Posts Tagged ‘Neocons’

NATO Expands Afghan War Into Pakistan

September 30, 2010 1 comment

On October 7 the United States and its North Atlantic Treaty Organization military allies will begin the tenth year of their war in Afghanistan, over 3,000 miles from NATO Headquarters in Brussels.

The following month midterm elections will be held in the U.S. and NATO will hold a two-day summit in Portugal. The American administration is eager to achieve, or appear to have achieved, a foreign policy triumph in an effort to retain Democratic Party control of the Congress and NATO something to show for the longest and largest military mission in its 61 years of existence.

President Barack Obama has tripled the amount of American combat troops in Afghanistan to 100,000 and along with forces from other NATO member states and partner nations there are now over 150,000 foreign troops in the nation, the most ever stationed in the war-wracked country. 120,000 of those soldiers are now under the command of NATO’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), the most ever serving in a North Atlantic Alliance-led military operation. NATO Kosovo Force at its peak had 50,000 troops, but they entered the Serbian province after an almost three-month air war had ended.

The 120,000 NATO forces currently in theater – from 50 nations already with more pegged to provide troops – are at the center of the world’s longest-lasting and increasingly deadly hot war. NATO’s first ground war, its first combat operations in Asia.

Last year was the most lethal for the U.S and NATO in what is now a nine-year conflict and this year has already proven even more costly in terms of combat deaths. And there are three more months to go.

Washington and Brussels could decide to save face and end the fighting through some combination of an internal political settlement and a true international peacekeeping arrangement – rather than the subversion of the International Security Assistance Force that was established by a United Nations mandate in December of 2001 but which is now the Pentagon’s and NATO’s vehicle for waging war in Afghanistan. And in neighboring Pakistan.

But the military metaphysic prevalent in Washington over the past 65 years will allow for nothing other than what is seen as victory, with a “Who lost Afghanistan?” legacy tarnishing the president who fails to secure it and the party to which he belongs being branded half-hearted and defeatist.

As for NATO, the Strategic Concept to be adopted in November is predicated upon the bloc’s expansion into a 21st century global expeditionary force for which Afghanistan is the test case. A NATO that loses Afghanistan, that loses in Afghanistan, will be viewed more critically by the populations of its European member states that have sacrificed their sons and daughters at the altar of NATO’s international ambitions. In the words of then-Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer six years ago: “What is NATO doing in Afghanistan? Defending values at the Hindu Kush in the present day international climate. We have to fight terrorism wherever it emerges. If we don’t do it at the Hindu Kush, it will end up at our doorstep. In other words, this perception gap [of the North Atlantic military alliance operating in South Asia] in the long run must be closed and must be healed – that is, for NATO’s future, of the utmost importance.” [1]

Not satisfied with the Vietnam that Afghanistan has become, NATO has now launched its Cambodian incursion. One with implications several orders of magnitude greater than with the prototype, though, into a nation of almost 170 million people, a nation wielding nuclear weapons. Pakistan.

As the U.S. delivered its 20th deadly drone missile attack of the month inside Pakistan on the 27th, five times the amount launched in August and the most in any month since they were started in 2004, NATO conducted a series of attacks with helicopter gunships in Northwest Pakistan. Claiming the “right of self-defense” and in “hot pursuit” of insurgents that had reportedly attacked a NATO camp, Combat Outpost Narizah, in Afghanistan’s Khost province near the Pakistani border, this past weekend NATO attack helicopters conducted two forays into the Federally Administered Tribal Areas where U.S. drone strikes have killed a record number of people this month.

Estimates of those killed, dutifully referred to in the Western press as insurgents, militants or terrorists, were 30, then 50, afterward 60, 70 and later “82 or higher.” [2]

The amount, like the identify, of the dead will never be definitively known.

Press reports stated the targets were members of the Haqqani network, founded by veteran Afghan Mujahedin leader Jalaluddin Haqqani, who when he led attacks from Pakistani soil against Afghan targets slightly over a generation ago was an American hero, one of Ronald Reagan’s “freedom fighters.” Two years ago the New York Times wrote: “In the 1980s, Jalaluddin Haqqani was cultivated as a ‘unilateral’ asset of the CIA and received tens of thousands of dollars in cash for his work in fighting the Soviet Army in Afghanistan, according to an account in ‘The Bin Ladens,’ a recent book by Steve Coll. At that time, Haqqani helped and protected Osama bin Laden, who was building his own militia to fight the Soviet forces, Coll wrote.” [3]

As to the regret that the otherwise praiseworthy Haqqani has of late allied himself with the Taliban, one voiced by among other people the late Charlie Wilson who once celebrated Haqqani as “goodness personified,” in an appearance on NBC’s Meet the Press last year Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari told his American audience that the Taliban “was part of your past and our past, and the ISI and the CIA created them together. And I can find you 10 books and 10 philosophers and 10 write-ups on that….” [4]

On September 27 two NATO helicopters attacked the Kurram agency in Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas, killing six people and wounding eight. A local Pakistani government official described all the victims as civilians. According to Dawn News, “Nato has also shelled the area before.” [5] Three attacks in three days and as many as 100 deaths.

