Mansoureh Tajik for The Saker Blog
Bismillah-ir-Rahman-ir-Rahim, “In the Name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.” This essay may be billed as a companion to, or a rebuttal of, or a commentary on Pepe Escobar’s article titled, “The Roots of American Demonization of Shia Islam” posted here. I am uncertain about a suitable label. Perhaps the readers could formulate a mental tag & file as they deem appropriate.
The core thesis of Pepe Escobar’s article relates to “Shia Islam and the failure of the West to understand it.” It is stated, “the congenital incapacity of so-called US elites to even attempt to understand Shi’ism – thus 24/7 demonization, demeaning not only Shias by also Shia-led governments.” Let’s suppose we know what is meant by “US elites” here. Let us suppose it means a network of formal and informal financial, military, and political entities that have the power and the means to influence and control the ultimate decisions and the actions of the United States as a collective. The statement, as structured, appears to suggest that “demonization and demeaning Shias and Shia-led governments” is a consequence, a product, an effect, if you will, of an “incapacity” by those elites “to attempt to understand Shi’ism”. In other words, they bash it because they do not have the capacity to understand it. No evidence was provided to support this causal link.
In the essay before you, I assert precisely the opposite and provide empirical as well as logical evidence that demonstrate the demonization and demeaning of Shia and Shia-led governments is because those elites understand EXACTLY what Shia is all about. I would go even further and explain, with evidence, what core elements about Shia make those so-called elites so scared and horrified that they have little choice but to continue their demonization campaign against Shia. Before filling these two very tall orders, however, it would be useful to first discuss and respond to several key points raised in Pepe Escobar’s article as a prelude to the essay itself.
Firstly, the article upholds there is a “congenital incapacity of US elites to attempt to understand Shi’ism.” – To the best of our knowledge, there is no congenital (present at birth) defects that adversely predisposes anyone to be incapable of understanding Shia. Nor is there any evidence of any genetic disorder or hereditary predisposition in the world and among people (elite or non-elite) that bars anyone from understanding Shia people and/or governments established based on the principles of Shia school of thought. If there is, we, the Shia, would like to see it.
Of course, this is not to disregard freedom and rights afforded by poetic license and/or to show that effectiveness of caricatured expressions to drive a point home are not appreciated. Rather, we do not wish to help corner anyone, not even figuratively, into any sort of inescapable trap of imagined incapacitation to understand Shia.
Secondly and with respect to “some serious academic research about the appeal of Shi’ism,” there is already a large body of serious academic research that explores and examines not only the appeal of Shia school of thought but also the essential features that make it an effective force. Indeed, these are the very evidence that when we look into and examine, we realize the animosity of the “Western elites” (with the US being its current façade and flag bearer) is not out of some misunderstanding or a random and/or institutionalized ignorance but a calculated, deliberate, and conscious malevolence. A few of these research is addressed in the essay as well.
Thirdly, regarding the suggestion for “visits to selected sacred sites across Southwest Asia: Najaf, Karbala, Mashhad, Qom and the Sayyida Zeinab shrine near Damascus,” by all means, this is an excellent advice. But those who visit should do so with an open heart in order to truly experience how it feels like to be welcomed with open arms by true patrons of those holy sites. Knowing who they are, how they lived, and what they did is paramount to gaining a better understanding about why they are so revered and avidly guarded by the Shia.
Fourthly, with respect to the statement by Dr. Marandi quoted in the article, “The American irrational hatred of Shi’ism stems from its strong sense of resisting injustice,” more needs to be said. It is true that resisting oppression and aggression, fighting against injustice, and defending those who are oppressed in the world are all core beliefs in Shia school of thought. Also, it is true that we have living examples of martyrs who sacrificed everything they had for their belief. However, that is neither the whole story nor unique only to Shia. There are other schools of thought that might be engaged in similar efforts but are not demonized as Shia is. Not only that, some of those ideologies are even propped up, by these very elites, as examples to follow in Shia’s stead and to even fight Shia. Since I am familiar with Dr. Marandi’s work, I presume the above statement may have been extracted from a much larger and more comprehensive context and explanation.
