BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents

 

Chapter 3

The Iranian Revolution in its Political Dimensions

 

This chapter is divided into the following sections:

• The United States of America and the Iranian Revolution
• The Shia Ambitions in the Gulf and Iraq
• What is behind the rapprochement between the Shia and the Nusayris?
• Their loci in the Islamic World
• Deteriorating internal conditions and brain drain

 

Section 1

The United States of America and the Iranian Revolution

 

• Principles that must be known
• Where is Iran going?
• The United States and the Iranian Revolution
• We condemn them from their own mouths

 

1. Principles that must be known

The readers will find passages in this section which are difficult to fathom, either because they feel that they oppose the political opinions and studies they are familiar with or they appear to be contradictory to them. Therefore, we felt it necessary to define general principles, through which we explain the reality of the Shia and all the Batini (esoteric) sects and the methodology they adopt in political affairs. We have relied upon their history, beliefs, and our own experience through monitoring their news in defining these principles. The most noteworthy of these principles are as follows:

 

1. The centre of leadership of the Shia and the esoteric groups branching out from them in various parts of the world is Iran. Khomeini indicated to this reality in his book, al Hukumah al Islamiyyah, and Ayatollah Shariatmadari mentioned this explicitly in his meeting with the al Siyasah newspaper, 26/06/1978, in which he said, “The Shia leadership is in Iran and in Qom in particular.” He demanded a higher Shia council in the world.

If it is necessary to differentiate between the deposed Shah and the religious leaders, then the Shia organisations throughout the world were and still are linked to the religious leaders, and not to the Shah; it is linked to them through the Hussainiyyat and religious seminaries.

Iranian scholars are responsible for directing and educating the Shia in most countries of the world. You see them altering their names by removing the Persian agnomen and adding an Arabic one to it. They believe they are from an Arab origin and from the Ahlul Bayt, and that their grandfather emigrated to Iran so many years ago and that today they returned back to their homelands. All the Shia residing in the Arab lands bear testimony to this.

2. The disputes of the deposed Shah with Khomeini did not have a significant impact on the Shia outside of Iran. What is important is the loyalty of the sect and its supporters to both the political leadership and religious leadership in Iran. We give two examples of this.

First example: In November 1968, the Shah of Iran went to visit Kuwait. Before the visit, the Shia, most of whom are Iranians, offered the government to carpet their entire way from the airport to the guest palace, a distance of almost ten kilometres. The government answered them in agreement, provided that they do the same with every president who visits the country. These merchants used to decorate their homes and offices with the image of the Shah. They replaced it with the image of Khomeini when the Shah left the country, and rejoiced in the so-called Islamic Revolution. We did not hear of any of them being accused by the Revolutionaries of being from SAVAK, although the number of SAVAK among them is very large.

Second example: The leadership of the Nusayri regime in Syria had close links with the ousted Shah of Iran and his regime, and they have closer and stronger links with post-revolution Iran led by Khomeini. No one questions how is possible that they had such a strong relationship with the Shah but then suddenly this become a strong relationship with Khomeini?

What is important is that they are allies and supporters of the political leadership in Iran—whatever the identity is—and of the religious leadership in Qom.

What is imperative to mention is that many Ayatollahs in and out of Iran had strong ties with the deposed Shah of Iran and were demanding reforms without wanting the removal of the Shah. Among these Ayatollahs were those who had a higher religious rank than Khomeini, like Shariatmadari and Khu’i.

3. Majority of the esoteric sects which branched out from the Shia have Persian roots. The Nusayris for example attribute themselves to their grandfather, Muhammad ibn Nusayr, who is a freed-slave of the Banu Numair (232-260) from Samurra’. His descendants emigrated to Syria during the Qaramitah’s invasion of Greater Syria and settled in the Kalbiyyin Mountains in the northwest of Syria, later called Jibal al Nusayriyyah (the Nusayria Mountains) after them.

The doctrine of the Nusayris is very similar to the doctrine of the Magi in its reliance on secrecy and its take on Taqiyyah, incarnation, and transmigration of souls.

The Nusayri association with Iran is ethnic from one angle and doctrinal from another angle.

4. The differences that existed and still exist between the leaders of the political parties—the Pahlavi family and the masters of the seminaries in Qom, Mashhad, and others—have no impact on Iran’s foreign policy and the ambitions of the Persians in a number of neighbouring countries.

Shah Mohammed Reza had expressed interest Bahrain and the Shatt al Arab, and he had already occupied the three Arab islands of Greater Tunb, Lesser Tunb, and Abu Musa.

The leaders of Khomeini’s Revolution came and claimed that the occupied islands were Persian and the Gulf was Persian, and they went further, demanding Bahrain, Iraq, Makkah, Madinah, and southern Lebanon. They are even trying to establish a major Shia empire that extends to all Islamic countries under the leadership of a ruler who must be of Iranian nationality as stipulated in their current constitution. They explicitly said that this leader should neither be Iraqi nor Lebanese.

On 20/10/1979, al Anba’ newspaper interviewed Dr. Shapour Bakhtiar, former Prime Minister of Iran. When the newspaper asked Bakhtiar about the occupied Arab islands, he believed they were not Arab and had no owner just as he refused to acknowledge the right of each of the Kurds, the Arabs of Iran, and the Baluchis for autonomy within the state of Iran.

Bakhtiar made these statements at a difficult time for him and it was in his interest to praise the Arab countries neighbouring Iran that were angered by Khomeini’s Revolution. But he refused to observe Taqiyyah and was keen on clarity and frankness while he was in a state of weakness.

