WORKING FOR KHILAFAH IS FARD

The revival of an obligation

The obligation we are about to discuss is something the Muslims took for granted, for well over a thousand years, much like the obligation of Salah (prayer) and fasting today which, al-hamdu lillah, are not open to discussion and debate. However the Prophet (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) did warn us there would come a time when the Deen will become strange and unrecognizable to the people and those carrying its Call will be seen as strange due to the Message that they carry.

He (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:

”Islam began strange and it shall return strange. So glad tiding to the Strangers.” [Reported by Muslim]

This hadith holds a meaning that is especially reflective of our times, for in the last hundred years this noble Ummah has witnessed the destruction of her State and with that, due to the colonization of her lands by the colonialists, the crushing tidal wave of the western culture. The western culture completely engulfed her to the point of suffocation. It turned black into white and white into black. Never did the Ummah encounter such cultural strangulation, which left her bewildered and confused about the most basic and rudimentary tenets of her Deen.

To cause maximum damage the colonialists chose their targets carefully when they unleashed their degenerate culture upon us:

• they attacked the notion of one Ummah by disseminating the idea of nationalism and nationhood
• the Sharee’ah was depicted as barbaric, harking back to a medieval age but not suited to an age of reason and modernity
• the ruling system of Islam, the Islamic Khilafah, was describes as nothing short of despotism justified under the name of religion.

So what impact did this western polemic have upon the sons of this Ummah? First of all the effect was mostly noticeable amongst the scholars, authors and men of letters. Some answered back but with an apologetic tone – so the Khilafah was deemed to be a democratic system all along– whilst a handful who had succumbed to the western culture even denied it as having any Sharee’ah legitimacy, such as the likes of ‘Ali Abd ar-Raaziq who, which will come as no surprise, was influenced by none other than the Kaafir orientalist Sir Thomas Arnold! For example in his book: ‘al-Islam wa Usul al-Hukm’ after attempting to prove that there is no daleel (evidence) for Khilafah in the Ayah:

”O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority from amongst you” [4:59]

he says on page 11: ‘If you want to find out more on this discussion then please refer to the book ‘The Caliphate’ by the scholar Sir Thomas Arnold. The explanation in chapter two and three of that book is excellent and convincing’ This book, quite opportunely it seems, was published a year after the Khilafah was destroyed in 1925. In it he went to great pains to argue that the above and other such hadith and ayat which command the obedience to a Khaleefah do not establish the obligation to appoint a Khaleefah because they apply only when an imam exists and if he does not exist then there is no obligation to appoint one.

To prove this he adduced the following breathtaking argument: ‘Are we not ordered by the Sharee’ah to be generous to beggars, respect the poor and treat them well and show kindness to them? So can anyone who has any intelligence say that this means the Sharee’ah has obliged us to bring about paupers and orphans?’ [al-Islam wa Usul al-Hukm' pp.125-126, in edition published by al-Mu`assasa al-'Arabiyyah lid dirasaat wan nashr.]

In time a sense of apathy towards the issue of Khilafah reigned over the Ummah and in cases even embarrassment. Many saw the Khilafah as a relic of the past and which should remain in the past or simply impossible to implement in this day and age; hence there was no alternative but to make recourse to secularism.

This was a time of great turmoil and change for the Ummah. This is the time when we witnessed the hadith of the Messenger (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) unfolding before our eyes when he (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:

”Verily, the knots of Islam will be undone one by one. Whenever one knot is lost then the people grabbed onto the one which came after it. The first of these knots will be the Ruling and the last will be the Salah.” [Reported by At-Tabaraani]

And in another version:

”Verily, the knots of Islam will be undone and there shall be misguided rulers.” [Authenticated by al-Hakim in his Mustadrak]

In time a sense of apathy towards the issue of Khilafah reigned over the Ummah and in cases even embarrassment. Many saw the Khilafah as a relic of the past and which should remain in the past or simply impossible to implement in this day and age; hence there was no alternative but to make recourse to secularism.

After losing the Khilafah, like people clutching at whatever they can on a sinking ship, the Ummah grabbed onto whatever remained of the Deen as poignantly depicted in the hadith above. However, the good is, and always will be, in this Ummah and it was not long before she started embarking on the path of awakening due to the work of the sincere Da’wah carriers.

One by one she began to reclaim the knots she had lost and now she is poised to reclaim that final knot; the knot of Ruling by Islam.

Today, by Allah’s Grace and Mercy, the notion of Khilafah is not strange to the Ummah, except to those of course who have been inebriated by the western culture. However, it is important to go beyond the recognition of this obligation and to familiarize ourselves with its detailed evidences.

Like all other obligations it should be anchored deep within the hearts and minds of the Ummah such that it can never be expunged from her memory again.

The hadith of our times

The evidences for Khilafah are many. But the evidence I wish to discuss perfectly describes our reality today: which is that we live at a time when no Khaleefah exists. And that evidence is the hadith reported by Imam Muslim on the authority of Nafi’ that the Messenger (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:

”The one who removes his hand from obedience he will meet Allah without a proof for himself’ and Whosoever dies without a bay’ah on his neck dies the death of Jahiliyyah.”

This hadith provides the Hukm Shar’i for a situation when Muslims die without the presence of a Khaleefah to rule over them. Perhaps, this is what explains the Fuqahaa`s (jurists) relative silence over this hadith while the numerous other evidences which establish the obligation of Khilafah have received greater attention and scrutiny.

In short, they could not imagine a situation when a Muslim would die without the presence of a Khaleefah; that was simply unthinkable! Hence the discussion tended to centre on the obligation of appointing a Khaleefah after the death of the previous Khaleefah. Or that it is obligatory to obey the existing Khaleefah and so having a Khaleefah must be obligatory.

However, one thing is for sure; the unthinkable has happened and the Khilafah has been destroyed and Muslims are dying while they have no Khaleefah over them. So what better evidence to start off with than the hadith which directly addresses our reality?

The process of extraction

What is the Manaat (reality) of the text?

The hadith is describing not one but two types of people since it came in two parts as indicated by the waw al-isti`naaf or ibtidaa` (in English the word ‘and’ is used) (ie the disjunctive syntax where the waw begins a new sentence). In the first part it says ‘The one who removes his hand from obedience he will meet Allah without a proof for himself’ This is when the Khaleefah exists and someone withholds his obedience to the Khaleefah.

As for the second part it is not describing the same person since the waw al- isti`naaf indicates it is beginning a new sentence to make a different point. This time he (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) says: And (waw al- isti`naaf) the one who dies without a bay’ah on his neck he dies the death of jahiliyyah’. This is further confirmed by the fact that he repeats the personal pronoun ‘man’ (the one who or whosoever). This also indicates the hadith discusses two types of people in two different situations.

To appreciate this point better let us look at another hadith where exactly the same thing happens: He (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said: man maata fee sabeelillah fahuwa shaheed wa man maata bit-taa’oon fahuwa shaheed[sahih Muslim]

”The one who dies in the Path of Allah he is shaeed and (waw al- isti`naaf) the one who dies in a plague he is a shaeed”

The death here occurs in two states separated by the waw al- isti`naaf. So the first death is in the Path of Allah whilst the second death occurs in a plague. It would be absurd if someone claimed here that the hadith is talking about the same situation.

Thus the hadith in question is talking about two different situations. The first situation as we said is when someone withholds his obedience to the existing Khaleefah. But what about the second part? The second part begins by saying: ‘the one who dies without a bay’ah on his neck..’ The waw al-Haal (waw of condition) in wa laysa fi ‘unuqihi bay’ah clarifies the state in which the person dies, and in this case it is when he dies ‘without a bay’ah on his neck’.

