No one, not even George W. Bush, has been able to infuriate the Left quite like former Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann (R, MN).  For just one hyperbolic example, here's what "Rolling Stone" had to say about her in 2011: "Bachmann is a religious zealot whose brain is a raging electrical storm of divine visions and paranoid delusions." I have often defended her, both because I thought such attacks unfair, and because a few years ago the Congresswoman and I spoke over the phone about my dismissal from lecturing jobs at Joint Special Operations University and the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (DHS) because of Obama Administration orders to deep-six folks who discussed jihad in counter-terrorism training. I found her to be intelligent, articulate, polite and well-informed on Islamic issues--at least for a non-specialist.

Alas, Ms. Bachmann has gone off the eschatological deep-end. This past week she said that the Apocalypse is nigh--because of Barack Obama, who "is intent...to ensure that Iran has a nuclear weapon. Why? Why would you put the nuclear weapon in the hands of mad men?"  President Obama's speechwriters couldn't resist having the TOTUS (Teleprompter-of-the-US), er, POTUS zing her over that at the White House Correspondents' Dinner.  And frankly, I don't blame them--or him (for a change).

 Imam Mahdi, the Caliph Husayn! 

Ms. Bachmann is the ultimate (bad) example of an unfortunate and pernicious trend: the inundation of GOP politics by one particular stream of Evangelical Protestant eschatology. I first spoke on this trending flow at Concordia University-Irvine back in 2011, but it's now become a flood. To briefly list the major elements of this worldview: the Antichrist of Revelation will be a Muslim leader (perhaps someone claiming to be the Mahdi); such a figure may very well come from Iran (or, alternatively, from a revived Ottoman Empire); and, ipso facto, the ayatollahs/Islamic clerics want nuclear weapons in order to use them against Israel and thus "hotwire the apocalypse," causing Allah to send Islam's primary messianic figure. 

I am convinced that a number of Republican and Tea Party politicians base their foreign policy views--particularly their antipathy for the Islamic Republic--in large measure on this line of reasoning.  And while I bow to no one in my respect for the power of Islamic apocalyptic movements across space and time, I think an objective analysis of Iranian political and Twelver Shi`i religious thought clearly shows that the leaders of Tehran are neither "mad," nor do they believe in hotwiring the apocalypse.  (Please see my rather long scholarly paper on the topic, or, if you're in a hurry, dear reader, my most recent previous blogpost on topic. And for some real entertainment, check out this "NewsmaxTV" exchange between me and a clueless Tea Partier on topic.)  Of course, it's also absurd for Bachmann to claim that Obama wants to provide Iran WMDs--but once you're on this particular crazy train, you might as well just keep throwing coal into the engine. 

I should add that, as I've blogged, lectured and said in media interviews dozens of times since last summer, there ARE Sunni jihadist groups trying to violently immanentize the eschaton--most notably, and dangerously, ISIS.  But the ayatollahs of Iran are not of that particular ilk. 

Finally, what is particularly galling to me as a Christian--albeit a Lutheran with Orthodox leanings, NOT an Evangelical--is the ignorant hubris of those like Michelle Bachmann who think that they know better than Christ Himself about The End: "of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father" (St. Mark's Gospel, 13:32).  

After all, even Bono knows that one can get carried away talking about the end of the world. 

The Boston University conference on Mahdism, May 3-4, entitled "Apocalyptic Hopes, Millennial Dreams and Global Jihad" has a new weblink and a new poster. How about that JJ Abrams-esque lens flare on the Mahdi?! 

My paper is entitled "Rejecting Millennial Time: The Ottoman Empire's 700-year War against Mahdism in its Realm." I'm honored to be sharing the stage with the likes of the august folks listed above!

If you're anywhere near Boston in 10 days, come on out!  After all, although the Mahdi is certainly a man I'll never be, I still expect to be feelin' satisfied after this conference! But that could just be because I'm used to bad news....

Last week I appeared on the Christian current events radio show "View from the Bunker" to discuss Iran's nuclear program in light of its Twelver Shi`a theology and how that relates to the modern Middle East. I spent an hour refuting the now-entrenched position of my fellow conservatives: that Iran wants nukes to use on Israel and/or the US in order to 1) annihilate the Jews and 2) spark the coming of the Twelfth Imam al-Mahdi.  Folks like Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck and even John Bolton may not be idiots, yet they're spouting little but sound and fury on this topic (Macbeth, Act V, Scene 5). 

 Wonderful artwork from josephhubbard.com! 

Give it a listen.  Host Derek Gilbert is amazingly well-informed and, well, I know a bit myself!  

In two weeks (May 3-4, 2015), Boston University will host "Apocalyptic Hopes, Millennial Dreams and Global Jihad." Topics covered will include: ISIS's and Boko Haram's eschatological ideas; reluctance of Western analysts and commentators to see the connection between global jihad and Islamic apocalyptic; Iranian apocalpytic thought; etc.  I will present a paper on how the Ottoman Empire responded to Mahdist movements within its borders, and what that might teach Muslim governments today.  There are some major-league presenters--both academic experts (Will McCants; Brookings; organizers Richard Landes, BU; David Cook, Rice; Jeffrey Bales, MIIS) and "lay" (Graeme Wood; Ayaan Hirsi Ali). 

Journalists, academics and government analysts interested in this important topic should please come to Boston!  