Fifthly, with regard to Blake Archer Williams’ argument titled, “A Reaction from Tehran to the Martyrdom of General Qāsem Soleymānī,” it is evident that he provided his real-time reaction to the news of the martyrdom of Shahid Sardar Soleymani in that essay. An analytical response to the question posed to him at a time when he is not in the midst of grieving will certainly produce a more cogent and focused response. Nevertheless, he wrote, “So the role of the politician in democracies seems not to be to try to understand anything but simply carry out the agenda of the elites who own them.” This is a fair assessment of the referenced politicians. However, it does not directly answer the reasons behind a serious aversion of their elite handlers and the barrage of sustained multi-pronged attacks against Shia. The answer is somewhat hidden within layers elsewhere in the article in a reference to the history of the West and Muslim interactions in the 18th and 19th centuries.
Furthermore, martyrdom is cited as a key deciding factor. Yes, martyrdom, by its very nature and design, makes things easier for Shia to fight and resist earnestly and robustly. At the same time, it makes it costlier for the oppressors to regress further into their corrupt and criminal ways. But martyrdom explains only one part, albeit a critical part, of Shia’s effectiveness. It does not explain the full picture. And it does not explain it as cause for adamant aversion demonstrated by US elites against Shia.
Lastly, regarding Princess Vittoria who “would rather frame the debate around the unquestioning American attitude towards Wahhabism” and stating she does not think “this has anything to do with hating Shi’ism or ignoring it,” for the sake of clarity, I must first state that Wahhabism to Islam is what homosexuality is to nature: an anomaly and a deviance. Full stop. Without sustained propaganda and active support by the West to shove either of them as anything legitimate down people’s throat, neither will see the light of the day and neither will amount to anything more than arbitrary aberrations meant to be expelled.
Therefore I found it odd that real origin of Wahhabism, both as an ideological tool and as a movement, which was adopted and perfected by Western elites, particularly Britain, to counter Islam and Muslims is overlooked. Given that Shia is (and has been) on the top of the Wahhabies’ hit list, based on what logic it could then be deducted that this has nothing to do with Shia? Here, too, I imagine extraction of a few lines out of a much larger context might have made the statement a curious one.
As for “Iranian revolution and Shia groups in the Middle East are today the only successful force of resistance to the US, and that causes them to be hated more than others. But only after all other Sunni opponents had been disposed of, killed, terrified (just think of Algeria, but there are dozens of other examples) or corrupted.” The point is well taken but it raises two more serious questions: 1) What made Shia the only successful force of resistance (thus the target of severe hatred. as asserted)? 2) What made the other Sunni opponents so disposable, terrified, and corrupt? The answer to these two questions, too, are addressed in this essay.
With this brief forward, we attend to main aims of the essay. One is to show so-called US elites demonize and demean Shia and Shia-led governments because they understand EXACTLY what Shia is. And the second is to answer the question of what the absolute essential elements of Shia are that make those so-called elites so horrified that they have no other choice but to continue their demonization campaign against Shia. We begin attending to the two aims using a few relevant examples in recent history.
In November 1891, Seyyed Mohammad Hassan Husayni Nouri Shirazi, better known as Mirzaye Shirazi, issued a short fatwa which simply read:
“Bismillah-ir-Rahman-ir-Rahim, On this day, use of tobacco and tobacco products in any way and shape is equivalent to a war with Imam-e Zaman (May God Hasten his return).”
Handwritten Fatwa by Mirzaye Shirazi regarding Tobacco Prohibition
This seemingly simple line began what is now known as “Tobacco Movement” in Iran. Immediately following the distribution of that fatwa among the public, the people of Iran burnt and destroyed any and all tobacco products and any related paraphernalia. The fatwa, in effect, made null and void a series of concessions made in secret by then corrupt king, Naseriddin Shah Ghajar, to the British company, Talbot. The concessions had given Britain the exclusive rights to everything that had anything to do with tobacco in Iran for a period of fifty years. In exchange, Naseriddin Shah would receive an insignificant sum which itself was to be used to pay back for an extortionate loan the king had received from Britain for his decadence and wasteful indulgences. All these at the expense of the Iranian nation.
