Home / All / Fiqh & Socitey / Why the West Spreading Dangerous Ideas of Ibne Taymiyyah and Wahhab?

Why the West Spreading Dangerous Ideas of Ibne Taymiyyah and Wahhab?

Why would the West even consider spreading dangerous ideas of Ibne Taymiyyah and Wahhab? And didn’t they take into account the immeasurable destruction that could result from injecting Wahhabi fanaticism into these regions? USA’s entanglement with Saudi Wahhabism has definitely been one heck of a tempestuous tango–so to speak.

The Following is the continuation of Previous article titled, “The Roots of Wahhabism, What Everyone Should Know,

Continuation… The Long Dark Shadow of Wahhabism:

The alliance was strong, on the brink of something phenomenally dangerous and disastrous.  And this occurred on a greater scale than Taymiyyah or Wahhab could’ve ever imagined. Wahhabism since has been emboldened, because of a Global Clique–US, Israel, Saudi, and Britain–nurturing its development and productivity, viewing Wahhabism as effective doctrine for taming human subjects; thus, molding several Wahhabi practitioners into militant-controlled extremists, used to fight on behalf of the Global Clique’s material interest and political agendas in the Middle East.

Part II:

The Wild West and their Tempestuous Tango with Wahhabism:

With Wahhabism in effect as the “opiate of the masses,” Saudi Arabia had been molded into the perfect testing site for its (Wahhabism’s) future expansion. A model society it was. Easy to manipulate and extremely micromanaged: The conditions were favorable for monitoring the potentiality and ease of spreading Wahhabi concepts into large communities. The end result would be a desirable one for Saudi Monarchy, who yearned for the adoration of people everywhere, cleverly disguising the infusion of cultish ideals into targeted domains through “charitable pursuits.” Oil was their bread-and-butter, to achieve set goals. Using the disguise of “zakat/charity” they found a way to spread the Wahhabi tentacles of influence through every nook, crevice, and cranny—with their Western partners by their side.

Poor, rural areas were first introduced to the Wahhabi Cult dogma–outside of Saudi Arabia; they were shadowed as the next of regions on a long list to implement strict, intolerant, fascist Wahhabi ideology: Saudi’s plans happened to coalesce with US government’s intent to combat the Soviet Union in the 1970’s. Afghanistan had been invaded and occupied in the midst of the Cold War by the Soviet Union. Coincidently, USA’s agendas amalgamated with that of Saudi Arabia’s; henceforth, they became greater allies in supporting the indoctrination of Wahhabi ideologies (7). The Wahhabi initiative commenced as planned. Training and conditioning through Wahhabi-centered manuscript and literature, funded by Saudi Arabia’s “charitable” printing press, took off as an extensive campaign in this region. USA, by way of CIA and other secretive military operations, took part in promoting Wahhabi doctrine to raise a strong “Mujahidin” front with their Saudi partners in fascism.  It was a desperate and greedy attempt. USA could not fathom a strong Soviet Union, especially while on the brink of war–and this is not to say what the Soviet Union did was right, as well.

 “In the 1970s, with the help of funding from petroleum exports and other factors, Saudi charities started funding Wahhabi schools (madrassas) and mosques across the globe and the movement underwent “explosive growth”.  The US State Department has estimated that over the past four decades Riyadh (alone) has invested more than $10bn (£6bn) into charitable foundations in an attempt to replace mainstream Sunni Islam with the harsh intolerance of its Wahhabism. EU intelligence experts estimate that 15 to 20 per cent of this has been diverted to al-Qaida and other violent jihadists.” (8) But, Why? Why would the West even consider spreading dangerous ideas of Ibne Taymiyyah and Wahhab? And didn’t they take into account the immeasurable destruction that could result from injecting Wahhabi fanaticism into these regions?

USA’s entanglement with Saudi Wahhabism has definitely been one heck of a tempestuous tango–so to speak. They needed familiar dogma, to appeal to a wider audience: You could not radicalize Christians in a predominant Muslim environment and expect favorable results. These achievements could not be accomplished in the way that Judaism and Christianity were used to defend Madeline Albright’s and Bush’s reasoning, respectively, for butchering children in the Middle East. (9) What worked for US and Israel could never work in the Middle East, where people, for most part, speak the religiously dominant language of Islam. Recognizable ideologies that Muslims could relate to were a prerequisite for attracting potential fighters. Vulnerabilities among the poor were played upon, raising a new breed of warriors who could culturally and spiritually connect with the people; and, they did this during some of the most trying and detrimental moments of these people’s lives; thus, mercenaries were easily provoked under the influence of Wahhabism to fight on behalf of the axis of evil. The West, for most part, disregarded potential disastrous consequences laid out by mathematical calculations—if ever applied–they most certainly had the intelligence to foresee a formidable outcome.

