Millions of people went onto to the streets in Paris on Sunday after the Charlie Hebdo massacre to take part in the „republican march“ to express their solidarity with the victims of this terrorist attack and their rejection of terror.
People are fed up with terror and they want the end of terror. However, many of these people do not understand the background of the terror.
For this reason, a small group international lords of terror, including the chief of the French regime of sympathizers with the terrorist group Al Qaeda Francois Hollande, the head of the Israeli state terror regime Benjamin Netanyahu and the head of the Ukrainian Nazi regime Petr Poroshenko, as well as representatives of the regimes of the USA , Germany, England, Spain, Turkey, representatives of EU, NATO and the Arab League, and so on and so forth, managed to advance to the vicinity of this major demonstration against terrorism and thereby enable mass media loyal to them portrait them as demonstrators.
It is rumored that even the ambassador of the Saudi regime, which after the Paris attack had whipped the liberal Saudi blogger Raif Badawi, because he had expressed on Facebook the opinion that Muslims, Jews, Christians and atheists are all equal, in this way participated Parisian in the demonstration to commemorate the victims of the terror against cartoonists. Nasty voices are saying that it is at present not known whether next to Saudi Arabia also the Islamic State Caliphate of Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi and the al-Qaeda group led by Ayman Al Zawahiri did sent offical representatives to participate in the mass rally against terror in Paris.
That leading representatives of global terrorism managed to blend in the demonstrators without causing an outcry can particularly blamed on the mass media of the so-called ‚Community of Western values‚ and is best endeavors to conceal and disguise crucial information about the global terror. The core of the central theme of the global terror complex that is regularly hidden by the mass media of the ‚Community of Western values‘ as thoroughly as possible, can be described with three expressions: Wahhabism, Takfirism, and Saudi Arabia.
Almost all terrorists responsible for global terror, who refer to Sunni Islam, from the Taliban in Afghanistan over Lashkar-e-Taiba in Pakistan, Hefazat-e-Islam in Bangladesh, East Turkestan Movement in China, Abu Sayyaf in the Philippines, the Caucasus Emirate in Russia, Jundallah in Iran, al-Shabaab in Somalia, Ansar Beit al-Maqdis in Egypt, Ansar al-Sharia – and earlier also LIFG – in Libya, Ansar Dine in Mali and other countries in North Africa, Boko Haram in Nigeria and neighboring countries, ISIS in Iraq and Syria up to Al Qaeda, including its offshoots such as the Syrian Nusra front, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula AQAP and al Qaeda in the Maghreb – and many more smaller terrorist groups than mentioned above operating in various countries are of Wahhabi nature, but to list them all would be beyond the scope here – are based generally on the same ideology: Wahhabism. Virtually all deadly terrorist attacks in recent years with – how the Western media call it – „Islamic background“ were committed by perpetrators who adhere to the ideology of Wahhabism, including the most spectacular terrorist attacks such as 9/11 in 2001 in the United States, the attack on the Moscow Dubrovka theater in 2002, Madrid in 2004, 7/7 2005 in London, the Westgate shopping mall attack in Kenya in 2013, the attack on the Jewish Museum of Belgium in 2014 and now the Charlie Hebdo-terrorist attack in Paris. All of these terrorist attacks were committed by offenders who follow the same ideology: Wahhabism.
In addition to this, there are also thousands of acts of terror and murderous attacks committed by Wahhabi terrorists in islamic countries ravaged by civil wars, which claim hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of innocent victims. But the Western media generally, if at all, publish only a short message about it, and therefore they are hardly noticed by the populations of the countries of the community of Western values, And from a certain intensity of terrorism in a country the Wahhabi terror is often perceived by Western media as just one of many acts of war and as such it is reported then. Add to this the problems of access for media in regions of war. Knowing this it can be explained that media reports were far fewer, when on the very same day as Charlie Hebdo in Paris was attacked by Wahhabi terrorists, Wahhabi terrorists committed an attack in the Yemeni capital Sanaa that killed far more people than in Paris, and the sparsely Boko Haram attack in northern Nigeria on the very same day may have killed even magnitudes more people. Without going further into the detailed mechanisms of selective reporting here, it can be said without doubt that the terror committed by Wahhabi ideologues constitutes the very vast majority of global terrorism, and that the overwhelming number of victims of the Wahhabi terror are not Westerners, but Muslims in predominantly Muslim countries.