Plenty of archived documents, books, and articles are produced in English around this movement.[2,3,4] A simple search in the literature using relevant key words produces hundreds of documents dating back to the beginning of the movement in 19th Century. Everything including the roles played by the clergy, the merchants, the devout Shia population, the women of the royal court, westoxicated intellectuals, and more is studied by academic and not-so-academic centers in Britain, France, US, and others in the West. It would take a unique form of tenacity to flip through page after pages of these documents and not admit that the West knows what Shia is all about.
From our side of the hedge, it is evident that Iranians, especially the clergy, knew what challenges would follow. In his memoires, Ayatullah Seyyed Hasan Modarres (1871-1937), revered scholar and Mujtahid, wrote,
“When I went to Najaf, I visited Mirzaye Shirazi who was in Samerah. I told him the story of our triumph over the tobacco event. I saw signs of worry appeared on his face. He remained silent and tears began rolling down his face. I was surprised by his reaction. I had expected to make him happy with that news. When I asked him about it, he said, ‘Now, the malevolent powers and enemies of Islam realize where the main power of this nation and the focal point of Shia movements’ strength is. I am now seriously worried about the future of the Islamic nation.” [Page 138]
Ayatullah Modarres further wrote about the dynamic interplay between the role of the people and the role of ulama (pious and learned scholars of Islam and Quran) and in bringing about an effective outcome,
“Mirza’s fatwa was a flame that was set in caches of gunpowder hidden deeply within the hearts of the Iranian people. If these hearts were not filled with such gunpowder, a piece of paper with a few broken lines written with a faded ink could not have possibly produced such blazing flames.”
Elsewhere he wrote,
“The tobacco event was like a canon fired at dawn. It awakened an astute nation from its slumber and informed people that a relentless quake must follow. The masses of people had not been informed of the depth of the matter but they felt the danger since they trusted their ulama. So, they mobilized and followed them.”
Tobacco movement, or Nehzat_e Tanbakoo as it is called in Iran, and what transpired thereafter were only an exercise and a practice run for the next nehzat (movement), Nehzat_e Mashrooteh, or Constitutional Movement of 1906. The pivotal role ulama played in this movement, too, is well studied —indubitably more by the outsiders than by the insiders. Those interested could do a literature search and find plenty of sources to keep them busy for months. A note of caution though, the framing of various research in this area to examine the role various groups played (like any other research in the world) often betrays the hidden agenda of those who financed the research for exploitative purposes. Therefore, it is important to “follow the money” as part of your overall assessment of any document. Beware, as well, that they often pull “a Harvard” or “a Reuters” and the actual sources of funding may be kept hidden for decades.
Notable clerical figures in the constitutional movement included Sheykh Fazullah Nouri, Akhound Khorasani, Seyyed Abdullah Behbahani, Hasan Modarres, and Seyyed Muhammad Tabatabei. The clergy, again, played a critical role in informing, mobilizing, and leading the masses in support of the constitutional movement. The basic rationale was that anything that limits the power of corrupt kings and cuts off the hands of foreign powers is a positive step forward.
However, once the clergy and believing people realized the influence of Western agents and their operatives, secular and westoxicated intellectuals in drafting the constitution, they began their open defiance. Every single one of the cleric directly involved in the constitutional were killed.
Late Imam Khomeini (God rest his soul) in a couple of his speeches dissected this tragedy as follows,
“In the constitutional [movement] they saw one or a few mulla in Najaf, a few turban-headed mulla in Tehran turned the foundation of tyrannical and despotic rulers upside down and established constitutional limits. Here, those who opposed did not sit still. They were active, too. If we were to tell the story, it gets really long. But about this very constitutional limits, Sheykh Fazullah Nouri (God rest his soul) stood up and said, ‘the constitution must be based on the rule of God. The rules must agree with Islamic rules.’ At the same time as he was saying these things, he also worked on the addendum to the constitution. That was his efforts, too. His opponents and the foreigners, when they saw such power in the clergy they pulled such tricks that, in Iran, Sheykh Fazlullah who was a Mujahid and high status Mujtahid, they fabricated a show trial and they put a deviant cleric look-alike to try and convict him. Then they hanged him in the middle of Tupkhaneh and in the presence of a large crowd.”
