A post from brother Warrior:
I consider myself an Orthodox Muslim, a believer in Madhab and the established doctrines. It is interesting that you would think that, why would i need to indulge in or develop/promote other ideals? Well to be honest, it is because of my Orthodox doctrine, that i promote my ideology to defend the Orthodoxy. Developing new ideas are not a sin, as long as it is to uphold the established ideals (see: Ashari, Maturidi, etc). But my ideas are not theological-based at all (because I'm not an Islamic scholar), in fact they are designed to be cautious against those who develop such religious or non-religious ideals, groups and movements, which are ultimately designed to thwart Islamic Orthodoxy, and in a broader context Traditonal/Abrahamic orthodoxies (outside of Islam). To sum it up, my ideals are purely political, social and socio-political (that is why my tirades are geared against Zionism, Cultural-Marxism, Corporatism, and Revisionism).
You might not believe me, but i was once part of the Hive Mind that plagues Muslims; I was a mod/admin at a number of j1hadist forums, and due to a series of events and realizations over the span of several years, i left that. I realized that contradictions, inconsistency, and blatant ignorance of truth/facts is abundant everywhere. And this is hurting Islam and Muslim Orthodoxy in the long run. That is why i have now resorted to a completely new fight: the info-war, but of a totally different kind. When i was on the forums, i was trying desperately to bring attention to the massacres in Iraq of 'Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah' at the hands of the Shia (namely the Badr Brigades and Jaish al-Mahdi), all of whom were backed by Iran. Back then nobody cared, everyone supported Hezbollah and Iran, and people would rather blame America (even though the bigger killer was someone else).
That was when the West worked with the Shia to bring down Saddam, and now the same West is working with Sunnis/Salafis to bring down Assad/Hezbollah/Iran. All of a sudden, everyone has joined the bandwagon. This showed to me that the Muslims – while in denial – are actually in a Love/Hate relationship with the US/West. Their (re)actions are all based upon the actions of the US. It took the West to target Shia'ism, for Muslims to realize that Shia's are now a threat. This is why "Dialectic" becomes an issue, because everybody (Muslims, Westerners, etc) are trapped within a paradigm/dichotomy, instead of looking outside the box, independently and objectively. They only act in response to or influence by someone else (the establishment, or some other group aspiring to be the establishment).
The main issue why i left was that the inconsistencies and blind-following of partisanship plagued the masses who support j1hadist groups. It was a bother to me, because over the years Salafism became more prominent but it changed; it was contradicting the previous codes of conduct with regards to its operation. For example- Under "AQI" and "Mujahideen Shura Council" (2004-2006), Sheikh Abu Musab al-Zarqawi worked alongside rival/local groups to target the invaders and safavids in Iraq (that was when the Iraq insurgency was its most fierce/formidable), and he defended the 'People of the Book'. But after he died, the self-proclaimed "Islamic State of Iraq" (2007) formed in his place and its leadership became Abu Omar al-Baghdadi and Abu Hamza al-Muhajir. But they now started to target and attack the rival groups claiming that they will be the sole authority in Iraq. This causes massive splits, and weakened the insurgency, and many former-mujahideen joined the enemy forming "Sahwas" (pro-govt/US militias). However, the ISI still defended the People of the Book, there was an incident where they saved several Christian hostages from kidnappers.
However, after Baghdadi and Muhajir died (2010), and were replaced by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, one of the first things they did was attack and massacre a Christian church in Baghdad killing several dozen. This had crossed the line for me; unlike the sheeple who were blindly supporting such activities on other forums, i atleast (being a veteran) realized the inherent inconsistencies in tactic/principle. It became obvious to me that, as time goes on the Extremism snowballs larger and larger, and the deviation and infighting that comes with it grows larger and larger.
A similar story happened in Somalia, where after the Ethiopian invasion (2006), the "Islamic Courts Union" began its insurgency, and the various factions were unified, formidable and winning. The enemy withdrew in 2009, but then a split emerged, some factions (Sheikh Sharif Ahmed) wanted to join the government others wanted to topple it (Hizbul Islam & Al-Shabab). But soon after, Al-Shabab started fighting its rivals groups (Hizbul Islam) for territory and taxes. This hurt the insurgency, and showed that their main agenda is power and control. And worst of all, these infightings are always done with the excuse of "unity", in reality its 'monopoly' (subjugation). Soon, they started attacking shrines and digging up graves and bodies. Because of that they created newer enemies, the group calling itself the "Ahlus Sunnac wal Jamaa" who were now driven to join the government side. This renewed infighting actually brought back the AU and Ethiopia back into Somalia.
