May this be a very special Juma Friday, with all the possible blessings Allah can bestow upon our honorable Mu’ammar al-Qathafi: health, longevity and the miracle of the Great Jamahiriya.…( a model for our world ).
(original has 16 pages 56- ) I start mid page 57 through page 71….
Religion and ideology By JAN HJÄRPE
Mu ‘ammar al-Kadhdhāfī, Islam and the “Third International Theory”
…I have chosen another example for this study, the Great Jamahiriya and its leader since the al-Fateh revolution of 01 September 1969, Mu’ammar al-Qathafi.
Here we find a reinterpretation of Islam and an explicit attempt to make this form of Islam the basis of a political ideology, the “Third International Theory”. The Great Jamahiriya claims to be the model state, the Utopia, of the practical application of this ideology, in its institutions and in its political actions.
When the Libyan monarchy was overthrown in the bloodless REVOLUTION of Light (al-Fateh) 01 Sep-tember 1969, the consequences were not only the constitutional changes, but a totally new policy, a policy which has been regarded as surprising and abstruse. al-Qathafi characterized the process of changes as a “cultural revolution”, and the world outside noticed at least two features thereof: the application of Quranic precepts in the criminal courts and the eagerness
to establish Arabic as an international language.
The transformation in the domestic policy is also called a “popular revolution” and its goal appears to be an almost corporativistic society’. al-Qathafi’s speech at Zwara on 16 April 1973, is regarded as the beginning of the “popular revolution”. The function of the “direct democrazy” and the political institutions in the Great Jamahiriya, falls outside the scope of this study, and I refer to H. Habib’s book on Libyan politics.*(8).
I intend to discuss here the connection between religion and ideology, the way in which Islam as a religion is applied, reinterpreted and transformed into a political ideology, by supplying the principles of Libyan policy, the “Third International Theory”.
The main sources of this study are information books and booklets issued by the Libyan Ministry of Information and Culture, speeches and writings by Mu’ammar al-Qathafi himself, and some collec-tions of newspaper interviews with him. I give a detailed list of those quoted in the study:
A. Information books and booklets issued by the Libyan Ministry of Information and Culture: The Revolution of 1st September, the fourth Anniversary, Benghazi, 1973. [Abbrev.: Revolution 1973] The Popular Revolution, Fundamentals & Objectives, Tripoli, January 1974. [Revolution 19746] La Revolution en Marche, Tripoli (?), September 1974. [Revolution 1974c] 1st September Revolution Achievements, 5th Anniversary, Tripoli, 1974.
[Revolution 1974a] “The popular revolution” is described by al-Qathafi 1974, 113 ff, cf. the booklet Revolu-tion, 1974b, 1 ff.
8: Cf. Habib 1 ff, cf. Human 31 ff,
and, as for al-Qathafi’s view on other constitutions, al-Qathafi 1976b, 1 ff.
The Human March in the Libyian Arab Republic, Rome, 1976; Masīrat al-insān fi-l-djumhūrīyat al-`arabīyat al-lībīya. [Human] at-Taharruk as-siyāsī al-`arabīyat al-lībīya fī ittidjāh asr al- djamāhīr, Tripoli, 1976 [at-taharruk]
B. Speeches and writings by Mu’ammar al-Qathafi: Allocution du Président Mu’ammar al-Qathafi et les responsables de l’informa- tion et des cadres de l’USA au Caire Portant sur la Religion, le Natio- nalisme et les problèmes s’y référant 5 Moharram 1393 H, 8 Février 1973, Tripoli, s.a. [al-Qathafi s.a. a] Discours du frere (sic!) président du conseil du commamdement (sic!) de la revolution tenu au complexe sportif
« al-Qathafi » à Lahore 25 Février 1974, Tripoli, s.a. [al-Qathafi.a.b] Discours du colonel Mu’ammar al-Qathafi… en Tunisie, Tripoli, s.a. [al-Qathafi s.a.c] Mu’ammar al-Qathafial-Kitāb al-Akhdar, al-awwal, Tripoli (?), 1976.
[al-Qathafi 1976b] Kadīyat ad-din fī-l-`ālam al-mu’āsir min akwāl al-akh Tripoli (?), 1976. [al-Qathafi 1976a] To this we may add the ex tempore speech by al-Qathafi on religion and ideology at the Muslim-Christian Dialogue seminar at Tripoli, the 2nd of February 19769.
[al-Qathafi 1976c] C. Collections of interviews with Mu’ammar al-Qathafi from newspapers and periodicals: Discourses by Mu’ammar al-Qathafi, Chairman of R.C.C., published in the Arab and International Press, S.l., 1975. [al-Qathafi 1975]
9: I had the opportunity to listen to the speech at Tripoli and to observe al-Qathafi as an orator, (cf. Hjärpe 93f.)
P. 60 JAN HJÄRPE:
The Paris Symposium, the intellectual meeting between the East and the West10, Beirut, s.a. [al-Qathafi s.a.d] Thus spoke Colonel Muammar al-Qathafi, Beirut, 1974 [al-Qathafi 1974]
3. Mu’ammar al-Qathafi on history (philosophy of history)
Mu’ammar al-Qathafi was born in 1942, into al-Kadhādhifa, a nomadic tribe claiming descent from the Prophet Muhammad”, and his parents are still bedouin. Thus his ancestry befits an Arab nationalist, in that he is both bedouin and sharīf.
A characteristic feature of his outlook is the appreciation of the moral values of the simple life of the bedouin and a certain contempt for the decadence of the coastal cities (12).