“You gentlemen have all heard about the constitutional period. A bunch of people did not want Islam to have any power in this country. And they were after turning the situation to their own advantage. They poisoned the atmosphere so much that someone like late Agha Sheykh Fazlullah who was a notable figure in Iran then, and was favored, they made such a poisonous atmosphere that they hanged him in the middle of a square and some stood around and clapped. This was a plot to cast aside Islam. And they did. After that, the constitution was not the sort of constitution that the ulama in Najaf wanted. Even the subject of late Agha Sheykh Fazlullah was portrayed in such a distorted way that not even a peep came out of there [Najaf]. This climate they created in Iran and elsewhere, this climate facilitated Agha Sheykh Fazullah’s conviction in the hands of some of these very clerics of Iran itself. Then they brought him into the middle of the square and hanged him. Then, they stood and clapped. They struck a blow against Islam at that time. And people were heedless. And even the ulama were heedless.”
A series of similar movements that followed could be presented, dissected, and examined at length. The Iranian oil nationalization movement in 1951 to cut off the British hand[17, 18], for example, in which Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh, then elected prime minister, was able to bring about (though it was very short lived) again with the help of very influential clerics such as Ayatullah Seyyed Abulghasem Kashani, Ayatullah Vaez-Zadeh Khorasani, Ayatullah Mohammad Taqi Khansari, and more who rallied the masses of people behind him. Once Mossadegh succeeded, however, he and his secular cabinet became too trusting of and too lenient toward another foreign power, the US. The coup d’etat of 1953 (Operation Ajax) by the US, followed by the Iranian Oil Consortium Agreement of 1954 gave foreign companies 40% of Iranian oil, effectively replaced Britain by the US as the master of the Pahlavi regime followed by decades of killing, imprisonment, torture, and sending to exile of thousands of people.
Imam Khomeini’s speeches in June 1963 and the uprisings that followed, his powerful speech in 1964 and the movement by the religious scholars, his exile that year and unrelenting struggles that led to the Islamic Revolution of 1979, have all been well examined and documented.
Finally, a fully functioning Islamic Republic based on tenets of Shia Islam was established thanks to two significant factors: 1) An active, aware, fearless, and devout Shia community ready to receive the message of its believing, pious, wise, and brave religious leaders; 2) An active, aware, fearless, and pious imam and leader. Article 1 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran confirms the establishment of an Islamic system of government based on “Iranian Nations’ long lasting belief in Quran’s authority in Truth and Justice following a victorious revolution under the leadership of eminent source of emulation, Grand Ayatullah Imam Khomeini.”
Article 2 of the constitution clearly spells out the 5 pillars (primary principles) of Shia Islam and the responsibility of the Shia community as follows,
“Islamic Republic is a system based on a belief in:
The Oneness of God (there is no god but God), the Governance and Laws belong to Him, the necessity to submit to God’s laws [Tawhid];
The revelations and the essential role they play in describing the laws [Nubuwwah, or Prophethood];
Mi’ad [The Hereafter, the Day of Judgment, Return of everything to God] and its constructive role in propelling human evolution toward God;
God’s Justice [Adl] in all creations and rules;
Imammat (the guardianship of infallible Imams) and uninterrupted leadership of the pious and their role in the continuation of the Islamic Revolution;
Human dignity, human excellence, and liberty integrated with responsibility before God by means of: a) ongoing scholarship by the learned and fully qualified Faqih based on the Book and the tradition of the infallibles (God’s Peace be upon them all); b) use of science, technology, and progressive human experiences and struggle to move them forward; c) defiance of all oppressors, tyrants, and any form of oppression, and establishment of justice, equity, and independence in political, economic, social, cultural, and that which ensures national unity.”
