Chapter 12 – The Rise of other Sunni Islamic Movements

This is a serialization of the book titled ‘Crisis in Islam’. The full book and its Endnotes may be accessed here:


As soon as Zionist Imperialism gained control of the Arabian Peninsula after enabling the Wahhābis of Mecca, it scrambled to contain the rest of the Arab world through Islam. The Orientalists and researchers in the Zionist institutes in Europe and America were not oblivious to the fact that the rest of the Arab world was not generally like the Arabian Peninsula and Gulf in backwardness. This meant that it would not have been easy to export Wahhābi ideology to the rest of the Arab world, especially if they took into account that the aspirations of the new educated population in Egypt, Syria and Iraq were toward freedom more than to return their thoughts to previous centuries about which these people had no knowledge save perhaps an idyllic vision that had no deep roots.

It does not matter that Zionist Imperialists had contributed to the rise of Islamic movements in the Arab East or that it embraced these movements after their rise. What is important is that the religious movements that have arisen in the Arab East were mostly acting in accordance with the Zionist interests in the Arab world.

Eastern Arabs of the northern parts of the Arabian Peninsula would not have been satisfied with a simple call, such as that by Abdul-Wahhāb, which was no more than a superficial look at the meaning of monotheism, which he himself had not understood at all. These Arabs, by virtue of their intellectual antecedence over the Bedouin of the Arabian Peninsula and the Gulf, were looking to link the state and religion in a new world, where relations are governed by new principles, such as the nation-state, international relations and the so-called ‘international law’, as well as treaties and alliances mostly created outside the scope of Islam without consultation with the Muslims. In other words, the nascent generation of Muslims of the East (which maybe is a loose term) wanted a political theory that may not be separated from Islam but able to deal realistically with the world where Muslims live after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, which had for centuries been a distorted face of Islam. Wahhābi naïve ideology was not able to satisfy this aspiration, or even deal with the realities that surrounded the Muslim World.

Continue reading “Chapter 12 – The Rise of other Sunni Islamic Movements”

This is the story behind the court case on Aggression in invading Iraq in 2003 against Tony Blair and others in the High Court in London.

Background

I started my life as an electrical/electronics engineer having studied at Baghdad University and specialised in Microwave Communication at UCL. I left Iraq in 1980 for political reasons. This means that I did not live through the calamities that have befallen Iraq between 1980 and today.

I cannot but loathe anyone, especially the Iraqis, who supported the imposition of sanctions on Iraq.

When the genocidal sanctions, the like of which had never been imposed before, were imposed on Iraq in 1990 I realised that the Zionist plan for the dismantling the Arab East had started. I had a few options to challenge the disproportionate forthcoming battle. I decided to study law and try to use it as my means of battle with injustice. At a great cost, I left engineering and studied law. In 1996 I was called to the English Bar. At that time, I had accumulated no less than SEVEN degrees in four different disciplines. Yet no less than TWENTY sets of chambers refused to accept me as a tenant!

Between 1992 and 1996, I published a quarterly magazine, “The Arab Review” which was the first publication to expose the use of the Depleted Uranium shells in Iraq, the crime of aggression and the genocidal sanctions.

I cannot but loathe anyone, especially the Iraqis, who supported the imposition of sanctions on Iraq.

I tried twice in 1999 and 2002 to invite the Iraqi Government to sue the aggressors in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against the genocidal sanctions, the continuous air raids that were carried out contrary to the rules of International Law, but to no avail. This is neither the time nor place to discuss the failure of the Iraqi Government to avail itself of the ICJ precedent in the case of Nicaragua v USA.

I helped a few British friends in their attempts to challenge the UK Government in the build up to the invasion of 2003. The courts used the argument that as no attack had taken place, they were not entertaining an action on hypothetical grounds.