In one of the interviews, he tells us about his childhood’s world of ideas (13), with chivalry (muruwwa) as the leitmotif and ‘Alī ibn Abī JIB as the great hero”. He learned to read at home from the Holy Quran, but his formal school educa-tion began only in 1954:
al-Qathafi attended military school in Libya in 1963-66 and in England in 1966. In 1967 he began to study history at university (15). He was of course already politically active at that time. There is a close connection between al-Qathafi’s “philosophy of history”, his view of religion and his political behaviour.
al-Qathafi declares that the main factors in history, the moving or driving forces, are religion and nationalism, “conflicts between religions, as well as between nationalisms, form his-tory” (16). “The two principal factors in the formation of our history, the history of mankind, are nationalism and religion.'”(17)
10: The symposium was at Plaza Hotel in Paris, the 24th of November 1973.
11.” Cf. al-Qathafi, 1974, 24.
12: We may compare this with the philosophy of Ibn KhalclOn. ”
13: Cf. al-Qathafi, 1974, 26 and 35.
14: Cf. ib. 25.
15: a-Qathafi tells about his studies in the first interview in ib. especially 26ff.
16: Human 47, cf. al-Qathafi 1974, 65f, al-Qathafi, s.a. a, 5 ff, and Revolution, 1974a, 10.
17: al-Qathafi, s.a. d, 16.
P.61 Religion and ideology
All other factors are considered secondary to these two”. The thesis is of course mainly directed against the Marxist interpretation of history. I quote:
“When I read history, I do not find that the movement of history is deter-mined by an economic factor disguised by nationalism or veiled in religion. History very clearly shows that its movement is a national and religious con-flict.” (19)
During the “Paris Symposium” a question was asked about the ‘Atatürk revolution in Turkey’, indicating that it contradicted al-Qathafi’s view on history. As an example of his analysis I quote his answer:
“The Turkish nation’s movement before ‘Atatürk’ was a religious one which influenced world history. ‘Atatürk’ came at a time when the national factor was starting to play its role. So, his movement was a nationalist one, which consequently affected the nation’s or the area’s destiny. The religious idea may appear again strongly in Turkey, and Turkey’s history may enter the religious stage. This stage is now evident. I believe there are signs and im-pulses for returning to Islam and revolutionizing The Turkish condition in accordance with Islam, and consequently for entering the stage of religious interaction. Thus, history is witnessing a movement between religion and nationalism. This is my analysis to the ‘Atatürk movement’. It is a nationalist movement and an assertion to my interpretation of history which is moved by religion and nationalism. Europe went through those stages in a religious period, and it was divided and fought for religion. It also went through a nationalist period, and it was divided and fought for nationalism. Those stages alternate continually. Nationalism and religion will once again play their role in the Soviet Union, and this conflict enters into the determinateness of history. That is why the Soviet Union tries to remove the religious and nationalist factors to avoid this certainty or determinateness.”
(20): al-Qathafi finds many examples in modern history. The division of India into Pakistan and the Indian Republic had religious overtones, the partition of Pakistan and the creation of Bangladesh was caused by antagonism between different nationalities (21),
the civil war in Yemen was caused by religion—one group is called “progressive”, the other “reactionary”, but the true ground of the conflict is the old animosity between Zaydites and Shi’ites (22),
and “is the existence of the Israelis in Palestine due to any economic reason? Is there oil? Is there gold? This is again a religious, national conflict . . . Now, experts and pilots leave the nice life in other countries and come for religious and national purposes and reasons to fight the Arabs” (23).
Since he regards Palestine as belonging to the Arabs, he concludes that “[. . 1 the conflict between Israel and us is natural and is one of the laws of nature” (24).
4. “The Third International Theory” “Since reading history has shown us that nationalism and religion are the factors that shape history, we must take them into account and respect nationalism and hallow religion.”(25)
The practical consequence of al-Qathafi’s interpretation of history is that he makes nationalism and religion the ultimate norms for every political decision. Wars and suffering will disappear if we can solve the problem of conflict between religions and nationalisms (26). In Libya’s foreign policy this involves support for several nationalist movements (e.g. the I.R.A.) (27) and for organisations aiming at the practical application of religion, while in her domestic policy it means the application of “Arabism” and the Islamic Sharī’a. The behaviour which results has its intellectual counterpart in a political programme or ideology, called the “Third International Theory” (28). It is named the “Third” Theory as it is supposed to supersede both the liberalism—capitalism of the West and the Marxist communism of the East. The Libyan nation “found the Western system based on exploitation, by individuals of the community where the rule says ‘Survival of the strongest’, which has reduced society to a collection of broken families, torn apart by crime, vice and degeneration of all values. Our nation also studied the eastern system based on exploitation of individuals by a party in the name of the dictatorship of class, where human beings have no freedom and are subject to absolute materialist ideas which contradict with human values” (29).
21: Cf. al-Qathafi, s a a, 8, al-Qathafi, s.a.d, 79f.
22: Cf. al-Qathafi, s.a. a, 9.
23: al-Qathafi, s.a.d, 80, cf. Revolution, 1974a, 18.
24: al-Qathafi, 1975, 46.
25: al-Qathafi, s a d, 16.
26: Cf. Human 48.
27: Cf. Revolution, 1974a, 20, al-Qathafi, s.a.c, 31, and al-Qathafi 1974, 128f, 157.
28: Cf. al-Qathafi 1976b, 1 ff. A short description of the “Theory” is given in the booklet Revolution, 1974c, 21ff, and in Revolution, 1973, 231 and 239ff, and in Revolution, 1974a, 9ff, al-Qathafi,1975, 133ff.
29: Revolution, 1974a, 9, cf. a1-Qathafi, s a d, 84f.
Religion and ideology
I do not intend to expound the details of the “Third Theory”, but we shall consider the way in which the “Theory” is connected with Islam. One declares explicitly that the “Third Theory” is based on religion and na-tionalism (30). It is obvious, however, that the concept of religion and what it implies is Islamic in essence. What is the role of religion (Islam) in the “Third International Theory”? The following theological concept plays a considerable role in the formulations of the booklets on the “Third Theory”, and they are without doubt fundamental for Mu’ammar al-Qathafi himself:
1. The oneness of ALLAH who governs the Universe”.
2. “The Heavenly Books” (Holy Quran, Bible [=Indjīl, The Gospel], Torah), as the sources for “unequivocal answers”. The Holy Quran is the absolute norm, the infallible authority, while human philosophies are subject to error.