On the same day a U.S. drone-launched missile strike killed four people in the North Waziristan agency. “The identities of the four people killed in the attack were not known….” [6]

The above events occurred against the backdrop of the revelation in Bob Woodward’s new book Obama’s Wars that “a 3,000-strong secret army of Afghan paramilitary forces run by the Central Intelligence Agency had conducted cross-border raids into Pakistan.” [7]

After mounting in intensity for two years and consisting in part – helicopter gunship attacks and special forces assassination team raids – of covert operations, the U.S. and NATO war in Northwest Pakistan is now fully underway and can no longer be denied.

The Pentagon – the helicopters used in the attacks on September 25 and 26 were American Apaches and Kiowas – defended the strikes over the weekend as falling within its rules of engagement and Defense Department spokesman Colonel Dave Lapan said the U.S. had adhered to “appropriate protocol” and “Our forces have the right of self-defense.” [8]

A spokesmen for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force initially denied that Alliance forces had launched any attacks inside Pakistani territory, although Afghan police officials had confirmed that they did. On September 27, however, the International Security Assistance Force verified that NATO forces had conducted the deadly strikes. As the third attack by NATO helicopters occurred on the same day, “Coalition officials said the cross-border attacks fell within its rules of engagement because the insurgents had attacked them from across the border.” [9]

A NATO official informed the press that “ISAF forces must and will retain the authority, within their mandate, to defend themselves in carrying out their mission.” [10]

Mehmood Shah, former top security official of the Pakistani government in the region where the helicopter gunship and drone strikes have killed over 200 people so far this month, said of the recent NATO attacks: “This should be considered a watershed event. They [Nato] must be warned: the next time you do this, it can lead to war. Our units should be deployed to fire upon them. This border has sanctity. Nato must realise they have a mandate to operate in Afghanistan, not in Pakistan.” [11]

On September 27 Interior Minister Rehman Malik denounced the NATO raids as a violation of Pakistani territorial integrity and national sovereignty and told the nation’s Senate that the Afghan ambassador to Islamabad would be summoned to explain the attacks. Malik and the Pakistani government as a whole know that the Hamid Karzai administration in Kabul has no control over what the U.S. and NATO do in its own country, much less in Pakistan. The interior minister’s comment were solely for internal consumption, for placating Pakistani popular outrage, but as Pakistan itself has become a NATO partner and U.S. surrogate [12] its officials, like those of Afghanistan, will not be notified of any future attacks.

Nevertheless domestic exigencies compelled Malik to denounce the strikes inside his country and assert “I take the drone attacks in Pakistani territory as an attack on the sovereignty of Pakistan.” A senator from the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz “asked the government to inform the parliament about any accord it had reached with the US under which drone attacks were being carried out.” [13]

At the same time Pakistani Foreign Office spokesman Abdul Basit went further and lodged what was described as a strong protest to NATO Headquarters in Brussels over the weekend’s air strikes, issuing a statement that said in part: “These incidents are a clear violation and breach of the UN mandate under which ISAF operates,” as its mandate “terminates/finishes” at the Afghan border.

“There are no agreed ‘hot pursuit’ rules. Any impression to the contrary is not factually correct. Such violations are unacceptable.” [14]

By the evening of September 27, after the Pakistani complaints were registered, NATO’s ISAF attempted to conduct damage control and reverted to the military bloc’s original position: That it has not launched attacks inside Pakistan at all. On that very day it had dispatched two more helicopter gunships for the third raid in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas.

NATO will continue to launch lethal attacks inside Pakistan against whichever targets it sees fit and will proffer neither warnings nor apologies. The U.S. will continue to escalate attacks with Hellfire missiles against whomever it chooses, however inaccurate, anecdotal and self-interested the reports upon which they are based prove to be.

The death toll in Pakistan this month is well over 200 and for this year to date over 2,000. The justification for this carnage offered by the U.S. and NATO is that it is intended to extend the policy of Barack Obama to “disrupt, dismantle and defeat” insurgent networks in Afghanistan into Pakistan, supposedly the sooner to end the war.

Forty years ago Obama’s predecessor Richard Nixon began his speech announcing the expansion of the Vietnam War into Cambodia with these words: “Good evening, my fellow Americans. Ten days ago, in my report to the nation on Vietnam, I announced the decision to withdraw an additional 150,000 Americans from Vietnam over the next year. I said then that I was making that decision despite our concern over increased enemy activity in Laos, in Cambodia, and in South Vietnam. And at that time I warned that if I concluded that increased enemy activity in any of these areas endangered the lives of Americans remaining in Vietnam, I would not hesitate to take strong and effective measures to deal with that situation.” [15]

He claimed that “enemy sanctuaries” in Cambodia “endanger the lives of Americans who are in Vietnam,” and “if this enemy effort succeeds, Cambodia would become a vast enemy staging area and a springboard for attacks on South Vietnam along 600 miles of frontier: a refuge where enemy troops could return from combat without fear of retaliation.”

