فجرت مرقد العسكريين”. Meaning “Iran attacked the Shiite Shrine.”

https://youtu.be/TlNhsNvqaP8

Tariq AlHashimi: Please refer the following YouTube link titled “الهاشمي ينتزع إعترافاً تأريخياً من قاسم سليماني !!”. Meaning “Details of his meeting with Qassim Soleimani.”

https://youtu.be/yBaqJDnIkeA

This chemistry between the Western Christendom and the Shiite has ‘generously and unceremoniously’ supported the export of Khomeini’s revolution to Iraq. The US-led coalition have been sacrificing their soldier’s blood in Iraq to fulfill Khomeini’s dream. This chemistry is simply another cheese on a mouse trap. This Western Christendom's act qualifies as the 2003 Iraqi version of the Belfour Declaration!

Khomeini And The Yemen Crisis

As part of the wider Arab Spring movement, the 9 months nationwide protest demanding an end to Ali Ahmed Saleh’s 32 years of ruling resulted in serious injuries to Saleh as a result of a blast or a rocket attack. Saleh was taken to Saudi Arabia for treatment and subsequently he and the Yemeni political factions agreed to the Saudi Arabia’s pro-stability peace deal that resulted in:

Saleh stepping down after being offered amnesty, including his family.
Saleh transferring power to his deputy Abdrabuh Mansoor Hadi.
Holding a historical election with United Nation logistical support with Hadi being the only candidate.
Holding a multi candidate election in 7 years.

The February 21^st,2012 election ended up being quite successful. It resulted in 65% voter turnout and 6,635,192 out of 10,243,364 registered voters voting for Hadi as their acting president to serve for 7 years. The new government had a consultative Shura Council with 111 seats (elected by the president) and a House of Representative with 301 seats (elected by plurality vote) to serve for 6 years. It was also agreed for the next election to be multi candidate. Please refer the following link titled “Election Guide Democracy Assistance and Elections News - Republic of Yemen Election for President”.

https://www.electionguide.org/elections/id/2224/

This single candidate election was a brilliant idea to calm a turbulent country, unite the factions and bring STABILITY to Yemen. It also ensured to keep Saleh out of the way for the next 7 years, while the new government tries to prepare itself for the bigger multi candidate election. But the picture was not as rosy as it looks.

The election faced unfortunate experiences, such as the Yemini separatists (demanding separation of South) and the Sunni Islamists (Al-Qaida) boycotted the elections in the South and destroyed the election centers. They also threatened people from participating in the elections. The exact same thing happened in the North by the Iranian backed Houthi separatists. The main and declared reason of both northern and the southern separatists for opposing the election was:

Refusal of the amnesty offered to Saleh and his family.
The desire to punish Saleh for attacking the protestors and for other corruption chargers.

Ironically, two years later, Saleh and the Iranian backed Houthis formed an allegiance and sieged the Capital Sana’a by use of force. It’s amazing how the Houthis and the Iranians agreed to cooperate with Saleh, whom they earlier wanted prosecuted, punished and executed. It's amazing how the Iranian backed Houthis initially boycotted the election because of Saleh and later on formed an alliance with Saleh.

This is another example of the Iranian regime leading proxy wars that destabilizes and bleeds both the Iranian and the other Sunni economies. This has nothing to do with Islam. This is the Machiavellian in its worst form. This is an integrity-free act.

But by now, the informed reader shouldn’t be surprised of lack credibility in the Iranian regime and their militias. As explained earlier, contradiction and deceiving are part of Shiite’s school of thoughts and methodology.

Khomeini's Revolution Achievements

The above five crisis prove that the Iranian regime lacks integrity and follows the Machiavellian values in its worst forms. It shows why the Western Christendom supported Khomeini and the Iranian revolution. It shows how the Western Christendom sacrificed the pro-Israel King so that they could “set to fail” a “radical over-ambitious” Islamist, who would transform the entire country of Iran into a militant-led ‘Shiite Caliphate’ that would invest in exporting destruction through his revolution to unconsciously bankrupt Iran and its neighbors by:

Fostering sectarian violence against peaceful Shiites to damage, radicalize and lead them worldwide.
Fostering Creative Anarchy to create and lead radical Sunni oppositions worldwide, hoping to fail or weaken all Sunni-ruled countries.
Leading proxy wars that unconsciously bleed and bankrupt the Iranian and Sunni economies.

This again reminds me of Napoleon Bonaparte who said:

“Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake”.

That’s exactly what the Western Christendom has been doing. In fact, it has been "acting as a fool" and turning a blind eye to extra-ordinary number of crimes committed by the Iranian regime in the Western world, something that no other country dares to do. Well, people do what they are allowed to do. Please refer the following link titled “Iran’s Deadly Diplomats”.

https://ctc.usma.edu/irans-deadly-diplomats/

Question

By now my dear readers could be genuinely wondering: Mr. Khalid, contrary to your prophecy, the Win-lose/integrity-free firefighting policy seems to be working for the Western Christendom. Isn’t it?

Yes, as of now, their policy is surly working but it’s too early to judge. History informs that:

The glorious 732 A.D. French victory in the historical Battle of Tours that defeated the Islamic army coming from the advance Muslim administered Spain effectively delayed the European Renaissance for 800 years! So, was it really a French victory? In other words, that victory inherited gigantic challenges to their Christian descendants for centuries. Similarly, only history will tell how effective the Western Christendom's policy is.
History further informs that coincidence was not how the Jews mastered the world of numbers and finance. It was the Western Christendom’s historical boycotting of Jewish products that opened desperate Jew’s eyes to alternative options, such as loaning money with interest rates. That boycott, and other prosecutions in general, were the root cause that slowly and naturally turned Jews into world’s best planners and financial controllers. In other words, the boycott of Jewish products was rather another Western Christendom’s Win-losing/integrity-free firefighting policy that eventually inherited gigantic challenges to their Christian descendants. Such anti-sematic boycotts turned Jews into a super-rich community that owns much of the world. Compliments!

Only history, not media, could tell how effective the Western Christendom’s policy is, but as mentioned before, history has provided evidences of it being very ineffective.

Father Is Right

As in the relay race, ever since the 1979 revolution, the Iranian media has been running its part of the race after successfully taking over the baton from the Western Christendom’s media. They continued to smartly promote their mysterious Anti-American/Anti-Israel and Pro-Palestinian democracy. In absence of an effective counter media and the Western Christendom’s decision to “act as a fool” and turn a blind eye, the Iranian regime’s slogans succeeded to gain extraordinary support in the Islamic world, if not in the entire world. Over decades, the mysteriously silent Arabic media helped the Iranians to slowly question the integrity of the Arabic regimes the Arabic Rulers. The secret of their success is not just lying and exaggerating, but it’s their slogans and openly chanting “Death to America and death to Israel”. Basically, until very recently, many Sunni Muslims thought that the Iranian regime is the best in complying with prophet Mohamed’s (ﷺ) teaching, where he said:

“Whosoever of you sees an evil, let him change it with his hand; and if he is not able to do so, then [let him change it] with his tongue; and if he is not able to do so, then with his heart — and that is the weakest of faith”. [Muslim] 40 Hadith Nawawi 34.

Until very recent, many in the Islamic world believed that the Iranian regime is the most CREDIBLE in the region. Many believed that unlike all other Arabic and Islamic regimes, only the Iranian Shiite Caliphate had the guts to abide by the above-mentioned prophet’s (ﷺ) teachings and had the guts to fight evil with their tongue by chanting “Death to America and death to Israel”, and they were excused for not physically fighting the much powerful evil with hands.

Indeed, media is a powerful tool that helps promoting an agenda for sometimes but not for long, not without ethics, integrity and credibility. Slogans are effective but not for long. No matter how good or loud your media and slogans are, sooner or later, people will realize the truth about your integrity that lies in your louder actions. In my first ever leadership training, I learned that corporates are required to have the mission and vision statements, and that not having them was bad for Business Continuity. But it was also emphasized that having the mission and vision statements and posting them on the walls without abiding by them was even worst for the Business Continuity. Such corporates only create disbelievers and hypocrites, and that’s exactly what the Iranian Shiite Caliphate has created over years in Iran, Lebanon and Iraq.

Have you ever seen a rich magician?

Magicians make great shows because they can't create dollars. Indeed, media can promote for the magician, but it can’t make the magician create dollars. It can temporarily deceive and trick innocent people, as it deceived the pious eyes of Moses (ﷺ), but not for long.

If media was so effective, Israel would have succeeded to promote its innocence to the Western nations. But even the Israeli propaganda has failed, simply because they can’t hide the face of the truth. Despite Western media’s biased and blind eye policy, and all damages caused by foolish Islamists to the genuine Palestinian grievances, social media has exposed Israel’s real faces, especially the apartheid face of Israel. It's a fact that even within Israel, many Israelis realize the apartheid and the occupational nature of their government, and the injustice caused to the Palestinians. Even worst, the crimes committed by the ‘radical over-ambitious’ Zionist Israeli government have led the international community to question the merits of the European Jewish’s historical grievances. The racist acts of the ‘racial over-ambitious’ Zionist Jews in Israel have even justified to some Europeans all the unfair sufferings and abuses the European Jews had to endure from the Western Christendom over the past 1000 years. Israeli media is unable to change such negative perceptions of Israel, simply because their acts lack credibility and integrity. Actions speaks louder than words.

Hence, isn't safe to say that the recent Israeli motion in the Western Christendom to consider Anti-Zionism equal to Anti-Semitism is a clear sign of the desperate Israeli media's failure?