3. The creation of Man and Universe by Allah, and Man as God’s khalīfa on earth. (32) (cf. Sura 2: 30/28).
4. The resurrection and the Day of Judgement and immortality. The faith in these constitutes religion as the source of moral obligation. (33).
5. The eternity of struggle between right and wrong and the inevitability of Allah’s predestination”.
30: Cf. a1-Qathafi, 1974, 124, cf. 49.
31: Cf. Revolution, 1974a, 10, Human 42.
32: Cf. al-Qathafi 1976a, 9f.
33: Cf: ib. 48, cf. a1-Qathafi, 1975, 122f.
34: Cf. Revolution 1974a, 10, Human 42.
P.64 JAN HJÄRPE
Point 4 is the most important.
“The Third International Theory emphasizes moral obligation as an im-portant element in a civilised community, in personal dealings and inter-national relations. Such a moral obligation, in view of the Third Inter-national Theory, cannot be achieved without faith. Religion creates a moral deterrent in individuals and communities. Such a moral obligation `forces good work and prevents evil’ .”(35) (cf. Sura 3: 104/100, 110/106).
It is often emphasized that Man needs religion (36). As for the practical application it is explicitly stated that the social rela-tions between individuals and between individual, family and state shall be in accordance with the Islamic Sharī’a (37). To “respect nationalism and hallow religion”, means, in the case of Libya, to stress the Arabism and to apply Islamic morals. This process is called a “cultural revolution” and includes an ardent endeavour to eradi-cate “corrupted and foreign ideas and concepts” and prevent the infiltra-tion of such ideas from both East and West (38).
We read in one of the book-lets:
“Books which contained such corrupt thoughts had to be burned because their contents opposed our revolutionary trend, and contradicted our religion and noble Arab heritage.” (39)
And in another:
“The Arab Libyan has realized that it is necessary to liquidate colonialism and its aftermath in order to reconstruct his country.”
Liquors were banned. Bars and night clubs were closed. Measures were taken to cleanse the Arab Islamic environment of imported malpractices and debauchery. All laws have been reviewed and rewritten in accordance with the Islamic Law (Sharī’a). This does not mean that the Arab Libyan rejects modern trend of thought. He is just sifting and filtering them to choose what suits his heritage and needs .(40)
35: Revolution 1974a, 11, cf. Séminaire § 3.
36: Cf. al-Kadhdhāfī, s.a. a, 5.
37: Cf. Human 49, cf. Revolution, 1974a, 11.
38: Cf. Revolution, 1974b, 20, Revolution, 1974a, 12, Human 31.
39: Revolution, 1974b, 23.
40: Human 87, cf. Revolution, 1974a, 13.
Religion and ideology
The Arabism of Mu’ammar al-Qathafi is also reflected in his own and the other leaders’ social behaviour (41).
We can also mention one example of his extreme nationalism: Libya does not celebrate the First of May as a Workers’ day, as al-Qathafi wants a special Arab national workers’ day and not an international one (42).
The “sectarianism” of Islam is a serious problem, as we know, in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, if not in Libya, and al-Qathafi believes that this “sec-tarianism” will cease to exist if the principle of nationalism is applied (43). The pride in Arab nationality includes pride in the history and cultures of all the Semitic (aka. ‘ARAB’) peoples of antiquity;
“Semitic” is often replaced by “Arab” so that the “Arabs” include the Accadians, the Phoenicians and Carthaginians etc.(44). “Arabism”, according to al-Qathafi always implies work for Arab unity (shu`b arabī wāhid, “one Arab people”), and this is one of the most important points in his policy”, the unity of all Arabs, Muslims and Christians; the tendency to local nationalism, Egyptian, Iraqi or Palestinian, is a violation of this principle. I shall illustrate with a quotation from an interview.
The journalist provokingly asks whether Mu’ammar al-Qathafi would like those Arab presidents who are afraid of Arab unity to be over-thrown, and he answers:
“If this ensures the achievement of unity, why not?! The Arab Nation should unite whatever the sacrifices may be. Unity is the only solution. It is the only way out of this desperate situation.”(46)
The centre of the Arab Nation must be Egypt, Cairo being the capital of both Arabism and Islam (47), and al-Qathafi’s ideal of Arab unity and its confrontation with the policy of Egypt is one of the main factors in the complicated political pattern in the Arab world today. We may also notice that the dependence of the Libyan 01 September revolution on the “mother” revolution of July 23rd (1952) in Egypt and on the “Leader-Teacher” Nasser is often underlined in the speeches of al-Qathafi (48).
41: Cf. al-Qathafi, 1974, 47f.
42: Cf. ib. 103f.
43: Cf. ib. 56ff, cf. 49.
44: Cf. the lecture of prof. Ismail al-Faruqi at the Dialogue seminar, Hjärpe 94f.
45: Cf. at-taharruk, 8f.
46: al-Qathafi 1974, 90.
47: Cf. al-Qathafi. a. a, 4 ff.
48: Cf. Human 55ff, Revolution, 1974a, 19, Revolution, 1973, 203f, al-Qathafi, 1974, 9, al-Qathafi, 1975, 129. 5-772570 H. Biezais
The former Libyian ‘president’ (REMEMBER THIS IS THE TIME OF PRESIDENT JALOUD) emphasizes that political parties and factions have seriously harmed the Muslims, and therefore political parties (“fac-tionalism”), are forbidden in Libya, regarded as treason and punishable with death (49).
The “Third Universal Theory” seeks to “hallow religion”, and this is one reason why al-Qathafi opposes communism, and even speaks of a “Holy war” (djihād) against it (50).