The course he ordered was to “go to the heart of the trouble. And that means cleaning out major North Vietnamese and Vietcong occupied territories, these sanctuaries which serve as bases for attacks on both Cambodia and American and South Vietnamese forces in South Vietnam.”

The practical application of the policy was that “attacks are being launched this week to clean out major enemy sanctuaries on the Cambodian-Vietnam border.”

In language that has been heard again lately in Washington and Brussels – with nothing but the place names changed – Nixon claimed: “We take this action not for the purpose of expanding the war into Cambodia, but for the purpose of ending the war in Vietnam….”

Washington indeed expanded the Vietnam War into Cambodia, with what disastrous effects the world is fully aware, and soon thereafter departed Southeast Asia in defeat, leaving vast stretches of Vietnam and Cambodia in ruins.

Afghanistan and Pakistan will not fare any better.

Pepe Escobar classic Fifty questions on 9/11

September 11, 2010 3 comments

It’s September 11 all over again – eight years on. The George W Bush administration is out. The “global war on terror” is still on, renamed “overseas contingency operations” by the Barack Obama administration. Obama’s “new strategy” – a war escalation – is in play in AfPak. Osama bin Laden may be dead or not. “Al-Qaeda” remains a catch-all ghost entity. September 11 – the neo-cons’ “new Pearl Harbor” – remains the darkest jigsaw puzzle of the young 21st century.

It’s useless to expect US corporate media and the ruling elites’ political operatives to call for a true, in-depth investigation into the attacks on the US on September 11, 2001. Whitewash has been the norm. But even establishment highlight Dr Zbig “Grand Chessboard” Brzezinski, a former national security advisor, has

admitted to the US Senate that the post-9/11 “war on terror” is a “mythical historical narrative”.

The following questions, some multi-part – and most totally ignored by the 9/11 Commission – are just the tip of the immense 9/11 iceberg. A hat tip goes to the indefatigable work of;; architects and engineers for 9/11 truth; the Italian documentary Zero: an investigation into 9/11; and Asia Times Online readers’ e-mails.

None of these questions has been convincingly answered – according to the official narrative. It’s up to US civil society to keep up the pressure. Eight years after the fact, one fundamental conclusion is imperative. The official narrative edifice of 9/11 is simply not acceptable.

Fifty questions

1) How come dead or not dead Osama bin Laden has not been formally indicted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) as responsible for 9/11? Is it because the US government – as acknowledged by the FBI itself – has not produced a single conclusive piece of evidence?

2) How could all the alleged 19 razor-blade box cutter-equipped Muslim perpetrators have been identified in less than 72 hours – without even a crime scene investigation?

3) How come none of the 19′s names appeared on the passenger lists released the same day by both United Airlines and American Airlines?

4) How come eight names on the “original” FBI list happened to be found alive and living in different countries?

5) Why would pious jihadi Mohammed Atta leave a how-to-fly video manual, a uniform and his last will inside his bag knowing he was on a suicide mission?

6) Why did Mohammed Atta study flight simulation at Opa Locka, a hub of no less than six US Navy training bases?

7) How could Mohammed Atta’s passport have been magically found buried among the Word Trade Center (WTC)’s debris when not a single flight recorder was found?

8) Who is in the possession of the “disappeared” eight indestructible black boxes on those four flights?

9) Considering multiple international red alerts about a possible terrorist attack inside the US – including former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice’s infamous August 6, 2001, memo – how come four hijacked planes deviating from their computerized flight paths and disappearing from radar are allowed to fly around US airspace for more than an hour and a half – not to mention disabling all the elaborate Pentagon’s defense systems in the process?

10) Why the secretary of the US Air Force James Roche did not try to intercept both planes hitting the WTC (only seven minutes away from McGuire Air Force Base in New Jersey) as well as the Pentagon (only 10 minutes away from McGuire)? Roche had no less than 75 minutes to respond to the plane hitting the Pentagon.

11) Why did George W Bush continue to recite “My Pet Goat” in his Florida school and was not instantly absconded by the secret service?

12) How could Bush have seen the first plane crashing on WTC live – as he admitted? Did he have previous knowledge – or is he psychic?

13) Bush said that he and Andrew Card initially thought the first hit on the WTC was an accident with a small plane. How is that possible when the FAA as well as NORAD already knew this was about a hijacked plane?

14) What are the odds of transponders in four different planes be turned off almost simultaneously, in the same geographical area, very close to the nation’s seat of power in Washington, and no one scrambles to contact the Pentagon or the media?