Similarly, the Iranian regime’s contradictory acts that lack integrity surfaced during the wider Arab Spring, as Arabs and Muslims couldn’t understand the Iranian Shiite Caliphate’s double standard in supporting the protestors in Egypt and Bahrain but viciously fighting them in Syria? Arabs and Muslims couldn’t tolerate the Iranian Shiite Caliphate media’s hypocrisy that always spoke loud for the oppressed in the world, while their Iraqi militia’s bullets spoke louder, killing hundreds of desperate and oppressed Shiite Iraqi protestors demanding basic needs, such as dignity, security, reliable water and electricity.

My father, may Allah bless his soul, used to say, “One can’t steel a tall and large camel by bending over!”. Similarly, the Iranian media can’t any longer justify such loud contradictions and atrocities with loud slogans. There is clearly a lot of corruption and hypocrisy but less of integrity and less of credibility. After 4 decades, the Western Christendom still believes in the Iranian Shiite Caliphate, while the rest of the world can clearly see the Shiite Caliphate’s destructive nature and their inability to develop and build.

Question

In absence of a credible media, one must retreat and ask:

Was the king of Iran really a puppet of USA as Khomeini and the Western media made us believe? Did the King really have an integrity issue? Was the King really less brave compared to Khomeini? Did the King really fail to comply with the teaching of the prophet Mohamed (ﷺ) in resisting evil verbally as Khomeini did through his slogans?

Also, why the Western Christendom didn’t support the pro-Israel Iranian King? Was the Western Christendom seeking to replace the monarch with a Shiite Caliphate in the Middle East? Didn’t the Western Christendom know about Khomeini’s obvious desire to establish a retrograded regime that was under the guardianship of Islamic Jurists, who acted on behalf of God the almighty? Isn’t that identical to what Zionist planned for the Palestine? Why didn’t the Western Christendom bother with Khomeini’s anti-Israel plans and slogans?

Why Khomeini was a better option for the Western Christendom than Shah of Iran?

To answer the above sensitive questions, we need to get to know the King better and that is exactly what we will do next.

Who Was The King Of Iran?

In 1974, just 5 years before Khomeini’s revolution and during the following interview with a British news agency, the Shah or the King of Iran said criticizing the West:

“Our country in the next 10 years will be what you are today. In the next 25 years, according to other people, I am not saying that, will be among the 5 most prosperous countries of the world”. Please watch minutes 0:14 to 0:28 of the interview.

The reporter asked: The increase of the oil price could affect UK’s economy and our balance of the payment. Is this what you want?

Shah responded, “Just the opposite. That’s why what we have decided, and the consequent decisions will alleviate for a very good part your balance of the payment. But don’t forget that in 3 years’ time, you will be a big oil producer yourselves. You might be a member of our club. So, the picture is not as bad as it seems to be. Maybe for 1 year 2 years you will have some difficulties. First of all, I am sure that you will overcome it. I am sure you will get out of the present difficult situation. You British have this quality of rallying around the flag of the country when it starts to be a little dangerous. I am sure that you will do it”. Please watch minutes 0:56 to 2:00 of the interview.

The reporter asked: The British people ask, what is it that you and some Arab sheikhs have against them? Why you want the British economy to suffer?

Shah responded, “First of all, it’s not British economy. If you want to say anything, it should be the world economy, and this is not against, we are just defending our chips. Because, for such a long time we have just been exploited. I can say that! Why don’t you say that when price of wheat was augmented by 300%, they had something against us? We had to buy it. Also, Soya bean or steel products or petrochemical products, which in some cases have augmented by 30 times! So, did you have anything against us when you augmented those prices? Or what I buy from you, even weapons, the price that you are charging today is not what you were charging 2 months ago! Its increasing. Have you something against us?" Please watch minutes 2:30 to 3:26 of the interview.

The reporter asked: Have you anything in principle against the system in Britain and other Western countries?

The King responded, “Not really against, but I must tell you, my opinion. If you continue this way, a permissive and undisciplined society, you’re going to blow up. You will go bankrupt. You work not enough, try to get too much money for the little work that you’re putting up. This cannot continue. It can continue for few months or 1 or 2 years, but not forever”. Please watch minutes 3:31 to 4:08 of the interview.

The reporter asked: Do you see oil a weapon to correct us?

The King responded, “Not really, but I was trying to defend my own interest. But I think at the same time, it is having this cause of having the effect of shock on you and to realize, whip your eyes and see that, to face future, you will have to change your ways.” Please watch minutes 4:27 to 4:46 of the interview.

The reporter then asked: How shall we change?

The Shah responded, “Discipline and more work” Please watch minute 4:48 on the interview.

Shah then added “Can I say that this year, we are going to have 40% national growth at constant prices, which is more than twice or 3 times the world record which was held by the Japanese”. Please watch minutes 5:26 to 5:44 of the interview.

Please refer the following YouTube link titled “Iran Live News | Shah Of Iran criticizing British foreign policy towards Iran”.

https://youtu.be/ciAEQMEtgNo

In 1975, just 4 years before Khomeini’s revolution and during the following interview with a Canadian news agency, the Shah or the King of Iran said criticizing the West:

“You built your progress and affluent at our expenses. So, you can’t say that we increased the price of oil all of a sudden, because for 24 years we have just been terribly exploited in very mean way!” Please watch minutes 0:35 to 1:00.

Shah added “Things have been put right and the price of oil is still so low that you have not yet started to mine your coal mines, liquefy coal and gasify coal or even go in a big way with the development of your nuclear energy or to find any other sources of energy” please watch minutes 1:37 to 2:05.

The reporter asked: How much does it cost to produce oil knowing that your oil could be produced easily and cheaper?

The king responded, “I don’t think this is a very fair question. Because you’re paying more to your workers, so you have the right to ask more for your oil. And furthermore, then your blessed with other things. For instance, you can grow wheat so cheap because you don’t need any irrigation. You got all the water from the skies. Thats why, you and the Americans are feeding the world with your wheat and all of a sudden, your wheat that was sold for $60 a few years ago, you sold it for $245 last year or the year before!” Please watch minutes 2:20 to 3:06 of the interview.

Shah added “Why you think your superior?” Please watch minutes 3:17 to 3:21 of the interview.

Shah added “We won’t be pushed around. We don’t wish a war, but if it is imposed on us, we will not shrink” please watch minutes 3:48 to 3:58 of the interview.

Shah continued saying “Nobody could invade us without being forced to crush us. Because we are not going to surrender. What excuse will you have to come to these oil producing countries? It will be barbaric, without any precedent in the world, the worst imperialistic movement that the world ever knew. How could you do that?” Please watch minutes 4:23 to 4:49 of the interview.

Please refer the following YouTube link titled “Iran’s last Shah - the fifth estate”.

https://youtu.be/n-grR1e6dw8

In 1976, two years before the start of Khomeini’s revolution and during the following interview with an American news agency, the Shah or the King of Iran said criticizing the Jewish lobby in the United States:

The reporter asked: Surly your majesty, you’re not telling me that the Jewish lobby in the United States pulls the strings of the presidency?"

Shah responded, "Not entirely, but I think a little too much even for the Israel's interests"

The reporter asked: You think the Jewish lobby in United States is too powerful for the interests of Israel?

Shah responded, "I think so. Sometimes they are disserving the interests of Israel, because of, they are pushing around too many people"

The reporter asked: Why would the president of the United States pay attention to that lobby?

Shah responded, "They are Strong!"

The reporter asked: Strong in what sense?

Shah responded, "They are controlling many things"

The reporter asked: Controlling what?

Shah responded, "Newspapers, medias, banks, finances and I am going to stop here!"

The reporter asked: Your majesty, you really do believe that the Jewish community in the United States is that powerful?! They make the media reflect their view of foreign policy. We do not report honestly.

Shah responded, "Don't mix things please, I don't say the media, I say in the media they have people. Not the entire media, some newspapers will only reflect their views, yes"

The reporter asked: The New Your Times for instance, is owned by the Sulzberger, who are Jewish. Are you suggesting that the New York Times is biased in its treatment of the question of Zionism, Israel's existence and the United States relations with the Arab World?

Shah responded, "I will have to put all the articles of the New York Times written on this subject and roll a conclusion. You can put this to the computer, and it will answer you"

The reporter asked: What you are saying is that, yes you do believe!

Shah responded, "Let's wait for the answer of the computer"

The reporter asked: Washington Post?

Shah responded, "The same"

The reporter asked: The networks?

Shah responded, "Yes"

Please refer the following YouTube link titled “Shah of Iran on the power of the 'Jewish Lobby' (60 Minutes interview by Mike Wallace)”.

https://youtu.be/8TEJayOg-Ig

On April 17^th of 1978, just few months after the start of Khomeini’s revolution and during the following interview with a British news agency, the Shah or the King of Iran said criticizing the West:

“You in the west are just filling your heads and filling your news media by advocating free countries, good members of United nations, good behavior and this and that. But the reality of the situation is not always the same. Its again brutal forces and bulling weaker countries” Please watch minutes 7:10 to 8:00 of the interview.

The reporter asked: Your regime is undemocratic. How do your respond to that?

Shah responded, “Your regimes are not more democratic than ours because in the name of democracy, you make things that we are horrified of! There is no equality between people. There is more difference of standard of living and wealth between your people and our people. Just look how many billionaires you have and how many poor people you have? Here we are subsidizing 5 items of food and all education is free throughout university. We are even paying pocket money to the students” Please watch minutes 11:46 to 12:32 of the interview.