We read in one of the pamphlets:
“For the Moslem, religion is everything; and he cannot be cordial to a communist at the expense of religion. How can a man feel confidence about a communist’s moral standards when he does not believe in God?” ( 51)
In an interview in the Yugoslavian paper Zagreb (29th April 1974), Mu’ammar al-Qathafi says of the Muslims in Yugoslavia:
“So long as Islam is respected and sanctified and left to grow, so long in return the friendship and affection between Yugoslavia and ourselves will continue to develop progressively.” (52)
The quotation also illustrates the pan-Islamistic principle in the application of the “Third Universal Theory”. Economic and political help is given to Muslims and to Islamic institutions all over the world”, and pan-Islamism is some-times designated as a “Holy war” (54). The solidarity of all Muslims is especially accentuated outside the Arab world, e.g. in al-Qathafi’s speech in Lahore (25th Febr. 1974) (55).
5. Islam reinterpreted and applied:
“We must differentiate between Islam and the ways it is practiced by Muslims.” (66)
In this way Mu’ammar al-Qathafi expresses a thesis common to all the reform movements, namely the distinction between “true” Islam and WAHHABI-Islam, as an empirical historical and sociological phenomenon. The goal of WAHHABISM is to substitute (at true Islam’s expense) their falsified version (for the which has hitherto dominated) (57).
49: Cf. al-Qathafi1974, 92f, cf. Human 31, and al-Qathafi 1976b, 12ff.
50: Cf. Revolution, 1973, 245, cf. 238f, and al-Kadhdhāfī, s.a.c, 38.
51: Revolution, 1973, 245.
52: al-Qathafi, 1975, 149.
53: Cf. at-taharruk, 16 ff, Revolution, 1974 a, 23 f, Human 63 ff.
54: Cf. Revolution, 1974a, 23.
55: Cf. al-Qathafi, s.a. b, e.g. 5 f, 9.
56: al-Qathafi, s.a.d, 68.
57: Cf. al-Qathafi, s.a. c, 20.
Religion and ideology
Mu’ammar al-Qathafi is especially anxious to emphasize that true Islam is in favour of modern science and technical and social progress (58).
“If Islam . .. [had been correctly] understood from the beginning, it would have been a real scientific, technological revolution. Unfortunately, Islam was understood in a very simple ordinary manner, so simple that when electricity was discovered it was thought to be anti-religion. When the moon was explored, there was wide-spread disapproval. This is a misunderstanding of Islam. Islam says that all things are created in pairs . . . (cf. Sura 36: 36). This is in line with the negative and positive and the northern and southern we know. Electricity, for example, consists of negative and positive poles.” (59)
Verses from the Holy Quran are interpreted as supporting modern social principles:
the verse “O mankind, we created you from a single pair of male and female” (Sura 49: 13 a) referring to equality of men and women, and “Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah, is he who is the most righteous of you” (Sura 49: 13 b) to racial and national equality—and so on (60).
As for the application of Islam and Islamic principles today, al-Qathafi takes an important step:
The binding norm is of course the ‘Holy Quran”, but this must be solely the Holy Quran without tafsīr, without the traditional exegesis (i.e. THE HADATH). He speaks explicitly of a “Sola scriptura” principle, because of the impossibility of distinguishing between true and falsified a-hādīth (traditions) (62). This principle will eliminate the problem of “sectarianism” in Islam according to Mu’ammar al-Qathafi; and “practical solutions will then be found for the performance of religious duties”, fasting, praying etc., in the conditions of the modern world.
This belief presumes that the Holy Quran is not ambiguous. An important point in al-Qathafi’s concept of religion is his distinction
between the “divine” Islam and the “historical” WAHHABI-Islam (65)—not to be confused with the distinction “true” and empirical Islam. The “divine” Islam, witnessed by the Holy Quran, is the monotheism of Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, and all the Prophets, while the “historical” Islam embodies only the reli-gion and revelations of Muhammad (much of which has been distorted by the Hadith, and other works composed by the power-minded Wahhabi-Ulami).
58: Cf. E.g. al-Qathafi, s.a.d, 68f.
59: al-Qathafi 1975, 122 f.
60: Cf. al-Qathafi, s.a.d, 54ff.
61: Cf. e.g. Revolution, 1974a, 11.
62: Cf. al-Qathafi, 1976c.
63: Cf. al-Qathafi, 1974, 50f.
64: Cf. al-Qathafi, 1975, 20 f.
The basis of the “Third Universal Theory” is, according to al-Qathafi, to be found in the “divine” Islam, so that this Theory should also be adopted by Christians and Jews. But the Muslim believes in all the Prophets, and when the Christian (and the Jew) denies the prophethood of Muhammad there is a defect in his faith (66). He is convinced that Jews and Christians manipulated the Scriptures, and al-Qathafi compares (and not without reason) the Gospels with the Islamic Hadīth literature (67). The conversion of atheists to “divine” Islam, to the worship of God alone, is regarded as a common interest for both Christians and Muslims (68). —Say: 0 People of the Book! Come to common terms as between us and you: That we worship none but Allah; that we associate no Partners with Him; that we erect not, from among ourselves lords and patrons other than Allah’, says the Quran (Sura 3:64/57).
By this, we understand, the worship of big powers, the worship of Lenin, and even the ‘worship’ of Muhammad whom we consider only a Prophet […]”(69)
65: Cf. al-Qathafi s.a.a, 10f and 14ff, al-Qathafi, 1974, 48f, and Revolution, 1973, 240 f.
66: Cf. al-Qathafi, s.a. a, 12f, cf. al-Kadhdhāfī, 1974, 49.
67: Cf. al-Qathafi, 1976c, cf. al-Qathafi, s.a.a, 11.
68: Cf. al-Qathafi, s.a.a, 22.
69: al-Qathafi, s.a.d, 86, cf. al-Qathafi, s.a.a, 21.