So what is that state when someone does without a bay’ah on his neck. It can’t mean giving the bay’ah because the hadith did not say ‘wa lam yu’til bay’ah’ (and he did not give the bay’ah) let alone the fact that giving the bay’ah (pledge) is a kifayah duty (sufficiency) and not an individual obligation in the first place as indicated by the Ijma’ as-sahabah (consensus of the Sahabah).

What explains the meaning of bay’ah on the neck is the fact that the contractual bay’ah does not require every single person to physically give it, rather it is enough for the Ahlul Halli wal ‘Aqd (those who represent the Muslims) to give the bay’ah on behalf of the people. This means that a person living even outside the Islamic authority has a bay’ah on his neck if a Khaleefah has been contracted to his post by the representatives of the Muslims.

In fact this was the basic format in which all the Khulafaa’ ar-Rashidoon were appointed. None of them were appointed by a bay’ah which was given by the whole of the population of the Islamic state, rather it was always the representatives of the Muslims who appointed them.

For example when ‘Umar b. al-Khattab was elected as Khaleefah by the ahlul halli wal a’qd in Madinah the people of ash-Sham and Egypt did not have to give the bay’ah because the bay’ah was on their neck by virtue of the fact that the contractual bay’ah had taken place through their representatives the ahlul halli wal aqd. Those who died in ash-Sham and Egypt during the Khilafah of ‘Umar b. al-Khattab did not die the death of jahiliyyah because they had the bay’ah on their necks even though they did not come to Madinah and physically give the bay’ah themselves. This is the difference between giving the bay’ah and having the bay’ah on one’s neck. If however the representatives of the Muslims in Madinah after ‘Umar’s death did not appoint a Khaleefah then the Muslims of ash-Sham and Egypt would not have the bay’ah on their necks because the contractual bay’ah had not taken place i.e. a Khaleefah had not been appointed.

Thus, the hadith is very accurate in its description; it is not talking about giving bay’ah to a Khaleefah but rather having a: ‘Bay’ah on the neck for a Khaleefah’ which describes a situation when someone dies without the presence of a Khaleefah. Hence it is wrong to argue that one cannot use this hadith to prove the obligation of Khilafah by claiming that it is talking about situation when the Khaleefah exists. Such an assertion is not established by the internal indications of the text which show that the Haal (condition) described is the death which occurs when a Khaleefah is not present.

As for Ali Abd ar-Raaziq’s argument that Sharee’ah has obliged us to look after beggars and orphans so does that mean if they don’t exist we have to bring them about to fulfill this command or the argument that we are obliged to obey parents so does that mean we are obliged to bring them back if they die?! Such arguments to say the least are highly fatuous and cannot be considered as scholarly opinions for they disregard the fact that the ahkaam (rules) come with their asbaab (causes). The sabab (cause) of obedience to parents is their existence and hence upon their death the sabab (cause) ceases which means the hukm of obedience also ceases. Also the same applies to beggars and orphans in respect to the ahkaams (rules) which came pertaining to them.

But this is different when it comes to appointing a Khaleefah because the sabab (cause) of the presence of a Khaleefah is the presence of the Jama’ah i.e. Ummah or community which has to look after its affairs by Islam. So if the community exists then Khaleefah must exist to look after their affairs.

The Prophet (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said in a hadith that has been narrated by Imam Ahmed in his Musnad;

”It is not allowed for three people to be in a fulaatin (journey) without appointing one of them as an Ameer.”

This hadith makes it clear that whenever a collection of Muslims exist i.e. jamaa’ah it is prohibited for them to exist except with an ameer i.e. therefore it is an obligation to appoint an Ameer WHEN there is any jama’ah i.e. the existence of jama’ah is the sabab (cause) of the obligation of appointing a Khaleefah.

In fact the term jama’ah in the Islamic text means State, authority, and Khaleefah. Let us look at the following hadith: Ibn ‘Abbas narrated that Messenger (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:

”The one who sees in his Ameer something which displeases him, let remain patient, for he who separates himself from the community (Jama’ah) by even so much as a hand span and dies (in this state), he will die the death of Jahiliyyah,” (reported by Bukhari and Muslim.)

This hadith makes it clear that whenever a collection of Muslims exist i.e. jamaa’ah it is prohibited for them to exist except with an ameer i.e. therefore it is an obligation to appoint an Ameer WHEN there is any jama’ah i.e. the existence of jama’ah is the sabab (cause) of the obligation of appointing a Khaleefah.

Here disobedience and rebellion against the Khaleefah is synonymous with separation from the Jama’ah. This is because it is obligatory on the Jama’ah to look after their affairs by Islam. Having a Khaleefah present means this duty is being fulfilled. But if he is disobeyed this means the obligation of looking after their affairs by Islam is being neglected since he is the one who undertakes this task. So the Jama’ah has to obey a Khaleefah so that their affairs can be looked after.

The reason why a Khaleefah needs to exist is because the affairs cannot be looked after except by him. Thus, the sabab (cause) of the presence of a Khaleefah is the presence of Jamaa’ah which is obliged to look after its affairs by Islam. Hence, when the Messenger of Allah (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) orders us to obey the Khaleefah this means by Ishaarah (alluded meaning) it is obligatory to appoint a Khaleefah for how can the Fard (obligation) of ruling by Islam be accomplished if he did not exist. So it is wrong to say a Khaleefah does not exist so we are not sinful for not appointing and obeying the Khaleefah. This is because the sabab (cause) is not his existence, rather the sabab (cause) of his presence is the presence of a Jamaa’ah which is obliged to look after its affairs by Islam.

We can see the same point much more clearly in another narration by Ibn ‘Abbas which uses the word Sultan instead of Jamaa’ah:

”If anybody sees in his Ameer something which displeases him, he should remain patient, for he who separates himself from the authority (Sultan) by even so much as a hand span and dies thereupon, he would die the death of the days of ignorance,”[Reported by Muslim]

Here we can see that separation from Jamaa’ah and authority (sultan) are used synonymously.

Authority (sultan) means the body which looks after the affairs. Jamaa’ah refers to the community whose affairs are looked after by the Khaleefah. The key thing in both is the obligation of looking after of the affairs which occasions the presence of a Khaleefah.

Also it is reported that ‘Umar b. al-Khattab said:

”There is no Islam without Jamaa’ah and there is not Jamaa’ah without Imaarah (leadership). And there is no Imaarah (leadership) without obedience.” (Reported by ad-Darimi in his Sunan)

That is there is no looking after of the affairs of the Jamaa’ah or authority (sultan) without an ameer (Imaarah) and naturally there can be no Ameer when there is no obedience to him. So the Jamaa’ah in order to exist ie for its affairs to be looked after must appoint an Ameer. And consequently obedience to this Ameer is obligatory because the obligation of looking after the affairs is not possible without an Ameer.

”There is no Islam without Jamaa’ah and there is not Jamaa’ah without Imaarah (leadership). And there is no Imaarah (leadership) without obedience.” (Reported by ad-Darimi in his Sunan)

Thus, when the Prophet (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) ordered us to give allegiance (bay’ah) or obey the Khaleefah it has a greater meaning than when he orders us to feed the poor or look after our parents. We feed the poor because they are poor and we obey parents because they are parents. Thus when they cease to exist the hukm ceases. But our obedience to the Khaleefah is because he looks after the affairs of the Jamaa’ah which itself is an obligation.

Thus when the Khaleefah dies the obligation of obedience to him does not cease because the sabab (cause) of the obedience still exists which is the looking after of the affairs. Hence, so as long as the cause of appointing a Khaleefah exists which is the presence of a Jamaa’ah whose affairs have to be looked after by Islam then the obligation of appointing him and obeying him remains even if he did not exist. This is the reason why the order to obey the Khaleefah by Ishaarah (alluded meaning) means the order to appoint him.