On March 21, 1979, nearly 98.2% of eligible voters in Iran said “yes” to an Islamic Republic. After 40 years, 9 months, and 13 days of sustained, relentless, and unparalleled multifaceted military, economic, and media attacks by so-called elites of the West, tens of millions of people poured into streets to mourn one of their most beloved soldiers of God. Why? Because he heard the commands of his wise and pious leader, his devoted wali, Seyyed Ali, and he obeyed in upholding the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the end. We congratulate and envy his martyrdom.
So, what is so special about this constitution? A lot but we will focus on what is more relevant to this essay. It contains the answer to the question why “24/7 demonization, demeaning not only Shias by also Shia-led governments by so-called US elites” that was posed by Pepe Escobar.
The constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran says the leadership, the governance, the imamat, if you will, the guardianship of the people and nations of the world and their affairs cannot be and must not be entrusted to anyone other than pious, righteous, non-corrupt, just, wise, learned, fearless, and selfless leaders. For Shia, it would be an Imam. In his absence, his rightful Nayib or vice-Imam, the one who most closely resembles him in piety of thoughts, words, and deeds.
The so-called elites would have had nothing to fear if Shia, too, accepted any corrupt, depraved, and sinful jester as their leader and the guardian of their affairs. Only if Shia could have been a normal community and satisfied with the choice between bad, worse, ugly, or the lesser evils. أَعـوذُ بِاللهِ مِنَ الشَّيْـطانِ الرَّجيـم (I seek refuge in God from the accursed Satan).
 Najafi M (1398). “Andisheh-ye Siasi dar Nehzat-haye Islami Tariq Mo’aser Iran” (Political Thoughts in Islamic Movements of Contemporary History of Iran). Special Collection No. 12, On the Occasion of the 1st of Jamadi ul-Awal, the Anniversary of the Issuance of Fatwa in Prohibition of Tobacco. Available online at: http://moaser.iki.ac.ir/book/export/html/339
 Gillard D, Bourne K, Watt DC (1985). Great Britain Foreign Office. British documents on foreign affairs. Reports and papers from the Foreign Office confidential print. Part I, From the mid-nineteenth century to the First World War. Series B, The Near and Middle East, 1856-1914. Vol. 13: Persia, Britain and Russia, 1886-1907. Vol. 14: Persia, Britain and Russia, 1907-1914. University Publications of America.
 Keddie NR (1966). Religion and Rebellion in Iran: The Tobacco Protest of 1891-1892. Frank Cass & CO Ltd. Publisher. ISBN:071461971X, 9780714619712.
 Oxford Dictionary of Islam (2020). “Tobacco Protest (Iran): 1891 – 92.” Available online at: http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t125/e2389
 Westoxification is a term used as a translation of the term “Gharbzadegi” coined by Iranian scholar, Jalal Al-e Ahmad in his well know book by the same name.
 Mahmoodi K & Jelodar ES (2011). “Orientalized from Within: Modernity and Modern Anti-Imperial Iranian Intellectual Gharbzadegi and the Roots of Mental Wretchedness.” Canadian Center for Science and Education. doi:10.5539/ach.v3n2p19. Available online at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272693398_Orientalized_from_Within_Modernity_and_Modern_Anti-Imperial_Iranian_Intellectual_Gharbzadegi_and_the_Roots_of_Mental_Wretchedness
 Najafi M, Isfahani Karbalaei H, and Ja’afarian R (1373 HS), Sade-ye Tahrim-e Tanbakoo (The Century of the Prohibition of Tobacco), In Persian. 1st Edition. Amir Kabir Publishing. Tehran, Iran.
 Ibid. Page 130.
 Ibid. Page 139.
 Oxford Islamic Studies Online (2020). “Constitutional Revolution (Iran).” Available online at: http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t125/e450
 Camila Domonoske (2016). “50 Years Ago, Sugar Industry Quietly Paid Scientists To Point Blame At Fat.” National Public Radio, September 13, 2016. Available online at: https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/13/493739074/50-years-ago-sugar-industry-quietly-paid-scientists-to-point-blame-at-fat
 Guy Falconbridge (2020). “Britain secretly funded Reuters in 1960s and 1970s: documents.” Reuters, January 13, 2020. Available online at: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-media/britain-secretly-funded-reuters-in-1960s-and-1970s-documents-idUSKBN1ZC20H
 Hermann D (2012). “Akhund Khurasani and the Iranian Constitutional Movement.” Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 49(3): 430-453.