Shah added “In the old days, you British and others who had influence here, you could change prime ministers as you wished. Are you sorry for that time that you have lost? Do you want the same thing? To manipulate our internal affairs? We won’t let you” Please watch minutes 13:17 to 13:39 of the interview.

Please refer the following YouTube link titled “UPITN 17 4 78 PAHLAVI SHAH OF IRAN INTERVIEWED ON A RANGE OF SUBJECTS”.

https://youtu.be/M1ECblyWAyY

It’s The Judgment Time

So, my dear reader, after watching the interviews, it’s time for you to be a judge and answer the following demanding questions:

Do you think the King of Iran was a puppet of USA and the West as Khomeini and the Western media claimed? Does he sound like that to you?

Do you think the King was corrupt and had integrity issues?

Do your think the King was less brave than Khomeini?

Do you think the King really failed to comply with the teaching of the prophet Mohamed (ﷺ) in resisting evil verbally as Khomeini did through his slogans?

Do you understand now why the Western Christendom didn’t support the pro-Israel King?

Do you understand now why the Western Christendom replaced the monarch with a Shiite Caliphate in the middle east?

Do you understand now why the Western Christendom didn’t bother with Khomeini’s anti-Israel slogans?

Is it clear now that the Western Christendom simply replaced Region’s Best Investor (The King) with Region’s Worst Investor (Khomeini) to bankrupt Iran and the region?

Is it clear now Why Khomeini was a better option for the Western Christendom than Shah of Iran?

Truth is bitter, isn’t it?

The Story In Short

Yes, dear reader, Khomeini was “set to fail” by the Western Christendom as a “radical over-ambitious” Islamist and Region’s Worst Investor to unconsciously destabilize and bankrupt the region, and he did!

The Western Christendom has demonstrated creativity in destabilizing and bankrupting both the Islamic and the Arabic worlds. In doing so, they have used their:

Media’s soft power alone, as in the case of Iran.
Military’s power alone, as in the case of Iraq.
Mixture of both soft and military powers, as in the case of Libya.
Media’s soft power alone, as in the case of the Arab Spring.

The king of Iran during the interview correctly expected the West to use its military power to invade Iran in order put an end to his ambitious investment plans for Iran and for defending the interests of Iranian people. But he never imagined the West succeeding by simply using their soft power of media alone to generate deceiving excuses necessary to create drama and take emotional Iranian masses out to the streets to overthrow their King’s sophisticated establishment (rather development plans) and write their own misery.

Luckily, the sincere Shah of Iran didn’t live to see how USA, Britain and Australia illegally used their military power alone and barbarically invaded his oil rich neighbor in 2003, without any excuse and against the well of the international community, to repeat the history and this time replace an Arabic regime with another Shiite-Caliphate-led regime.

Luckily, the accountable Shah of Iran didn’t live to see how the Western Christendom in 2011 and without any excuse, used military powers alone to repeat the history and replace another Arabic regime in Libya with another Caliph-Erdogan-led regime. Shah of Iran didn’t live to see how the Western Christendom once again used their soft powers of regional and international media (Al Jazeera and western media) to generate dramatic and deceiving excuses necessary to take emotional Arabic masses out to the streets:

Replacing their governments with pro-Turkey/Iran militias.
Destabilizing their region.
Bankrupting their region.

I am sure you still remember the story of the lion and the three white, black and brown bulls? Well, the King of Iran was the first and the white bull of the story, who was naively offered by the Iranian riff raffs and neighbors to the Western Christendom’s lion. Saddam, the president of Iraq, was the second and the black bull of our story, who was naively offered by the Iraqi riff raffs and neighbors to the Western Christendom’s lion. Qaddafi, the president of Libia, was the third and the red bull of our story, who was offered by the Libyan riff raffs and neighbors to the Western Christendom’s lion. Ever since the King of Iran was replaced by Khomeini, the Islamic and the Arabic worlds have been getting weaker and weaker. The Western Christendom’s lion is still hungry, but there are less riff raffs in the region to feed him.

The September 11 New-Crusaders

Before ending this case study, it’s necessary to analyze and diagnose the effects of the 911 attack on the Islamic and the Arabic worlds. I don’t want to get into who exactly planned and executed it, but history tells that no party or country could be exempted, including those who planned and assassinated the United States’s President J. F. Kennedy. Furthermore, it’s not unfair to say that Al Qaida couldn’t have solely planned and executed such a sophisticated attack, just as Khomeini couldn't have solely planned and executed the sophisticated Iranian revolution.

As far as I am concerned, no one analyzed and diagnosed the effects of 911 attacks better than my father’s uncle, may Allah bless their souls. It was a strange question, since he never showed any interest in politics throughout his life that was devoted to building mosques and schools, digging water wells and planting palm trees for the poor. He was a traditional Muslim clerk, who had learned basic Islamic studies in 1940s Saudi Arabia from the traditional non-Wahabi scholars. Yet, I will never forget his following response when I asked him:

Do you agree with Osama Bin Laden's attack on the world trade centers in USA?

He responded, “What is to gain by slapping someone who is far stronger than you, then ending up shattered and broken?”.

Absolutely!

Osama Ben Laden and other Islamic militants have also been “set to fail” as "radical over-ambitious" Islamists and Region’s Worst Investors to destabilize and bankrupt the Islamic and the Arabic worlds, and to slow down the phenomenal worldwide spreading of the Sunni Islam. They were the pious who were used to bring the chaos, which they did and continue to do so. Alas, unconsciously, they are the Western Christendom’s New-Crusaders!

Case Study 3

The Radical Over-Ambitious Hindus Of The Asian World

Are the Indian Hindus ‘generously and unceremoniously’ being set to fail as a ‘radical over-ambitious’ minority to weaken the Asian competition?

Well, one photo tells a thousand words! We will know more in few years.

What is The Way Forward?

للبيت رب يحميه

It means "The house has Allah to protect it". This is what Abdul Muttalib, prophet Mohamed's (ﷺ) grandfather, had said when Abrahaa, the Christian King, came from Yemen with a mighty army of elephants to destroy the Kaaba, or the house of Allah in Mecca. Of course, this war took place before Islam and during the same year the prophet (ﷺ) was born. Abdul Muttalib was a wise leader who realized fighting Abrahaa and defeating him was a suicidal attempt. So, like any sincere leader, he decided to protect his people by ordering them to vacate Mecca, trusting that Allah the almighty would protect his house. The story tells that Allah sent birds carrying burning stones that targeted each and every soldier in Abrahaa's army. Like 9/11, this event did reset the calendar for Mecca people and was named the year of 'Pheel', or the year of the Elephant. The story is also narrated in Quran for a reason:

"Have you not considered, [O Muhammad], how your Lord dealt with the companions of the elephant? Did He not make their plan into misguidance? And He sent against them birds in flocks. Striking them with stones of hard clay. And He made them like eaten straw." Quran chapter 105 verses 1 to 5.

Muslims need to be strong believers and trust Allah, just like Abdul Muttalib who wasn’t even a Muslim. Muslims need to remember that the Western Christendom media and other soft power’s wind will always blow and trying to stop it is a waste of time and effort. Muslims need to remember that such winds could only blow away the weakest trees and leaves. Strong trees and leaves don't have to worry about such soft powers. A Totalitarian, consultative, self-critical and pious nation will never fall for such a wind.

Finally, my dear reader, I hereby conclude seeking guidance from Allah the almighty.

Where The Arrows Are Going?

If you want to know the truth, then watch where the arrows are going. Where are the arrows of ISIS, Al-Qaida, Al-Houthi in Yemen, Turkey, Iran, Hiz-Bul-Allah in Lebanon, Al-Jazeera Qatari Channel, Muslim Brotherhood, the Shiite militias in Iraq and the Western Christendom media are being directed to. All those arrows are currently being shot at the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the crown prince Mohamed Bin Salman in particular.

It is a telling image of the ever-hesitant Western Christendom, continuing to inherit failure to its future generations by investing in our differences and causing us calamities. They want us ever-squabbling so they could believe the lie of their ethnic superiority. The unfortunate fact is that the Western Christendom is afraid and worried about the false beginnings of their picturesque scientific renaissance, which inherited them lack of self-confidence and the delusion of their inability to retain their current global lead. So, they continue the crusades but in a new and a sexier way.

However, I see no justification for all this fear and anxiety, because the cake is big and enough for everyone and the survival of the leading Western Christendom’s civilization is an urgent human necessity despite all its flaws. It is time for the Western Christendom to change and inherit prosperity to its future generation. It’s time for them to try investing in strategic partnerships with our region that are based on credibility, rather than continuing to flounder with failing conspiracies that are failing the humanity and wasting bigger opportunities.

In its quest to maintain its global lead, the Western Christendom has enjoyed keeping Saudi Arabia under the range of its fierce criticisms, keeping it busy defending itself and only competing at the level of its Gulf surroundings. They enjoyed comparing the Sunni Wahabi-Salafist Saudi Arabia to the Safavid-Shiite Islamic Republic of Iran, as two contradicting sides of an Islamic currency that is meant to appear to the Westerners as a retrograde, backward and savage faith. This hideous image is intended to disrupt the breeze of Sunni Wahabi-Salafist Islamic Spring, which for several decades has crossed the helpless Sykes Pico fortresses intended to safeguard the Western Christendom’s world. They enjoyed pushing for reforms and for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to remain resistant, so that their fortresses remain safe.