Let us consider the following ayah:

”O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority from amongst you” [4:59]

Here we are obliged to obey those in authority because they are the ones who look after the affairs. So obedience is due as long the ruler looks after the affairs by Islam. Since looking after affairs by Islam is Fard then the obedience to them indicates by Ihsraah that they need to exist.

In another hadith this point is made even more clearer:

”Even if a slave was appointed over you who leads you with the Book of Allah then hear and obey.”[reported by Muslim]

Here to emphasis the obedience to the one who looks after the affairs we are commanded in the style of mubaalagha (exaggeration) to obey even if the ameer is a slave. I.e. obedience is due because he looks after the affairs which is an obligation. Hence the order to obey

indicates by ishaarat an-nass (alluded meaning from the text) the obligation of his presence.

Otherwise we are saying the hukm does not have be fulfilled because something necessary for its fulfillment does not exist even though the sabab (cause) of the hukm still exists!

For example if we apply this type of erroneous thinking on other ahkams look what happens: Jihad for instance is an obligation whose sabab (cause) is the presence of Kuffar under the authority of Kufr. So if Kuffar exist under dar al-kufr then Jihad exists. However to fulfill the Jihad one requires an Ameer by Iqtidaa (required meaning). Without an Ameer jihad cannot be undertaken and hence appointment of an Ameer becomes obligatory in order to fulfill Jihad because that which is necessary to fulfill a wajib is itself a waajib. So by Iqtidaa the presence of an Ameer becomes waajib. But if we follow the silly logic mentioned above the conclusion would be Jihad is not Fard because an Ameer does not exist! Such a conclusion is completely wrong because the sabab (cause) which caused the obligation of Jihad to exist is not the presence of an Ameer but the presence of Kuffar in Dar al-kufr. So as long as kuffar exist the Fard of jihad exists regardless of an Ameer’s presence. Rather what we take from the existence of the Fard is that a Ameer needs to be appointed in order to fulfill the obligation.

Finally, the use of the expression ‘man maata’ deserves a further comment. The reference to the point of death indicates that the hukm (rule) must exist throughout his life. There cannot be a point in his life when he is in a state without a bay’ah on his neck i.e. without the presence of a Khaleefah. So the hukm is continuous unlike the ahkam of obeying parents where the hukm ends upon their death or the hukm of giving to the poor which ends when poverty ceases. But the obligation of having a Khaleefah over you never ceases because text says ‘the one who dies’ indicating the continuity of the hukm throughout the life of a person for he is not allowed to die in situation where the Khaleefah is not present.

What is the Hukm Shar’i?

The legislative value of the above discussion is that it allows us to extract two hukms: that it is Fard ‘ayni (individual obligation) to have a Khaleefah present and also that it is Fard Kifayah (obligation of sufficiency) to appoint a Khaleefah.

As for the first hukm it is deduced from the request (talab) in the hadith that a Muslim should not die without a Khaleefah present. As we said before ‘bay’ah on the neck’ is not possible to have without the presence of the Khaleefah. So if it is not allowed to die without a bay’ah on the neck, this means it is not allowed to die without the presence of a Khaleefah. This type of indication (dalaalah) in Usul al-Fiqh is known as dalaalat al-Iqtidaa (the required meaning of the text). I.e. this is when the truthfulness or correctness of a statement (sidq al-mutakallim wa sihhatul malfooz bihi) cannot be established unless one understands the lafz (expression) in a certain way.

For example: ”And never will Allah grant to the disbelievers a way over the believers.”[4:141]

Here the mantooq (pronounced meaning) is Allah will not allow the kaafir to have authority over the believers. However, is this permission in terms of the occurrence of authority or prohibition of authority? It cannot be the first because we know the kuffar in actuality have authority over the believers in Palestine and Kashmir so the only meaning which will give truthfulness to the statement is prohibition. So we say the mafhoom (implicit meaning) of this ayah through dalalat al-iqtidaa (required meaning) is that Allah prohibits that Kuffar have authority over the believers.

In the same manner the mafhoom (implied meaning) of ‘bayah on the neck’ is the presence of the Khaleefah by the required meaning (dalalaatul iqtidaa). Thus for the expression ‘bayah on the neck’ to be truthful we must understand it to mean presence of the Khaleefah.

Thus, the one who dies without the presence of the Khaleefah would be sinful due to the qaraa’in which make the request decisive. For example the preposition ‘fee unuqihi’ actually means ‘ala unuqihi ie obligation to have on one’s neck much like when we say in English someone has ‘a debt on his neck’ i.e. he has a debt he has to pay. We can also see the use of the ‘ala in the following hadith of Prophet (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:

wa ‘alayka bis sam’I wat taa’ah fee ‘usrika wa yusrika wa manshitika wa makrahika wa atharatin ‘alayk

”It is obligatory for you (‘alayka) to hear and obey the ruler in adversity and prosperity, in pleasure and displeasure, and even when another person is given (rather undue) preference over you.” [Reported by Muslim in his Sahih/num:1836]

In addition to this is the explicit qareenah (indication) ‘dies the death of Jahiliiayh’. The attribution of a death occurring in the days of Ignorance establishes beyond any doubt the decisiveness of the request. This means the command is a Fard which if neglected would entail sin and punishment. Also, since the personal pronoun ‘man’ is general this means it includes every single Muslim i.e. every individual faces death and therefore the indefinite term ‘maata’ i.e. dies, coupled with the negation is clear that every single individual is addressed and hence it is a Fard ‘ayni (individual obligation) to have a Khaleefah present.

As a further proof of the above understanding let us look at other narrations of the same hadith. It has been narrated on the authority of ‘Umar that the Messenger (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said: ”The One who dies without an Imam he dies the death of Jahiliyyah”. [Reported on the authority of 'Umar by at-Tabarani and Abu Nu'aym. The latter declared the hadith as authentic]

Yet in another hadith narrated on the authority of Ibn ‘Umar by al-Hakim in his Mustadrak we have the following version:

”He who abandons the Jamaa’ah by even so much as a hand span is as if he has taken the knot of Islam off his neck, until he returns.’ And he (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said: ‘whoever dies while there was no Imaam of a Jamaa’ah ruling over him, his death would be that of the days of Jahiliyyah.”

It well known the scholars of hadith permitted the narration of hadith by meaning (riwayah bilma’na). So in the above hadiths the raawi (transmitter) narrated the meaning of the saying of the Prophet (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam). So whilst the extraction of the hukm from the man maata hadith in Sahih Muslim is from the implicit meaning (mafhoom), the above two hadiths however are even more explicit as they make the same point in the uttered meaning (manTooq). Incidentally, the hadith in Sahih Muslim and the one above from al-Hakim are both narrated by Ibn ‘Umar. The first says ‘bay’ah on the neck’ while the second says ‘while there was no Imaam of a Jamaa’ah ruling over him’. The meaning is same but the difference is that the former is understood from the implicit meaning (mafhoom) while the latter is taken from the uttered or pronounced meaning (mantooq).

As for the second hukm which is that it is Fard to appoint a Khaleefah, this is deduced from the dalalaatul Ishaarah (the alluded meaning of the text). The ishaarah is a hukm derived from the text which was not intended directly from the speech.

For example when Allah (Subhanahu wa ta’ala) says: “So ask the people of the message if you do not know”[16:43] This cannot be done without the presence of Mujtahideen and hence the presence of mujtahideen in every age obligation in order to find out the sharee’ah rule on a matter. The ayah did not directly mention the obligation of having mujtahideen but it is understood from the ishaarah when it commanded us to ask those who know if we do not know.