However, as the invasion ensued, the following took place:

 

  1. On 24 March 2003, and only four days after the beginning of the invasion, I sent a letter to the AG seeking his consent to initiate criminal proceeding against PM Blair and his Cabinet for invading Iraq in breach of Part 5 of the International Criminal Court Act 2001. When the AG wrote back trying to argue the objectives of the invasion, I advanced counter legal argumentation challenging the AG’s right to sit in judgment in his case, contrary to natural justice and nemo iudex in causa sua, a maxim backed in English jurisprudence. On 26 January 2004 I lodged a Judicial Review application CO/39/2004 seeking a High Court order to quash the AG’s refusal to grant consent, arguing that the AG acted contrary to natural justice. On 12 March 2004 Tucker J refused the application and on 21 June 2004 Rose LJ rejected the renewal application. Neither judge considered or responded to my argument that the AG acted contrary to natural justice in acting in his own cause.

 

  1. On 7 April 2003, I sent a letter to the AG seeking his consent to initiate criminal proceedings against President George Bush for having breached the Geneva Convention Act 1957 as amended in 1995 and 2001. The AG wrote back arguing that George Bush enjoyed state immunity, which he did not have. An indication of the AG’s incompetence or arrogance was that he suggested that the matter of criminal investigation was up to the Metropolitan Police. But no sooner had we contacted the Metropolitan Police than they responded that the AG had denied them the authority to investigate any member of HM Government in such matters.

 

  1. On 28 January 2004 I sought the AG’s consent to initiate criminal proceedings against the UK Government arguing that it breached the Genocide Act 1969 in imposing total sanctions on Iraq. Following the AG’s refusal, I applied on 7 May 2004 for Judicial Review which was rejected by Collins J on 22 June 2004.

 

  1. On 4 February 2004 I wrote a Pre-Protocol letter to Mr. Tony Blair advising him that I was seeking Judicial Review from the UK’s actions in breaching International Law in the actions of the CPA contrary to SC Resolutions in changing Iraq’s laws. On his failure to respond I lodged application CO/2134/04 for Judicial Review which was rejected by Collins J on 10 June 2004.

 

The reason why none of the above actions were pursued any further is simple – money. It is a fiction to talk about the availability of justice in the Capitalist system. The UK is a good example. You have access to justice if you are rich and powerful but none if you are neither. In our case, we were intimidated into giving up because we were faced with two obstacles – the imposition of heavy cost bill at the first substantive refusal and the demand of a large security for costs to be deposited with the Court before proceeding to the appeal stage!

Between 2007 and 2015

Iraq was invaded; occupied, dismantled and left in ruin and civil war at the hands of a group of the most-evil US/UK men and women that history has ever gathered before. Fourteen years after the so-called liberation and democracy, Iraqis still have no electricity, while the Ba’ath regime managed to export electricity in 1987!

Fighting for justice for Iraq became my life mission.

I never ceased inviting Iraqi victims of the sanctions, DU, invasion and occupation who lost everything to take action, but found little response. Iraqis exposed their fragile nature of despair and a sense of indifference!

I decided to dedicate my time to research in order to create a record of the crimes and events and to lay down the foundation for legal action in the future. To that end, I authored or co-authored the following books on Iraq dealing with the subjects obvious from their titles:

  1. The Trial of Saddam Hussein, 2008, Clarity Press Inc. Atlanta.
  2. Uranium in Iraq: The Poisonous Legacy of Iraq Wars, co-authored with Joanne Baker, 2009, Vandeplas Publishing.
  3. Genocide in Iraq, The Case Against the UN Security Council and Member States, co-authored with Tarik Al-Ani, 2012, Clarity Press Inc. Atlanta,
  4. Genocide in Iraq II, The Obliteration of a Modern State, co-authored with Tarik Al-Ani, 2014, Clarity Press Inc. Atlanta.

 

I did not stop seeking victims willing to sue while I was researching an writing.

Current Action on Aggression

In 2015 General Abdul Wahed Shannan Al Rabbat, ex-chief of Staff of the Iraqi Army, personally expressed to me his desire to sue: not to get financial damages, albeit he is entitled to it after having lost everything, but rather as his reply to the aggressor that he had no right to deny him his dignity as a human being.

It is not true, as has been circulating, that the current action against Tony Blair was initiated by the release of the Chilcot Report. The preparation for launching the action started in 2015 but were delayed for reasons that are irrelevant to this topic. Having said that, it remains true that the material in Chilcot Report, which I have read in full, turned out to be a valuable asset in our evidence.