Earlier this week the current affairs analytical shop Wikistrat asked me to opine on the conflict in Yemen. Here it is: 

"With Saudi Arabia and other Arab Sunni powers carrying out airstrikes in Yemen and accusing their regional nemesis, Iran, of instigating the Houthi uprising in the country, Wikistrat asked its Senior Analyst Dr. Timothy Furnish, who is an authority on especially Shia Islam, Mahdism and other Islamic sects, to provide background on the conflict and explain to what extent Iran really is involved.

Dr. Furnish notes that Yemen has been a battleground for rival brands of Islam for over a millennium.

In the 900s, it was contested by dueling Shiisms: the (then-militant) Seveners, or Isma’ilis, from North Africa waged dawah and jihad against Fivers, or Zaydis, from Iran. (This was before Iran’s forcible conversion to Twelver Shiism by the Safavids in the sixteenth century.) The Zaydis won and established a militant Imamate in northern Yemen. The Ottomans occupied Yemen twice in order to safeguard the holy cities of Mecca and Medina as well as Red Sea trade. Both times, Zaydi insurgents forced them out, despite massive Ottoman efforts to delegitimize the Zaydi Shii Imamate.

Iran would like this map--because there's no Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. But they'd dislike the return of the Ottoman Empire. 

In the 1960s civil war, staunchly Sunni Saudi Arabia (ironically) backed the Zaydis while Nasser’s Egypt supported the “republicans” who ultimately emerged victorious. After unification in 1990, the Sana’a government largely ignored the needs and demands of the 40 percent of the Yemeni population that was Zaydi, contributing to the sense of disenfranchisement felt by the main Zaydi tribe, the Houthis — which has now led to civil war again.

Iran has various aims in fanning the flames of the Houthi rebellion, Dr. Furnish explains:

• Leveraging “persecution” of Shia into regional geopolitical influence for Tehran-Qom;
• Appealing to, and exploiting, historical connections with Shia Muslims of Yemen and greater Arabia;
• Undermining and delegitimizing the Saudi government;
• Strengthening its strategic position on both sides of the Red Sea;
• Strengthening the anti-Israel Islamic front;
• Searching for allies wherever they can be found.

But Dr. Furnish also cautions that Iran neither created nor controls Yemen’s Zaydi discontent.

One might well argue, instead, that the Houthis Zaydi leadership is using Tehran more than the other way around.

For much of the last 1200 years, Zaydis have ruled over much of Yemen and they do have legitimate grievances against both the recent Sunni leadership in Sana’a and, of course, against Sunni jihadists like Al Qaeda and (allegedly) ISIS there.

Saudi Arabia’s reflexive theological and political fear of Shiism in the peninsula is understandable as well. Besides Yemen, there are large minority pockets of Twelvers in eastern Saudi Arabia and of Seveners in Najran.

Also, Mahdism has been a real fear since 1979, when Juhayman al-Utaybi declared his brother-in-law, Muhammad al-Qahtani, the Mahdi and their forces occupied the Great Mosque — a fear that has grown in recent years as Saudi Arabia has suffered a rash of “lone wolf” Mahdis across the kingdom.

Simply bombing Yemen is not going to stop such eschatological fervor, though, Furnish warns. If anything, it could drive more than just Houthis into Iran’s embrace.

Some means of redressing legitimate minority — Shia of all three denominations, that is — grievances must be part of the equation. Perhaps Oman, whose Ibadi Islam is tolerant of both Sunnis and Shiis and whose government is on good terms with Iran, can play a key role here.

Finally, Furnish urges Saudi Arabia and other Arab states to keep in mind that the self-declared “Islamic State” to the north is ultimately far more dangerous than the Zaydis to the south."

Also, in 2013, I was in Israel lecturing on this topic, at Haifa University. Here is the audio link.

The scimitar of the Zaydi Imam(s): Iran didn't forge it--but is helping aim it (at the Saudis).  

In the final battle, it wasn’t even close: ISIS handily dispatched its cousin Boko Haram to the tender care of the houris, making mincemeat, er, baba ghanouj of those pretenders from the Africa regional—as well as of the Obama analysis that ISIS was “the JV team.”  Ultimately, ISIS’ full-Mideast press, its much-maligned but politically-brilliant caliphate declaration, and its literally slashing approach to both offense and defense won the day.  

So ISIS will have a full year’s worth of bragging rights as jihadist champions—unless some other power declares a new tournament to challenge al-Baghdadi and his 7th century club.  

But that appears bloodly unlikely.  

 We're Number Wahid! We're Number Wahid! 

And then there were two…. After a grueling weekend of terrorism contests, the championship match is set: Boko Haram, emerging from the African regional, will take on its ostensible master, ISIS/ISIL/Da`ish, which rode roughshod over all pretenders in the Middle Eastern bracket.  

Ansaru, like Michigan State, really stood little chance against its big brother Boko Haram—especially when ECOWAS (the Economic Community of West African States) canceled plans for a joint, zone defense against BH, thus freeing up the African jihadists par excellence to roam around the court almost at will.  

ISIS, unlike Kentucky, continued its string of victories, adding recruitment of American Muslim women to its already well-established reputation for  artifact-plundering, er, “idol-smashing.”  At the same time, ISIS took the fight directly to HAMAS, which choked...literally on its own blood, with ISIS beheading one of its shaykhs in Syria. HAMAS’  joint Western-Islamic approach proved no match for ISIS’ brutally literalistic, Qur’an-derived playbook.  

Which Muslim terrorist team will lay claim to being the true Army of the Mahdi, come midnight Monday? Allah alone knows! 

 ISIS' women's team won't dress like this (except under their burkas)--but they will sport similar scimitars!