In the same manner the ‘man maata’ hadith establishes the obligation of having a Khaleefah present, this means by ishaarah that it is an obligation to appoint a Khaleefah. Therefore, when the text says it is Fard to have a Khaleefah present it also alludes to the obligation of appointing a Khaleefah such that he is present over us.

Thus, the above hadith clearly establishes the obligation of having a Khaleefah over us and the obligation of working to appoint a Khaleefah.

On WHOM does the Hukm shar’i apply?

Is it an individual (Fard ‘ayni) or collective obligation (Fard kifaa`i) and what does that mean for the Muslim ?

The obligation of having a Khaleefah present is an individual duty. This is because the personal pronoun ‘man’ (which means whoever) is from the general expression (seeghatul ‘umoom) and it encompasses all people. Its nature is such that if the Khaleefah is present then he is present for all and if he is absent then he is absent for all thus the obligation covers all people. It is well known in Usul that the general remains general until there is another evidence to specify it. Yes the insane, non-baligh are excluded from this generality but that is not from the mind but there is a text to say they are not legally responsible (ghayr mukallaf) and hence they cannot be held responsible for duties they did not have capacity for.

He (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:

”Three types of people are exempted from accountability, the one who sleeps until he wakes up, a child until he reaches the age of puberty and the insane until he is cured.”[Reported by Abu Dawood]

Thus, the general remains in its generality unless another text comes to specify it. And in this case the obligation of having a Khaleefah present is on every legally responsible (mukallaf) Muslim whether man, woman, layman or scholar.

As for the obligation of appointing a Khaleefah this is Fard kifaayah (obligation of sufficiency). However this should not be taken as an excuse for inaction. This is because in terms of obligation (wujoob) and removal of the sin (isqaat) the Fard ‘ayn and kifayah are the same. This is because Fard means the Legislator has demanded in a decisive form the performance of an action which if neglected will result in sin.

So it is wrong for someone to say appointing a Khaleefah is Fard kifayah so let some people do it and we will be saved. This will not save that person on the Day of judgment because the Fard has not been accomplished and hence the obligation remains on every single neck.

Thus the obligation to fulfill the command is on all. Only if the command has been fulfilled by some then the sin is removed from the rest. This is because the consideration is for the accomplishment of the Fard and not the undertaking of the Fard. Until and unless the Fard is accomplished it continues to be an obligation on all no matter how many people undertook it. That is why the definition of Fard kifayah is: ‘What some have accomplished then the rest are absolved from sin’ (maa aqaamuhul ba’d saqata ‘anil baaqeen) not ‘what some have undertaken …’ (maa qaama bihil ba’d). There is a big difference between undertaking an action and accomplishing it. So until the Fard is accomplished the obligation remains on all. That is why if the kifayah obligation neglected everyone is sinful and not just a few people.

For example it is Fard Kifayah for a group to respond when salam is given to them. The obligation remains on all of them until the obligation is fulfilled. If one responds with the salam and the Fard is accomplished then all are saved from sin because the consideration is the accomplishment of the Fard but if no one respond then all are sinful. Thus Fard kifayah and ‘ayn are the same in obligation and removal of the sin.

So it is wrong for someone to say appointing a Khaleefah is Fard kifayah so let some people do it and we will be saved. This will not save that person on the Day of judgment because the Fard has not been accomplished and hence the obligation remains on every single neck.

The Ummah has only three days and two nights to choose a Khaleefah, if they fail to do this after this time the obligation continues on all and those who undertake the Fard are saved from the sin. But those who neglect will be sinful for not fulfilling their Lord’s command and they will have to explain themselves to Him on the Day when His Account (Hisab) is swift.

SAUDI ARABIA:weapons but no will

The release of the latest US congressional review has shown the global arms market continues to grow and that US arms sales have more than doubled from the previous year – 2010.

Total worldwide weapon sales nearly doubled to $85.3 billion, the US made $66.3 billion of these up from $21.4 billion in 2010. The report found Russia, the nation with the second highest weapon sales, sold only a mere $4.8 billion worth of arms.

Saudi Arabia was the world’s largest purchaser of global arms and America’s biggest customer in this period of economic uncertainty. In total Saudi purchased $33.4 billion, from the US. This was mainly comprised of 84 advanced F-15 fighter jets.

Saudi Arabia has for the last decade been one of biggest importers of arms. Whilst Saudi Arabia produces very little military equipment it has used its energy wealth to arm itself with the worlds most sophisticated and latest weaponry. Whilst much of this keeps foreign workers employed, Saudi actions globally do not reflect this position. In fact Saudi Arabia operates from a position of weakness even though it possesses the world’s coveted black gold.

Saudi Arabia claims to represent the Ummah as it maintains guardianship over the two Holy Mosques, however this has not been the case with regards to its foreign policy and relations with the wider Ummah. We find Saudi’s weapons inventory includes the latest battle tanks (the M–1A2 Abrams and 290 AMX–30), its air force is composed of over 300 jets which include the newly acquired Eurofighter Typhoons and upgraded Tornado IDS, F-15 Eagle and F-15E Strike Eagle fighter planes. It would surprise many to learn that Saudi military strength and technology is a match for many European nations and is superior to Israel in many areas.

Put within the context of this wealth of military riches, the inability of the Saudi regime to provide any protection to Muslims in recent crisis seems nothing short of criminal. The recent massacre in Burma is a case in point. Saudi Arabia in one stroke could have brought the whole episode to an end through the sheer force of its arms, even the threat of action from such a force would likely have been sufficient.  The Burmese army has virtually no experience against a conventional fighting force as most of its history has been busy in various counter insurgencies. Burma’s 30 F7’s would have been no match against Saudi’s modern Eurofighter typhoon. The MiG-29′s (1970’s model, purchased in 1996 from Russia as used surplus stock) are probably the most “modern,” jets Burma has. Their air defence equipment is outdated and even Chinese weapons supplied to Burma are older models. In the event of a strike, Saudi jets would be heading home before the Burmese even knew they had been hit.

Military equipment, technology and progress are useless if not matched with global ambition. The prophet (saw) fought in many wars with his infantry outnumbered by the enemy, but through ambition he managed to conquer the Arabian Peninsula. His Sahaba took the Deen to China and the coasts of the Atlantic, whilst dealing with the Persian and Roman empires. Today’s Saudi Arabia is largely an artificial creation from the 19^th century and with successive rulers working to achieve the aims of the global powers in the region rather than pursuing their own ambitions.

This episode shows what is lacking is not technology, nor weapons. Rather it is the lack of ambition and political will, and an attachment to western political goals which is nothing short of a master-slave relationship. The Arab spring has shown that this relationship has had its day and the Saudi Monarchy should take notice at what has happened to the other lackeys in the region.

BALOCHISTAN NEEDS YOU

On 21 July 2012, Foreign Sponsored elements are hit a security checkpost located in Pishukan area of Gwadar. In this militant attack, six security personnel were killed and four others injured when unknown terrorists fired rockets at security.  The local administration and Levies personnel reached the scene and shifted the injured to hospital.  The security forces cordoned off the area after the attack and launched search operation to arrest the culprit

Notably, sudden increase in blast waves, militancy in Karachi and resumption of drone attacks just after restoration of Nato supply, beheading of soldiers after abduction from FATA, interference in Balochistan, killing of Pakistani soldiers on Chenab River Bank, raiding under training security elements in Lahore and now attacking security checkpost in Gwadar Port (Balochistan) on 21 July 2012, are clear cut indications of involvement of hands in militancy in Pakistan. All these subversive activities are being controlled by CIA, RAW,MI-6 and Mossad. Afghan National Security Council is providing and facilitating CIA, RAW and otherintelligence agencies for launching their agents in Pakistani area.