 Shirkhani A & Rezaei M (1390 HS). Naqsh_e Rohaniat dar Enghelab Mashrouteh (The Role of the Clergy in the Constitutional Movement). Islamic Revolution Studies, Summer 1390. In Persian. Available online at: http://ensani.ir/file/download/article/20120419195128-8054-21.pdf
 Sahifeye Noor, Collection of speeches, messages, interviews, decrees, religious permits, and letters by Imam Khomeini. Vol. 13, Page 175.
 Sahifeye Noor, Collection of speeches, messages, interviews, decrees, religious permits, and letters by Imam Khomeini. Vol. 18, Page 181.
 Keesing’s Record of World Events (formerly Keesing’s Contemporary Archives), Volume VIII, July, 1951 Persia, Iranian, Page 11569 © 1931-2006 Keesing’s Worldwide, LLC -All Rights Reserved. Available online at: http://web.stanford.edu/group/tomzgroup/pmwiki/uploads/3195-1951-07-Keesings-a-OEP.pdf
 International Court of Justice Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders Anglo-Iranian Oil Co. Case (United Kingdom v. Iran) Preliminary Objection judgment of Jul 22nd, 1952. Available online at: https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/16/016-19520722-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf
 Heiss MA (1994). “The United States, Great Britain, and the Creation of the Iranian Oil Consortium, 1953-1954.” The International History Review, 16(3): 511-535. Taylor & Francis, Ltd. Publishing.
 Fathi M & Koohi Isfehani K (Editors.). Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran with Commentaries and Interpretation by Guardian Council (1359-1396). Guardian Council Research Center, Tehran. 1397. Article 1, Page 14. Available online at: https://www.shora-gc.ir/files/fa/news/1398/9/21/4354_236.pdf
 Ibid. Article 2, Page 14.
I didn’t know about the Tobacco movement. I appreciate the info.
Very informative. I learned a lot. My respect to the brave leaders of Iran, present and past
Very informative exposé of an overlooked (despite its significance) period of Persia’s history (it was not yet Iran) albeit self serving. But since the theme in discussion is the terror that Shia induces in American ‘elites’ one would have expected the author to say at least a few words about the role played by William Morgan Shuster in the ‘Persian Constitutional Revolution’!
Mr.Shyster was not the only emissary that Teddy Roosevelt sent out with his White Fleet to entangle foreign countries in Uncle $cam’s World Wide Web of deceit. The whole sordid business of seduction, exploitation and abandonment is summed up by the character Lootenant Pinkerton in Puccini’s opera Madame Butterfly.
PS Iran was always Iran, even if the Greeks named it Persia. Which is why those of us who belong to the Indo-European ethnic group are known as Aryans, after the original pronunciation of that name by which the people of Iran called themselves in the ancient Holy Book of the Iranians (see WikiPaedia). Which also explains why the late Iranian general Solomeini had the face of a senior Greek god, Father Zeus or Father Neptune, because the ancient Greeks and ancient Iranians were closely related for better and for worse; all their quarrels were family quarrels.
Persians, pardon Iranians, were to happy to have him to piss off the Russians and Britishers.
“After being recommended by the U.S. government to the Iranian minister in Washington, Shuster was appointed by the Majlis to help manage the country’s financial position…
Shuster became active in supporting the Constitutional revolution of Persia financially. When Iran’s government ordered Shu’a al-Saltaneh, the Shah’s brother, who was aligned with the goals of Imperial Russia in Persia, to surrender his assets to the government, Shuster was assigned this task, which he promptly moved to execute. Imperial Russia immediately landed troops in Bandar Anzali demanding a recourse and apology from the Persian government.