That the ideology of Wahhabism is an essential factor in global terror is generally not disputed at the level of experts dealing with the matter. Bob Graham, who was from 2001 to 2003 Head of the Intelligence Committee of the US Senate, says so, as well as US politician Hillary Clinton did so earlier, just as the British religious scholar Karen Armstrong, and Reza Aslan, who teaches in the USA Religious Studies, and Mohamed Daadaoui, who is occupied with Islamic things as a US based political scientist, and, of course, the secular and religious authorities of non-Wahhabi Islamic countries like Iran and Syria say so as well as non-Wahhabi, but Islamic organizations like Hezbollah.
The reason why the ideology of Wahhabism is blamed for the terrorism is that it is propagated in Wahhabism, unlike in other religious, moral and ethical schools in and outside of Islam, that far-flung interpretations of Quran are a justification for – without any particular other reason – killing infidels, people of other faiths, dissenters, apostate and rebellious Sunni co-religionists, and even more so, of course, to murder those people who have done something else that Wahhabis strongly dislike, like hateful caricatures of Mohammed, the making of disgusting movies about Islam or publicly calling for the equality of all people, regardless of religion and belief, and that this is widely accepted among Wahhabis.
All in all there are also no doubts where the center is, from the where the world is flooded with the ideology of Wahhabism. It is Saudi Arabia, the country where Wahhabism is the state religion. Since decades the oil superpower Saudi Arabia supports the global spread of Wahhabism With hundreds of billions of petrodollars. And wherever it succeeds to spread Wahhabism, there one can find earlier or later terrorism driven by the inhuman doctrines of contemporary Wahhabism. This is true in the region of Bonn in Germany, where the King Fahd Academy spreads Saudi Wahhabism, and in principle, it is not unlike how it is in Pakistan, Yemen, Egypt, Great Britain or France, where similar institutions financed with plenty of Saudi petrodollars spread the ideology of Wahhabism since decades, too, with more or less results. Who does not know the Arabic history and wants to know more about the symbiotic relationship between the Saudi royal family with the preacher and founder of Wahhabism Mohammad Ibn Abd al-Wahhab and his followers can find more information in English, for example, in the article „You Can’t Understand ISIS If You Don’t Know the History of Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia“ by Alastair Crooke, a former MI6 agent and expert on the Middle East region, which he has published a few months ago, after ISIS took power in Mosul. Alastair Crooke explains in this article also why the relationship between some parts of Wahhabis and the Saudi royal family is loaded with tension: a lot of Wahhabis accuse the Saudi royal family to have committed treason against what they see as the true Wahhabi tradition of pure islam as preached by Wahhab, and this has happened not as least because of the Saudi alliance with Britain and the United States. So the Saudi royal family is internally under pressure, under the penalty to its possible destruction, to represent themselves as the true representative of the pure Wahhabi doctrine and to behave accordingly.
What one should know, too, is that Saudi Arabia is not the sole state propagator of Wahhabism in the world, despite the close relationship of Wahhab to Saudi Arabia. For example, the Emirate of Qatar has named a few years ago, it’s newly built and largest mosque in Doha after the founder of Wahhabism, Abdul Wahhab, which is a clear sign of Wahhabism. And the Muslim Brotherhood and Turkey are not free from the influence of the teachings of Wahhab, neither. However, without doubt the key driver and the financially strongest force behind the global spread of the bloody ideology of Wahhabism is the oil superpower Saudi Arabia.
Regarding Wahhabism itself, one should know that Wahhab was an Islamic fundamentalist who rejected all innovations and deviations in Islam as well as idol worship and who wanted to bring back Islamic society to where it was at the time of the life of the Prophet Mohammed. Followers of the Wahhabi ideology are often referred to in Western media as Salafists. The term, however, is imprecise and inaccurate. The Salaf are the first generations of Muslims after Muhammad. These Salafi are revered by most Muslims as particularly original and benevolent Muslims, like many of today’s Christians venerate saints of the Middle Ages. The followers of the Wahhabi ideology so not a negative attitude about the Salafi neither. However, the followers of the Wahhabi doctrine do not see themselves as supporters of the Salafiyya, but simply as followers of Muhammad who practice a particularly pure and original form of faith. Wahhabis themselves therefore do not want to be addressed under terms such as Wahhabis and even Salafis and are usually offended by them. They themselves do describe themselves just as „Muslim“ – following to their faith as good as they can. Wahhabis reject the classical Sunni schools of law, where hundreds of years of cultural development of Islam are taught and passed down from generation to generation, regularly claiming that they were established after the life of the Prophet Muhammad and therefore they are not originally Islamic. Wahhabis therefore are often characterized by a complete lack of understanding the sometimes painful process Islamic culture learned through the centuries, and even more often by ignorance. Contemporary Wahhabism often works in the way that someone utters the Islamic creed, so that he or she is a Muslim, and then scrolls in the Quran, and pulls from the suras the instructions according to his own amateur interpretation of what he or she shall do today, from marriage over human rights up to war. Therefore, one can say with some justification, that Wahhabis seek a social life in the Middle Ages. Wahhabis, especially in Western countries but not only, are often downright laity, without a glimmer of centuries of development of Islamic culture. From one Wahhabi, who moved to Syria to participate in the war, it is even known that he has ordered prior to travel a copy of „Islam for Dummies“ from Amazon to get at least some idea of Islam.