In order to put to rest the material circulating in some quarters of the media about the action, its background and its details from people, some of whom have no access to events, I give below a brief summary of what has happened in this action.

  1. On 28 September 2016, I, acting as Counsel for General Abdul Wahed Shannan Al Rabbat, laid Information before Westminster Magistrates seeking the issue of Summons against Tony Blair, Jack Straw and Lord Goldsmith to ‘appear before it and answer to the accusation of committing the crime of aggression in invading Iraq in 2003 contrary to the jus cogens norm established in the Nuremberg Tribunal set up by the UK and its allies post WWII’.

 

  1. The Information was accompanied by a ‘Statement of Case’ of some 100 pages of legal argument and facts starting with preliminary preparation to the invasion and occupation.

 

  1. On 24 November 2016 District Judge Snow refused to issue the Summons for the following reasons:

“1.     Implied immunity as former head of state and government ministers, therefore                                    offence not  made out.

2.     Allegations involve potential details being disclosed under the   Official Secrets Act                              for which  Attorney General and Director of Public Prosecutions consent are required.”

 

  1. On 6 December 2016 I sent the District Judge the pre-action letter asking him to reconsider his decision before I proceed to seek Judicial Review (JR) by the High Court of his refusal.

 

  1. On 29 December 2016 I was advised by the Magistrates Court that District Judge Snow was ‘not prepared to change his original decision’.

 

  1. The reason why I started the action on my own was not a question of seeking empty glory but because I found that very few people believed that there was a serious case to be pursued. That included barristers and solicitors with whom I had discussed the potential of legal action. However, now that the action is in the stage of Judicial Review (JR), it has become a serious matter to be considered by lawyers.

 

  1. Having reached the stage of JR, I realized that it was impossible for me to proceed in the legal action alone. I needed help as I was aware of what I was going to face. I contacted my old friend, the competent solicitor, Mr. Imran Khan who indicated an immediate interest and willingness to offer his personal skills and office service to the action.

 

  1. Imran and I decided that the skills of a QC was advisable in such a high profile action. Mr. Michael Mansfield QC was no less forthcoming than Imran Khan in offering his skills in the pursuit of justice; and both pro bono!

 

  1. On 22 February 2017, we filed with the High Court in London an application for permission to seek Judicial Review of the refusal of the Magistrates Court to issue Summons as requested in the Information.

 

  1. On 24 March 2017 we were served with a notice from the Attorney General (AG) indicating the following:
  • That the AG was intervening in the action;
  • That the three accused were being represented by the Government Legal Department; and
  • That the three accused supported the AG’s intervention.

 

  1. On 11 April 2017 the AG submitted his argument to the court opposing our application for permission of JR despite not having been advised of the court’s decision to accept his intervention.

 

  1. In his submission of 11 April, the AG added nothing to our submission as he raised the opposition based on the judgment of the House of Lords in the case of Jones and others (2006) in which the HL held that ‘aggression’ despite being a crime under Customary International Law is not part of domestic criminal law because Parliament has not legislated for it to be so.

 

  1. We have accepted that such an authority exists but argued that in view of the facts and the changes in law the decision in Jones need to be revisited.

 

  1. On 25 May 2017, Ouseley J ordered that the application for permission for JR be adjourned to be heard before a Divisional Court.

 

  1. Ouseley J held that as long as we are bound by the judgment in Jones, the only issue in question is whether or not the decision in Jones should be reconsidered.

 

  1. On 5 July 2017 the Divisional Court composed of Lord Chief Justice Thomas and Ouseley J heard submissions from both sides. We argued that Jones should be reconsidered while the AG invited the Court to refuse our application and dismiss the action because the Supreme Court was unlikely to revisit the judgment in Jones.

 

  1. The Divisional Court requested further documentary evidence to be submitted within a week. We have since submitted the requested material.