15) Could defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld explain why initial media reports said that there were no fighter jets available at Andrews Air Force Base and then change the reports that there were, but not on high alert?

16) Why was the DC Air National Guard in Washington AWOL on 9/11?

17) Why did combat jet fighters of the 305th Air Wing, McGuire Air Force Base in New Jersey not intercept the second hijacked plane hitting the WTC, when they could have done it within seven minutes?

18) Why did none of the combat jet fighters of the 459th Aircraft Squadron at Andrews Air Force Base intercept the plane that hit the Pentagon, only 16 kilometers away? And since we’re at it, why the Pentagon did not release the full video of the hit?

19) A number of very experienced airline pilots – including US ally Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, a former fighter jet pilot – revealed that, well, only crack pilots could have performed such complex maneuvers on the hijacked jets, while others insisted they could only have been accomplished by remote control. Is it remotely believable that the hijackers were up to the task?

20) How come a substantial number of witnesses did swear seeing and hearing multiple explosions in both towers of the WTC?

21) How come a substantial number of reputed architects and engineers are adamant that the official narrative simply does not explain the largest structural collapse in recorded history (the Twin Towers) as well as the collapse of WTC building 7, which was not even hit by a jet?

22) According to Frank de Martini, WTC’s construction manager, “We designed the building to resist the impact of one or more jetliners.” The second plane nearly missed tower 1; most of the fuel burned in an explosion outside the tower. Yet this tower collapsed first, long before tower 2 that was “perforated” by the first hit. Jet fuel burned up fast – and by far did not reach the 2000-degree heat necessary to hurt the six tubular steel columns in the center of the tower – designed specifically to keep the towers from collapsing even if hit by a Boeing 707. A Boeing 707 used to carry more fuel than the Boeing 757 and Boeing 767 that actually hit the towers.

23) Why did Mayor Rudolph Giuliani instantly authorized the shipment of WTC rubble to China and India for recycling?

24) Why was metallic debris found no less than 13 kilometers from the crash site of the plane that went down in Pennsylvania? Was the plane in fact shot down – under vice president Dick Cheney’s orders?

25) The Pipelineistan question. What did US ambassador Wendy Chamberlain talk about over the phone on October 10, 2001, with the oil minister of Pakistan? Was it to tell him that the 1990s-planned Unocal gas pipeline project, TAP (Turkmenistan/Afghanistan/ Pakistan), abandoned because of Taliban demands on transit fees, was now back in business? (Two months later, an agreement to build the pipeline was signed between the leaders of the three countries).

26) What is former Unocal lobbyist and former Bush pet Afghan Zalmay Khalilzad up to in Afghanistan?

27) How come former Pakistani foreign minister Niaz Niak said in mid-July 2001 that the US had already decided to strike against Osama bin Laden and the Taliban by October? The topic was discussed secretly at the July Group of Eight summit in Genoa, Italy, according to Pakistani diplomats.

28) How come US ambassador to Yemen Barbara Bodine told FBI agent John O’Neill in July 2001 to stop investigating al-Qaeda’s financial operations – with O’Neill instantly moved to a security job at the WTC, where he died on 9/11?

29) Considering the very intimate relationship between the Taliban and Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), and the ISI and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), is Bin Laden alive, dead or still a valuable asset of the ISI, the CIA or both?

30) Was Bin Laden admitted at the American hospital in Dubai in the United Arab Emirates on July 4, 2001, after flying from Quetta, Pakistan, and staying for treatment until July 11?

31) Did the Bin Laden group build the caves of Tora Bora in close cooperation with the CIA during the 1980s’ anti-Soviet jihad?

32) How come General Tommy Franks knew for sure that Bin Laden was hiding in Tora Bora in late November 2001?

33) Why did president Bill Clinton abort a hit on Bin Laden in October 1999? Why did then-Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf abort a covert ops in the same date? And why did Musharraf do the same thing again in August 2001?

34) Why did George W Bush dissolve the Bin Laden Task Force nine months before 9/11?

35) How come the (fake) Bin Laden home video – in which he “confesses” to being the perpetrator of 9/11 – released by the US on December 13, 2001, was found only two weeks after it was produced (on November 9); was it really found in Jalalabad (considering Northern Alliance and US troops had not even arrived there at the time); by whom; and how come the Pentagon was forced to release a new translation after the first (botched) one?

36) Why was ISI chief Lieutenant General Mahmud Ahmad abruptly “retired” on October 8, 2001, the day the US started bombing Afghanistan?

37) What was Ahmad up to in Washington exactly on the week of 9/11 (he arrived on September 4)? On the morning of 9/11, Ahmad was having breakfast on Capitol Hill with Bob Graham and Porter Goss, both later part of the 9/11 Commission, which simply refused to investigate two of its members. Ahmad had breakfast with Richard Armitage of the State Department on September 12 and 13 (when Pakistan negotiated its “cooperation” with the “war on terror”) and met all the CIA and Pentagon top brass. On September 13, Musharraf announced he would send Ahmad to Afghanistan to demand to the Taliban the extradition of Bin Laden.