In recent years, in Syria, Iran and Lebanon, another term was given prefernce to Wahhabism: Takfirism. The term Takfirismus describes broadly the same people as the term Wahhabism, but is more selective, precise and does not generally depend on views concerning the historical legacy of the person Mohammad Ibn Abd al-Wahhab, but on a current behavior: takfir. Takfir is the practice of accusing other people to be infidels or apostates, thereby justifying sanctions against them, and even death. By declaring people to be infidels or apostates laymen like Wahhabis can declare practically any person to be an outlaw and justify any crime against them. Scholars today, however, would use the practice of takfirism today, if at all, more likely in order to pursue real criminals, or to threaten potential felons with persecution by the clergy. Wahhab himself did engage in the practice of takfirismus, but although he applied them plentiful, in some of his writings he is critical about it. But Wahhabi laymen do not mind: they look selectively for the verse suitable to them, and draw from that the justification for any crime they want to commit anyway. Using the word takfirism instead of wahhabism also opens a door to those followers Wahhab, who see in Wahhab an overall beginner of a renaissance of original Islamic values with positive historical legacy, but who refuse the practice of takfirism, and in particular the practice of amateur takfirism. At the same time, the concept of takfirism includes violent offenders, who practice amateur takfirism, but who are not followers of Wahhab and his teachings, and thus are not Wahhabis, which could possibly be true, for example, for many Deobandis. The use of the term takfirism instead of Wahhabism is therefore more accurate as it targets behavior instead of identity, because who doesn’t practice takfir no more is no longer a takfirist, and because it opens a way to within the community of followers of Wahhab and facilitates start talking with the followers of Wahhab about right and wrong behavior.
If followers of Wahhab have such an identity or change to get such an identity that they praise Wahhab as Islamic innovator as many Christians do with Martin Luther, but also condemn the Wahhabi terror and intolerance basis of takfirism like Christian Protestants today condemn the ugly anti-Semitism of Martin Luther, then the Wahhabi ideology might – after some time – be pulled away from their intolerant, inhuman and terrorist nature. And this, rather than Wahhab himself, should of course be the aim of the arduous quarrel with Wahhabism, after all: the intolerance, the inhumanity and the terrorism shall end. Therefore, it is a plausible notion that the term takfirism is preferable to Wahhabism, although in most cases, so the same people are meant with it. Here, for the English language readers who want to be able to feel a bit more compassion for the Wahhabi movement harshly criticized above, I want to add a reference to an essay of William Polk, where he describes that the Wahhabi movement got to rose in the same moment of history as cheap European products resulting from the industrial revolution in England drove a lot of arab muslim businesses centuries old out of the market, thereby stimulating a desire in Muslim communities to regroup and to concentrate on the core beliefs of their muslim identity. When one remembers that the Calvinian and Lutherian reformist movements in Europe had also deep economic drivers, that idea makes even more sense. And who understands that a core driver of Wahhab’s activism was that he in his time saw plenty of rich, debauched and hash smoking muslim arab dignities coming to the Hajj, it may also well be understood, what drove the original Wahhabi movement to it’s puritan form of religious practice, and why many of today’s followers of Wahhab deeply despise the house of Saud and it’s many debauched princes despite the Sauds‘ claims to be the living defenders of Wahhab’s puritan teachings.
Unfortunately Western media do rarely discuss Wahhabism and the role of Saudi Arabia in the spread of this murderous ideology and takfirismus is practically not discussed at all. Of all the thousands of media articles in German mass media, which dealt with the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attack until now, hardly any of them them dealt with Wahhabism and the role of Saudi Arabia behind it and not a single one spoke about takfirism. Instead, German mass media claim either as a fact that Muslims and Islam are not to blame for terror, or that Islam is precisely the cause of terror. With this primitive dual picture of the world, the media pushes defenders and opponents of Islam against each other, but neither black or white helps to enlight the public about the particular problem of the Wahhabi takfiri ideology spread by Saudi Arabia worldwide, which is the major cause of global terror, and from which Muslims and non-Muslims are suffering. And with the international media the situation is similar, for English language media it seems a a bit less true, but for French media it seems to be even more true than for German media.