The hiring of Shuster and his American associates as financial advisors concerned the imperial powers, who sought to keep Persia from independent influences and dampen national feeling…
Under Russian and British pressure, the vice-regent of Persia expelled Shuster from office in December 1911 against the will of the Persian parliament. Shortly thereafter, due to the chaotic political climate created by Shuster’s ouster, the deposed Shah, Mohammad Ali Shah Qajar attempted an invasion of Persia from Russia…”
I quote only the Wikipedia, but one should read the book of Shuster “The The Strangling of Persia”, which has been dedicated to “The Persian People”The book was subtitled, the story of the European diplomacy and oriental intrigue that resulted in the denationalization of twelve million Mohammedans, a personal narrative. The dedication of the book reads thus:
TO THE PERSIAN PEOPLE
” In the endeavour to repay in some slight measure the debt of gratitude imposed on me through their confidence in my purposes towards them and by their unwavering belief, under difficult and forbidding circumstances, in my desire to serve them for the regeneration of their nation, this book is dedicated by the author”.
Motto: “Time with whose passage certain pains abate
But sharpens those of Persia’s unjust fate”.
I am all in favour of Muslims doing whatever they like in their own countries. They certainly should be treated with respect and not attacked in order to acquire their oil.
However, I do believe that Muslims – and Jews – should be kept out of Europe. Both the Jews and the Muslims are envious of Europeans and they undermine societies. Let them play their games in their own countries. The Jews with their media-control and bought-up politicians undermined Europe and that is why so many Muslims were allowed in.
However, I do believe that Muslims – and Jews – should be kept out of Europe.
Well, you should have told the Allies, principally the Brits and the French, that during WW1, Alfred.
An estimated 2.5 million Muslims — Indian sepoys, Algerian spahis, Tunisian light infantrymen, Moroccan goumiers, as well as indentured labourers — were brought to Europe to fight the Kaiser’s forces. Many of them died on Europe’s killing fields. Their graves are still there. Perhaps they should have been told to stay home in their tents and tend to their camels and goats and not bother themselves with arguments among Europeans. After all, they could undermine Europe, couldn’t they — more than a million armed Muslim men? And while we’re on the subject could you please advise the French and Germans to leave the Malians alone so that they can “play their games” in their country? Very likely that if the Europeans break their country, they might just up sticks and find their way to Europe. Just ask the Libyans or Syrians if you’re unsure.
“If you don’t know history, then you don’t know anything. You are a leaf that doesn’t know it is part of a tree.” — Michael Crichton. (unashamedly plucked from one of the links below.)
Please for the love of all that is holy to you, understand this:
europe is not the center of the world.
yes; it would help if Australians also go back to Europe and return the land stolen from locals, I believe evangelical christians are jealous of muslims and their strong faith while they live immoral lives while busy stealing and plundering others land for resources.
“the guardianship of the people and nations of the world and their affairs cannot be and must not be entrusted to anyone other than pious, righteous, non-corrupt, just, wise, learned, fearless, and selfless leaders.” If this were the case in every country the world would be a much better place. However desire for wealth and/or power does tend to drive the worst examples of humanity to capture government. That Iran trusts their imams is their choice, how many other countries would actually trust their religious leaders to possess the quoted characteristics to run their countries? Sadly many have a somewhat less than envious record in ethics and morality. Renunciation of desire, although a Buddhist ideal, clearly makes sense for any journey into piousness.
Thank you for a fine apologetic essay on behalf of Shi’sm, Mansoureh.
Basically I’m more inclined to Princess Vittoria’s position to wit, “who would rather frame the debate around the unquestioning American attitude towards Wahhabism” and stating she does not think “this has anything to do with hating Shi’ism or ignoring it.”
I have said this many times and I repeat: Wahhabism is a pernicious and grotesque aberration of Sunni Islam. It has spread hate and destruction, while continuing to sow discord throughout the Muslim world. It is the prime driver of the hate of Sunnis towards Shi’as. Anyone who has a modicum of knowledge about Islam knows about the Sunni-Shi’a divide although this was not apparent in Western media till Bush’s criminal invasion of Iraq in 2003. Now even a bimbo on CNN is quick to qualify Islam as either Shi’a or Sunni. There is a simmering tension between the two to be sure but the spread of Wahhabism after WW2, fueled by petrodollars, has managed to elevate the tension into open warfare in certain parts of the Muslim world. The AngloZionists understand this tension and are exploiting it to the maximum.
