Brussels’ attacks – How Belgium was sold radicalism for oil

SHARE

SHAFAQNA – However tragic and painfully criminal Brussels’ terror may have been it is our reaction to such attacks which will ultimately determine their success … and I would hope their failure. While there is little doubt as to whose hands were in fact involved in such senseless bloodshed, it is terror’s patrons, and terror’s agenda which still remain elusive. Rather it has been the greater public’s inability to perceive terror’s ambitions and goals which has played to our collective disadvantage – allowing for criminals to cloak themselves as righteous defenders of liberty and democracy, when their aims remain inherently nefarious.

Brussels witnessed a despicable series of attacks, which echo has yet to be truly measured – and I am not referring to the new wave of Islamophobic hysteria which has deluged social media, and camped on politicians’ lips … Muslims these days are accustomed to the wrath well thinking Westerners are only too keen to throw at them – the last remnants of a colonial mind-set which thrives on misplaced ethno-centrism, and a self-righteous religious supremacist complex.

Islam is not what inspires terror, or terror militants – control, and a desire to rule over are!

While one tires at expressing, and reasserting the same fundamental truths, that true faith can NEVER become a source or catalyst for hate, ignorant bigotry and prejudice, the diseased calls for genocide against all Muslims, and unfettered xenophobia have proven once more how easily public opinion can be swayed.

Before I delve into the politicking of terror – the agenda behind the engineered chaos, allow me to clarify a few points as to Islam’s perceived guilt in the making and rising of terror. If my views are not exactly politically correct, as they betray realities governments would much rather keep under wrap, I do believe that perspective is key to understanding this plague which has befallen us – this so-called Islamic radicalism.

Islam was elected to become THE new enemy to be had decades ago … 1979 to be precise, when Iran rose in resistance to Western-backed, Western-propped imperialism by rooting itself in Islam’s most fundamental tenets: freedom, social-justice and resistance before tyranny. Before Iran’s political emancipation, western imperialists recognize the harbinger of their own demise. Such a threat of course had to be contained. And so Iran became this great evil America has been so intent on vilifying, and discrediting.

The cornerstone of the phenomenon we call Islamophobia was architected as a knee jerk reaction to Iran’s claim to self-governance and colonial emancipation. It is Saudi Arabia and one ambitious US official, Zbigniew Brzezinski, in the 1980s who would later exploit old religious tensions to resurrect an old demon: Takfirism, and wage faceless neo-imperial wars for invisible patrons throughout the Greater Middle East.

Takfirism is a centuries-old belief that suddenly revived among Islamic militants in Egypt after the Israeli victory in 1967. Takfirism today is expressed in Wahhabism, Saudi Arabia state religion.

Takfirism claims that the Muslim community has been weakened by deviation in the practice of Islam. It classifies all non-practising Muslims as kafirs (infidels) and calls upon its adherents to abandon existing Muslim societies, settle in isolated communities and fight all infidels.

Although Takfirism stands in negation of everything Islam represents, teaches, and preaches it has been in governments’ interests over the decades to feed this monster, and offer its adepts some form of validation to better exploit their penchant for bloodshed as a new powerful asymmetrical weapon of war.

Back in 1998, when asked by Le Nouvel Observateur whether he regretted that the Afghani insurgency eventually transformed into the Taliban and then gave birth to al-Qaeda, the mastermind of the US-Mujahedeen collaboration, Zbigniew Brzezinski noted: “Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? What is more important in world history? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some agitated Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?”

The real face of terror is not Islam but Takfirism – the same Takfirism the United States was only to keen to utilize against the Soviet Union to hamper Moscow’s sphere of influence, while at the same time isolating Shia Iran.

But back to Brussels …

While mainstream media have made a spectacle out of Belgium tragedy, fanning hate and bigotry to avoid answering any real questions what about we actually challenge the official narrative, and begin looking at some whys … What about we step back for a second and look at Brussel’s attacks within a more global political perspective.

What will Brussels’ attacks achieve? If Terror has often claimed itself to carry a religious will, its real ambitions are always political, and/or territorial.

Now, let us remember that for Belgium to have been breached the way it was, the country would have had to be infiltrated and propped. How did that happen? Here is one theory the Independent volunteered: “There are many reasons why Belgium has become a hotbed of radical Islamism [Wahhabism]. Some of the answers may lie in the implanting of Saudi Salafist preachers in the country from the 1960s. Keen to secure oil contracts, Belgium’s King Baudouin made an offer to Saudi King Faisal, who had visited Brussels in 1967: Belgium would set up a mosque in the capital, and hire Gulf-trained clerics. At the time, Belgium was encouraging Moroccan and Turkish workers to come into the country as cheap labour. The deal between the two Kings would make the mosque their main place of worship.”

Here is your Trojan Horse … To assuage very capitalist ambitions, Belgium allowed for radical Wahhabis/Salafis elements to infiltrate its society, and thus reprogram its growing Muslim community. The threat was never immigration, but the Wahhabization phenomenon officials tolerated in exchange for lucrative contracts and energy security.

Here is what George Dallemagne, a Belgian member of parliament for the centre-right CDH, an opposition party, had to say on the matter: “We like to think Saudi Arabia is an ally and friend, but the Saudis are always engaged in double-talk: they want an alliance with the West when it comes to fighting Shias in Iran, but nonetheless have a conquering ideology when it comes to their religion in the rest of the world.”

He added: “We can’t have a dialogue with countries that want to destabilise us. The problem is that it is only recently that authorities are finally opening their eyes to this.”

If Belgium is in fact waking up to the real enemy in its midst, it would still have to contend with the breadth and depth of its entanglements with wealthy Saudi Arabia. To begin with Belgium would have to find another partner in its pursuit of oil security. More importantly, this new partner would have to share in the rejection of Wahhabism.

How fast can you say Iran is a natural choice?

By Catherine Shakdam  – This article appeared first in the American Herald Tribune

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here