38) Who inside the ISI transferred US$100,000 to Mohammed Atta in the summer of 2001 – under orders of Ahmad himself, as Indian intelligence insists? Was it really ISI asset Omar Sheikh, Bin Laden’s information technology specialist who later organized the slaying of American journalist Daniel Pearl in Karachi? So was the ISI directly linked to 9/11?

39) Did the FBI investigate the two shady characters who met Mohammed Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi in Harry’s Bar at the Helmsley Hotel in New York City on September 8, 2001?

40) What did director of Asian affairs at the State Department Christina Rocca and the Taliban ambassador to Pakistan Abdul Salam Zaeef discuss in their meeting in Islamabad in August 2001?

41) Did Washington know in advance that an “al-Qaeda” connection would kill Afghan nationalist commander Ahmad Shah Massoud, aka “The Lion of the Panjshir”, only two days before 9/11? Massoud was fighting the Taliban and al-Qaeda – helped by Russia and Iran. According to the Northern Alliance, Massoud was killed by an ISI-Taliban-al Qaeda axis. If still alive, he would never have allowed the US to rig a loya jirga (grand council) in Afghanistan and install a puppet, former CIA asset Hamid Karzai, as leader of the country.

42) Why did it take no less than four months before the name of Ramzi Binalshibh surfaced in the 9/11 context, considering the Yemeni was a roommate of Mohammed Atta in his apartment cell in Hamburg?

43) Is pathetic shoe-bomber Richard Reid an ISI asset?

44) Did then-Russian president Vladimir Putin and Russian intelligence tell the CIA in 2001 that 25 terrorist pilots had been training for suicide missions?

45) When did the head of German intelligence, August Hanning, tell the CIA that terrorists were “planning to hijack commercial aircraft?”

46) When did Egyptian President Mubarak tell the CIA about an attack on the US with an “airplane stuffed with explosives?”

47) When did Israel’s Mossad director Efraim Halevy tell the CIA about a possible attack on the US by “200 terrorists?”

48) Were the Taliban aware of the warning by a Bush administration official as early as February 2001 – “Either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs?”

49) Has Northrop-Grumman used Global Hawk technology – which allows to remotely control unmanned planes – in the war in Afghanistan since October 2001? Did it install Global Hawk in a commercial plane? Is Global Hawk available at all for commercial planes?

50) Would Cheney stand up and volunteer the detailed timeline of what he was really up to during the whole day on 9/11? Fifty questions on 9/11  By Pepe Escobar. Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007) and Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge. His new book, just out, is Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009). He may be reached at

Arrival of Imam Mahdi and Rise of Islam

November 23, 2009 1 comment


By Sajjad Shaikh

The coming of the Mahdi is one of the major signs of Judgement Day. Unlike the minor signs his appearance will signal that the Final Hour is near and that believers must ensure that they are ready to endure its trials and tribulations (fitan).

The Mahdi will come at a time when Muslims will have become disunited and where tyranny and corruption will have prevailed.The situation will be so bad that a person would wish he was not born or that if someone died he would wish that it was him.

The story of al-Mahdi, as recounted in the sunnah, is a story of hope where the struggle between Haqq (Good) and Baatil (Evil) results in the believers gaining victory over the disbelievers, where the earth is filled with peace and justice due to the just rule of al-Mahdi. It is narrated by Abu Said al-Khudri (ra) that the Messenger of Allah (Sallallahu alaihi wassalam) said: “At the end of the time of my ummah,the Mahdi will appear. Allah will grant him rain, the earth will bring forth its fruits, he will give a lot of money, cattle will increase and the ummah will become great.” (Reported by al-Haakim in his Mustadrak, 4/557-558).The story of mahdi is one that encourages the believers to work for the unity of Muslims and the justice of Islam via the establishment of the Khilafah and the application of the Shariah as the believer knows that one day the whole world will be enlightened by the light of Islam and falsehood shall vanish. But until that day comes he must take encouragement from the bashaarat (glad tidings) of the Messenger (Sallallahu alaihi wassalam) and strive and work for Islam following the Sunnah of the Messenger (Sallallahu alaihi wassalam).

