A Price For Treachery

The pictures of the helpless civilians fleeing Najaf is reminiscent of the events of 1948, when the Palestinians fled their land and never to return. Post 1948, almost all of the resistance movements like Hamaas, PLO and Islamic Jihad were born: ‘effect always follows the cause’. This is one of the few principles from the world of physical science that may be applicable to many of the areas dealing with human behaviour.

Similarly, it was the first Gulf war and the continuous onslaught by the US forces in places like Iraq and Palestine that gave birth to AL-Qaeda. There are very few reporters, commentators or editors in the West that wants to elaborate on this point in depth. The scientific and rational West suddenly becomes very medieval; prefer to burn their witches at the stake with their lethal weapons as they are doing at this moment in Najaf, Kut and Baghdad.

According to the mass media, the resistance movements are composed of brainwashed suicide bombers looking for virgins in paradise. Virgins may be very scarce and despised in the West but there is no shortage of them in the Islamic world! So, why haste to end ones life on earth to obtain something that is already guaranteed for every successful Muslims in the hereafter? Besides, Muslims are not constrained by celibacy or condemned to live in the imaginary world where virtuous monogamous couples live until: “till death do us apart”.

Of course, the moderate-Muslims are also preaching about the virtues of monogamy and the ‘impossibility’ of true polygamy. They see no contradictions in being lectured on the issue by the likes of Bill Clinton, John Major, Mitterrand or their experts, many of who are known adulterers! Examine the statistics; monogamy in its true definition is a rare phenomenon especially in the ‘freedom’ loving societies. Almost every man has had several partners by the time they reach their graves, it even includes, priests, bishops and may even include the Pope in the near future!

The moderates with a defeated mindset are crippled by the arguments espoused by the anti-Islamic Western mass media. So, they and their scholars constantly apologise for polygamy whilst failing to recognise that these are the same people preaching the virtues of homosexuality! There is already a homosexual ‘mosque’ in the US. Is it a ‘mosque’ where homosexuals pray or a ‘mosque’ where they preach and practice the subject? Regardless, this all fits, when you look at any episode of Jerry Springer, you realise that the US is truly a land of the ‘free’ –” meaning, a land where anything is ‘possible’!

Coming back to the Palestine issue, created post 1948. It epitomises treachery. The agreement between the British and the Arabs as well as the initial UN mandate after the First World War did not include any reference to giving ‘Palestine’ to the Jews. For some of our American readers, especially those village-Republicans from Deep South or Midwest, I use the word ‘Palestine’ as Israel came into existence in 1948. The Palestinians have lived there for centuries. Therefore, Israel is a bit like how the modern US or Australia came into existence. And like the Israeli-Jews, the European immigrants in America and Australia are now dictating who is or who is not a foreigner that is entitled to enter these lands!

Treachery was not one sided. Since 1948, the Palestinian cause was never taken on seriously by the entire Islamic world, each regime giving it lip service to promote their personal agenda. The oil money was one of the most potent resources but it was simply squandered. A similar process of betrayal has also been talking place in Iraq. Without sounding sectarian, large sections of the Shia leadership cooperated with the invaders during the early phase of the recent war. Some were doing this through a pragmatic policy to oust Saddam whilst others in their naiveté believed in the American slogans. The fruits of their actions are now being unravelled in front their eyes very painfully.

The Sunnis (Arabs and Kurds) also betrayed, but the unlike the Shia leadership the Sunni leadership is far more accountable and their followers tend to exercise independent judgement. In contrast, the notion of blind following (Taqleed) is very prominent within the Shia school of thought. Under such climate when the leader falters its masses also falter. This was shown with examples in a recent televised documentary; an entire Shia family was imprisoned and abused by the American soldiers in Abu-Ghraib style. But that did not lead them to take up arms after their release as they all followed Sistani’s ‘guidance’.

Therefore, the Shias helped and facilitated the coalition forces allowing them to settle in where as most of the resistance have come from the Sunni concentrated regions. Some of the Shias also handed over a lot of the weapons over to the invading forces. It was reported that 3000 SAMS were given over to the British forces in the south. This meant that the Shias did not build up their military experience and lacked weapons. The recent skirmishes led by Muqtada al-Sadr, the Shias did very badly as compared to those in places like Ramadi, Baquba and Fallujah.

Most of the ordinary Shias and Sunnis generally agree on the causes and solutions with regards to Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan and most of the problems facing the wider Islamic world. The real source of treachery has come from the Shia Scholars (Ulemas) rather than from the ordinary followers.

Ayatollah Sistani’s silence is astonishing, treasonous and disgusting; particularly after the revelations of the gruesome happenings inside Abu-Ghraib, which no one has certified that it has stopped. Before the fanatical blind following Shias jump like the Saudi-Salafis and highlight Sunni Ulemas betraying, please remember, one haram (forbidden act by Islamic law) action can never be used to justify another haram. It is even more appalling when the neo-conservatives like David Frum are citing Sistanis conduct in support of their policies in Iraq. Even today, Sistani has called for the ending of fighting in Najaf without declaring the rights and wrongs of the issue and implicitly blaming the followers of Muqtada al-Sadr, who are resisting the invaders.

Many have commented that the departure of Sistani to London is no coincidence nor was his health the real criteria. Sheikh Hamed Khafaf, al-Sistani’s spokesman in Beirut, said that the ayatollah "needs special treatment, but he is not in a deteriorated state." Al-Sistani was also well enough to meet with Nabih Berri, head of the Shiite Amal Party, during a stopover in Beirut.

It seems as if there was a deal struck with Sistani as he has already shown overt signs of coexisting happily with the American-Zionist camp and their installed puppet regime. This allows the Americans to deal with the rebellious and in their eye, the more pro-Iranian Muqtada al-Sadr. Sistani’s departure was timed so that he can remain a spectator to the US onslaught on al-Sadr’s men even it means defiling the holy sites around Najaf. Thus, Sistani’s absence gives him a plausible deniability.

This may also explain why the US has stepped up its recent rhetoric against Iran and Muqtada al-Sadr whom it considers the unofficial Iranian representative in Iraq. The onslaught is an indirect confrontation with Iran. Perhaps it is for the same reason why Ayatollah Hakim who was also very pro-Iranian was blown to pieces earlier.