U.S. and her allies are working for grater Balochistan. They are interested in causing instability in Balochistan through terrifying locals and settlers.  As per set foreign agenda local lords of Balochistan immediately allege country’s intelligence agency for any murder and abduction of innocent Baloch. Whereas, it has been found that abduction of people for ransom and killing them have become the routine of daily life in Balochistan. Few days back, honorable Chief Justice visited Balochistan for hearing of missing person case. He has also shown concern over abduction and killing of innocent persons. It is suggested that Chief Justice should take some more visit of Balochistan for punishing the terrorists.

Involvement of foreign hands particularly of Americans, British’s and Indian cannot be denied since prevailing adverse security situation and unrest of Balochistan directly linked to  international politics due to  the development and operation of strategically important Gwadar Port.

It would also be correct in saying that intensification of current terrorism throughout the country is by design, since our political system is getting strength day by day. Moreover, tenure of ruling elite is almost over and the country is heading towards transitional phase of exchange of powers. Thus, anti-Pakistan elements are more interested in instability of political system while sabotaging the peaceful transaction of the system.

In fact, the current blast wave was planned, staged and executed by CIA, RAW and   MI-6. Some of the Western, US, Indian and local electronic and print media started throwing slush on own country on the name of violations of human rights in Balochistan. I would like to suggest to the honurable, Chief Justice of Pakistan to take suo motu actions on the murder of soldiers rather than just pulling security andintelligence agencies on the name of missing persons. He should also take suo motu against Baloch lords who are playing in foreign hands, inviting CIA and RAW militancy to carry out in Balochistan. In most of the cases the act of killing is being done by RAW and CIA simply with the aim of fueling militancy of Balochistan. Anyhow, this adventure of maligning and alleging country’s security forces and intelligence agency should be stopped since it is strengthening the hands of foreign intelligence agencies and damaging the country’s solidarity.

 US and Indian  joint venture is aiming at (1) supporting rebels Baloch leaders for storming terrorism in Pakistan (2) Incorporating Iranian and Afghanis’ Baloch areas in purposed Greater Balochistan (3) Declaring Pakhtune region as Al-Qaida dominated areas and targeting Gas pipeline. In short, there is a need of resolving the issue politically but at the same time foreign agents busy in fomenting terrorism, abducting and killing innocent people should also be dealt with iron hands. However, true leaders should be approached and given chances for ruling the province and establishment the peace. Media pundit and so called anchors should not try to fuel the issue deliberately or unintentionally. Media should discourage the anti Pakistan elements operating in Balochistan. It is also suggested that fencing of international border, effectively guarding of   coast line and mountain passes need to be emphasized.

RIDA ZAHEER

Disinformation of media

There was a time, not too long ago (relatively speaking), that governments and the groups of elites that controlled them did not find it necessary to conscript themselves into wars of disinformation.

Propaganda was relatively straightforward. The lies were much simpler. The control of information flow was easily directed. Rules were enforced with the threat of property confiscation and execution for anyone who strayed from the rigid socio-political structure. Those who had theological, metaphysical or scientific information outside of the conventional and scripted collective world view were tortured and slaughtered. The elites kept the information to themselves, and removed its remnants from mainstream recognition, sometimes for centuries before it was rediscovered.

With the advent of anti-feudalism, and most importantly the success of the american revolution, elitists were no longer able to dominate information with the edge of a blade or the barrel of a gun. The establishment of Republics, with their philosophy of open government and rule by the people, compelled Aristocratic minorities to plot more subtle ways of obstructing the truth and thus maintaining their hold over the world without exposing themselves to retribution from the masses. Thus, the complex art of disinformation was born.

The technique, the “magic” of the lie, was refined and perfected. The mechanics of the human mind and the human soul became an endless obsession for the establishment.

The goal was malicious, but socially radical; instead of expending the impossible energy needed to dictate the very form and existence of the truth, they would allow it to drift, obscured in a fog of contrived data. They would wrap the truth in a Gordian Knot of misdirection and fabrication so elaborate that they felt certain the majority of people would surrender, giving up long before they ever finished unraveling the deceit. The goal was not to destroy the truth, but to hide it in plain sight.

In modern times, and with carefully engineered methods, this goal has for the most part been accomplished. However, these methods also have inherent weaknesses. Lies are fragile. They require constant attentiveness to keep them alive. The exposure of a single truth can rip through an ocean of lies, evaporating it instantly.

In this article, we will examine the methods used to fertilize and promote the growth of disinformation, as well as how to identify the roots of disinformation and effectively cut them, starving out the entire system of fallacies once and for all.
media disinformation Methods

The mainstream media, once tasked with the job of investigating government corruption and keeping elitists in line, has now become nothing more than a public relations firm for corrupt officials and their Globalist handlers. The days of the legitimate “investigative reporter” are long gone (if they ever existed at all), and journalism itself has deteriorated into a rancid pool of so called “TV Editorialists” who treat their own baseless opinions as supported fact.

The elitist co-opting of news has been going on in one form or another since the invention of the printing press. However, the first methods of media disinformation truly came to fruition under the supervision of newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst, who believed the truth was “subjective” and open to his personal interpretation.

Some of the main tactics used by the mainstream media to mislead the masses are as follows:

Lie Big, Retract Quietly: Mainstream media sources (especially newspapers) are notorious for reporting flagrantly dishonest and unsupported news stories on the front page, then quietly retracting those stories on the very back page when they are caught. In this case, the point is to railroad the lie into the collective consciousness. Once the lie is finally exposed, it is already too late, and a large portion of the population will not notice or care when the truth comes out.

Unconfirmed Or Controlled Sources As Fact: Cable news venues often cite information from “unnamed” sources, government sources that have an obvious bias or agenda, or “expert” sources without providing an alternative “expert” view. The information provided by these sources is usually backed by nothing more than blind faith.

Calculated Omission: Otherwise known as “cherry picking” data. One simple piece of information or root item of truth can derail an entire disinfo news story, so instead of trying to gloss over it, they simply pretend as if it doesn’t exist. When the fact is omitted, the lie can appear entirely rational. This tactic is also used extensively when disinformation agents and crooked journalists engage in open debate.

Distraction, And The Manufacture Of Relevance: Sometimes the truth wells up into the public awareness regardless of what the media does to bury it. When this occurs their only recourse is to attempt to change the public’s focus and thereby distract them from the truth they were so close to grasping. The media accomplishes this by “over-reporting” on a subject that has nothing to do with the more important issues at hand. Ironically, the media can take an unimportant story, and by reporting on it ad nauseum, cause many Americans to assume that because the media won’t shut-up about it, it must be important!

Dishonest Debate Tactics: Sometimes, men who actually are concerned with the average American’s pursuit of honesty and legitimate fact-driven information break through and appear on T.V. However, rarely are they allowed to share their views or insights without having to fight through a wall of carefully crafted deceit and propaganda. Because the media know they will lose credibility if they do not allow guests with opposing viewpoints every once in a while, they set up and choreograph specialized T.V. debates in highly restrictive environments which put the guest on the defensive, and make it difficult for them to clearly convey their ideas or facts.

