How nice to have Charles dredging up old posts just to trash me.
Thanks ever so much.
Two comments.
1). Is it sensible to say that Calvinism was created by secret agents of capitalist elites and therefore is not a real religious current? Or would it be more sensible to say that capitalism and Calvinism interacted in a way that produced a specific variant of Protestant Christianity? Plug in Wahhabism here.
2). Citing theological arguments from versions of Islam that consider Wahhabism a heresy is a good way to find conspiratorial allegations, but hardly a sound research methodology. I can find Protestant websites that call the Catholic Church the Whore of Babylon and Satan's agents on earth. So what?
I understand that Wahhabism is unpopular among most Muslims. We have discussed this on the list. It is discussed in my web page collection on the subject. Please do not strain so hard to crush the gnat of my opinions. They are just opinions.
-Chip Berlet
See: http://www.publiceye.org/frontpage/911/wahhabism.html http://www.publiceye.org/frontpage/911/clerical-911.htm
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> [mailto:owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com]On Behalf Of Charles Jannuzi
> Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 1:18 AM
> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> Subject: Re: fundamentalism
>
>
> From last month, discovered at the online archive
> (actually I was doing a web search on a related
> topic and my search engine hit this!).
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> > [mailto:owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com]On
> Behalf Of joanna bujes
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 6:54 PM
> > To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> > Subject: Re: fundamentalism
> >
> >
> > At 12:25 AM 05/01/2002 -0400, you wrote:
> > >One was led by Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab
> (1703-92), that
> > >became the Wahhabi movement-the theology
> behind the Saudi
> > government. Think
> > >of the Wahhabist Saudi government as similar
> to the
> > theocratic government
> > >created by John Calvin in Geneva. Both are
> based on the idea of the
> > >sovereignty of God administered by righteous
> men.
> >
> > i thought this was the one that the Brits
> helped invent.
> > Wasn't there some
> > info on this on a previous thread?
> >
> > Joanna
>
> >Hi, If you really think that Wahhabism was a
> plot by British secret >agents, may I suggest you
> switch to the David Icke list where you >can also
> talk about alien lizards controlling Jewish
> bankers.
> >-Chip
>
> Hakki A. posted on late last year. This belief is
> actually rooted in historical fact and many
> anti-Wahib interpretations of that record are not
> from alien lizards.
> If you want to understand the theory about
> conspiratorial Wahhabism and its total lack of
> appeal to most Muslims you might sample the
> thinking at the following sites. Beware Chip, the
> last parallels
> your theory about Calvinism but supports a
> different answer to Joanna's good question than
> anything you came up with (which, I might add,
> was needlessly snide and did not answer the
> question, but then, where is the moderator ever
> when Chip posts?).
>
> http://www.islamicsupremecouncil.com/unity.htm
>
> Strategies of Europe's anti Islam Forces
>
> In late 1700s and early 1800s century the
> European powers realized that there is no way
> that the Christian forces can break the strength
> of Muslim Ummah. The West had seen more than 13
> centuries of Muslim rule. The only way the anti
> Islam forces could weaken the unity of Muslim
> Ummah was to use and nourish some of the Muslims
> within the Muslim community who could divide the
> Muslims. Europeans especially the British were
> studying the Muslim society for many years. They
> were working hard to develop a wicked strategy
> which could not only divide Muslims but also help
> them in controlling the Muslim land and
> resources. The strategy of European anti Islam
> forces was based upon the following principles.
>
> end of excerpt
>
>
> http://www.iiie.net/Articles/Wahabism.html
>
> There is no group of people who like to be called
> "Wahabis", therefore, this term should be dropped
> by the Muslims. The term "Wahabis" and "Wahabism"
> was the invention of the British to divide
> Muslims and fight against each other and weaken
> each other, so that the British could continue to
> conquer Muslims land and rule them. We should not
> allow ourselves to continue to be the victims of
> Imperialist designs.
>
> http://yangtze.cs.uiuc.edu/~jamali/sindh/res/breakup.html
>
> History of Pakistan
> In the 1930s, the Indian movement for
> independence had gained considerable momentum. As
> a means of postponing their day of departure,
> British colonialists promoted a Muslim leadership
> which encouraged religious divisions in the
> subcontinent. Later the British found it
> expedient -- and apparently beneficial to their
> geostrategic interests -- to create an oddly
> shaped Muslim majority state, separated into two
> "wings" more than a thousand miles apart.
>
> http://www.inminds.co.uk/mohaiseh/1025.html
>
> 1740-1747, Sheikh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab was
> preaching his views and
> severely criticising and attacking the Ottomani
> Khilafah. This continuous
> attack was beautiful music to the ears of the
> rebellious Muhammad Bin
> Saud.