The Western Christendom never wanted to see the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia reformed. The proof is that they are now more upset, disturbed and offensive towards Saudi Arabia after seeing the young Prince Mohammed bin Salman undertake radical and rapid reforms that would take Saudi Arabia from local to globalism in a short time and become one of the world's favorite destinations for many Western hearts. Their confused hostility towards the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia intensifies as reforms accelerate, the goals of the Saudi 2030 development strategy are achieved, and civil rights are revived. The Saudi reforms have exposed the Western Christendom’s fake slogans and fake calls for reform. They do not want to repeat the Emirati experience, which has peacefully captured many Western hearts.

Watch out dear reader, as Saudi Arabia's reforms are purely economic and emanate from the economic minds in Riyadh. Those who are made to believe that the reforms are dictated to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia by the Western Christendom with the purpose of targeting the religion of Islam are wrong. The Saudi 2030 economic reform is old and new, as it follows the footsteps of the 1960s balanced development approach of Dubai Builder Sheikh Rashid bin Saeed Al Maktoum, may Allah rest his soul. Dubai’s approach has been a purely economic and sovereign decision and has nothing to do with political pressures or foreign dictations.

The Western Christendom does not fear the radical political Islam and does not want to reform it. As a matter of fact, the Western Christendom understands radical Islamist’s mind, invests in it, criticizes it and uses it to strike its rivals as and when required. The Western Christendom did not, does not and will not wish reforms to Saudi Arabia and the reforms that are now being achieved annoy the Western Christendom, as they were equally annoyed by the Shah of Iran's economic reforms and his relentless pursuit for the globalism and success. Iran’s rapid development during Shah ruling led the ever-panicking Western Christendom to support the establishment of a Shiite Islamic Caliphate (militias) in Iran, without heeding its hardline, anti-American and anti-Semitic slogans such as "Death to America and death to Israel". The Western Christendom did intelligently bet on the anti-development and the expansionist objectives of this emerging and rebellious Shiite Caliphate in Iran and its destructive actions on the ground. This Shiite Caliphate in turn has unconsciously served the Western Christendom’s interests, weakened Iran, weakened the entire region economically and delayed it developmentally.

Today, China's growing economic renaissance is annoying the Western Christendom, as China is about to be crowned the throne of the Superpowers Club. So, the panicked Western Christendom is supporting the rise of an extremist Hindu Caliphate on the Chinese and Pakistani borders, carrying with it the gospel of a collision that would eliminate the Asian competition. The Western Christendom media is also conveniently choosing to demonize China by investing in the demands of the Hong Kong rebels and the grievances of the oppressed Uighur Muslims. The Western Christendom cannot stand a world that China is leading economically and Saudi Arabia ideologically.

History is important because it explains the present, and vice versa, the present can explain the past. A quick look at the current condition of the Arabic and Islamic worlds shows that lying is the religion of most of the critics of the Kingdom of the Saudi Arabia. These critics are between a sincere but short cited believer, a wrong reformist, a political teenager, an extremist opponent, an envious brother, an aspiring partner, and the ever-panicking Western Christendom that lacks self-confidence. The later recruits and supports all these forces, blessing an Islamist-led Arabic Spring that intends to establish a Sunni Islamic Caliphate (militias) that would fail the glimmer of hope remaining for the future generations.

Today, the Arabic and Islamic worlds are divided into two blocs. The first bloc supports the globalization of the Saudi Arabia (the United Arab Emirates is one of them), and the second bloc is against the universality of the Saudi Arabia (Iran, Turkey and Qatar are among them). Each bloc has its own opinion, ideology, slogans and legitimate ambitions. But the second bloc is characterized by the audacity to lie, media fraud and double standards, while the first bloc is characterized by greater candor and transparency. This scene reminds us of the situation of the Islamic world after the first three charitable centuries and when the tsunami of false news hit the shores of the Muslim communities, strafed it and brought the pioneers of fraud to tear the body of the Islamic nation like the Great White Shark. Those overwhelming waves were countered by credible scholars who vowed to save the nation by revising such news, distinguishing the precious and following the truth from it. Therefore, if you come across those who demonize Saudi Arabia and challenge even its birth by referring to some sources that suggest the Kingdom having a Jewish origins, remember that such sources (even if old) are not the undoubted Qur'anic verses. In fact, such sources could be pure tales and lies spread by the ancestors of the pioneers of our false present. So, follow whoever you want, but don't follow a false index, which is contrary to the credible approach of ‘Ahl-u-Sunnah-Wal-Jamaah’.

It is no secret to a sane that our Sophist-Sunni Turkey rightly wishes to be the face of the civilized Muslim world, so it is troubled by the idea of the universality of the Salafist-Sunni Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Unfortunately, the reformed Saudi seems to be worrying the Turkish Neo-Ottomans and their expansionist and leadership ambitions. The reformed Saudi Arabian is also worrying the ever-hesitant Western Christendom, which is working hard on our foolish-in-mind and riff raffs using its soft powers, so that the new Sophist-Salafist Sunni Islam does not globalize on the magic carpet of the Saudi reforms. This Sophist-Salafist monotheism doctrine is capable of repeating the history and bringing people of different races together on one religion that is free of hatred and racial incites. This is especially true over there in the Western Christendom, where people are raised as good listeners with independent, logical, scientific, tolerant and open minds. The Western Christendom knows very well that there is no doctrine as easy, scientific and logical than the Saudi Sophist-Salafist monotheism that could naturally coexist with the modern science as it did for many centuries.

What doesn't kill you will make you stronger. As the challenges faced by the European Jews in the Western Christendom made them the Master of Economy and finance, the challenges faced by the Rigid-Wahabi-Salafist Sunni Islam made it revert to its original Sophist-Salafist Sunni Islam, which is even more attractive and appealing to the Muslims and non-Muslims. This would not have happened without the Western Christendom's win-lose/integrity-free policies that are pharaonicaly over-smart.

It remains for everyone to remember that the cake is big enough for everyone and that the competition is healthy and required, but without the stronger coveting the share of the weaker and without harming our values, identities and cohesive families. Others see us as more beautiful with our good old heritage, values and authentic identities. Let us compete to inherit prosperity for our future generations, neighbors and humanity as a whole by investing in the strategic partnerships that builds TRUST and are based on CREDIBIIITY and INTEGRITY.

But the funny and sad thing is that, despite all Saudi economic and social reforms and impressive achievements, arrows are still being shot at the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the young Prince Mohamed bin Salman in particular. Alas, these arrows are being shot by people of our own skin while hysterically dancing, clapping and whistling to the beat of the loud drums of the Western Christendom’s soft powers. The confrontation continues to demonize and target the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

[video width="1920" height="1080" mp4="http://hakandkak.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/VideoEditor_20210730_023644_1_1_1.mp4"][/video]

In the meantime, and because the Western Christendom can’t any longer use the Kingdome of Saudi Arabia to bad mouth the Sunni Islam, they are once again ‘generously and unceremoniously’ supporting the establishment of a militant-led Sunni-Caliphate of their choice in Afghanistan. Taliban is their convenient hideous image of Sunni Islam that they could enjoy criticizing and attacking. Taliban is a scarecrow for distancing the Sophist-Salafist Sunni Islam from many good listeners, beautiful, independent, logical, scientific, tolerant and open minds of the Western Christendom. Taliban is another pious that is being ‘set to fail’ to bring the chaos.

The Western Christendom has burned the Islamists card. All Islamists will be fostered, sheltered, and isolated in Afghanistan to be further radicalized and prepared to unconsciously take part in the Western Christendom’s future crusades. In few years, the Islamists will be able to develop the necessary grievance and regain the lost trust of the future less-experienced Muslims (riff raffs). In the meantime, the ‘radical over-ambitious’ liberals of the Islamic and the Arabic worlds will continue to unconsciously take part in the Western Christendom’s crusades, dancing, clapping, whistling to the loud beats of the Western Christendom's soft power. They will support "The New Middle East" Creative Anarchy, bring chaos to their region and their future generation.

It’s important to identify and eliminate all radicals, irrespective of their ideologies. Radicals who are ready to collaborate with foreign competitors such as the Western Christendom and unconsciously support their crusades. Simply, the Western Christendom will continue its win-loss/integrity-free policy of the hesitant with the Islamic world.

My Pious Reader

Is it not time for the common Muslims to calm down, apologize to themselves, become reliable listeners, stop entering in a vain discourse with those who are engaged in it, stop clapping along and stop following the herd?

Is it not time for the tanned Sunni Islamists to calm down, apologies to themselves, become reliable, reform their suicidal approach, stop taking part in the Western Christendom’s crusades and follow Hassan-bin- Ali’s unifying approach?

Is it not time for the tanned Shiite Islamists to calm down, apologize to themselves, become reliable, reform their destructive Safavid approach, stop taking part in the Western Christendom’s crusades and follow the productive approach of the honorable house of the prophet (ﷺ)?

Is it not time for the tanned Jews of Israel to calm down, apologies to themselves, stop blaming others, reform their Zionism moment, start blending with Arabs, and follow the productive approach of the honorable house of Abraham and Israel (ﷺ)?

Is it not time for the blond crusaders of the Western Christendom to calm down, apologize to themselves, stop bullying others and start inheriting win-win strategies of the confident to their future generations instead of their current win-lose policies of the hesitant?

Last but not least my dear reader, I know that your right, but you could be wrong, and I know that I am wrong, but I could be right.

So, help us ‘O Allah’!

يا مغيث

“The Sunni Islamists are unconsciously helping to enable a second and a greater global Holocaust that will lead to the murder of two third of the world's Muslim population as the first Holocaust murdered two third of the world's Jewish population.