 

  1. There are two possible decisions the Divisional Court could make. The Court may refuse our application and put an end to this action. Alternatively, the Court may decide that the decision in Jones need to be reconsidered in which case it would certify the question to the Supreme Court for the latter’s reconsideration.

 

What Next?

This is the first serious active case brought before a proper court after 27 years of the first crime of imposing genocidal sanctions on Iraq. There are several other crimes that can be brought before a Court in the UK if there are Iraqi victims willing to do, and have both the courage and sense of grievance to do so. I believe that the action has awakened many Iraqis to the serious possibility and may even encourage people to be engaged in active support of these actions in more than one peaceful and legal way.

They may fabricate a case and arrest me as they did in 2003 when I was arrested soon after lodging my case against the AG on the ground that I broke the sanctions imposed on Iraq. But whatever happens I will not give up seeking justice for Iraq.

Abdul-Haq Al-Ani (Dr.)

Barrister

Member of the Inner Temple

14 July 2017

 

 

 

 

Chapter 11 – Wahhābism in the Service of Imperialism

This is a serialization of the book titled ‘Crisis in Islam’. The full book and its Endnotes may be accessed at:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/d/Books/Crisis-Islam-Dr-Abdul-Haq-Al-Ani-Author/0993572006/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1486203904&sr=1-1&keywords=The+crisis+in+Islam

______________________________________________________________

I explained in the previous chapter how Wahhābism was created as a nucleus for the Imperialist project that preceded all political activity in the Arab world and survived after most projects undertaken a century or two later had failed. But I also stated that the British, during Britain’s golden age, were realistic in that they did not expect, and for several reasons, that the Wahhābi movement was going to swallow the Muslim world in the blink of an eye. One of these reasons, and perhaps not the least serious, was that the Ottoman Empire was still a force to be reckoned with and one must be wary of tampering with its areas of influence. Bringing a new doctrine, although it claimed to be renewing the Hanbali sect, would not be easy to accept in a world built centuries ago on prohibiting ‘Ijtihad’ (independent reasoning) and the suspension of thinking in Islam!

In addition, when the Wahhābi movement was born, the Arabian Peninsula was poor and created a burden on the British Imperialists. But all that changed in the light of two important developments. Firstly, the collapse of the Ottoman Empire opened the door to Imperialism to come and act freely in the Arabian Peninsula and the Gulf without much opposition. Secondly, the discovery of the unimaginable oil reserves in the region, turning it from an economic burden to a financial source of which the Imperialists had not even dreamt!

The creation of Wahhābism formed the first stage of the plan to subject political Islam to the will of Zionism. I hope to follow examining the role of Wahhābism in the first stage by dealing with creation of the Muslim Brotherhood in the second stage, and conclude with the third stage on the wide Imperialist plan, that of the creation of Al-Qaeda. Perhaps sometime in the future there will be created another stage whose nature we do not know yet. But Imperialism has taught us that it’s creativity has no limits, and it may bring something new as long as we live in repose, making the sleep of ‘the People of the Cave’ seem modest! 1

Before proceeding further, I need to clarify that when I talk about Zionist Imperialism, which leads to effective ‘Zionification’ of Wahhābism, the Muslim Brotherhood and Al-Qaeda, I do not mean that all of those who joined, endorsed, or supported these movements are Zionists in the sense of their belonging and believing. This is because the majority of those involved in these movements were naïve Muslims who are of the third category, as described by ‘Ali Ibn Abi Tālib in saying: “People are three categories: A Rabbāni who devotes his knowledge to serving Allah, a learner who learns for the sake of saving himself, and the hooligan type of rabbles that follow anyone who cries out, turning whichever way the wind blows, not illuminated by the light of knowledge and not fallen back upon support that offers safety, strength and security” 2. These are excused for having followed a project of whose true nature they know nothing. They honestly believe that they are serving Islam in whose absolute belief they were raised, and faith is blind!

