Da'wa too is jihad. Tactically, kitman and taqiyyah are Quranically sanctioned; so the following outrageous nonsense from the National Post and a Canadian news service on shari'a in Canada might cause some chuckles and some teeth gnashing too.
For those who forgot, dhimmitude full-blown is the best we can hope for later, so at the end of this installment we've tacked on the "Pact of Omar" to refresh your memories. The two pieces below are edited for length.
***
http://www.canada.com
"Sharia's underclass"
Salim Mansur
National Post
The unanimous resolution opposing"the establishment of so-called Islamic tribunals in Quebec and Canada," adopted recently by the Quebec National Assembly, has placed the spotlight on the Liberal government in Ontario and its pending decision relating to the use of Sharia (Islamic law) under the province's Arbitration Act.
The issue surfaced in 2003 when an organization calling itself the Islamic Institute of Civil Justice (IICJ) was established in Toronto to provide arbitration services to Ontario's Muslims. The founder of the institute is Syed Mumtaz Ali, a Muslim lawyer originally from India, who argued that since Ontario's Arbitration Act permits religious groups to settle family matters by applying their respective faith traditions -- e.g., Orthodox Jewish groups -- the same right should be extended to Muslim communities.
The IICJ then went public with its proposal that Muslims should arbitrate family disputes in its forum -- and be bound by its decisions without recourse to Canadian courts.
In June 2004, the Ontario government requested former NDP provincial attorney-general Marion Boyd to review the Arbitration Act and make recommendations respecting the use of Sharia in Ontario. Boyd sought the middle ground. In her December, 2004, report to Premier Dalton McGuinty, she sought the middle ground by supporting the inclusion of religious law in arbitration regarding "family law matters" -- provided that certain, vaguely defined safeguards were put in place through legislation.
During Boyd's consultations, the most well-considered opposition to the IICJ proposal came from the Canadian Council of Muslim Women (CCMW). The group's basis for opposing Sharia is reflected in its response to the recent Quebec decision: "Quebec has clearly understood that different laws for different citizens leads to discrimination and has nothing to do with multiculturalism or Charter rights."
The CCMW's concerns are well-founded. Mumtaz Ali has explained Muslims in Canada are obliged to follow both Sharia and Canadian laws. But the two are based on different premises, and cannot be reconciled.
Canadian laws originate with a democratically elected legislature, and are subject to revision. Sharia, by contrast, is based on the premise that Islamic laws are inspired by the Koran, Islam's sacred text. Since their origin is divine, they cannot be revised or amended by humans. Though there are different schools of Muslim jurisprudence, traditional Muslim scholars commonly insist on the sacredness of Sharia, and the idea that sovereignty in all matters belongs exclusively to God. [Allah.]
Sharia evolved between the eighth and 10th centuries [A.D.]....
By the end of the 10th century, however, there emerged a consensus among leading Sunni Muslim jurists that innovative legal prescriptions should be avoided; and that, henceforth, the task of religious scholarship would be to imitate the early jurists who'd founded the major schools of Muslim jurisprudence (Hanafi, Shafi, Maliki and Hanbali -- the Shia branch of Islam has its own school of thought, known as Jafari). As a result, Sharia became, and remains, a closed legal system locked in an ancient era. Modern post-colonial efforts to reform Sharia have mostly failed. Instead, militant Muslims have demanded full implementation of Sharia rulings .
***
In recent times, the world has witnessed such implementation in various Arab and Muslim societies -- for instance, in Afghanistan under the Taliban, in Saudi Arabia under that country's tribal monarchy, in Pakistan under various military dictators, in Iran, and even in parts of northern Nigeria. The more egregious aspects of Sharia rulings -- such as stoning of women charged with adultery, amputating limbs for stealing, public lashings for taking intoxicants and bearing false witness, ritual decapitation for capital offence, the death sentence for apostasy -- have particularly captured the attention of the Western media.
But even putting aside such brutal punishments, Sharia's prescriptions for family matters show how incompatible it is with the values of our era. The inherent problem here is the sanctification of gender inequality . Sharia prescriptions rest on the Koranic verse, "Men are in charge of women" (4:34). Consequently, any IICJ ruling in an arbitration panel on marriage, divorce, child custody, guardianship, income and property settlement, if it is to be consistent with Sharia requirements, would -- by definition -- be in violation of the equality rights protected by the Charter.