TV pundits are often trained in what are commonly called “Alinsky Tactics.” Saul Alinsky was a moral relativist, and champion of the lie as a tool for the “greater good”; essentially, a modern day Machiavelli. His “Rules for Radicals” were supposedly meant for grassroots activists who opposed the establishment and emphasized the use of any means necessary to defeat one’s political opposition. But is it truly possible to defeat an establishment built on lies, by use of even more elaborate lies, and by sacrificing one’s ethics? In reality, his strategies are the perfect format for corrupt institutions and governments to dissuade dissent from the masses. Today, Alinsky’s rules are used more often by the establishment than by its opposition.
Alinsky’s Strategy: Win At Any Cost, Even If You Have To Lie

Alinsky’s tactics have been adopted by governments and disinformation specialists across the world, but they are most visible in TV debate. While Alinsky sermonized about the need for confrontation in society, his debate tactics are actually designed to circumvent real and honest confrontation of opposing ideas with slippery tricks and diversions. Alinsky’s tactics, and their modern usage, can be summarized as follows:

1) Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.
We see this tactic in many forms. For example, projecting your own movement as mainstream, and your opponent’s as fringe. Convincing your opponent that his fight is a futile one. Your opposition may act differently, or even hesitate to act at all, based on their perception of your power. How often have we heard this line: “The government has predator drones. There is nothing the people can do now…” This is a projection of exaggerated invincibility designed to elicit apathy from the masses.

2) Never go outside the experience of your people, and whenever possible, go outside of the experience of the enemy.

Don’t get drawn into a debate about a subject you do not know as well as or better than your opposition. If possible, draw them into such a situation instead. Go off on tangents. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty in your opposition. This is commonly used against unwitting interviewees on cable news shows whose positions are set up to be skewered. The target is blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address. In television and radio, this also serves to waste broadcast time to prevent the target from expressing his own position.

3) Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.

The objective is to target the opponent’s credibility and reputation by accusations of hypocrisy. If the tactician can catch his opponent in even the smallest misstep, it creates an opening for further attacks, and distracts away from the broader moral question.

4) Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.

“Ron Paul is a crackpot.” “Gold bugs are crazy.” “Constitutionalists are fringe extremists.” Baseless ridicule is almost impossible to counter because it is meant to be irrational. It infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage. It also works as a pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.

5) A good tactic is one that your people enjoy.

The popularization of the term “Teabaggers” is a classic example; it caught on by itself because people seem to think it’s clever, and enjoy saying it. Keeping your talking points simple and fun helps your side stay motivated, and helps your tactics spread autonomously, without instruction or encouragement.

6) A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.

See rule No. 5. Don’t become old news. If you keep your tactics fresh, it’s easier to keep your people active. Not all disinformation agents are paid. The “useful idiots” have to be motivated by other means. Mainstream disinformation often changes gear from one method to the next and then back again.

7) Keep the pressure on with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.

Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. Never give the target a chance to rest, regroup, recover or re-strategize. Take advantage of current events and twist their implications to support your position. Never let a good crisis go to waste.

8) The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.

This goes hand in hand with Rule No. 1. Perception is reality. Allow your opposition to expend all of its energy in expectation of an insurmountable scenario. The dire possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.

9) The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.

The objective of this pressure is to force the opposition to react and make the mistakes that are necessary for the ultimate success of the campaign.

10) If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside.

As grassroots activism tools, alinsky tactics have historically been used (for example, by labor movements or covert operations specialists) to force the opposition to react with violence against activists, which leads to popular sympathy for the activists’ cause. Today, false (or co-opted) grassroots movements and revolutions use this technique in debate as well as in planned street actions and rebellions (look at Syria for a recent example).

11) The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.

Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem. Today, this is often used offensively against legitimate activists, such as the opponents of the federal reserve. Complain that your opponent is merely “pointing out the problems.” Demand that they offer not just “a solution”, but THE solution. Obviously, no one person has “the” solution. When he fails to produce the miracle you requested, dismiss his entire argument and all the facts he has presented as pointless.

12) Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it.

Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. The target’s supporters will expose themselves. Go after individual people, not organizations or institutions. People hurt faster than institutions.

The next time you view an MSM debate, watch the pundits carefully, you will likely see many if not all of the strategies above used on some unsuspecting individual attempting to tell the truth.
Internet Disinformation Methods

Internet trolls, also known as “paid posters” or “paid bloggers,” are increasingly and openly being employed by private corporations as well governments, often for marketing purposes and for “public relations” (Obama is notorious for this practice). Internet “trolling” is indeed a fast growing industry.

Trolls use a wide variety of strategies, some of which are unique to the internet, here are just a few:

1. Make outrageous comments designed to distract or frustrate: An Alinsky tactic used to make people emotional, although less effective because of the impersonal nature of the Web.

2. Pose as a supporter of the truth, then make comments that discredit the movement: We have seen this even on our own forums — trolls pose as supporters of the Liberty Movement, then post long, incoherent diatribes so as to appear either racist or insane. The key to this tactic is to make references to common Liberty Movement arguments while at the same time babbling nonsense, so as to make those otherwise valid arguments seem ludicrous by association. In extreme cases, these “Trojan Horse Trolls” have been known to make posts which incite violence — a technique obviously intended to solidify the false assertions of the think tank propagandists like the SPLC, which purports that Constitutionalists should be feared as potential domestic terrorists.

3. Dominate Discussions: Trolls often interject themselves into productive Web discussions in order to throw them off course and frustrate the people involved.

4. Prewritten Responses: Many trolls are supplied with a list or database with pre-planned talking points designed as generalized and deceptive responses to honest arguments. When they post, their words feel strangely plastic and well rehearsed.

5. False Association: This works hand in hand with item No. 2, by invoking the stereotypes established by the “Trojan Horse Troll.” For example: calling those against the Federal Reserve “conspiracy theorists” or “lunatics”; deliberately associating anti-globalist movements with racists and homegrown terrorists, because of the inherent negative connotations; and using false associations to provoke biases and dissuade people from examining the evidence objectively.

6. False Moderation: Pretending to be the “voice of reason” in an argument with obvious and defined sides in an attempt to move people away from what is clearly true into a “grey area” where the truth becomes “relative.”

7. Straw Man Arguments: A very common technique. The troll will accuse his opposition of subscribing to a certain point of view, even if he does not, and then attacks that point of view. Or, the troll will put words in the mouth of his opposition, and then rebut those specific words.

Sometimes, these strategies are used by average people with serious personality issues. However, if you see someone using these tactics often, or using many of them at the same time, you may be dealing with a paid internet troll.
Stopping Disinformation

The best way to disarm disinformation agents is to know their methods inside and out. This gives us the ability to point out exactly what they are doing in detail the moment they try to do it. Immediately exposing a disinformation tactic as it is being used is highly destructive to the person utilizing it. It makes them look foolish, dishonest and weak for even making the attempt. Internet trolls most especially do not know how to handle their methods being deconstructed right in front of their eyes and usually fold and run from debate when it occurs.

The truth is precious. It is sad that there are so many in our society who have lost respect for it; people who have traded in their conscience and their soul for temporary financial comfort while sacrificing the stability and balance of the rest of the country in the process.

The human psyche breathes on the air of truth. Without it, humanity cannot survive. Without it, the species will collapse, starving from lack of intellectual and emotional sustenance.

Disinformation does not only threaten our insight into the workings of our world; it makes us vulnerable to fear, misunderstanding, and doubt: all things that lead to destruction. It can drive good people to commit terrible atrocities against others, or even against themselves. Without a concerted and organized effort to diffuse mass-produced lies, the future will look bleak indeed.

BANKERS DECLARE VICTORY OVER U.S & EUROPE

A recent CNBC clip in which financial analysts admit to viewers that America is under the control of a group of central bankers who are building a world government is a damning insight into how the establishment has dispensed with any pretense of trying to hide their agenda as it is finalized.

During the video, the host asks guests, “Do we all work for central bankers – is this global governance at last – is it one world – the central bankers in charge….aren’t we all just living and dying for what the central banks do?”

“To answer your question, we are absolutely slaves to central banks,” responds the guest.