Anyone, who has read something about Islam, could not overlook the fact that the Prophet Muhammad did not enter Mecca with an army, and did not take it by force. He entered it in peace and pardoned the hardened idolaters of Quraysh, to show the people an example that this land must remain peaceful and safe and Islam was a religion of love and forgiveness. His act in Mecca would fit perfectly with the Message of his brother Jesus in turning the other cheek. However, this Muhammadian desire, which embodied the Divine Sign of making it a ‘safe sanctuary’ 3, was not preserved at the hands of Muslims in later times. Muslims after the Prophet did not all the time heed Allah’s will or the Prophet’s wish to keep Mecca a safe haven. It was attacked and burnt repeatedly, not just by heretics, but by armies ordered by Muslim Caliphs. A few examples from the past to illustrate this are cited here. Umayyad Caliphate Yezid Ibn Mu’awiya sent his army to ransack Medina and fight Abullah Ibn Az-Zubair in Mecca, and Al-Hajjāj Ibn Yusuf was sent by Abdul-Malik Ibn Marwān to attack Mecca in the year 73 AH (692 AD), burning even the cloak of the Ka’ba.4  Its destruction did not satisfy the Qarmatians, who even stole the black stone in the year 317 AH (929 AD). 5

After centuries of relative calm in the Arabian Peninsula, the Wahhābis brought back violence, destruction and killing to Mecca when Abdul Aziz Ibn Sa’ud entered it in 1342 AH (1929 AD) by force with British support and put its people to the sword in the name of Islam. 6 With the fall of Mecca in the hands of Wahhābis and their other Bedouin allies, the first dream of Imperialist Zionism was realized by overtaking the most significant base of Islam. Everything that happened after that was a natural consequence of that victory.

When the Imperialists managed to put their hands on Mecca, they held the key to controlling the Muslim and Arab worlds, because the majority of Muslims sincerely believe that Allah could not deliver His House but to honest believers, and this means that anyone who controls Mecca must be virtuous and obeyed. Had they read the Qur’an carefully and understood Allah empowering the devil to cause havoc in the land, they would not have arrived at this conviction, but they are far from having the ability to understand this. This is what the Imperialists have thought of for centuries and aspired to achieve, and they did.

Anyone who objectively reads the history of the area in the twentieth century away from sectarianism and partisanship, if possible, will discover that there is no event or political stage in which the Zionist Wahhābis were not involved using their religious weight at the beginning and adding their oil wealth later. This is the reason why I use the term Zionist Wahhābis, because political affiliation is not a slogan raised by the political or religious movement, but the sum of its practices and its actions. In addition, whoever has followed what the Wahhābi movement had done in the twentieth century, will find that it was indeed riding on the coattails of Imperialist Zionism in every stage of the political development in the Arab lands during the past nine decades.

– They supported the Sykes-Picot agreement and drawing of borders by Percy Cox determining the borders between Iraq and Arabia. The pleading of Sa’ud with Percy Cox is well documented.7

– they did not dispatch a single soldier to support the Palestinian people who were displaced in 1948.

– they supported the tripartite aggression against Egypt in 1956 over the Suez Canal, standing with the Zionists, the British and the French.8

– they opposed and plotted against every project that sought to unite Arab lands, and were against the unity of Egypt and Syria in 1958 and against the unification of Iraq and Jordan in the same year.9

– they intervened directly in Yemen when the republic was established after Al-Sellal’s overthrow of the Imamate (1962), and contributed to and supported the bitter and bloody fighting, which depleted Yemen and the Egyptian army that came to support the Republic.10

– they contributed financially to the throwback that took place in Syria in 1961 and led to the collapse of the first Arab unity.11

– In 1967, they incited the West and Israel to attack Egypt, strike it and eliminate the rule of Jamal Abdul Nasser after having pinned down a large contingent of the Egyptian army in Yemen.

– they sought and succeeded in lifting the oil embargo, which they were forced to impose on Europe in the wake of the 1967 war, in September of the same year. This gave the Zionists what they needed to humiliate the Arabs in war and take their oil voluntarily. The argument that they needed money to support the Arab military effort was nothing but a fig leaf that did not cover their nakedness, because the money they had was enough for them to live for years if not decades, while Europe could not have afforded an oil embargo for one year.