So it is sad to hear sometimes that some find in the story of Mahdi an excuse and justification for inaction, taking the fatalistic view that we as an Ummah cannot, and even should not, do anything about the corrupt situation until the Mahdi appears at the end of time and establishes the Khilafah. Clearly, this is not the message the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) took when they heard the story directly from the lips of the Messenger (Sallallahu alaihi wassalam). They heard this story and they took its lessons and they worked tirelessly, first in Makkah in order to establish dar al-Islam and then after its establishment in Madinah to consolidate and extend the influence of the Islamic state.After the death of al-Mustafa (Sallallahu alaihi wassalam) the Sahabah appointed Khulafah who extended the authority of Islam even further until the light of Islam had spread to a large part of the world. So how can it be that the coming of the Mahdi has become an excuse for the resignation to the corrupt reality? Indeed, if we analyse the authentic reports about the coming of Mahdi from both a prophetic and legal point of view we can conclude the following:

The Khilafah will not be established by the Mahdi but he will be a Khaleefah coming after the death of the Khaleefah before him. In other words the Khilafah will have been established by the Muslims before the coming of the Mahdi.This can clearly be seen in the hadith narrated by Umm Salamah (ra) that the Messenger of Allah (Sallallahu alaihi wassalam) said: “Disagreement will occur at the death of a caliph and a man of the people of Medina will come flying forth to Mecca. Some of the people of Mecca will come to him, bring him out against his will and give bay’ah to him between the Rukn and the Maqam. An expeditionary force will then be sent against him from Syria but will be swallowed up in the desert between Mecca and Medina. When the people see that, the God fearing people of Syria and the best people of Iraq will come to him and swear allegiance to him between the Corner and the Maqam. Then there will arise a man of Quraysh whose maternal uncles belong to Kalb and send against them an expeditionary force which will be overcome by them, and that is the expedition of Kalb. Disappointed will be the one who does not receive the booty of Kalb. He will divide the property, and will govern the people by the Sunnah of their Prophet (peace be upon him) and establish Islam on Earth. He will remain seven years…” (Reported by at-Tabarani in al-Awsat.According to Ibn Hajar in his Majma’ az-Zawaid the transmitters in at-Tabarani’s narration are sound and authentic.)

Notice the above hadith states that disputes will take place at the death of the Khaleefah and consequently a man will come forth who after being given bay’ah as the khaleefah will declare himself to be the Mahdi. So clearly Mahdi will not establish the Khilafah Rashidah that will return as foretold in the ahadith, and as well he will not be the first Khaleefah after the destruction of the Khilafah and nor will he be the last Khaleefah. Rather, he will be a just Khaleefah who will establish the justice of Islam on earth.This is from the perspective of the account of the story as prophesised by the Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wassalam).

From a shar’I or legal perspective the hadith which detail the emergence of the Mahdi do not establish any Shariah rules for the reality of Muslims of today, as they relate to a different situation when the Khilafah exists.A Hukm Shar’i or divine rule comes for a manaat (reality to which the hukm pertains) which requires a ruling, which is our current reality and not the end of time which will be signaled by the major signs of the day of judgment.A hukm shar’i essentially is a request to do an action or refrain from it whether by way of obligation (wujoob), prohibition (tahreem), encouragement (nadb) or discouragement (karaaha).Although the hadiths about the Mahdi do not request the obligation to establish the Khilafah, as they are largely ikhbari (informative) in nature and as the Khilafah will already exist when the Mahdi comes (which is why we say this reality is inapplicable), but they certainly do NOT say it is not obligatory to work for a Khilafah when it does not exist. Indeed the Shariah rules established at the time of the Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wassalam) are applicable till the end of time as long as they pertain to the reality for which they came. So not only must the Muslims abide by them, so must the Mahdi and so did ‘Isa (Alaihi as salam) who came not as a Prophet but as a follower of the Shariah of Muhammad (Sallallahu alaihi wassalam). So if the coming of a great Prophet like Isa (as), after the prophethood of Muhammad (Sallallahu alaihi wassalam), cannot suspend the rules of the Shariah, how can the coming of the Mahdi suspend them?

As for the hukm shar’i on what to do when the Khilafah does not exist, as we see in our situation today, we need to refer to the following hadith of the Messenger (Sallallahu alaihi wassalam) as it addressed that very manaat (reality): “Whosoever dies without a bay’ah on his neck dies the death of Jahiliyyah.” (Reported by Muslim in his Sahih).This hadith clarifies by its implied meaning (mafhum) that it is not permitted for a Muslim to live without the presence of a Khaleefah as it censures the one who dies without his presence. Consequently, it becomes obligatory on the Muslim to work for the presence of a Khaleefah who will rule justly and work to remove, through only da’wah and political struggle, the Ruwaibidah that are our current despicable rulers.This is our reality today and the work to establish the Khilafah is the vital issue that the Muslims cannot neglect.

Whilst the coming of the Mahdi is an important subject in the books of hadith, it is almost as though some have taken the subject as a “get-out” clause to not work for the return of the Khilafah and the giving of bayah to the next Khaleefah.As though the mere mention of Khilafah in the time of Mahdi in some way excuses Muslims from their obligation of removing the corrupt regimes of today.Yes, there will be a Khilafah again inSh’Allah, but will we all be of the ummah that lived in darkness and did nothing to change that situation? And wait for Allah (SWT) to bring a people that loved him and He (SWT) loved.