Religion and ideology
One saying of al-Qathafi is very revealing:
“Islam […] is a secular reli-gion”. In this sentence we find the definition of the transformation of religion into a political ideology: “[…] Islam itself is a secular religion: the Holy Quran deals with the economic, social and political order, with war, peace, peacemaking, treatment of prisoners, personal conditions and laws, neighbourhood and interrelations of societies. In addition and above all, it regulates man’s relationship with God. Originally, Islam is a secular religion, and therefore there is no secularism in Islam. If some Arab countries have spoken of secularism and
declared their belief in it, this is attributable to a misunderstanding of Islam in the period of Islam’s decline [. . .] [Islam] regulates economic life for both the individual and society [. . .] It regulates defense of the individual and the state [. . .] It regulates relations between nations. Islam has not disregarded any economic, political, military or social aspect: it has regulated them all [.. .](70) [. . .] Our state revives Islam [. ..] There is absolutely no contradiction between socialism and Islam. Actually, the more we revive Islam the more we will be emphasizing the basics of social justice which itself is socialism.” (71)
We may emphasize that by “socialism” al-Qathafi does not mean socialism in the western sense (72), since for instance private ownership (if non-exploiting) is safeguarded, and inheritance regulated according to the Islamic Sharī`a (73).
The work for the practical application—or institutionalization—of Islam in Libya is governed by the Higher Council for National Guidance, the first meeting of which took place on November 2lst 1972 (74). The basis of National Guidance is explicitly said to be Islam, but, as we can see from the following quotation, a purifieded and reinterpreted Islam, in the tradition of the ancient prophets and original intent of the scripture:
“We need to reoffer Islam as a complete philosophy and general framework governing the relationship of the citizen with God and society and as a general picture of life as it should be. This way the citizen is armed by a genuine understanding of Islam in its religious moral and spiritual values against falsehoods and materialism. There are many ways to achieve this including providing the citizen with spiritual and cultural needs as exemplified in the Holy Qur’an,
Sunna traditions and Moslem legacy is respected, in addition to the revival of Moslem spiritual and moral principles, like the desire for jihad, the rejec-tion of negative attitudes and dependence, against seeking the means of personal-power, working instead for the fostering of the family and the promulgation of Islam throughout the world and the reconsideration of legislation in force in the light of Moslem Sharī’a.” (75)
70: al-Kadhdhāfī, s.a.d, 66, cf. Revolution, 1974b, 29f.
71: al-Kadhdhāfī, s.a.d, 67, cf. al-Kadhdhāfī, 1974, 54.
72: Cf. Human 42, al-Kadhdhāfī, s.a.d, 21.
73: Cf. Human 25. 74 Cf. Revolution, 1973, 161ff. 75 Ib. 163 f.
Islam is hallowed, acts against the precepts of religion are punished (76), the Sharī a is applied (77), national liberation movements are regarded as djihād and supported”, at international conferences.
Libya has demanded the suppression of drugs and strong drinks (78) etc. The aim of the GREAT JAMAHIRIYA, and its leader Mu’ammar al-Qathafi is to create in Libya a “revolutionary ex-ample”, a model for an Arab Islamic state” and for the entire world, the practical application of Islam in political and social life, an Islam regarded as a “secular religion”.
Unprinted source al-Qathafi, M., 1976c., An ex tempore speech by Mu’ammar al-Qathafion religion and ideology at the Muslim–Christian Dialogue seminar at Tripoli, 2 February 1976.
(Notes in the possession of the author.)
Printed sources and literature Ali, A., 1975, Karāmat ‘Ali EI 4. Delanoue, G. 1971,
al-Ikhwān al-Muslimūn. EI 3. EI Encyclopaedia of Islam.
Leiden & London.
Gilsenan, M., 1973, Saint and Sufi in Modern Egypt. Oxford.
Goldziher, I. –Jomier, J., 1965, Djamāl al-dīn al-Afghānī. EI 2. Habib, H., 1975, Politics and Government of Revolutionary Libya.
Montreal. Hjärpe, J., 1976, Det islamisk–kristna dialogseminariet i Tripoli, Libyen. Svensk missions- tidskrift 2.
Human, 1976, The Human March in the Libyan Arab Republic [=Masīrat al-insān fī al-djum- hūriyyat al-`arabiyyat al-lībiyya].
Rome. al-Kadhdhāfī, M., S.a. a, Allocution du Président Muammer al-Qathafi et les responsables de t information et des cadres de l’ USA au Caire .. Portant sur la Religion, le Natio- nalisme et les problèmes s’y référant 5 Moharram 1393 H, 08 Février 1973. Tripoli.
— S.a. b, Discours du frer (sic!) président du conseil du commamdement (sic!) de la revolu-tion tenu au complexe sprotif « Gueddafi » d Lahore 25 Février 1974. Tripoli.
— S.a. c, Discours du colonel Moamar Gadhafi . en Tunisie. Tripoli.
— S.a. d, The Paris Symposium, the intellectual meeting between the East and the West. Beirut.
— 1974, Thus spoke Colonel Moammar Kazzafi. Beirut.
— 1975, Discourses by Mu’ammar el-Qathafi, Chairman of R.C.C. published in the Arab and International Press. S.l.
— 1976a, Kadīyat ad-din fi-l-‘ālam al-mu’āsir min akwāl al-akh al-‘akīd. Tripoli (?).
— 1976b, al-Kitāb al-Akhdar, al fast al-awwal. Tripoli (?). 76 Cf. Revolution, 1974b, 9. 77 Cf. Revolution, 1974a, 156. 78 Cf. al-Kadhdhāfī, 1974, 36, Revolution, 1974a, 20. 79 Cf. Revolution, 1974a, 21. 80 Cf. ib. IV, al-Kadhdhāfī, 1975, 15f and 136, Revolution, 1974 b, 31, and Human 12f.