– in spite of their disagreement and their hostility to the ruler of Jordan, King Hussein Ibn Talāl, they supported him in September 1970 in attacking and killing the Palestinians at the time when those were fighting the Zionists, heralding a possible revolution. The events came to be known as the ‘Black September’ in which it was claimed that some 25000 Palestinians were killed and the PLO was thrown out of Jordan. Syria was on the side of the PLO while it is commonly believed that the US, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia helped Jordan.

– Although the oil embargo had caused significant damage to the Zionist capitalist economy, they were quick to lift it and ease the effects. Had they kept it up, something else might have changed!12 They stood against the war in 1973 and made every effort to ease the burden on Imperialist Zionism, which would have made it possible for the Arab nation to put pressure on the Zionists to give back the land they had occupied in 1967.

– they founded the Gulf Cooperation Council to include the last authoritarian political regimes in the world in order to ensure the continuation of the Zionist plan in the Arabian Peninsula and the Gulf by securing that none of those states, some of which are fictitious, would deviate from the objectives of the plan.13

– they gave Imperialism bases and airports for the rapid deployment force established by President Jimmy Carter. During the invasion of Iraq, a US commander commented that he had not seen facilities as ready and suitable anywhere else, not even in the United States.14

– they succeeded in penetrating the nationalist movement in Iraq’s and Syria’s Ba’ath at a time when the Ba’ath Party in the two countries was involved in an unethical, irrational and incomprehensible internal conflict. They worked to push each of the two sides apart and conspired with one against the other, and that is how it went.

– they spent huge amounts of money to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan in the 1980s, despite the lack of any Arab interest in it, because the only benefit was for the Imperialist projects in the fight against the Socialist system.15

– they secured full support for the Imperialist economic system by pumping quantities of oil exceeding ten times the need of the Arabian Peninsula, in order to maintain the level of prices of energy required by the Capitalist market without any consideration for Arab national security in maintaining the wealth of the Arabs for future generations.16

– in 1991, they called on ‘infidel’ Zionist Imperialism to bring its armies to the land of ‘Muhammad’ in order for it to destroy Arab-Muslim Iraq.17

– they supported Imperialism in its crimes in parts of the world outside the land of Arabs and Muslims in many secret wars that most people have not heard about. They were exposed when their support for the terrorists called ‘the Contras’ in Nicaragua, who were fighting the leftist government in a war that had nothing to do with Islam and Muslims, came to light, which confirms that the Wahhābi movement was employed to serve Imperialism anywhere in the world!18

– they put the Arabian Peninsula; its land, its air and its water, in the service of Zionist Imperialism to impose the unjust embargo on Iraq for 12 years, participating in killing millions of Muslims while claiming to be the trustees of Allah’s religion!19

– they imposed on the rest of the defeated Arabs the ‘Arab Initiative’ whose aim was to resolve the Palestinian issue without the Palestinians having a say in the project. They offered this project to the world knowing fully that Zionism will reject it because they want more which would mean that the Arabs would need to give still more.20

– they participated in the invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003 by providing access to US bases and way-leaves across the border.21

– they recruited treacherous Muslims, provided them with money and weapons, and sent them to destroy Syria and blow up its facilities and kill its children, claiming the reason to be the desire to change the regime for its injustices and its strong hold on power, even though they, and their Wahhābi rulers of the Gulf Cooperation Council, are the last people on Earth who have the competency to demand that!22

Zionist Imperialism has succeeded in achieving all this at the hands of the Wahhābis for two reasons. The first is the availability of money that started pouring in with the flow of oil in the twentieth century. The second, and most important, is the nature of Islamic culture that has made religion a tool for politics, and helped them claim that they are establishing the law of Allah, although Zionism is not related to Allah!

What has Zionist Wahhābism done?

Wahhābism has had what is not available to any political movement or party in the world. It employed its fortunes in the construction of mosques across the globe and in sending half-educated Bedouin and its followers to manage them and preach to the simple Muslims anything written or decreed by their Zionists masters, and which can be veiled by religion. One would often find an invented Hadith from some period of falsified Islam. Our era is not the only era when Muslim rulers needed to find excuses and justifications for their behaviour and their policies. This was done by those who claimed indulgence in jurisprudence centuries ago.