In addition, many people denied that Western nations were schooled on the dangers brewing in Asian countries through the promotion of Wahhabi ideologies; while, in fact, U.S., UK, and other powers concentrated in the West, who have dirtied up their hands using the Wahhabi initiative, were just as guilty as the Saudi government ever was… perhaps more. Western powers and their Middle Eastern allies were made aware of the dangers triggered by the spread of Wahhabi doctrine: regardless, they recklessly used elements of fanaticism that worked towards their own advantage. When this network of global powers realized how Taymiyyah-Wahhab ideals controlled certain actions and thoughts of humankind, effectively–right down to what hand and foot to begin the day with–for them it seemed the perfect apparatus–necessary to control their RoboMercenaries. It would also seem to be the most beneficial stratagem for the West, in terms of efficiency–they preferred to kill more of “the others” rather than “their own kind.” Furthermore, during those times, Westerners would never agree to terms of war if they knew the truth, or if more of their “own” were sacrificed for another bloody war… Wahhabwashed pawns were the easiest bet to wager on; especially, after Americans endured one long hard fight to pull out of another failure–Vietnam.

On the other hand, Western powers and politicians were not the only ones aware of sinister plans brewing in the midst of Wahhabism’s rising.  American advocates on the ground, Asian countries in particular, took note of these proportionally epidemic-like findings. They fought the spread of the massive Cult—blacked out by mainstream media–lurking as a secret WMD (Weapon of Mass Demoralization). They brought their knowledge of Wahhabism straight to congress. Activists, like Greg Mortenson, led many attempts to warn US congressmen on undermining this mounting matter. Beginning with the educational system, he recognized that in parts of Pakistan and Afghanistan, Saudi funded schools were creating young extremists in militant centered madrassas (Arabic word schools): This can be found and fully explained in his book Three Cups of Tea. (10) Although his work was well intended, insightful, and could have saved many lives, he was virtually shut down: Silenced and ridiculed. Ethnocentric critics and those with their own agendas labeled his works as “Pro-Islamic”—as if there is nothing prejudice in that objection—despite his rigid fight to expose militant training of children in Wahhabi-centered schools. Nevertheless, those overwhelmed by ignorance refused to accept the validity and practicality of his work: They rejected Mortenson’s sincere warnings and slandered him instead. The CIA (USA’s Central Intelligence Agency) would not back Mortenson, as an alternative they probed him. The capitalist nation had ultimately shamed him; since, men like Greg Mortenson came with no profit: It would have taken an entire act of kindness to enter the initiative Mortenson called for, which is something they knew little of.

As they frowned on the Mortensons of that era, USA sponsored Wahhabi loyalist like Osama bin Laden. They pledged their allegiance to Bin Laden and the Taliban’s mission. US media was also on the Bin Laden fighting side.

USA’s very own Frankenstein: Osama Bin Laden

Subsequently, Osama Bin Laden became USA’s own version of “Frankenstein” taking Wahhabism to daring new heights, using the doctrines to create Kamikaze like combatants among the people of his realm. It was no secret, Bin Laden was a fan of Ibne Tamiyyah: “Al Qaeda former leader, Osama Bin Laden famously quoted Ibn Taymiyyah’s Fatwa of Madin as justification for civilian and Muslim casualties in his terror attacks.” (11) Bin Laden was one of leading “gurus” on Taymiyyah-Wahhab ideals and implemented them wherever he laid his turban. He was the western labeled “Freedom Fighter,” whom, ironically, stripped away at any freedom in regions where his “Midas touch” stretched. What seemed like a promising mission of glittering wealth and prosperity for the sordid Saudi-Israelican (Saudis, Israelis, & Americans all bunched up in one) alliance would form an everlasting dark cloud, lingering over the Earth and her inhabitants–one that dampers our doorsteps today. Osama bin Laden with CIA, helped manage and create the most treacherous Taliban tribes of his time, which also gave rise to Al Qaeda and Jundallah. Little did Osama realize, or maybe he did, that he would be a scapegoat for an event bigger than Pearl Harbor–in the making…

The W Factor: 

By the time the 90’s rolled around, at the start of the Bush-Clinton dynasty rule, the US, seemingly immune to the division and damage caused by Wahhabi loyalist in Asia, continued with praises for Saudi Arabia and stuck to their rock solid alliance. They clung to their terrorist creations and plans for future destruction in the Middle East–where leaders not only rejected Saudi Israelican policy, but also the imposition, destruction, and suppression that Wahhabi inspired cults and groups had forced upon their lands and people.