Religion and ideology 71 Laoust, H., 1971a, Ibn `Abd al-Wahhāb. El 3.
— 1971 b, Ibn Taymiyya. El 3. Revolution, 1973, The Revolution of 1st September, the Fourth Anniversary. Benghazi.
— 1974a, 1st September Revolution Achievements, 5th Anniversary. Tripoli.
— 1974b, The Popular Revolution, Fundamentals & Objectives. Tripoli.
— 1974c, La Revolution en Marche. Tripoli (?). Séminaire, 1976, Séminaire du dialogue Islamo-Chrétien, Tripoli 1-6 Safar 1396/1-6 Février 1976. Recommandations et résolutions. Tripoli. at-taharruk, 1976, at-taharruk as-siyāsī lī-l-djumhuriyyat al-‘arabiyyat al-lībiyya fi ittidjāh ‘aṣr al-djamāhīr. Tripoli. Watt, W., 1956, Muhammad at Medina. Oxford.
— 1961, Islam and the Integration of Society. London.
خطابات الطاغي تسبق الزمن
1 476 vues
عندما تحدث القذافي عام 2007 عما سيحصل في ليبيا في عام 2011
لمادة خطابات الطاغي تسبق الزمن
هل كان هذه الكافر يري بعين الله
The ‘children of Sheikh Abdul Salam Asmar’ a partagé la vidéo de ‘eye Rafla in every place and time’.
Allah bless Aataga … Akhkhkhkhkh Aazemn?
‘Rafla eye in every place and time’:
When al-Qathafi spoke in 2007 of what will happen in Libya in 2011
Question … ??
Article overwhelming letters precede time
Was this being an infidel, to see into Allah ?
‘Rafla eye in every place and time’:
Do you know of you ….?
Abaya and how al-Qathafi was Mguet-atkm !
“17 FEBRUARY” have the curse of Allah and His Messenger (PBUH),
as you know, and you Matpettm ..
SARKOZY, BHL and EU bastards subservient to SATAN
والله عزيز ذو انتقام
‘The children of Sheikh Abdul Salam Asmar’ a partagé la vidéo de ‘poet Ibn Badr – Official’.
Suffice Allah and yes, the agent (SATAN)..
انتقام الله……..(والله عزيز ذو انتقام)
‘Zintan Neto ground’, informs us:
Now strong clashes between the Libyan Army (with her tribal supporting forces) against the ‘Roma Libya’ areas
and told you a little lipo Magistrate:
meaning Tripoli ‘Friday Aahfrh blood’ !
GREEN NAFUSA WESTERN MOUNTAINS:
Ahto Aatric gives loans to channel Zintan, and urgently soon, we will show the pleasures of Council Beida al-Lahad
Channel frequency Aadinm
حطو ياتريس على قناة الزنتان وقرو العاجل متع المجلس
PICTURE: ZINTAN TV LOGO
‘Zintan Neto ground’, reports:
Members of ‘the battalion at the center of Zintan Martyrs Fnaitees’ to support the Libyan Army.
Lord dampers requires him to eat and decide their feet, Lord.
‘Zintan Neto ground’, reports & comments:
And our response now…
A meeting between the leaders of the Western region of the Libyan Army Forces and the forces supporting the camp of the Fourth Brigade yesterday, after what has been a bombardment by the pilots of ‘Roma Libya’ and clashes today,
Your prayers are asked for our Libyan Army.
‘Zintan Neto ground’:
It declared the rebels of ‘Zintan Military Council’ in a statement that the expensive of the Council has the power to expel today Thursday, 28/05/2015 vandals who approached the security field to base Wattayah.
Many groups, were destroyed and a number of armed tank cars.
The council said that while it remind residents of the nearby areas to assume their responsibilities to prevent terrorists from using their land as a pass through, we tell them that our patience has begun to be at an excess, which forces us to take other measures. We are not responsible for the negative consequences.
Provide the joint forces of the Army and the forces supporting, in the axes of Wattaya, and we inflicted those militias affiliated to ‘Dawn Libya’ amongst the Amazigh, with heavy losses.
‘Zintan Neto ground’, reporting:
Allah is great and thankfully ..
Significant progress Libyan Army support and strength to him in all axes and special Wattaya axis and the morale of the Libyan army Champions support and force him high and is okay in all axes.
Allah is great and thankfully ..
call for their support of the ‘Libyan Army’ and supporting forces in the Western Region.
‘Rouge Valley directly’, warns us:
Mohammed of the Chadian population surnamed ..’Rndh slave’ ..
He is one of the wounded in al-Sabri.
Information that there is Wahhabi terrorist-infiltration onto the streets of Benghazi, in order to carry out terrorist operations,
Please take all cautionary means.
Random shells fall on the land area wires caused the deaths of a mother and son!
Benina between the steadfastness and the fall of al-Karzabih (GHARDABIYA) Airport (in SIRTE) to ‘DAASH’ ...
Probe hopes Jahlha to know why we say that (gently/Cyrenaica troops are a dust protector).
Pictures of Benina:
SYRIA, IRAQ & BEYOND:
Obama’s Gun-Running Operation: Weapons and Support for “Islamic Terrorists” in Syria and Iraq. “Create Constructive Chaos” and “Redraw the Map of the Middle East”
Global Research, May 28, 2015
Url of this article:
Newly disclosed Pentagon documents prove what we’ve known for a while now: the Obama administration knew as early as 2012 that weapons were being sent from Benghazi, Libya, to rebels in Syria.
The U.S. government also knew at the time that:
“the Wahhabi-terrorists, the ‘Muslim’ Brotherhood, and [Al Qaeda in Iraq were] the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria and Libya.”
But did they just “know” or was it part of the plan?
These official documents of the Obama administration add to the large amount of evidence proving that the actual chaos and havoc wreaked by extremist groups in the Middle East was deliberately created by the U.S. and its allies and is not the result of a “failed foreign policy”.