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ مَن يَرْتَدَّ مِنكُمْ عَن دِينِهِ فَسَوْفَ يَأْتِي اللّهُ بِقَوْمٍ يُحِبُّهُمْ وَيُحِبُّونَهُ أَذِلَّةٍ عَلَى الْمُؤْمِنِينَ أَعِزَّةٍ عَلَى الْكَافِرِينَ يُجَاهِدُونَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللّهِ وَلاَ يَخَافُونَ لَوْمَةَ لآئِمٍ

“O you who believe! If you ever abandon your faith, Allah will in time bring forth (instead of you) people whom he loves and who love Him – humble towards the believers, strong towards all who deny truth: [people] who strive hard in Allah’s cause, and do not fear to be censured by anyone who might censure them” [5:54]

This documentary was created by a Turkish Scholar which proofs that all major prophecies by Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) have been fulfilled and we are living in the last age where we will witness the arrival of Mehdi and Jesus Christ (pbuh)

The Spiritual War

967, a report was issued under the presidency of Lyndon B. Johnson, “The iron mountain report” which was a global research study on the possibility and desirability of peace in US. This was the era of cold war, the time when US was in the middle of Vietnam war and both US and Soviet Union providing excuses to Egypt, and Jordan that they can’t help them for the upcoming invasion on Israel (the 6 day war). How funny it seems now that the biggest opponents of cold war were practicing same diplomacy tactics when it comes to the sovereignty of Israel and dealing with Muslims. One can say that this was the right time to look for world peace and this study was conducted just for that…. or not. This report has reached the conclusion that the worst thing that can happen to United States and its national security were if world peace were to come about. It said that “if lasting peace could be achieved in the world, it would almost certainly not be in the best interest of the society because war is an essential part of the system, war is an essential part of the economy”. Period.

The above concept refers to the teachings of Leo Strauss a professor at Hebrew University of Jerusalem and who is known to be a political Zionist. It is widely believed that it was his teachings that fostered neoconservative foreign policy of George W. Bush’s administration. It was his teachings that resulted in the formation of Neo-cons or more accurately “Neo-con Evangelist Christian Zionists”. Among his famous students being Paul Wolfowitz, who was deputy secretary of defense during U.S. led Iraq war and William Galtson who was a senior advisor to President Bill Clinton on domestic policy. It is hence no surprise, that Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld who are known for orchestrating the whole Iraq war, are among the well-known neo-cons who crave for war to fill their own interests.

The concept of keeping society intact by keeping them in a fear of constant war is not just a Western doctrine. Chanakya, who was an adviser and prime minister to the first Maurya Emperor, Chandragupta and who played an important part in the foundation and governance of Maurya dynasty used to say, that in order to gain control over the people of the country, always keep them in war with your neighboring dynasty or country. Hence it is not surprising at all that India has never been on good terms with it’s neighbours and these terms don’t seem to be on their way to improvement anytime soon..

Why global peace is such a dangerous phenomenon that it used to and still threatens the mightiest of empires and countries. If we dig deeper, the idea of world peace has been reduced to symbols from ancient mythology that are the very opposite of everything that reflects positive energy. For example, the sign of world peace (the dove) is in reality a ritualistic symbol for the Illuminati. Why the most powerful and influential people of the planet are scared of global peace? This is not a matter of imposing martial law on the people of the planet, the upraising of new world order. This has nothing to do with gaining more power or taking over the world or implanting RFID chips in humans as if they are “products” tagged with a number, these are just small pieces in the bigger picture. Believe it or not, even the most ritualistic or evil of mankind wants to get enlightened with satanic power, the power of evil, the power of their satanic god “Lucifer”.

The Satan challenged ALLAH (SWT):
“O My Lord, because Thy hast put me in the wrong, I will make (wrong) fair-seeming to them on the earth and I will put them all in the wrong. Except thy servants among them, sincere and purified (by Thy Grace)” (Al Hijr: 39-40)

And the war has been waged on mankind ever since. The question here is, who was purified by the will of God and how many dedicated their lives to serving the sinister plan of Satan, who thrives on anarchy, war and mayhem. The world peace is a threat to those who are the followers of satan. This is a war of spiritual values, the religious beliefs of the good and the evil, this is the war of the verses..

President George W. Bush told French President Jacques Chirac in early 2003 that Iraq must be invaded to invoke Gog and Magog, the Bible’s satanic agents of the Apocalypse. The president of the United States, in a top-secret phone call to a major European ally, asked for French troops to join American soldiers in attacking Iraq as a mission from God. During the Iraqi invasion in 2003, their out of office statement was that “Gog and Magog are at work in the Middle East…the biblical prophecies are being fulfilled…this confrontation is willed by God … and this is necessary before the beginning of the new age”. Now all of a sudden the prophecies from the book of Ezekiel and Jeremiah (Jewish Books) are so important for them that they were willing to forget their very own New Testament which clearly tells us the downfall of their evil (read: satanic worship) in such a way that even their ultimate savior Jesus (PBUH) won’t help them.

