Preface by Washington’s Blog: We have no idea about whether or not the author’s theory is correct. Even he acknowledges that it’s speculative. It is interesting, however.
By D. Senti
The development of ISIS, to anyone paying attention to the Middle East, is a growing concern. It is a difficult situation to understand on multiple levels. I attempted earlier, by using Sutton’s Theory of Elite Action, to explain its rise and use by the elites of the world for the purposes of synthesis and movement toward a one world government. There is another side to the story, however, and that is the Muslim side.
Some believe that the development of ISIS is the intentional product of Israeli or American action. This is certainly true in at least the broadest sense; these radicals would not have gained the power and arms that they currently possess were it not for the support provided them by these states, both overtly and covertly. Yet this alone is not enough to incite such a strong reaction in Iraq and Syria. A great many Muslims have offered their support to the organization, vocally, financially and in their very person. I have seen no media coverage, unsurprisingly, attempting to explain exactly why this is.
I am by no means an expert on Islam, nor am I suggesting that all Muslims are supportive of ISIS – far from it. Nonetheless the existence of ISIS plays suspiciously well into certain traditions regarding the Islamic pre-End Times period. And the Federal Reserve was partially behind this.
First, I would note that exploiting religious beliefs of groups to accomplish political and military agendas is par for the course for the US in the last sixty years. Getting the Emperor of Japan to submit to US forces at the end of World War II was absolutely essential; the Japanese went from willing participants in kamikaze attacks to a relatively complacent people in a mere decade, all thanks to their Shinto religious beliefs in the Emperor. Zbigniew Brzezinski can be seen easily on Youtube talking to the mujahideen of Afghanistan in the 80s to wage their insurgency against the USSR, the same group of people that later caused 9/11 (according to the standard theory, at least, though STEA finds the distinction unimportant for assigning blame to the elites). The CIA during Operation Mongoose once planned to fake the Second Coming to get the Cuban people to revolt against Castro. And so on. So it should not come as a surprise that they would attempt this type of maneuver again.
Islamic End Times
The view that we are nearing the End Times, common among certain American Christians today, is also shared by a number of Muslims, albeit with differing events. Islamic eschatology says that the final age of the world will begin with the appearance of two figures, the Mahdi and Masih ad-Dajjal. The Mahdi will be a sort of temporal savior, who will fight against the False Messiah (ad-Dajjal) with the assistance of Isa (Jesus), who will have returned around the same time. Afterwards comes your typical apocalyptic imagery – wars and death, a period of deep unbelief, a final resurrection and so on. There is another figure, Sufyani, distinct from ad-Dajjal and (likely) prior to him, who is an evil tyrant who rules over Syria and persecutes the faithful Muslims. The allegiances of the Islamic peoples will also be divided among different rulers (Abqa’, As’hab, etc.) (See this: http://www.mahdiwatch.org/
Much of this is taken from Hadith, oral religious traditions from Muhammad’s followers whose words were later recorded in different collections held in different levels of esteem. These same traditions supposedly foretell what will happen in the time between the death of Muhammad and the coming of the Mahdi:
“The Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: The Prophethood will remain amongst you for as long as Allah wills it to be. Then Allah will raise it when He wills to raise it [meaning the prophet will die]. Then there will be the khilafah upon the Prophetic methodology. And it will last for as long as Allah wills it to last. Then Allah will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be biting kingship, and it will remain for as long as Allah wills it to remain. Then Allah will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be tyrannical (forceful) kingship and it will remain for as long as Allaah wills it to remain. Then He will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be a khilafah upon the Prophetic methodology. Then he (the Prophet) was silent.” (Musnad Imam Ahmad (v/273)
Many Sunnis see this as an apt description of events leading up to today. The Four Just Caliphs (those right after Muhammad) are seen as the most glorious rulers, but the Umayyad dynasty (and perhaps the Abassid) can also be included in that. Afterward, the Ottomans are seen as the biting kingship. The last period is one of tyranny over dar al Islam (the House of Islam, primarily the Middle East), which covers the dictatorial rulers in the Middle East since the first World War. And finally comes the restoration of the Caliphate.
Lastly, I would add that many Shiites – particularly in Iran – have a different view of the Mahdi, who they believe lived in the past and went into hiding so as to emerge in the End Times.