Judicial Watch recently revealed:
The DoD documents also contain the first official documentation that the Obama administration knew that weapons were being shipped from the Port of Benghazi to rebel troops in Syria. An October 2012 report confirms:
Weapons from the former Libya military stockpiles were shipped from the port of Benghazi, Libya to the Port of Banias and the Port of Borj Islam, Syria. The weapons shipped during late-August 2012 were Sniper rifles, RPG’s, and 125 mm and 155mm howitzers missiles.
During the immediate aftermath of, and following the uncertainty caused by the CIA, in the destruction of the Great Jamahiriya in October 2011 and up until early September of 2012, weapons from the former Libya military stockpiles located in Benghazi, Libya were shipped from the port of Benghazi, Libya to the ports of Banias and the Port of Borj Islam, Syria. The Syrian ports were chosen due to the small amount of cargo traffic transiting these two ports. The ships used to transport the weapons were medium-sized and able to hold 10 or less shipping containers of cargo.
The heavily redacted document does not disclose who was shipping the weapons. (Benghazi Scandal: Obama Administration Knew Weapons Were Being Sent to Al-Qaeda in Syria, New Documents Show, Judicial Watch18 May 2015)
Although the documents do not reveal who was responsible for sending weapons to Syria, it is quite obvious from the language used in the documents that it was a US initiative and the CIA presence in Benghazi at the time suggests that US intelligence was behind this gun-running operation.
PICTURE above shows LIBYA’s Tripoli ‘mayor’ el-MAHDI HARATINE training insurrectionists, in Syria, as also did Abdul Hakim Belhadj, the TRIPOLI ‘governor’.
Libyan Terrorists in Syria
On 11 September 2012, the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was attacked. Four people were killed, including the (so-called) U.S. ‘Ambassador’-spy Chris Stevens (actually an American espionage spy) and two CIA officers.
In August 2013, Business Insider reported :
The Agency, for its part, doesn’t want anyone knowing what it was doing in the Libyan port city.
On Thursday Drew Griffin and Kathleen Johnston of CNN reported that the CIA “is going to great lengths to make sure whatever it was doing, remains a secret.”
Sources told CNN that 35 Americans were in Benghazi that night — 21 of whom were working out of the annex — and that several were wounded, some seriously.
One source said: “You have no idea the amount of pressure being brought to bear on anyone with knowledge of this operation.”
Among the questions are whether CIA missteps contributed to the security failure in Benghazi and, more importantly, whether the Agency’s Benghazi operation had anything to do with reported heavy weapons shipments from the local port to Syrian rebels.
In short, the CIA operation is the most intriguing thing about Benghazi. (Michael B. Kelley and Geoffrey Ingersoll,Intrigue Surrounding The Secret CIA Operation In Benghazi Is Not Going Away, Business Insider, August 3, 2013)
Last January, the Citizens Commission on Benghazi concluded that the “Obama White House and the State Department under the management of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “changed sides” (HAH! HAH…really?) in the war on terror’ in 2011 by implementing a policy of facilitating the delivery of weapons to the al-Qaida-dominated rebel militias in Libya attempting to kill Muammar Qathafi and destroy the GREAT JAMAHIRIYA”, WND reported.
WND added that
“several members of the commission have disclosed their finding that the mission of Christopher Stevens, prior to the fall of the GREAT JAMAHIRIYA, and during Stevens’ time as ‘U.S. ambassador’, was the management of a secret gun-running program operated out of the Benghazi compound, and an extensive CIA-spy network.” (Jerome R. Corsi,Libya: U.S. Generals Conclude Obama Backed Al-Qaida and Operated a Secret Gun-Running Program in Benghazi, WND, 20 January 2015)
We’ve also known for several years that Western special operations forces were on the ground training rebels to fight against Assad.
In January 2012, Michel Chossudovsky reported:
Several articles in the British media confirm that British Special Forces are training Syrian rebels.
The underlying pattern is similar to that of Libya where British SAS were on the ground prior to the launching of NATO’s military intervention.
A ‘Responsibility’ to ‘Protect’ (R2P) NATO intervention (HAH,HAH) ‘modelled on Libya’ is contemplated… The reports confirm that British military and intelligence operatives are already on the ground inside Syria. (Michel Chossudovsky,
SYRIA: British Special Forces, CIA and MI6 Supporting Armed Insurgency. NATO Intervention Contemplated,
Global Research, 07 January 2012)
Even CNN reported back in 2012 that rebels were being trained by defense contractors to handle chemical weapons:
The US and some of its European allies “are using defense contractors to train Syrian rebels on how to secure chemical weapons stockpiles in Syria,” according to “a senior US official and several senior diplomats,” CNNreports.
The US-funded training is going on inside Syria, as well as in neighboring Turkey and Jordan and “involves how to monitor and secure stockpiles and handle weapons sites and materials,” according to CNN. US Defense Contractors Training Syrian Rebels to Handle Chemical Weapons
Bashar Al-Assad Is The Target
The deadly chemical weapons were later used against Syrian soldiers and civilians. The U.S. government and the Western mainstream media tried to blame President Assad, but a UN investigation later concluded that it was the rebels who had used the chemical weapons.
Another official document from 2012 revealed by Judicial Watch indicates that the “growing sectarian direction of the war was predicted to have dire consequences for Iraq, which included the “grave danger” of the rise of ISIS:
This creates the ideal atmosphere for AQI [al Qaeda Iraq] to return to its old pockets in Mosul and Ramadi, and will provide a renewed momentum under the presumption of unifying the jihad among Sunni Iraq and Syria, and the rest of the Sunnis in the Arab world against what it considers one enemy, the dissenters. ISI could also declare an Islamic state through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria, which will create grave danger in regards to unifying Iraq and the protection of its territory. (Judicial Watch, op., cit.)