“We beholden to what central bankers and policy makers do rather than the fundamentals in the economy,” adds another.

This is just one of a deluge of examples where it is now being thrown in our faces that a banking elite is building a world government at the expense of the American people.

From treating the issue as a “conspiracy theory” for decades, the establishment is now tearing away the veil in an effort to force Americans to blithely accept what has been planned all along.

A global government is now being forcefully pushed as the “solution” to all manner of problems, but specifically in relation to financial crisis. We are being brainwashed to accept the premise that centralized power in the hands of a tiny elite is the only recourse, and that a one world currency is inevitable.

At the height of the last economic crisis, Bilderberg member and Financial Times columnist Gideon Rachman argued that “everything is in place” for a dictatorial world government to be imposed by a technocratic elite.

Rachman’s 2008 call for authoritarian technocrats to be put in charge of the global economy in preparation for the official birth of global government is now well on its way to completion, with the economies of France, Ireland, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Greece, along with the IMF and the European Central Bank, all under goldman sachs banker occupation.

These technocrats have not been bashful in openly announcing what they are doing.

Upon his selection to become EU President in 2009, Herman Van Rompuy announced that the financial crisisand efforts to combat global warming were designed to precede “the global management of our planet.” He also declared 2009 to be “the first year of global governance.”

In the same year, Van Rompuy was joined by the Pope who also called  for a “world political authority” to manage the global economy.

World Bank President and Bilderberg elitist Robert Zoellick also openly admitted the plan to eliminate national sovereignty and impose a global government during a speech on the eve of the G20 summit.

Calls for a one world currency to be a key component of global governance have been consistent.

In 2000 speech, member of the executive board of the ECB, Sirkka Hämäläinen stated, “In conclusion, I should like to come back to Paul Volcker’s prophecy. He might be right, and we might one day have a single world currency. Maybe European integration, in the same way as any other regional integration, could be seen as a step towards the ideal situation of a fully integrated world.”

In a 2010 speech to the CFR, former president of the ECB Jean-Claude Trichet made it clear that the Global Economy Meeting (GEM), which meets at the BIS (Bank of International Settlements) headquarters in Basel would “become the prime group for global governance among central banks.”

Trichet added that the BIS meetings were ensuring that “the system is moving decisively towards genuine global governance.”

Trichet went on to define how global governance would operate.

“There are numerous definitions of global governance. In the economic and financial sphere I will propose that global governance comprehends not only the constellation of supranational institutions – including the international financial institutions – but also the informal groupings that have progressively emerged at the global level. Those informal forums (G7, G10, G20, etc.) are key in improving global coordination in all the areas where decision making processes remain national – whether in helping to work out agreed prudential standards and codes or to facilitate where appropriate, the coordination of economic macro-policies.”

Numerous other members of the political establishment have openly expressed the agenda to create global government. not only in response to the financial crisis but also as an answer to man-made climate change.

In 2009, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon admitted that carbon taxes levied in the name of abating global warming would be collected by a world body.

“We will establish a global governance structure to monitor and manage the implementation of this,” he stated.

In a new yorek times editorial entitled “We Can Do It,” Ki-moon also wrote that efforts to impose restrictions on CO2 emissions, “Must include an equitable global governance structure.”

Fellow globalist and environmentalist David De Mayer Rothschild also disclosed the agenda for global governancein an interview with Bloomberg news.

“It’s past the point of talking. We know historically that the global governance sort of agenda to these issues is very hard to… with all the best intentions it’s very hard to actually activate.” Rothschild noted.

Similarly, Al Gore said in a 2009 speech that attempts to regulate CO2 emissions would be driven through “global governance and global agreements.”

a 2010 UN blueprint for putting the organization back at the forefront of global governance alarmingly revealed the agenda to re-brand global warming as “overpopulation” as a means of dismantling the middle classes while using “global redistribution of wealth” and increased immigration to reinvigorate the pursuit of a one world government.

Bureaucrats at the 2011 UN Climate Summit in Durban outlined plans for the most draconian, harebrained and madcap climate change treaty ever produced, under which the west would be mandated to respect “the rights of Mother Earth” by paying a “climate debt” which would act as a slush fund for bankrolling an all-powerful world government.

Earlier this year a Scientific American article entitled Effective World Government Will Be Needed to Stave Off Climate Catastrophe argued that global management of the planet was the only means of combating global warming.

Although the agenda for global government is now bearing its teeth with little regard for subtleness or stealth, the following quotes stretching back over the last several decades prove that the plan has been long in the works.

“Today America would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow they will be grateful. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government.”
henry kissinger

“We are grateful to the washington post, The new york times, Time Magazine and their great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”
David Rockefeller

“In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single global authority and realize national sovereignty wasn’t such a great deal after all.”
Strobe Talbot

“We need a global New Deal — a grand bargain between the countries and continents of this world.”
Gordon Brown

“It seems to many of us that if we are to avoid the eventual catastrophic world conflict we must strengthen the united nations as a first step toward a world government patterned after our own government with a legislature, executive and judiciary, and police to enforce its international laws and keep the peace. To do that, of course, we Americans will have to yield up some of our sovereignty. That would be a bitter pill. It would take a lot of courage, a lot of faith in the new order. Pat Robertson has written in a book a few years ago that we should have a world government, but only when the Messiah arrives. He wrote, literally, any attempt to achieve world order before that time must be the work of the devil. Well, join me. I’m glad to sit here at the right hand of Satan.”
Walter Cronkite

“This is global governance in the making. But we must agree, and agree to a binding commitment.”
George Papandreou, former Prime Minister of Greece

“For the first time, humanity is instituting a genuine instrument of global governance. From the very earliest age, we should make environmental awareness a major theme of education and a major theme of political debate, until respect for the environment comes to be as fundamental as safeguarding our rights and freedoms. By acting together, by building this unprecedented instrument, the first component of an authentic global governance, we are working for dialogue and peace.”
Jacques Chirac

“For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”
David Rockefeller, from his own book, Memoirs.

THE SATANIC MEDIA CONTROLS THE WORLD

Perhaps the greatest unknown fact about life on Planet Earth concerns the MEDIA, and in particular, the MAINSTREAM MEDIA (MSM).

The etymology of Media takes us back to the time of the ancient Persian Empire to a people known as the Medes. According to Herodotus, there were six primary Mede tribes or castes. Of these six Median tribes, it is the Magi who have distinguished the Medes because of their prominent place and influential role within their society.

“The sixth tribe were the Magi…They were a hereditary caste of priests of the Zurvanism religion that evolved out of Zoroastrianism. The name Magi implies a link with the Sumerians, who called their language Emegir, over time becoming simplified to Magi.”[1]

As implied, the word magic is derived from the name of this priestly class because of their capability to produce what would be considered magic within their culture. Also known as the “Enchanters of Old”, these experts in astrology, alchemy, and geomancy exercised great power within Persian society. Their esoteric knowledge allowed them to exert great influence over the common man as is often the case with those who possess the ability to predict and prophesy.

“Magi (Latin plural of magus; Ancient Greek: μάγος magos; Old Persian: maguš, Persian: مُغ‎ mogh; English singular magian, mage, magus, magusian, magusaean) is a term, used since at least the 4th century BC, to denote followers of Zoroaster, or rather, followers of what the Hellenistic world associated Zoroaster with, which was – in the main – the ability to read the stars, and manipulate the fate that the stars foretold.”
(Per Wikipedia)

Of course, over the span of centuries “the term ‘magian’ acquired a negative connotation and was associated with tricksters and conjurers.” Hence, we see the direct connection to those in the modern day mainstream ‘media’ who conjure up false stories in order to trick the nations of the world into perpetual war. This media-driven, geo-political dynamic is at the very root of almost six thousand years of human history. And, yes, it is ‘His Story’ much more than ‘Her Story’ since men really do seem to come from Mars, as most women seem to come from Venus.

