Submitted by David Livingstone on Sat, 12/01/2007 – 03:38

The NY Times reports that support for the rigid implementation of Shariah in Nigeria is down. Readers will likely remember the fiasco that occurred a couple of years ago, where Nigeria became one of the main perpetrators, along with Taliban, in the negative image that Islamic law has been receiving. Obviously a carefully calculated and deliberate defacement of Islam.

Here’s why.

Because, once again, we find the same ugly hand at play here. It’s the same devious state that has been largely responsible for the radicalization of Islam in various parts of the world, and in service of the Western aim of fomenting a “Clash of Civilizations”. You guessed it, it’s Saudi Arabia, and it’s wayward brand of Islam known as Wahhabism.

The Times article remarks that, “The Islamic revolution that seemed so destined to transform northern Nigeria in recent years appears to have come and gone — or at least gone in a direction few here would have expected.” But notice this important comment:

“When Muslim-dominated states like Kano adopted Islamic law after the fall of military rule in 1999, radical clerics from the Arabian peninsula arrived in droves to preach a draconian brand of fundamentalism, and newly empowered religious judges handed down tough punishments like amputation for theft.”

There is a still more in-depth article written by Stephen Schwartz about Wahhabi influence in Nigeria.

The article reveals that, again, it’s the usual suspects involved. Named participants in the radicalization of Nigeria are members of the Golden Chain, a document discovered in Bosnia listing Al Qaeda financiers. Though not implicated in Nigeria, the chief contributor of the Golden Chain was Khalid bin Mahfouz, who was many years in Houston TX, along with bin Laden’s older brother Salem, doing business with the Bushes.

It’s important to understand the very special role of Saudi Arabia. First of all, Laurence of Arabia was used to dupe Sharif Hussain of Mecca in combatting the Turks during WWI, only to be tricked, when the British and French negotiated behind the scenes to partition the Middle East among themselves, even though Hussain had been promised to be appointed “King of the Arabs”. Saudi Arabia did not fall within this scheming, but a special fate was reserved for it. Instead, it was Ibn Saud, as head of the extremist Wahhabi faction, who was permitted to seize power in that country in 1932. A year later, he signed a deal conferring drilling rights in the country to Rockefeller’s Standard Oil.

Oil production in that country has supposedly shifted into native hands, under the guise of ARAMCO, but in reality, the organization merely acts as a front to hide continuing American control.

In it through this relationship that Saudi Arabia both acts to safeguard the continuing monopoly of one of the world’s most precious resources, and also acting to finance the spread of the British created “Wahhabi” extremism, designed to undermine Islam from within.

Leave a Reply