The Caliphate is no minor thing to Islam. Its closest analog in Christendom would be the papacy for Catholics. It’s an institution divinely ordained and integral to the designs of God for the faithful. Its dissolution under Ataturk in Turkey was a substantial political and religious blow to traditional Islam. Muslims, or at least a great many of them, would feel obliged to submit themselves to a true Caliph. The two conditions for this are that they be founded upon Islamic principles of Sharia Law and that they actually function as a state, not merely as a warzone. (See this for more info: http://abdullahalandalusi.com/
Given the above prophecy from Muhammad, it’s easy to see that the Muslim world would be more than happy to overthrow their dictatorial rulers, if given the opportunity, as many believe this would herald a golden age under Mahdi. And, as I mentioned in Sutton’s Theory of Elite Action, setting up opposing forces to create a synthesis is the modus operandi of the elite; if a particular group plays a potentially threatening role toward global unity under their rule, they will eventually need to be subjected to the Hegelian dialectical process. Historical materialism, in their view, guarantees that the outcome will be superior to the previous state and will inevitably progress toward unity.
Because of the petrodollar’s world reserve status, our inflation can be essentially exported to other parts of the world. In addition, since nearly all goods are indirectly priced in US dollars, there is an inflationary impact on other countries. In recent years, that has hit the most impoverished nations particularly hard – like for instance the Muslim world – because such a large portion of their income goes toward food, which doubled in price. When people are unable to feed their children, they tend to lose it. In fact, it’s the only circumstance where revolution is all but guaranteed. Knowing this, it should have come to no one’s surprise that our exported inflation caused widespread revolution across the Middle East.
But there’s more. The above-mentioned prophecy means that, as soon as it appears that the dictators around the Muslim world are falling like dominoes, other dictators in the Middle East are guaranteed to be threatened. The prophecy becomes self-fulfilling; the people finally realize they have the power to overthrow their wicked rulers, yet they think this only because they believe prophecy is being fulfilled. This was certainly a contributing factor to the Arab Spring, and it also shines a light on the events that have followed. After all, Muslims tolerated poverty and dictatorship in the Middle East for years. Why the sudden change? Now you know why.
If the elite are attempting to apply the Hegelian dialectical process to the Muslim world, they could not have envisioned a more ideal circumstance. These revolutions would inevitably lead to some attempt to restore the Caliphate; this, too, is a product of the same prophecy. By aiding that effort, the US and Israel can guarantee that such a movement will gain popular support and succeed. And having it arise in Syria and Iraq is truly the best thing they could have imagined! No other claim, at no other location, could possibly have a greater dividing effect on the Muslim world.
Why? Because the prophecies simultaneously mention BOTH the coming of the Mahdi who restores the Caliphate AND the precursor to the Islamic equivalent of the Antichrist, Sufyani, who is supposed to appear in Syria! This is either an ASTOUNDING coincidence, a proof of Muhammad’s divine gifts, or a well-orchestrated plan. My money is on the latter. The very same person and organization can provide the Muslim world with its prophesied messiah and monster. ISIS can claim that Assad is Sufyani (or some other foe) while those against ISIS can claim al-Baghdadi is Sufyani. It’s perfect.
By including Iraq in the conflict, the Sunni-Shia division is guaranteed to come into play as well. Iraq, which has gradually come under Iran’s thumb through its eastern Shiites, would inevitably see ISIS as a false messiah. The Iranian theocrats believe in Twelver Shia Islam, and think that the Mahdi must return in the flesh as he was an actual historical figure. Extremists like ISIS, moreover, don’t consider Shiites to be Muslims at all. The Shiites are in the severe minority, yet a good portion of Sunnis will not accept ISIS. And just like that, you have a recipe for full-scale war across the Middle East.
A few things that happened recently could have disrupted the growing conflict. Had ISIS pushed east too quickly, they could have secured too much power for other Muslims to put up a real resistance. So we bombed them. Yet nothing could be more damaging to the anti-ISIS position than to see both the Great and Little Satans (Israel and the US) attacking them. So we’re contemplating bombing BOTH SIDES of the war in Syria, which would even the playing field. Bombing both sides in a war would make zero sense unless you’re either a bomb manufacturer or trying to orchestrate a conflict.
This is all speculative, of course, but no other explanation seems to make any sense, and I’ve never seen this covered by any other media venue. One couldn’t possibly orchestrate a better method to stoke an intra-Islamic war across the Middle East. Every side is being played; every role is cast; any disruption caused by our interference is later balanced (arm them, bomb them, hand them Iraq on a silver platter and bomb their enemies…). That’s not to say they’ll succeed. No small number of people have noticed that the situation is being manipulated by outside forces, even if they can’t put their finger on it.
For the elite, Islam is a problem that must be solved. Creating an End Times schema allows them to dictate the outcome with little direct interference, and either way the problem is closer to being solved. An ISIS-run Middle East makes a perfect boogeyman, while their defeat by a moderate coalition of Sunnis and Shiites will be the first cooperative endeavor by these two sects in a thousand years. Unity through war.