The second Holocaust intends to shrink Islam into its Arabian Peninsula’s origin as the first one intended to shrink the Judaism into its Levant’s origin.”

[video width="1280" height="720" mp4="http://hakandkak.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/تساؤلات-حول-طالبان-_-فايز-الكندري_1_1_1_1_1.mp4"][/video]

Back to blog

2 Arabs

3 Others

4 Muslims

The latest articles

Protected: Set The Malign To Fail The Benign

26 October 2019

Dear reader

This book is about cultures and how they shape the Political Identities of different nations.

While reading, remember that Bernard Lewis defined Christendom as:

Accordingly, in this article the "Western Christendom" refers to the entire Christian civilization, but not the Christianity as a religion or its peaceful followers.

Please bear this in mind.

Introduction

“This is the Book about which there is no doubt, a guidance for those conscious of Allah” Quran chapter 2 verse 2.

Then, verses 3 to 5 introduces the students to the attributes and behaviors necessary to successfully search for the straight path. Verse 2 in particular says:

“Who believe in the unseen, establish prayer, and spend out of what We have provided for them”

“Recite in the name of your Lord who created, Created man from a clinging substance. Recite, and your Lord is the most Generous, Who taught by the pen”.

My dear reader, I know that your right, but you could be wrong, and I know that I am wrong, but I could be right. So, stay beautiful as usual!

The Unceremonious Generosity

Why did they leave so ‘generously and unceremoniously’?

Because they never did. One doesn’t leave by ‘generously and unceremoniously’ serving cheese on a mouse trap. Does he?

‘Set to fail the radical and over-ambitious’, or the foolish in mind.
‘Act as a fool’.

The radical over-ambitious Zionists of the Jewish world.
The radical over-ambitious Islamists of the Islamic world.
The radical over-ambitious Hindus of the Asian world.

But, before examining the above three case studies, let us better understand the above-mentioned smart tools.

The First Smart Tool

‘Set to fail the radical and over-ambitious’

جدم الغشيم و الحقه

The Second Smart Tool

‘Act as a fool’

الكيل بمكيالين

There are three reasonably obvious examples in the recent history, covered by the following three case studies.

Case Study 1

The Radical Over-Ambitious Zionists Of The Jewish World

https://yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Relations_between_Jews_and_Non-Jews/Historical_Overview

Interestingly:

In 1896, Theodor Herzl wrote in the preface of his book Der Judenstaat (The State of the Jews): “Everything depends on our propelling force. And what is our propelling force? The misery of the Jews.” This sounds like the Creative Anarchy!
Arthur Balfour acted anti-Semitic when he promulgated the 1905 Aliens Act, to stop the immigration to Britain of Jewish refugees fleeing the vicious anti-Semitic pogroms in the Russian Empire.
Edwin Samuel Montagu, the only Jewish member of the cabinet headed by David Lloyd George, to which Belfour belonged, considered the Balfour Declaration anti-Semitic. In a memo to the Cabinet, Montagu considered the Declaration a tool to free Europe from Jews and wrote:

Hence, isn’t it safe to question Jesus Christ (ﷺ) lover’s decision to ‘generously and unceremoniously’ offer support to the killers of Jesus Christ (ﷺ)?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_of_Israel

https://youtu.be/rzYqimDCyjs

“nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil rights of the non-Jewish communities in Palestine”.

Please refer the following YouTube link titled “Jimmy Carter: PALESTINE - PEACE NOT APARTHEID”.

https://youtu.be/b3rytiINiUo

https://youtu.be/TOaxAckFCuQ

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium.highlight.MAGAZINE-jews-looted-arab-property-en-masse-in-48-the-authorities-let-them-1.9201926

https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/editorial/amid-opposition-to-polish-law-israel-must-recognize-theft-of-palestinian-property-1.10120851

Absolutely, but!

A harmful Could Be Fruitful

رب ضارة نافعه

It’s another Arabic proverb that means “A harmful could be fruitful”. How?

How come then the magnificent, majestic, extraordinaire and most advanced culture of the Western Christendom hasn’t led to conversion of Muslim Arabs to Christianity?

“Never will the Jews or Christians be pleased with you, until you follow their faith” Quran chapter 2 verse 120.

But why the Western Christendom haven’t been able to deal with the Islamic world with integrity?

https://youtu.be/iojISmRrTq0

https://youtu.be/EFK8Ruc1lSQ

Remember Dear Reader:

Western Christendom’s ‘Set to fail the radical over-ambitious’ and ‘act as a fool’ are Win-Lose/Integrity-Free policies of the unconfident.
Win-Lose/Integrity-Free is a short term and a fire-fighting policy of the hesitant that can’t defeat principals.
The Western Christendom could achieve much better results by following the strategy of the confident that is based on integrity.
The Arabic and the Islamic worlds should watch out for Unceremonious Generosities.

Case Study 2

The Radical Over-Ambitious Islamists Of The Islamic world

Were the Islamists ‘generously and unceremoniously’ set to fail as ‘radical over-ambitious’ to tarnish Islam’s reputation in the West and bankrupt the Arabic and Islamic worlds?

When embarking on such studies, one must adhere to what Bertrand Russell, the British philosopher and historian, wisely advised in his message to the future generations:

Please refer the following YouTube link titled “Bertrand Russell - Message To Future Generations”.

https://youtu.be/ihaB8AFOhZo

While the first case study concluded that:

Win-lose/integrity-free is not a strategy but a firefighting policy of the hesitant, unable to defeat principals and has inherited challenges to the Western Christendom’s descendants.
Integrity is a Win-win/sustainable strategy of the confident that can defeat principals and inherit stability to its descendants.

This case study concludes that:

The Western Christendom is seriously concerned of losing its global lead to the Asians.
The Western Christendom's cutting of the Islamic world into smaller countries in 1922 has backfired.
The Sunni Islamists of the Islamic world are off-track the fundamentals adopted by their successful elders.
The Sunni Islamists are unconsciously helping to enable a second and greater global Holocaust that will lead to the murder of two third of the world's Muslim population as the first Holocaust murdered two third of the world's Jewish population. The second Holocaust intends to shrink Islam into its Arabian Peninsula’s origin as the first one intended to shrink the Judaism into its Levant’s origin.
The Sunni elders considered STABILITY more important than being pious or corruption free.

Back To The Fundamentals

So, fundamentally, what is most important for any civilization, being corruption-free or stable? Which one of them is a priority?

So, is there a perfect answer? Which one of them is a priority, being corruption-free or stable?

Well, that’s what we will try to study and conclude next.

Stability And The West

Tough environmental regulations are not promising, choking the economy and the industry.
Constructive criticism has turned into a toxic OPPOSITION-PHOBIA that seeks to deform and not reform.
Being self-critical, which is the corner stone of any healthy establishment, is being misused. Competing political parties suffer from opposition-phobia, act alien to the mother land and tend to criticize everything at any cost, including the stability of the countries.
Some of the democratic establishment in the West, such as the United States and Britain, are on the verge of a civil war between the conservatives and the liberals.
The establishment dwarfs the elected president and effectively rejects him. It's not a secret that the democratic party in USA never accepted the result of their 2016 presidential elections, never recognized Trump as the elected president and continued to fail him.
The establishment has failed to face a real competition. The Western Christendom's inability to face the Chines Totalitarian and Consultative Establishment's competition on its own field is a testimony.
Rapid rise of the dismayed radical far-right (totalitarian minded political parties) followers all over the Western Christendom.

https://youtu.be/k5hdt1xTc_Y

The objective is to improve the stability.
The democratic establishment is still in a pilot stage.
To reflect and not to copy blindly.

Stability And Abu Baker

Stability Before And After Omar

Liberation and independence struggle from colonialism.
The global and sexy Socialist and Marxist ideologies.
Competition between Britain, France and USA.

Stability In The History

Stability And The Creative Anarchy

https://youtu.be/i8_04KswP70

Questions

What is the crisis for Islam?

Please refer to ‘Conversation about Islam With Bernard Lewis Part 2’, Mi GG, You Tube, minutes 06:57 to 08:19.

https://youtu.be/-eDnaEMF0oE

The Core And The Luxury Values

Instead of fighting corruption, shouldn’t stability of countries be the priority number one on the enlightener’s agendas?
Is it unfair to define genuine and responsible enlighteners as those whom stability tops their agendas of change?
Shouldn’t reform mean preserving our stability, while taking calculated steps towards being a more pious nation?
Is it unfair to conclude that historically, it’s corrupt, unrealistic, in genuine and misleading of Islamists to call for the restoration of the Islamic Caliphate that lasted 1300 years by selling the golden Omar Ibn Al Khattab’s version of it that lasted only 10 years, when we know that during the other 1290 years, most of the Islamic Caliphs failed to meet Omar Ibn Al Khattab’s standards?
Is it unfair to conclude that Islamists suffer from the Western Opposition-Phobia and turn a blind eye to the Islamic fundamentals, just to fail the existing Muslim rulers?
Isn’t fair to call such reformists Region’s Worst Investors (RWI)?