These factional infighting weaken the insurgency as whole, but that doesn't matter because now they get to have a monopoly (of the 'resistance'). And when you have a monopoly on j!had, you get to become the "good guys" regardless of what actions you commit; you get to keep the sole taxes, ghanima and control, and dictate your version of "Islam" without any dissent. But the question arises, when the ICU were in power, you never broke shrine (you had the perfect opportunity and legitimacy to do so), then why do so now and create enemies and more infighting? It became obvious to me, that the Salafist strategy is simple: (1) establish yourself among local population/land, and work alongside local/rival groups; (2) gain enough support and traction among local population; (3) when opportunity arises, declare yourself sole Hegemon, fight for "unity" (monopoly) and start enforcing your version of religion (salafism) and politics.
We have seen this in Iraq, we saw this in Somalia, and we will likely see this in some form in Syria to come. Al-Shabab banned food aid and charities even, which directly contradicts the Taliban (Islamic Emirate of Aghanistan)'s position, which shows the blatant ideological inconsistencies. The fact that sheeple can still support this without ever thinking why the discrepancies, really showed the light of how blind and dumb Muslims can be (but this is not isolated to Muslims). Al-Shabaab went on to clash against Hizbul fiercely in 2010 over various lucrative territories, primarily Burkhaba, even threatening to behead the Hizbul prisoners. After that event, Hizbul Islam surrendered to Al-Shabab.
None of the above however, were covered on the j1hadist forums (except the 2 i was working with). That because the majority of the forums are under the control of Al-Fajr and GIMF (which are the same group anyways). And they are the ones who publish the media for the AQ "brand" groups (and "brand" is all they are anymore, since they have no moral ideological principles/consistency). No mention of any infighting in Somalia, then suddenly in the New Year they make an announcement "Glad Tidings.. Hizbul Islam have 'merged' with Al-Shabab.. Unity, yay!!". No context whatsoever, no mention of the surrender, everything's so right in happy-go-lucky land. With regards to Iraq, they promoted ISI as a sole legitimate group, and spread lies that all the other groups (IAI, 1920RB, JaR, SoI, etc) were either "nationalist", deviant, or "sahwa". These blatant lies were fed, and the sheeple ate. It is all about 'controlling the narrative', that way you control the people and the direction.
This is why i became opposed to salafism, because it is a sweet poison. Sweet and unsuspecting at first, but when the time comes it become poison and bound to kill you. It is evident, that as time goes on the extremism snowballs, and therefore we must not allow it to get traction from the beginning. When the bigger enemy was Shias, nobody cared about Shias. Now the bigger enemy has become Salafis, but Muslims dont care about Salafis, you support them now. Muslims are always 3-steps behind the enemy, 3-steps behind whatever is going on. Just like Iran/Shia, they will come to realize who the enemy was all along, and then they will regret it. That is what I'm trying to prevent. The #1 threat at this moment is Salafi-takfiris, the #2 threat is Shia'ism, the #3 threat is Zionism (by that i don't mean Israel, i mean Zionist agents who influence the policies of the US/West).
If you want details (with sources/links) regarding my commentary on Iraq, Somalia, J!hadist-media, then i have made more elaborate posts elsewhere; not sure if they're existent or deleted, but feel free to give 'em a read. The Salafists know that their sectarianism, factionalism, infighting weakens the insurgency/j1had and therefore drags on the war. But thats what they WANT, just like the US want to drag on the Iraq and Afghan wars. The longer it drags on the longer they keep up the "War on Terror" facade, the longer/more they get to put money into the pockets of the Military-Industrial Complex and corporations, and increase their power/control at home (increasing security measures, growing gov't bureaucracies). The salafis do the same thing, because the longer the war drags on, the more opportunity they have to propagate/spread their religion/ideology, because during peace-time they never get any success. But during war-time and desperation, people come to them in droves, and those whom they don't like they can simply kill. And it all becomes "justified" in the name of "j!had". Ordo ab Chao – Order out of Chaos.