The U.S. did exactly what was needed to create “the ideal atmosphere” for Mosul and Ramadi to fall and for ISIS to declare an “Islamic state”.
With the fall of Mosul last June, the recent fall of Ramadi in Iraq and numerous reports about the U.S. delivering weapons and ammunition to ISIS, the recently disclosed official documents show once more that the U.S. gun-running operation created “the ideal atmosphere” for Al Qaeda Iraq and “the rise of ISIS” in the region. The war against the so-called Islamic State can thus only be a flatout lie.
The following articles pertain to the U.S. delivery of weapons to ISIS while it was supposedly fighting it:
Delivery of US Weapons and Ammunition to ISIS: Iraqi Commander Wiretaps ISIS Communications with US Military
Terrorists Supported by America: U.S. Helicopter Delivering Weapons to the Islamic State (ISIS), Shot Down by Iraqi “Popular Forces”
As a solution to the problem they created, with full knowledge of the consequences, the U.S. and its allies offered a military intervention with the stated intent of fighting the enemy they had created while covertly supporting it in order to sustain the war, for the greatest benefit of defense contractors and Israel, which has the a lot to gain in the dismantlement of neighboring states.
The purpose of this “constructive chaos” is nothing less than to redraw the map of the region and create a “New Middle East.”
As Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya explained back in 2006:
The term “New Middle East” was introduced to the world in June 2006 in Tel Aviv by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (who was credited by the Western media for coining the term) in replacement of the older and more imposing term, the “Greater Middle East.”
This shift in foreign policy phraseology coincided with the inauguration of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) Oil Terminal in the Eastern Mediterranean. The term and conceptualization of the “New Middle East,” was subsequently heralded by the U.S. Secretary of State and the Israeli Prime Minister at the height of the Anglo-American sponsored Israeli siege of Lebanon. Prime Minister Olmert and Secretary Rice had informed the international media that a project for a “New Middle East” was being launched from Lebanon.
This announcement was a confirmation of an Anglo-American-Israeli “military roadmap” in the Middle East. This project, which has been in the planning stages for several years, consists in creating an arc of instability, chaos, and violence extending from Lebanon, Palestine, and Syria to Iraq, the Persian Gulf, Iran, and the borders of NATO-garrisoned Afghanistan.
The “New Middle East” project was introduced publicly by Washington and Tel Aviv with the expectation that Lebanon would be the pressure point for realigning the whole Middle East and thereby unleashing the forces of “constructive chaos.” This “constructive chaos” –which generates conditions of violence and warfare throughout the region– would in turn be used so that the United States, Britain, and Israel could redraw the map of the Middle East in accordance with their geo-strategic needs and objectives. (Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, Plans for Redrawing the Middle East: The Project for a “New Middle East”, Global Research, November 2006)
Note: The above map was prepared by Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters. It was published in the Armed Forces Journal in June 2006, Peters is a retired colonel of the U.S. National War Academy. (Map Copyright Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters 2006). Although the map does not officially reflect Pentagon doctrine, it has been used in a training program at NATO’s Defense College for senior military officers. This map, as well as other similar maps, has most probably been used at the National War Academy as well as in military planning circles (Mahdi D. Nazemroaya).
All the evidence is there to prove ISIS and their ilks are instruments of U.S.-NATO-Israel foreign policy.
How long can the Western mainstream media ignore this overwhelming evidence that the U.S. and its allies are supporting the entities they claim to be be fighting in the Middle East without totally losing the very little credibility it has left?
Looking at the situation, Joachim Hagopian argues that the war on ISIS is just for show since its “enemy” is only gaining territory:
The US led coalition air strikes in Syria and Iraq have failed to stop the Islamic State’s expansion. Four months ago it was noted that since the US air campaign began last August, the Islamic State has doubled its space in Syria, controlling more than one third of the country’s territory. In the same way that the US predator drone warfare policy has only caused more hatred against America in the nations it’s been deployed against in Pakistan, Yemen, Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia, the same reverse effect is occurring in Syria where residents are increasingly sympathetic to Islamic State. Additionally, Syrian opposition groups bitterly complain that the US led coalition forces fail to coordinate dropping bombs with the rebels, thus not permitting them any tactical advantage in driving IS back. It’s as if the air strikes are more for show than to actually neutralize the enemy. (Joachim Hagopian,The US-Islamic State Dance: One Step Forward and Two Steps Back – By Design, Global Research, 19 May 2015)
This war on ISIS is just another disastrous endeavor for populations in the Middle East, another military intervention under a false pretext, another lie to divide and conquer. And once more, the Western mainstream media has failed to report the truth.
Below is a selection of articles on this topic.
U.S. General: “We Helped Build ISIS” – Islamic State Obtained Weapons from U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, Paul Joseph Watson, 03 September 2014
U.S. Efforts to Arm Jihadis in Syria: The Scandal Behind the Benghazi Undercover CIA Facility, Washington’s Blog, 15 , 2014
CIA Gun-running, Qatar-Libya-Syria, Phil Greaves, 09 August 2013
Benghazi, US-NATO Sponsored Base of Operations for Al Qaeda, Tony Cartalucci, 21October 2012
Resurgence of Al Qaeda in Iraq, Fuelled by Saudi Arabia, Zayd Alisa, 03 March 2014
More Evidence of Israel’s Dirty Role in the Syrian Proxy War, Steven MacMillan, 18 May 2015
Copyright © 2015 Global Research
Ayatollah Khamenei in a meeting with (IRAN) ‘Majlis’ Speaker and MPs:
– If domestic potential is being used, it becomes easy to solve nuclear issue; if we increase the domestic power other issues will be solved too.
– Our stance on nuclear issue is what we stated publicly. The exact same points are being said to officials; these are our basic stance.
– I know that we are facing a lack of resources and sanctions had an impact on this; the solution is to economize and observe financial discipline.