>
> In 1747, The Amir Muhammad Bin Saud declared full
> support and adoption of
> Sheikh Muhammad Bin Abdul-Wahhaabs ideas and
> views. This led to the
> formulation of a tribal authority (Imaarah
> Qabaliyyah) under the political
> leadership of the rebellious Muhammad Bin Saud
> and the Spiritual
> leadership of Sheikh Muhammad Bin Abdul-Wahhaab.
> The Sheikh was calling
> for and teaching his views i.e. the Wahhabi
> Mazhab or School of thought,
> while the rebellious Muhammad Ibn-Saud was ruling
> and judging with them.
> (The scholars refer to this alliance as the
> Wahhabi Movement).
>
>
>
> http://utenti.lycos.it/ArchivEurasia/imamovic_wahabism.html
>
> The Wahabi Heresy, Origin history and
> ......End......(?)
> The origin of the Khawarij heresy traces back to
> the historical dispute between the fourth caliph
> Hadrat eAli ibn Abu Talib (ra), cousin of
> Prophet (Sa) and Muawya ibn Abu Sufian. Its roots
> can be connected to a pre-Islamic "evil
> influence" located in the desert of Najd, in the
> middle of the Arabian Peninsula. Not casually the
> name of Sheikh al Najd has been traditionally
> used to define both Shaytan (Satan) and the XVIII
> century leader of the Wahabi movement Muhammad
> Ibn Abdel Wahab, the most recent version of the
> Khawarij heresy. The Wahabiya shares with the
> original version an extremely moralistic and
> puritan vision of faith and an open rebellion
> against Traditional Authority, which they dare to
> judge from the purely exterior point of view. But
> it has got also an original jurisprudence and
> theology, mainly developed from the teaching of
> the Muslim scholar Ibn Taimya, which was put to
> death for heresyin the XIV century.
>
> .....
>
>
> In the mainstream of the Wahabi heresy we can
> currently distinguish more "reformed" brands,
> which accept to some extent the juridical
> schools, and a "moderate" (moralistic) Tasawwuf
> as the "Dehobandi" sect. This is spread in the
> Asian sub-continent and among the Asian
> communities in the Anglo-Saxon world, the Afghani
> Taliban movement is a sub branch of such school.
>
>
> .....
> Another longstanding peculiarity of the
> contemporary Khawarij from their very beginning
> is the strong politically link formerly with the
> British Empire, then with the US. This is
> realised either openly, as in the case of the
> Saudi Kingdom, or covertly as the links of the
> militant Islamic movements with the intelligence
> agencies of those countries. As even a British
> Muslim author recently said, such a link finds
> easy justification in the common puritan and
> reformed attitude towards faith shared by the
> Wahabis and the English speaking cultures.
> Remembering that only one century separates
> Oliver Cromwell from Muhammed Ibn Abd El Wahab,
> the same "evil providence" seems to have played
> some role in it.
>
> The current events, examined under the light of
> those considerations, look quite surprising:
> Wahabiya helped to crumble down the Ottoman
> Empire, helped to keep away the Soviet Union from
> Afghanistan, was crucial to keep "in straight
> line" the unreliable Arabs regimes, as Egypt, or
> to blackmail others as Algeria. In the next
> future Pakistan, Indonesia and Malaysia, will be
> "kept straight" by it. In Europe only the
> ruthless attitude towards it from the Muslim
> Bosnian fighters, the very same currently under
> trial at Hague, mostly strictly connected the
> traditional Balkan brotherhoods, saved from the
> worst. So what did happen to break this long
> lasting "diabolic love"c?
>
> The answers can be different, but the increasing
> instability of the Muslim countries and
> societies, shaken by "Globalisation", the growing
> immigration from Muslim countries to the US and
> Western Europe, and the growing conversion of
> Westerners to Islam have made this "movement" not
> so much useful and controllable anymore.
> Especially if the extreme brands, developed to
> destabilise Arab regimes, are spread among
> unemployed low income immigrates of the suburbs
> and "bainlieux" in the West. Soon Muslim origin
> will amount to about 20% of the Western European
> population; the same is true of the US. New
> actors, puppets and toys are required in the
> current parody, and the old ones can be very
> useful to prepare the scenario, even if they had
> to be "disassembled" in the process. And why not,
> if this can even be used to justify a further
> penetration in the "Heart" of the world were some
> possibility of real traditional Islam survivec?.
> "Le jeux vaut vraiment la chandelle".
>
> --------
>
> Posted by C. Jannuzi
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com