Based on history, we could safely conclude that:

The pious Omar Ibn Al Khattab's Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphate is a testimony that integrity is a low-cost soft power that builds trust, helps to sustain both unity and stability in a self-critical multi-cultural nation, without the need for factions or opposition parties.
The other less-pious Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphates proved beyond any doubt that an iron fist is a high-cost power that can’t build trust but helps to sustain enough stability to build a civilization in a divided multi-cultural nation, with many factions or opposition parties.
Omar Ibn Al Khattab’s type of pious Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphate is rare and almost a fairytale that doesn’t qualify to be a SMART objective. On the other hand, the other less-pious type of the Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphates are quite common, hence do qualify as a SMART objective.
Insisting to adopt Omar Ibn Al Khattab’s pious and PERFECT model of Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphate could have catastrophic consequences on the stability, such as the assassination of Uthman Ibn Affaan, the third pious and elected Caliph in Islam. It’s not a secret that adopting a leadership style different than that of Omar Ibn Al Khattab’s was the main excuse used by factions or opposition parties to spread doubt in the society and turn naive Muslims against their pious Caliph Uthman and assassin him unlawfully.
The prophet (ﷺ) stressed on stability being the core value and also stressed on the lawfulness of stable and less pious Totalitarian Caliphates, Caliphs and rulers.

Stability In The Quran

Like history, a helicopter and holistic look will reveal that fundamentally the Islamic literature teaches to prioritize stability over piousness (fighting corruption), by means of:

Promoting unity among the Muslims.
Promoting peace with the non-Muslims.

Quran continues to stress on unity and stability among the Muslims by promoting patience in verse 46 of chapter 8 that says:

“And obey Allah and His Messenger, and do not dispute and [thus] lose courage and [then] your strength would depart; and be patient. Indeed, Allah is with the patient.”

A deterrent mighty military power.
Making fighting Muslim’s last resort.

Quran prioritizes stability over war and makes it mandatory on Muslims to cease fighting as and when their enemy inclines to peace. See Quran verse 61 of chapter 8:

“And if they incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah. Indeed, it is He who is the Hearing, the Knowing.”

As a matter of fact, Sharia Law has always promoted peace and stability by offering non-Muslim nations conquered by the Totalitarian and Consultative Caliphate 3 choices:

Peace, by denouncing their religion and converting to Islam.
Peace, by signing a treaty with the Caliphate and paying tax. In return, the Caliphate offers them security, allows them to continue practicing their beliefs and to elect a ruler of their choice among them to govern them, as per their own sharia (governing laws).
Only if the first two choices were rejected, fight and face the risk of becoming slaves or be executed, as was the practice globally until very recent (in fact still it is today to great extent but unofficially).

So, what is the ‘way of the believers?’

That is what we will know next by examining the Hadith.

Stability In The Hadith

Stability And The New-Shiite

The names of the two denominations:

The first three elected Caliphs who preceded Ali, may Allah bless them all.
The companions of the prophet (ﷺ) who elected those three Caliphs, may Allah bless them all.
The entire Sunni community who adopts election through consultation as a process to choose their Caliphs before offering the chosen Caliph the pledge of allegiance.

Stay united under the Caliph if there was a Caliphate, even if he didn’t respect their rights or didn’t strictly follow the teachings of the prophet (ﷺ).
Stay united under a Ruler if there was no Caliphate.
Stay away from different sects and follow the rulers, even if the Rulers didn't adhere strictly to the prophet’s traditions.

But are post 1922 Islamists paying attention to such clear warnings and advices from the prophet (ﷺ)?

The religious methodology:

Would Omar choose Imam Ali as his successor during his risky journey to the Jerusalem, if they were not in good terms, as claimed by the Shiite scholars and the literature?

Would Imam Ali agree to marry his daughter to Omar, if they were not in good terms, as claimed by the Shiite scholars and the literature?

Would Imam Ali have named two of his sons after Abu Baker and Omar, if they were not in good terms, as claimed by the Shiite scholars and the literature?

Of course not!

“[Allah] said, "What prevented you from prostrating when I commanded you?" [Satan] said, "I am better than him. You created me from fire and created him from clay."

In support of this doctrine of deception, the Shiite attribute the following to the pious Imam Abu Abdullah (Jaffar as-Sadiq):

“Nine tenths of religion is Taqeyyah (dissimulation), hence one who does not dissimulate has no religion.” Al-Kafi vol.9 p.110.

The chapter in particular is recited by Muslims every Friday as recommended by the prophet (ﷺ). I say this so critics of Islam won’t say that I am referring to the abrogated verses of the Quran.

“And when they are told, “Believe as people believe,” they reply, “Will we believe as the fools believe?” Indeed, it is they who are fools, but they do not know” Chapter 2 verse 13.

The political methodology:

Stability And Omar’s Golden Model

But why Omar didn’t approve prophet’s (ﷺ) companions’ requests to leave Medina? Why did he insist that they stay around him and close to him?

The following saying of the prophet might be another valid reason for Omar to insist that prophet’s companions (immigrants from Macca specifically) remain in Medina for consultation:

“Indeed, Allah will not gather my Ummah upon deviation, and Allah's Hand is over the Jama'ah" Jami` at-Tirmidhi 2167.

Stability And Opposition Phobia

In Nutshell

Based on the above, the Sunni Islamists:

Speak like “Ahlu-Sunna-Wal-Jama’a” which means “People of the traditions and majority”, but they clearly behave as a Shiite or a faction.
Don't abide by the traditional Sunni Totalitarian and Consultative Establishment that is based on inclusive opposition that offers nonbinding consultation.
Lack consistency and credibility. Resort to deceiving and twisting of facts, which is a Shiite methodology and those who practice it are Shiites-in-mind even if they call themselves Sunnis.
Speak highly of Omar Ibn Al Khattab but fail to follow his political model or methodology by not being satisfied with a nonbinding consultative role. As such, they are fundamentally Shiites in mind, even if they call themselves Sunnis.
Speak highly of Omar Ibn Al Khattab but fail to follow his consultation style in wisely sharing their opinions with the learned and not openly with the riff raffs on the social media, promoting misunderstandings and misinterpretation that lead to instability.
Speak highly of Omar Ibn Al Khattab but fail to prioritize stability over piousness and fighting corruption.

Fundamentally, the Sunni Islamists are the New-Shiites. The same applies to the Turkish-Arabs as elaborated below.

Stability And Turkish-Arabs

Quran chapter 5 verse 8 clearly requires Muslims to be credible and fair even with their enemies:

https://youtu.be/BM-bYgTC0k0

https://youtu.be/R-2491jpj4A

https://twitter.com/DrHAKEM/status/1275521397272567809?s=19

The following Hadith demonstrates how such patriotic and humble nomadic Arabs (the companions of the prophet ﷺ) were balanced and able to see the strength of their competitors:

"Mustaurid al-Qurashi reported: I heard Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying: The Last Hour would come (when) the Romans would form a majority amongst people. 'Amr said to him (Mustaurid Qurashi): See what you are saying? He said: I say what I heard from Allah's Messenger (ﷺ). Thereupon he (Amr) said: If you say that, it is a fact for they (Romans) have four qualities. They have the patience to undergo a trial and immediately restore themselves to sanity after trouble and attack again after flight. They (have the quality) of being good to the destitute and the orphans, to the weak and, fifthly, the good quality in them is that they put resistance against the oppression of kings." Please refer Sahih Muslim, the Book of Tribulations and Portents of the Last Hour. Hadith 45.

Has official and full fledge political and economic relations with Israel.
Has an embassy in Tel Aviv.
Has visited Israel officially in 2005. Together with Sharon, President Erdogan visited Yad Vashem (Holocaust Remembrance Center) and placed flowers on Theodor Herzl's grave.
Has signed an agreement with Israel in 2016 that refers to the Jerusalem as the eternal capital of Israel.
Has a consulate in Jerusalem since 2016, that’s before Trump moving the USA embassy to Jerusalem in 2018.
Has been conducting joint military exercises with Israel as two pious members of the NATO organization.
Has continued selling weapons to Israel.
Has been operating the largest number of weekly commercial flights to the Israeli capital.

Stability And The Shiite-In-Mind Sunnis

Please refer the following YouTube link titled “Radical Islam, Israel and West”, Hebrew University of Jerusalem. YouTube, minutes 1:16:49 to 1:22:32.

https://youtu.be/7KePJz28_GY

Fundamentally, both Turkish-Arab and Islamist’s approaches are contradictory to that of Omar’s and off track the following Sunni mindset and fundamentals:

Never compromise the stability of the Caliphate and that includes the stability of the Uthman Caliphate which shouldn’t have been compromised, despite its political and religious deviations. Those who demonized it and helped to topple it have gone against the Sunni fundamentals taught by the pious Omar and the other companions of the prophet (ﷺ).
Consultation ends with offering consultation to the Caliph or the ruler.
Citizens will respect the final decision made by the Caliph or the ruler.
Candor is a soft power used by the Caliph to manage the consultation process and account for the exclusive-opposition risks.
Freedom of speech is regulated to account for the riff raff risk.

May The Pious Bring The Chaos

This case study begins exactly where the first one ended, the INTEGRITY (credibility).

https://youtu.be/_rZwnJ1cE1s

Don't you agree that the above two threats were enough to make the unconfident Western Christendom panic and worry about losing their global lead and influence?

How the Islamists, who regard themselves as the Guardians of the Caliphate, have served Islam?

Imagine where would have Sunni Islam been today globally, if the 'radical-over ambitious' Islamists in late 1970s had let Islam grow naturally without a Caliphate?

The Iranian Industry Before And After Khomeini

Contrary to the current Iranian government’s claims, the transparency, economic and social indicators show that Iran has underperformed after the 1979 Islamic revolution as summarized below.