From here we determine: Khomeini’s foreign policy is not different to the Shah’s policy or Bakhtiar’s policy. Causes are many and death is one.

5. The Shia, Nusayris, and all esoteric sects which branch out from the Shia issue conflicting statements, provoking disagreements.

One threatens to export the Revolution, and after this threat makes headlines around the world, another official issues a statement confirming that their revolution is not exportable and that the one who issued the first statement is not an official. Therefore, the Batiniyun are riding every wave, of liberation, esotericism, revolutionary, republican, and so on from the modern slogans. The slogans they raise are not more than local consumption and phased planning, and you see them saying one thing and intending another. This methodology is consistent with their belief in Taqiyyah and in line with their belief in secrecy.

The Shia have lied against Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala and His Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, against the Messenger’s Companions radiya Llahu ‘anhum, and against ‘Ali and his children radiya Llahu ‘anhum, whose infallibility they believe in. They have filled the pages of history with intrigue and slander. Previously—in chapter two—we quoted the statements of the scholars of al jarh wa al ta’dil regarding them. Hence, it is not correct to believe in the truthfulness of their words and actions.

Moreover, they have become inebriated with love for treachery. Whoever monitors their conditions sees that they have been continue for many years in a national movement, until they are able to control and contain them. So, when they succeeded in achieving their goal, they turned their backs on their partners and trampled on the slogans they used to parade around and call on people to glorify and worship.

Our scholars described this methodology of theirs saying: They draw closer to every nation using aspects that they have in common with them and distinguish between those they can deceive and those they cannot. So, they approach Muslims from one perspective, the [alleged] oppression of the Ummah against ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and the killing of Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhu. However, if the addressee is Jewish, they approach him from the perspective of awaiting the Messiah and their Messiah is the Mahdi. And if he is a Christian, the opposite is true, and so on.

As for secrecy, this is one of their fundamentals, even if they are in authority. If this indicates to anything, it indicates to their ambiguity and the lack of clarity about their goals. They say one thing in their media and do the opposite in secret. Everyone who deals with them must prepare himself for many surprises that contradicts what he knows about them.

6. The Shia look towards the Arab Muslims with eyes of rancour and hatred, for no other reason except that they destroyed the glory of Persia and Kisra’s authority. History is the best witness to their unbridled support for the disbelievers and polytheists, and seeking their assistance against the Ahlus Sunnah and Muslims.

The Tartars utilised them in the most egregious slaughter in Islamic history. Their leader was Nasir al Tusi, minister and guide of Halaku, in exterminating the majority of the Muslims in Baghdad.

The Christians employed them in the famous Crusader wars. The Nusayris volunteered and fought the Muslims on the coast of Greater Syria. The Magian Fatimid state did everything it could to secure the Crusaders in Egypt. Some Imami Shia princes also handed over their areas to the Crusaders without a fight in some parts of Greater Syria.

The Portuguese and British employed them against the Muslim Ottoman Empire and against the Muslims in general, while the Safavids played a malicious role in enabling the disbelieving colonisers to access the borders of the Muslim countries.

We will soon mention numerous testimonies in the upcoming sections which highlight their collaboration with the Maronites, America, and Israel as happened in the Lebanon War of 1975 and is prevalent in Iran today.

They are instruments of the enemies of Islam in every time and clime. Deluded greatly is the one who rests his hopes upon them and believes that the Shia of today are better than the Shia of before.

7. The Shia have old socialist roots. This is because the Qaramitah is one of the branches of the disgusting tree planted by Mazdak and nurtured by Abu Hamid al Qirmiti thereafter.

Among the methods employed by the Shia to spread their call is chaos, so man does not feel safety under their regimes for himself, his money, and his honour, and they take advantage of this chaos, annihilating their opponents and terrorising those who do not subscribe to their views.

8. There are no principles in their belief system preventing them from the forbidden or warning them against committing evil. Their belief in Taqiyyah has turned them into the worst of liars. Their belief in Mut’ah has turned majority of them into adulterers. Their insolence towards the Messenger’s Companions radiya Llahu ‘anhum facilitated for them abusing the believers and slandering the righteous.

Yes, what doctrine is this that Rifaat al Assad and his people were raised on? What doctrine is this that Dr. Sadeq Tabatabai, Deputy Prime Minister of Iran, produced?

We reject the claim that some of them appear to have good morals. What kind of morals does not prevent a person from lying, swearing, committing adultery in the name of Mut’ah, and associating with evil people?

It is imperative that the readers remember these principles when reading the books of the Shia, when entering into dialogue with them, and when keeping track of their activities and evaluating their approach and plans.

When one is unaware of these principles and then tries to judge them, he will find himself facing contradictions and conflicting issues. He might judge them based on an opinion he heard from one of their leaders which he accepted, as he was unaware that the belief of this leader allows him to lie in the name of Taqiyyah. Sometimes he may read a view of this leader which contradicts what he heard from him, so he will say with all simplicity and negligence regarding the second view that what was quoted was fabricated. These are the means by which the international media wages war against those who call to Allah.

In summary: The Shia today have succeeded in establishing a state in Iran and are looking forward to expanding their grand empire. No writer or researcher on the issues of the Islamic world can ignore them, and studying their affairs must be based on broad backgrounds and outlines.

For example, whoever writes about the Jews must be familiar with their history, their stance on the prophets of Allah, their view on non-Jews, and their love for money. If the writer neglects these issues, the results of his research will be trivial and worthless.

For this and other reasons, we presented these principles about the Shia, so that our readers can keep them in mind as they follow this study with us.

 

NEXT⇒  2. Where is Iran going?