Wahhābis regularly and progressively instilled the Takfiri thought (accusations of apostasy) which is based on considering anyone who disagrees with them to be suspect in his belief. The non-Muslim is an infidel, albeit the tone of the campaign was mild for known reasons. The rest of the Muslims were divided between the infidel and the confused. The ‘Alawi, Isma’ili and Shi’a for example are infidels and apostates, while the rest of the Sunnis live in semi-aberrance and their elders in need of criticism and reform.

They then laid the foundation for a scary and strange culture, where they decreed, based on the teachings of Ibn Taymiyyah, that the soul, money and honour of the infidel is permitted for them, thus allowing the murder, theft and rape on the grounds that this is the religion of Allah. However, Allah and His Messenger have nothing to do with any of it. They hinted at their intent to demolish the tomb of the Prophet Muhammad, but the advice of their masters was to postpone that work until the Muslim reaction is tested first in the inevitable occupation and destruction of Al-Aqsa Mosque.

In the early nineteenth century, the Wahhābis attacked the graves of members of the Household of the Prophet when they ransacked Karbala, one of the most holy cities for the Shi’a Muslims, killing, looting and destroying.23 This culture gradually permeated two generations of Muslims in the twentieth century, giving birth to Al-Qaeda’s destructive movement, as we shall see later.

Thus, by exploiting Islam, Wahhābism had at its disposal what no other political or ideological movement in the world had. Mosques are open in the entire Muslim world five times a day for prayers, and between prayers for Hadith and preaching sessions. Millions of Muslims come to the mosque every day voluntarily. On the other hand, if a political movement or party would want to hold a conference for its members, it would endeavour and strain to get a small group to the meeting. Wahhābism gets people without effort five times a day all over the world, and all it has to do is corrupt their minds through controlled preaching, as it has succeeded in exploiting Islam to realize the centuries-old Zionist plan to control Muslim minds.

Wahhābism benefited from another fact related to the backwardness and poverty in the Arab world in particular. These two factors had led to the migration of tens of thousands of Arabs from Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Sudan and Palestine to work in the Arabian Peninsula and the Gulf States, where they were embraced by the Wahhābi environment, with its ideology and mosques, and which fed them the thoughts it wanted to spread. A whole new generation of Arabs was born in the Arabian Peninsula and the Gulf who have not heard of Ammār Ibn Yāsir but know Ibn Taymiyyah! This is not surprising since most of these were simple people, and simple minds need no more than simple ideas. Flat thinking easily accepts the theory that the Earth is flat!

When they returned to their home countries, many of these were saturated with Wahhābi ideologies and believed that it was the true religion, and that following the edicts of Wahhābi sheikhs is the right thing. Out of these came suicide bombers, killers, eaters of hearts, and belly-rippers, all in the name of religion. The behaviour could be understood because they have not heard anything else and in any case, it may be too late to change that indoctrination.

Arab political regimes outside the Peninsula in countries like Iraq, Syria and Egypt did not understand the scale of the plot and thus were not able to deal with it. They disregarded the mosques and what was going on inside them, thinking that they did not pose a threat to them. The Wahhābi movement took advantage of that vacuum and filled mosque with its followers. These evil preachers began brainwashing people, taking advantage of the failure of the Arab political system to reform the status of people in those countries, disregarding the fact that Wahhābism itself had failed to reform the status of people in the Arabian Peninsula and the Gulf.

When the Arab political system realized the danger of the plot, it was too late. The tide had intensified in Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Iraq, and Syria. Some of the steps taken to avoid damage backfired. When Saddam Hussein comprehended the size of the catastrophe in Iraq, he wanted to alert people to it, but he committed a great folly when he launched the ‘faith campaign’ which gave the Wahhābis more than one opening to agitate people against the nationalist project and enticed them on sectarian grounds whose effects are still with us today.24

I will deal with the project of the Muslim Brotherhood, how it was integral and parallel to the Wahhābi movement before arriving at the conclusion of the plot in the birth of Al- Qaeda, which was the outcome of what preceded it.