The Bush dynasty, especially, had a common goal with the Saudi dynasty in securing control over countries like the Islamic Republic of Iran, to increase their own political power and wealth. Politicians, like former president George W. Bush appeared to completely adore their equally brutal and gluttonous Royal Saudi friends. “W” (pronounced: Dub-Yuh) brought and welcomed Wahhabi doctrine disguised as Islam, throughout media, into the US; which contributed towards its upsurge on US soil and in some (not all) US masjids. His test subjects were easily available in US prisons. He was passionate about Wahhabism as a form of “therapy” for criminals in US corrections facilities. Some criminals later became terrorists and passionate Wahhabi indoctrinated scholars. (12) Bush was the Bin Laden of the USA, carrying on Osama’s torch in his part of the world. In fact, Bush rested so much faith on the “promising effects” of Wahhabism that he was one of the most open and aggressive US presidents to promote the illusive dogma.

An actual scholar of Islam explains how in Bush’s time a “radicalized Islam,” which the writer recognized as Wahhabism, made its way into the US prison system. Daveed Ross writes for The Weekly Standard in 2005: “BEFORE ENTERING THE COUNTERTERRORISM FIELD, I worked for a radical Islamic charity called the Al Haramain Islamic Foundation. In this capacity, I gained some familiarity with the kind of Islamic extremist literature that often finds its way into the U.S. prison system and thus influences inmates’ religious education. I was, after all, one of the people responsible for distributing this literature. He further informs the reader: “THE INTERNATIONAL AL HARAMAIN ORGANIZATION was originally formed as a private charity in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, in 1992. (13)

Alternatively, a more liberal American writer, Linday West, argues: Bushes’ views on Islam were “progressive,” simply because he praised Islam, or seemed to. (14) Little did the writer delve into the content and material of what Bush was actually encouraging; and, it was not Islam he encouraged: it was Wahhabism. Moreover, she seems to shrug off the influence that he was under at the time, his “open-minded” behavior was enthusiastically appreciated. Uhum, thanks… but, no thanks. West did not even, courageously, scratch the surface of what Middle Easterners, mostly Muslims, endure, because of Wahhabism’s existence. Many fell for Bush strategy in the past, and many have regrets today. He was truly a, “Man of Words and not Deeds.” W and OBL were analogous in the sense that both could spellbind the public with their layman’s tongue, steering those captivated by their enchantment away from truth. His plans, eventually, seemed to fall into place for what was soon to hit the American people hard on the catastrophic day of 9/11.

From a fanatical Western position, Wahhabism may have worked as a great tool for militarization—then. But as many have witnessed, now and then, the fascism and hatred Wahhabism promoted would come back to haunt everyone. Shortly after, as 9/11 struck fear in Americans, the USA’s CIA—convincing the public and most politicians oblivious to anything Wahhabi-centered–implemented one of their own operatives with a familiar name, Osama Bin Laden, as the mastermind behind the 9/11 attack.

US then led what seemed to be a faux aggression against the perpetrators of the 9/11 disaster. They used the questionable event as a scapegoat to situate their aggression on a region where the money was. Iraq. The Western nations, acting on this so-called aggression of war, despite claims of an inside job, set up the entire globe for the backlashing consequences of Wahhabism to be felt on their own soil, to inject fear and paranoia into the hearts and minds of their own people–just as some Middle Easterners felt under the umbrella of USA… Terror networks would manifest from east to the west, north to south, embracing Wahhabism as a weapon under the pressure of a belligerent US led invasion…To Be Continued


Works Cited

  1. The Saudi Connection: Wahhabism and Global Jihad. Choksy, Carol and Jamsheed, Choksy. Washington, DC: World Affairs Institute, 2015.
  2. Staff. What is Wahhabism? The reactionary branch of Islam said to be ‘the main source of global terrorism’. Telegraph. [Online] March 26, 2016. [Cited: April 17, 2017.]
  3. Blum, William. Madeleine Albright Ethically Challenged. Williamblum.org. [Online] February 2001. [Cited: April 17, 2017.]
  4. Mortenson, Greg and Relin, David Oliver. Three Cups of Tea. New York: Penguin Group, 2007. 0-670-03482-7.
  5. Islamic Philosophy. WordPress. [Online] December 9, 2015. [Cited: April 6, 2017.] http://islam.hilmi.eu/ibn-taymiyyah-the-founder-of-isis/.
  6. Prison Islam in the Age of Sacred Terror. Hamm, Mark. S. 5, Oxford: The British Journal of Criminology, 2009, Vol. 49. 667-685
  7. Ross, Daveed. Prison Jihad. The Weekly Standard. [Online]  [Cited: April 21, 2017]
  8. West, Linday. The US Debate around Islam Makes George W. Bush Look Progressive. The Guardian. [Online] November 22, 2015. [Cited: April 21, 2017]

The article was written by Anahita Hamzei and first published in khamenei.ir.

About Ali Teymoori

Check Also

Call for Papers: Humans and Other Animals: Multifaith Responses to the Significance and Symbolism of Animals in Science and Religion Dialogue

The animal and religions dialogue has been growing over the last 25 years, the aim of this conference is to bring this broadening area of scholarship to dialogue with the science-religion arena through two...

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Google Analytics Alternative