If at all there is ‘American demonisation of Shi’a Islam’ I believe that it is similar in character to US demonisation of Russia, China, Venezuela and North Korea — a well-tested technique of preparing the US population for eventual ‘kinetic’ war. It is less to do with the nature of Shi’ism, particularly Iranian Shi’ism.
No understanding is required for the demonisation. It’s Shi’as now. It could well be another religious or ideological group tomorrow.
Just like a plane can be over-engineered, a political conflict can be over-ruminated.
Stand Easy; The larger point concerning imperialist demonization is to ask if all of those movements historically demonized by the empire display anything in common. The truth is that they do. All the demonized nations and forces do in fact radiate a dangerous commonality. That being some degree of incorruptibility, which stems from these groups having a noticeable capacity to radiate the purity of humanity’s inner light. The darkness of empire fears the light that it sees in these historic movements. This inner humanist light is judged to be a dangerous and impenetrable barrier to ego driven imperialist and capitalist corruption. All of these groups display a collective integrity fueled by the light of the inner human spirit. This makes them all a fearful and dangerous antagonist to the darkness of spirit that animates capitalist imperialists. All of the movements you mention carry this value, expressed in their own language. Hence their designation as dangerous threats to “national security”. It is a war within humanity between darkness and light. And the light can express itself in various languages.
You are right Snow Leopard, that there’s a certain kind of spirit within people that causes them to recoil instinctively at the gross injustices and depravations perpetrated by the AZ Empire, and to resist. And, I might add, not limited to just the countries that I mentioned.
People are free of course to make what they want of the current stand-off between the US and Iran. But to suggest that Shi’sm, the subject of this article, is demonised by the US/AZE precisely because of its nature, whether they understand it (this article) or not (Pepe Escobar’s) smacks of — excuse me for saying this — exceptionalism.
There are powerful factions within Iran who want to be friends with the US, the so-called reformists. Former presidents Rafsanjani, Khatami and the incumbent, Rouhani, come to mind. These people and their supporters share the same values and spirit as other Iranians but differ from the so-called hardliners in their approach to the world, in particular the West. They are more reconciliatory and more inclined to coexistence particularly with the Sunnis, less inclined to export ‘Islamic revolution.’ It’s one belief but different worlds.
That’s why, like Princess Vittoria, I say that the present demonisation is just an expedient tool, method, technique, to set the ground work for (as the Empire sees it) eventual war. It’s nothing personal or exceptional.
Stand Easy: You make a sound point it appears. I suspect you know more about Shia than I. So do you think the difference in attitude to the empire within Shia is a measure of the degree of passionate emotional commitment to the core values of Shia? As with Christians there are soft Christians (convenience oriented) and passionately committed Christians. I suspect the depth of one’s commitment to the transcendental values of that spiritual belief systems might be the determining factor. Your thoughts?
Integrity and Fearlessness.
Honesty and Bravery.
Hard to submit a People United in those.
The other term for this illness of Westoxification is Occidentosis, which is also perjoratve.
Hope the author will continue in another essay.
I very appreciated this article. I really would like you could write more on the historical subjects. I think most of our friends would really benefit from more accurate education on the history and fundamentals of Shia. Please, write more often.
Thank you very much.
I really don’t know what to make of this. Shia in Persia seem to have an exclusive ownership of persecution from western spooks etc. No mention is made of persecuted minorities who suffer 10,000 times what Iranians have.
This seems a little self-focussed all-in-all.
The constitution of Iran has a clause stating: “…while scrupulously refraining from all forms of interference in the internal affairs of other nations, it supports the
just struggles of the mustad’afun [oppressed] against the mustakbirun [oppressors] in every corner of the globe.”
This is a direct affirmation of the heroism that Shia Islam sees as the duty of every person. There is no other country that puts itself on the line like Iran for those in other lands. It’s a notable difference between Iran and Russia. Who would be a better target of hate by satanists?