Since the very notion of war has been so hardwired into the genes of humanity over eons, the Universe has seen to it that there will be intermittent times to practice up on the battlefield known as Planet Earth. The very purpose of the Iron Age was to fashion weapons of war out of iron which would go on to define the hard and cold nature of our ‘civilization’. Steel is very hard and cold. It is also ubiquitous in its many uses throughout every sphere of life. A double-edged sword can cut both ways — for good and ill. And so we have seen … everywhere across the land.

The Kali Yuga is the Age of Conflict

It is important to understand that the Iron Age is analogous to the Kali Yuga. They are essentially one and the same. Since conflict is the defining nature of the Kali Yuga (just look at recorded human history), and war is the quintessential form of conflict, LOTS of wars have been started and fought throughout this final age of a 60,000 year epoch. This is where the MEDIA comes in. And especially its capacity for deceit and deception in the interest of starting wars by those who ultimately control the MSM.

When it’s understood that the Mainstream MEDIA[2], was conceived and designed to trick the masses into fighting each other, it will have much less hold over those who become aware. However, we are talking about one of the foundational forces of creation known as Maya. Maya is the very essence of illusion, and very difficult for even the best among us to penetrate. Admittedly, the Cosmic Convergence Research Group is tricked and trapped by its two-facedness treachery every single day, so powerful is its capacity to weave webs of illusion.

When A War Is Destined To Be Fought There Is No Stopping It

This is a very unhappy statement, we know; but completely true nevertheless. Think about the role of the MSM in the run up to the War in Iraq in 2003. Everyone knew it was based on bald-faced lies, contrived falsehoods and miscellaneous fabrications. And yet it proceeded in the face of great worldwide opposition. A very unfortunate situation indeed, especially in light of the current predicament in Iraq.

Were one to dissect the entire role of the MSM in the execution of this crime against humanity, its culpability would be quite obvious and thoroughly damning. Simply put, without the media there would not have been a blatant war of aggression waged upon the people of Iraq. Ditto that for Afghanistan … and Libya … and Serbia … and Pakistan … and Viet Nam … and Korea … … …

As the title of this essays implies, whoever controls the media controls the switch for starting and ending every war, conflict and minor skirmish, anywhere on the planet. About this fact of of life, there is no doubt. Likewise, we see on the flip side of ‘peace’ that the MSM controls the myriad conflicts and dramas which abound in every form of media, even throughout the alternative news media (through the process of media referral and reflex*). How difficult is it to separate fact from fiction on so many alternative sites? Many websites have been co-opted and don’t even know it. Unwittingly, some alternative sites serve the very same purpose as the MSM of which they profess their vow to expose.

*Alternative media reflex is the anticipated reaction of the alternative media to fake stories in the MSM which often serves to legitimize them. MSMedia referral is the outright exportation of fraudulent stories from the MSM to the alternative media carried with more ‘depth and context’ thereby giving them credibility.

When we say that there is no stopping the force of destiny, particularly with regard to the waging of war, what are we really saying?

By way of illustration, we need only to look at the presidential elections of 2000 and 2004. In both instances, the MSM played the vital role in ensuring that each election would be stolen outright by a proud warmonger. Even though votes were not properly counted, a supreme court rubber stamps an obviously fraudulent election. However, there are two critical points which cannot be overlooked. Each concerns the inviolable laws karma and destiny.

I. A nation always gets the leadership it deserves per the laws of national karma and the outworking of personal destinies. No exceptions granted except by highly exceptionalDivine Decree.

II. The leadership, which guarantees that war will be waged when its time has come, will always be installed regardless of the illegal or immoral means when it is time for war to be declared.

This second statement is a tough one, especially for all us peacemakers. Let’s fast forward to 2008 and evaluate what the Noble Peace Prize winner Barack Obama has done in the war department??? Let’s take a very close look at Afghanistan … Iraq … Iran … Pakistan … Libya … Syria … Honduras (rubber stamped a coup d’etat) … Paraguay (rubber stamped a coup d’etat) … as well as the numerous, clandestine acts of USA militarism all over Africa.

The Biggest Culprit of ’em all

When the Old Gray Lady* – the new york times – is responsible for starting more wars than any other single newspaper in world history, you know we have a serious problem. The NYT is supposed to be the bastion of liberal, progressive, democratic thought and sentiment (supposedly anti-war???) … and yet it is directly responsible for more wartime deaths worldwide than any other print media on the face of the planet … for all time!

he new york times allowed reporter Judith Miller to use its front pages to sell War against Iraq by way of naked warmongering and bellicose yellow journalism. Miller’s pre-war coverage contained perhaps the most obvious prevarications in post WWII journalism history. Practically everyone knew she was lying for the Chickenhawks, and yet the nation shamelessly proceeded to war!

*The Gray Lady, [is] a nickname for The New York Times newspaper, referring to its historical tendency to present a higher-than-usual proportion of text to graphics … Nicknamed “the Old Gray Lady”, and long regarded within the industry as a national “newspaper of record” … It is the third largest newspaper overall, behind The wall streat journal and USA Today … The NYT has won 108 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any news organization. (Per Wikipedia)

The spinning of webs and weaving of illusions is so strong that a sitting president is allowed to routinely kill, maim and paralyze the people of Pakistan any time they are labelled a terrorist threat. Now that’s pretty strong matrika shakti at work, isn’t it? That peace-loving ex-hippies and former beatniks would sit by idly and support a government policy or political agenda or elected official whose record is that of a cold blooded murderer is as strong a testament as one could provide toward revealing the true power of the press.

Matrika Shakti is the power

What is matrika shakti? It is the very power inherent in the word. Each letter, each word, each phrase, each sentence possesses its own matrika shakti or power (energy). When strung together in a certain way, these words will compel men to pick up a gun and thoughtlessly kill other men — without the least bit of hesitancy and often with zeal — in a foreign land.

What are we really saying as to what the MSM might be shaping up during this 2nd great depression that keeps getting ‘greater’. Perhaps the following quote from “Special Message to the Market Oracles and Money Masters of the Universe” suffices in this regard.

HINT: Let’s get serious for a moment. Most of us know by now that the Crash of ’29, as well as the great depression that followed, were the main events of an intricately engineered financial and economic armageddon calculated as a necessary prelude to the real Armageddon known as WWII. Historically speaking, a man without a job, or prospects for employment in his homeland, is much more likely to hire himself out to his guvment as a mercenary fighting in a foreign land. Hasn’t this been their (TPTW)* formula for both war and wealth creation for eons?! Although it has always worked like a charm, wethinks the charm has finally worn out. Yes, that old fashioned Hegelian dialectic based ‘problem – reaction – solution’ MO has seen its final days. We also think their misbegotten plan to foist WWIII upon us has somehow been thwarted by the real TPTB. Yes, they’ve finally been snoockered!
*The Powers That Were

Conclusion:
The internet has permitted the establishment of an alternative news media much of which is thoroughly dedicated to the dissemination of real facts, unvarnished truth and heretofore secret information. Therefore, the playing field has been leveled like never before, though it is still tilted in the TPTW’s favor. As more become digitally connected and disconnect from the MSM, the old media paradigm loses power.

Given the awesome proliferation of cyber technology, there does exist the likelihood of a sufficient number of souls setting up their own platform within their own cyber-space. As this organic, grassroots, global initiative expands throughout civil society, we may see a tipping point in regard to who will control the predominant media of the future. Only at that point of media evolution will we see the real change that so many long for.

Like we said: Whoever Controls The Media Controls The World