Regarding the question why Western media and politicians do not or do rarely discuss Wahhabism, takfirism and the Saudi role in the spread of this ideology, one may speculate. One reason could be that many Western journalists and politicians simply do not have a slightest idea of it. This is for some journalists and politicians likely so, but certainly not for all. Too many senior people up to to former US Secretary of State Clinton have already shown that they know about the dangers stemming from Wahhabism. Another reason could be that Saudi Arabia and Qatar, with its oil and gas billions are financially strong investors and clients with whom the West does not want to quarrel. Given that the Western countries have in recent years already spent many billions or even trillions of dollars for military operations allegedly designed to counter the terrorist excesses of Wahhabism spread by Saudi Arabia, and the result was that only more Wahhabi terror popped up, the validity of this argument appears doubtful. It’s likely that the military struggle against the Wahhabi takfiri terror was for the West until now already much more expensive than anything Saudi Arabia and Qatar could have ever invested in or bought from the West, and there is still no end in the struggle against Wahhabi terror in sight.
More substantial seems to be the idea that many Western journalists and politicians know well the nature of Wahhabism, takfirism and the role of Saudi Arabia in that disaster, but they say nothing, because Wahhabism, takfirism and Saudi Arabia are seen as a partner of the West and Israel. These partners may be considered crucial in the geopolitical transformation of the Arab world and Central Asia, for example to weaken or to change governments having good relations with Iran, Russia and China, which are disliked by the West, Israel and Saudi Arabia, with the help of takfiri terror, just as it was about three decades ago in Afghanistan, three years ago in Libya, and as it can be seen now in Syria.
Of course this would mean that the Western leaders who have taken to the streets against terror in Paris, are main sponsors of the terror of which they claimed to demonstrate against in Paris on Sunday, but it is a plausible explanation for the fact that Western politicians and media are suffering on the topic of Wahhabism, takfirism and Saudi Arabia, to put it mildly, from gross underreporting though there is currently a huge public interest in understanding the causes of the terror. This idea also explains why the Western mass media constantly agitate against Iran, the Syrian government, Hezbollah and the Houthis, despite these are the leading forces in actual combat on-site against the takfiri terror and the Wahhabi ideology.
The big question now is whether the population of the western countries will continue this concealment of the whole truth by their politicians and media, or whether they will now demand so loudly answers and solutions on the topic of Wahhabism, takfirism and Saudi Arabia from their elites that the media and elites cannot longer afford to ignore tackling this crucial matter.
This article is a translation, sometimes a bit adopted for English readers, of the German Parteibuch article „Was die Massenmedien zum Charlie-Hebdo-Terroranschlag verschweigen: Wahhabismus, Takfirismus und Saudi Arabien“ from 12-1-2015. It got a lot of attention in Germany, and we have good reason to believe that it may have inspired a bit mass media coverage of the topic of the complex of Wahhabism, terror and the Saudi role in spreading the abhorrent Wahhabi ideology globally. Since the German Parteibuch article appeared, the topic was also covered by some major English language media, eg Reza Aslan had an appearance in NBC Meet The Press to speak about the subject, Jon Snow published an enlightening article on this subject at his blog at Channel 4, and Trudy Rubin put up a wrathful article titled „World must confront Salafi teachings.“ So some MSM coverage is already coming from all ideologocal spectres, but it is far from enough to push through political change that will pull the rug from beneath that ghastly Wahhabi ideology spread globally by Saudi Arabia. Therefore the Parteibuch editors ask everyone who can to spread this article in every possible way or to cover this topic with his own words, with the aim of raising more public awareness for this topic and to build pressure on politicians to act. And finally a special request to the readers able to translate German or English into French: please translate this article into French or cover this topic with your own words. We at the Parteibuch do not speak French well enough to translate this into French, but as we look around it seems to us that this crucial topic – Wahhabism, takfirism, terrorism, Saudi Arabia and the relations between those – is not present in the French debate at all. So our request: bring this crucial topic to France and the French debate on terror. Whoever wants to translate this article into other languages, or pick some arguments fromhere and spread the message, please just do it. But getting the message into French and France, and that quickly, seems to us especially important at this point.