But as Bible says:
“Seeing they see not, and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.” (Matthew 13:13)

Even Quran tells us about Zulqarnain and the wall that he built to keep Gog and Magog from spilling onto the earth. Yes we allowed them to manipulate our ancient history by replacing Zulqarnain with Alexander the Great but this is just another example of our ignorance. We might have seen the movie “Alexander the Great” and admired it but we have no fear or knowing of the second coming on Gog and Magog prophesized in Quran:

“But when Gog and Magog are let loose and they rush headlong down every height (or advantage). Then will the True Promise draw near” (Al Anbiyaa:96-97)

There is nothing significant about Horus sharing same life events as of Jesus. What most of us don’t know this Egyptian methodology of Horus is same as the methodology of Nimrod with her mother Semiramis and the miraculous birth. Horus who was also known as the “war god” or the “god of war” is associated with the falcon. The great seal of United States which features the “falcon” on one side and “pyramid” on the reverse side, strongly reinforces their dogma of following the Horus and Egyptian gods. A detailed study of events occur in the Mesopotamian region (present day Iraq, with some parts of Syria, Turkey and Iran) will give you so much more that will change your point of view on macro level. The Operation Iraqi Liberation wasn’t about just OIL. For them Iraq (former Babylon) is the land of their serpent Gods. For them they are the new leaders of the planet. They will prove what once has been joked by Ronald Reagan on international media that “What is that we need to build world peace … an attack from some outer space, an alien attack that will unite us under one supervision” (New World Order).

You may call them evil beings or satan worshippers … you can see them worshipping and presenting sacrifices to Moloch every year in July (The Bohemian Grove) and still we don’t understand why they are doing this? Nimrod was the first monarch on this earth who wanted to take over the whole world. Today Nimrod statue is present in Israel with Nimrod being one of the most famous names among its inhabitants. He was a “fire-worshipper” and he’s been idealized in a country formed on the ideology of a monotheistic religion. It’s hard to imagine what kind of evil we are dealing with and knowing no evil makes you one of them. This is what they are trying to do to keep us ignored and in return we are becoming a devil within our ownselves.

No matter how much you talk about the Holocaust of World War II, no matter how much you yell over the legality of Belfour Declaration, blame Lawrence of Arabia, Mufti Amin Al Hussaini (the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem), Anwar Saadat anyone. According to Jews, creation of Israel is the fulfillment of the prophecy written in Torah (old testament).

“I have set watchmen upon thy walls, O Jerusalem, which shall never hold their peace day nor night: ye that make mention of the Lord, keep not silence, and give Him no rest, till He establish, and till He make Jerusalem a praise in the earth”. (Isaiah 62:6, 7)
Then say to them what Adonai Elohim says: ‘I will take the people of Israel from among the nations where they have gone and gather them from every side and bring them back to their own land”. (Ezekiel 37: 21)

If we dig history further, these verses are in conflict with each other and we will notice a pattern in them which will lead us to the present time, to the world we know today. The problem is we have forgotten our history our roots, we have been put into sleep deliberately and they, they have memorized history like no one’s business.

In the “book of Daniel” comes a story about a prophet of God named Daniel who, while explaining the meaning of a dream seen by the king of Babylon, ‘Nebuchadnezzar’ prophesiezed the upcoming world events. This was the time of Jewish exile into Babylon. It was here in Babylon the Jews started learning and practicing black magic known as “Kabbalah”. It was a time for the creation of Talmud and Mishnah, both being books of law that deviates Jews from the original commandments given to Moses and which govern the present day Israel. Prophet Daniel in the year 333 BC prophesized about the upcoming empires of the world. In the end of it he prophesized that, 2300 years from then on, an “evil empire” will emerge on the face of this earth and from that point we will enter into the end of times. Do your math and you’ll find out that the year is 1967. The year in which after the end of 6 days war with Palestine, Syria, Jordan and Egypt, Israel was able to capture the Sinai desert, Golan heights, West bank and Jerusalem. It was after this war that Israel emerged on the face of the earth as a superpower : An empire founded on murder and injustice: or in the words of Prophet Danile (PBUH), an ‘evil’ empire. He also prophesized that 45 years after the creation of the evil empire, the time for the coming of Antichrist or Dajjal will be very near. Do your math again and find out which year he is referring to.

This is a war initiated by Satan himself and it is a battle for our soul. Dajjal being the final of Satan’s weapon for inflicting unbearable pain on the sons and daughters of Adam, is about to be unleashed into this world. The Quran teaches that for Nimrod came Abraham, for Pharoah came Moses and for Dajjal will come Jesus (PBUH). So, the question that we need to ask is; are we ready for this war on the ground and more importantly within ourselves? The misinterpretation and manipulation of holy scriptures is nothing but a warfare technique chosen by satan and his followers. Those who understand this know that this is in every sense a ’spiritual’ war.