Pre 1979 Revolution Economic And Social Indicators (Shah Time)

Indicator

Description

Economical

Education

Women Rights

Reference

Shah of Iran managed to increased oil revenue from USD 555 Million in 1963 to USD 20 Billion in 1976.

Number of students raised from 1.5 million in 1963 to 10 million in 1978.
Total number of schools multiplied by 3.24x.
Education Budget:

1. 1963-1967: 45 Billion Iranian Rials.

2. 1968-1972: 172 Billion Iranian Rials.

3. 1973-1977: 551 Billion Iranian Rials.

The right to vote, run for office and serve as lawyers and Judges.
Increased marriage age to 15

Please refer YouTube link titled “History of US-Iran Conflict Explained”

https://youtu.be/d_htudbaqsk

Post 1979 Revolution Economic And Social Indicators (Khomeini Time)

Indicator

Description

2019 Corruption Perception Index

Reference

South Korea 39/180
Turkey 91/180
Vietnam 96/180
Iran 146/180

Transparency International

https://www.transparency.org/en/countries/iran

GDP Trends

GDP Ranking

Policies

Reference

Please refer the following link titled “Atlantic Council, Iran’s economic performance since the 1979 Revolution. FEB 1^st, 2019, by Nadereh Chamlou.”

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/iransource/iran-s-economic-performance-since-the-1979-revolution/

Unemployment Rates

Inflation

Reference

Young Iranians 27%.
University graduates 40%.

40% as per declared numbers.
At least 250% as per experts.

Please refer the following link titled "History of US-Iran Conflict Explained"

https://youtu.be/d_htudbaqsk

Obviously, some firefighting needed to be done by the panicking and unconfident Western Christendom due to their inability to:

Defeat the Islamic principles.
Slow down the Middle Eastern economical and industrial advancement.

So, they decided to patch their post 1922 failed policies with another win-lose/integrity-free firefighting policy, aiming to destabilize the region by eating the white bull!

The Integrity Game

Now that we know WHY and HOW the Western Christendom decided to destabilize the region, the question is, WHO could possibly do it for them?

In the WAR OF PRINICIPALS:

INTEGRTY (credibility) is the secret weapon used by the internal and external competitors to defeat the ruling principals.
Integrity often gets used and abused by both the internal and external competitors to steal people’s loyalty and shape their destiny by spreading rumors and hiding the truth.
Opposition claims purity and demonizes its competitor, using the corruption stick.
The Machiavellian manifests in its severest forms.

The Islamists Are Not An Exception

1978 Belfour Declaration

Have you?

The One-Billion-Dollar Question

Why did the Western Christendom take the risk of helping the anti-Israel Khomeini to establish a Shiite Caliphate?

The answer is because they never did! As in the case of Zionists, one doesn’t help by ‘generously and unceremoniously’ serving cheese on a mouse trap. Does he?

Khomeini’s Occult Policies

Death To America And Israel

"So give good tidings to My servants. Who listen to speech and follow the best of it. Those are the ones Allah has guided, and those are people of understanding." Quran chapter 39 verses 17 and 18.

The Region’s Worst Investors (RWIs)

An exhaustive war with Iraq.
Fostering sectarian violence to create and lead radical Shiite oppositions worldwide.
Fostering Creative Anarchy to create and lead radical Sunni oppositions worldwide.
Proxy wars that bleed the Shiite and Sunni.

Khomeini And The Cinema Rex Fire Crisis

Khomeini And The Gulf Crisis

The following are the results of Iran’s investment in the wrong revolution:

The war contributed to the world oil market's volatility and helped to undermine OPEC's cohesiveness and market control, resulting in price cuts. While the Iranian King’s policies succeeded to raise the price of oil from USD 1.32/b in 1968 to USD 12.79/b in 1978 (an increase of 850% in 10 years), Khomeini’s policies initially raised the price of oil to eventually settle at USD 14.24 in 1988 (an increase of 111% in 10 years), due to region’s bleeding post-war economy. The initial rise of prices was associated to the natural risk of the war on oil supplies, but the global arms industry was the real beneficiary of such rise in prices and not Iran or region’s economy. Meaning, the King used the Petro-Dollars to invest in Iran, while Khomeini used it to infest militias outside Iran. Please refer the below link for the average annual OPEC crude oil price from 1960 to 2020 (in U.S. dollars per barrel).

https://www.statista.com/statistics/262858/change-in-opec-crude-oil-prices-since-1960/

1. Since the 1970s, USA was awaiting an opportunity to fill the vacuum created by the British forces. The Iranian adventure in the Gulf partly fulfilled the United States’s Longley-awaited consent of the region to navigate the warm waters of the Gulf and establish its first military base. Iraq’s 1990 adventure and invasion of Kuwait further materialized the United States’s Longley-awaited consent of the region to walk the warm lands of the Arabian Peninsula and establish military bases. That’s what a wrong investment could result into.
This example demonstrates how the Iranian regime's policies diverted attentions, destabilized the region and damaged its economy, instead of investing in industrialization and development. Nevertheless, Khomeini continued to invest in exporting his revolution and fixing his 'Shiite Caliphate’s' feet elsewhere, while the radical Shiites enjoyed attending, singing and dancing in this Shiite wedding and anxiously waiting to grab the bride’s flower bouquet. In the meantime, the pious Western Christendom band conveniently continued playing the Iranian music in this religious Shiite wedding, wishing them happiness and the expansion of their Anti-American and Anti-Israeli ‘Shiite Caliphate’. Hallelujah!

Khomeini And The Lebanon Crisis

Hailed by most of the Lebanese factions, the Israeli forces invaded Southern Lebanon in 1982 and forced the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) forces out of the country. As a result, the organization had to move its base for the second time to Tunisia, after being forced out the first time from the Jordan in 1971 as a result of their armed clash with the hosting Jordanian government forces in what is known as the Black September. Surprisingly, Israel didn’t mind the vacuum created to be filled by the radical pro-Khomeini Shiite militant group called Hiz-Bu-Allah that still chants “Death to America and death to Israel”!

The outcome of the 2006 Israel vs. Hiz-Bu-Allah war that lasted two months also came as a surprise as Hiz-Bu-Allah became stronger and the Lebanese government weaker, since Israel conveniently targeted many Lebanese Government’s military bases and civilian infrastructures that never called for the war! As a matter of fact, ever since PLO left south Lebanon, other than “Death to Israel” chants, there has been no serious attacks by Hiz-Bu-Allah on the Israeli territories. This has led many analysts to conclude that Hiz-Bu-Allah has been practically securing Israel’s northern borders, despite all the Israeli and Hiz-Bu-Allah flirting media wars. As a matter of fact, such fake media wars have further added credit to Hiz-Bu-Allah’s integrity. As a result, Hiz-Bu-Allah has succeeded to win mass’s sympathy in the Arabic and Islamic worlds, highjack Lebanon’s authority and command. Their leader Hassan Nasr-U-Allah has openly declared pledge of allegiance to the Iranian supreme leader. In fact, this qualifies the Israeli and PLO war of 1982 as the Lebanese version of the Belfour Deceleration!

Never mind the “Death to America and Israel” chanting, the chemistry between the Western Christendom and the Shiite minority didn’t stop at ‘generously and unceremoniously’ offering support to the birth of a ‘Shiite Caliphate’ in Iran and birth of a radical pro-Iran Shiite militant group in Lebanon, but it expanded further to Iraq, when USA came to Khomeini’s rescue, invaded Iraq, toppled the Iraqi Government and replaced it with a pro-Iranian militants who also chant ‘Death to America and Israel’. Hallelujah!

This is how the Iranian regime leads proxy wars that destabilizes the region and bleeds the Iranian and Arabic economies.

Khomeini And The Iraqi Crisis

Even though the United Nations considered the 2003 war on Iraq illegal, USA together with Britain and Australia did lead and used direct military force to barbarically occupy Iraq and remove Saddam. Although the USA-led coalition declared Iran as part of the Axis of Evil, practically they didn’t mind the vacuum created by them in Iraq to be filled by a pro-Iranian government and many radical pro-Iran Shiite militant groups that also chants “Death to America and Israel”. In fact, up until recently, USA didn’t mind paying the salaries of such militants and the pious militants’ intern didn't mind being paid by its enemy. The United States congress has recently (after 18 years) started looking into stopping such financial supports. So, in spite of the verbal conflicts and the occasional clashes between the pro-Iran militants and USA forces in Iraq, in reality, there seem to be a lot of chemistry between them. Again, fake media is turning such slogan wars into and a huge publicity for the pro-Iranian militants.

Then came the 2006 turning point of Al-Askari Shiite Shrine Bombing in Iraq. The bombing was considered a sectarian violence between the Iraqi Shiite and Sunni communities. USA president George Bush suspected Al Qaida, but Al Qaida officially denied responsibility for such acts while the Iranian officials accused USA. However, the following two testimonies of George Casey, the US commander in Iraq, and Tariq AlHashimi, the Iraqi Sunni politician, do complement each other and strongly suggest Iran being the orchestrator of the Shiite shrine bombing and other sectarian violence against Iraqi Shiite community. The bombing intended to divide and rule the homogenous Shiite-Sunni Iraqi fabric. AlHashimi’s reveals details of his meeting with Qassim Soleimani in Iran, wherein Soleimani reluctantly confirmed Iran being behind many sectarian bombings in Iraq and also confirmed Iran’s collusion with radical Sunni groups, such as ISIS, to disturb United States’s plans for Iraq! This reminds us to Cinema Rex fire, orchestrated by Khomeini’s revolutionary forces to cause mass demonstrations that toppled down the King. Indeed, Al-Askari bombing did succeed to burn the strong Iraqi Sunni-Shiite fabric, but not for long.

This is an example of the Safavid-Shiite Iranian regime fostering sectarian violence to create and lead radical Shiite oppositions worldwide. This has nothing to do with Islam. It’s the Machiavellian in its worst form. This is the result of the Iranian regime's investment in the wrong revolution that is destabilizing and bankrupting Iran, the Arabic and the Islamic worlds.

Please refer the following YouTube link titled “General George Casey speaking in Paris about Iran terrorism in Iraq-June2014”.

https://youtu.be/NsGeCgSBHxg

Tariq AlHashimi: Please refer the following YouTube link titled “طارق الهاشمي: إيران هي من فجرت مرقد العسكريين”. Meaning “Iran attacked the Shiite Shrine.”

https://youtu.be/TlNhsNvqaP8

https://youtu.be/yBaqJDnIkeA

Khomeini And The Yemen Crisis

Saleh stepping down after being offered amnesty, including his family.
Saleh transferring power to his deputy Abdrabuh Mansoor Hadi.
Holding a historical election with United Nation logistical support with Hadi being the only candidate.
Holding a multi candidate election in 7 years.

https://www.electionguide.org/elections/id/2224/

Refusal of the amnesty offered to Saleh and his family.
The desire to punish Saleh for attacking the protestors and for other corruption chargers.

Khomeini's Revolution Achievements

Fostering sectarian violence against peaceful Shiites to damage, radicalize and lead them worldwide.
Fostering Creative Anarchy to create and lead radical Sunni oppositions worldwide, hoping to fail or weaken all Sunni-ruled countries.
Leading proxy wars that unconsciously bleed and bankrupt the Iranian and Sunni economies.

This again reminds me of Napoleon Bonaparte who said:

“Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake”.

https://ctc.usma.edu/irans-deadly-diplomats/

Question

Yes, as of now, their policy is surly working but it’s too early to judge. History informs that:

The glorious 732 A.D. French victory in the historical Battle of Tours that defeated the Islamic army coming from the advance Muslim administered Spain effectively delayed the European Renaissance for 800 years! So, was it really a French victory? In other words, that victory inherited gigantic challenges to their Christian descendants for centuries. Similarly, only history will tell how effective the Western Christendom's policy is.
History further informs that coincidence was not how the Jews mastered the world of numbers and finance. It was the Western Christendom’s historical boycotting of Jewish products that opened desperate Jew’s eyes to alternative options, such as loaning money with interest rates. That boycott, and other prosecutions in general, were the root cause that slowly and naturally turned Jews into world’s best planners and financial controllers. In other words, the boycott of Jewish products was rather another Western Christendom’s Win-losing/integrity-free firefighting policy that eventually inherited gigantic challenges to their Christian descendants. Such anti-sematic boycotts turned Jews into a super-rich community that owns much of the world. Compliments!

Only history, not media, could tell how effective the Western Christendom’s policy is, but as mentioned before, history has provided evidences of it being very ineffective.

Father Is Right

Have you ever seen a rich magician?

Hence, isn't safe to say that the recent Israeli motion in the Western Christendom to consider Anti-Zionism equal to Anti-Semitism is a clear sign of the desperate Israeli media's failure?

Question

In absence of a credible media, one must retreat and ask:

Why Khomeini was a better option for the Western Christendom than Shah of Iran?

To answer the above sensitive questions, we need to get to know the King better and that is exactly what we will do next.

Who Was The King Of Iran?

In 1974, just 5 years before Khomeini’s revolution and during the following interview with a British news agency, the Shah or the King of Iran said criticizing the West:

The reporter asked: The increase of the oil price could affect UK’s economy and our balance of the payment. Is this what you want?

The reporter asked: The British people ask, what is it that you and some Arab sheikhs have against them? Why you want the British economy to suffer?

The reporter asked: Have you anything in principle against the system in Britain and other Western countries?

The reporter asked: Do you see oil a weapon to correct us?

The reporter then asked: How shall we change?

The Shah responded, “Discipline and more work” Please watch minute 4:48 on the interview.

Please refer the following YouTube link titled “Iran Live News | Shah Of Iran criticizing British foreign policy towards Iran”.

https://youtu.be/ciAEQMEtgNo

In 1975, just 4 years before Khomeini’s revolution and during the following interview with a Canadian news agency, the Shah or the King of Iran said criticizing the West:

The reporter asked: How much does it cost to produce oil knowing that your oil could be produced easily and cheaper?

Shah added “Why you think your superior?” Please watch minutes 3:17 to 3:21 of the interview.

Shah added “We won’t be pushed around. We don’t wish a war, but if it is imposed on us, we will not shrink” please watch minutes 3:48 to 3:58 of the interview.

Please refer the following YouTube link titled “Iran’s last Shah - the fifth estate”.

https://youtu.be/n-grR1e6dw8

The reporter asked: Surly your majesty, you’re not telling me that the Jewish lobby in the United States pulls the strings of the presidency?"

Shah responded, "Not entirely, but I think a little too much even for the Israel's interests"

The reporter asked: You think the Jewish lobby in United States is too powerful for the interests of Israel?

Shah responded, "I think so. Sometimes they are disserving the interests of Israel, because of, they are pushing around too many people"

The reporter asked: Why would the president of the United States pay attention to that lobby?

Shah responded, "They are Strong!"

The reporter asked: Strong in what sense?

Shah responded, "They are controlling many things"

The reporter asked: Controlling what?

Shah responded, "Newspapers, medias, banks, finances and I am going to stop here!"

Shah responded, "Don't mix things please, I don't say the media, I say in the media they have people. Not the entire media, some newspapers will only reflect their views, yes"

Shah responded, "I will have to put all the articles of the New York Times written on this subject and roll a conclusion. You can put this to the computer, and it will answer you"

The reporter asked: What you are saying is that, yes you do believe!

Shah responded, "Let's wait for the answer of the computer"

The reporter asked: Washington Post?

Shah responded, "The same"

The reporter asked: The networks?

Shah responded, "Yes"

Please refer the following YouTube link titled “Shah of Iran on the power of the 'Jewish Lobby' (60 Minutes interview by Mike Wallace)”.

https://youtu.be/8TEJayOg-Ig

The reporter asked: Your regime is undemocratic. How do your respond to that?

Please refer the following YouTube link titled “UPITN 17 4 78 PAHLAVI SHAH OF IRAN INTERVIEWED ON A RANGE OF SUBJECTS”.

https://youtu.be/M1ECblyWAyY

It’s The Judgment Time

So, my dear reader, after watching the interviews, it’s time for you to be a judge and answer the following demanding questions:

Do you think the King of Iran was a puppet of USA and the West as Khomeini and the Western media claimed? Does he sound like that to you?

Do you think the King was corrupt and had integrity issues?

Do your think the King was less brave than Khomeini?

Do you think the King really failed to comply with the teaching of the prophet Mohamed (ﷺ) in resisting evil verbally as Khomeini did through his slogans?

Do you understand now why the Western Christendom didn’t support the pro-Israel King?

Do you understand now why the Western Christendom replaced the monarch with a Shiite Caliphate in the middle east?

Do you understand now why the Western Christendom didn’t bother with Khomeini’s anti-Israel slogans?

Is it clear now that the Western Christendom simply replaced Region’s Best Investor (The King) with Region’s Worst Investor (Khomeini) to bankrupt Iran and the region?

Is it clear now Why Khomeini was a better option for the Western Christendom than Shah of Iran?

Truth is bitter, isn’t it?

The Story In Short

The Western Christendom has demonstrated creativity in destabilizing and bankrupting both the Islamic and the Arabic worlds. In doing so, they have used their:

Media’s soft power alone, as in the case of Iran.
Military’s power alone, as in the case of Iraq.
Mixture of both soft and military powers, as in the case of Libya.
Media’s soft power alone, as in the case of the Arab Spring.

Replacing their governments with pro-Turkey/Iran militias.
Destabilizing their region.
Bankrupting their region.

The September 11 New-Crusaders

Do you agree with Osama Bin Laden's attack on the world trade centers in USA?

He responded, “What is to gain by slapping someone who is far stronger than you, then ending up shattered and broken?”.

Absolutely!

Case Study 3

The Radical Over-Ambitious Hindus Of The Asian World

Are the Indian Hindus ‘generously and unceremoniously’ being set to fail as a ‘radical over-ambitious’ minority to weaken the Asian competition?

Well, one photo tells a thousand words! We will know more in few years.

What is The Way Forward?

للبيت رب يحميه

Finally, my dear reader, I hereby conclude seeking guidance from Allah the almighty.

Where The Arrows Are Going?

[video width="1920" height="1080" mp4="http://hakandkak.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/VideoEditor_20210730_023644_1_1_1.mp4"][/video]

My Pious Reader

Last but not least my dear reader, I know that your right, but you could be wrong, and I know that I am wrong, but I could be right.

So, help us ‘O Allah’!

يا مغيث

“The Sunni Islamists are unconsciously helping to enable a second and a greater global Holocaust that will lead to the murder of two third of the world's Muslim population as the first Holocaust murdered two third of the world's Jewish population.

The second Holocaust intends to shrink Islam into its Arabian Peninsula’s origin as the first one intended to shrink the Judaism into its Levant’s origin.”

[video width="1280" height="720" mp4="http://hakandkak.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/تساؤلات-حول-طالبان-_-فايز-الكندري_1_1_1_1_1.mp4"][/video]

url

Back to

Blog