Divorce, for instance, may occur by a simple act of repudiation by a man of his wife, or on charges of infidelity, or on the inability of a woman to bear a male child. The only obligation a man has is to observe a waiting period of three menstrual cycles to confirm if the woman is pregnant, and the payment of the amount of money for which the marriage was contracted.
Unlike in the West, under Sharia custodial rights presumptively belong to fathers. On matters of inheritance, a female child has only half the rights of a male child, and a widow's right is restricted to a prescribed fraction (it may vary according to different schools of Muslim jurisprudence) of her husband's assets. On these matters Sharia's prescriptions would contradict not only the gender equality mandated by the Charter, but also the Ontario Family Act, and numerous other statutes.
Of course, the IICJ knows all this perfectly well. And so what is behind its initiative? The answer, as even a cursory reading of the IICJ's Web site shows (muslim-canada.org), is that the group seeks to incrementally win recognition for the idea that Muslims should be permitted to live by their own laws, separate from every other Canadian. The IICJ thereby seeks to set a precedent for other nations with a Muslim minority. Boyd's endorsement of Sharia law, therefore, unintentionally provides a trojan Horse for the global project of Muslim fundamentalists.
***
The argument that Sharia and Canada's secular laws may coexist harmoniously is either a vain wish, or a cynical ploy. But it is not fooling the people who count. As Madame Fatima Houda-Pepin, a Moroccan-Canadian member of Quebec's National Assembly, reminded me in a recent interview, modern Muslim women in Canada, though unapologetic when it comes to their faith and confident of their status in society, generally recognize that their rights and freedoms are best protected under the Charter. It remains a puzzle to them, as it does to others, why any government would entertain the proposal of encouraging the use of Sharia in this country.
© National Post 2005
***
"Terror in Europe, Sharia in Canada spark Multiculturalism row"
By Bruce Cheadle
OTTAWA (CP) - It seems a long way from the London terrorist bombings to a public policy debate in Canada over family arbitration reforms.
But each has sparked a heated debate on both sides of the Atlantic over the merits of multiculturalism as state policy and the role of what some call "political Islam" in secular societies.
In Europe, there is deep introspection over the terrifying reality of "homegrown" terrorists attacking open societies from within.
In Canada, from Quebec to Alberta, there has been spirited public sparring over proposals to permit Muslim Sharia religious arbitration in civil disputes.
Alienation and integration are the themes that bond these two seemingly disparate debates.
Marion Boyd, a former Ontario attorney general, has recommended changing the province's 14-year-old arbitration act to continue permitting religious arbitration, but with new oversight mechanisms and safeguards.
Religious family arbitration, she argues, "is one of the ways to keep the alienation and the disaffection of people under some control."
Yet at the same time, Boyd says Canada must do far more to educate newcomers about the legal reality of the state.
"That's been a criticism for a long time from groups that are working to settle immigrants and refugees," she said in an interview.
"There just is far too little legal education. People don't understand what their rights and obligations are."
Compare that to a recent speech by Trevor Phillips, the head of Britain's Commission for Racial Equality.
Five days after the July 7 bombings in London, Phillips launched a new race relations guide while excoriating "the divisive and stultifying effects of old-style, corporate multiculturalism."
"Aren't we compelled to ask whether a policy which puts recognition of difference before equality merely ensures that - while we salve our consciences by paying lip service to diversity - we deny some people the same life chances as most of us?" asked Phillips.
He warned that British communities are "in danger of sleepwalking into a kind of passive co-existence in which a friendly distance today will become an armed stand-off tomorrow."
This apocalyptic language comes from the black, Labour-appointed head of a government agency.
Couldn't happen in Canada?
Boyd's report on Ontario arbitration of December 2004 sparked language almost as strong.
Alia Hogben, president of the Canadian Council of Muslim Women, has called Sharia family arbitration "an abuse of multiculturalism."
Tarek Fatah of the Muslim Canadian Congress recently called it "multiculturalism run amok."
Homa Arjomand, an Iranian immigrant who's spearheading an international movement to stop the Ontario reforms, said Sharia family law exposes multiculturalism's flaw: "ghettoism. I'm talking about isolating minorities from mainstream society.
"That leaves them vulnerable to any kind of advertising or provoking or promoting," she said in an interview. "This is what I'm so worried about."
Indeed, all sides of the debate - whether in Europe or North America - have powerful reactions to the threat of domestic terrorism in the name of imported ideologies.
Wahida Valiante of the Canadian Islamic Congress, which endorses Boyd's reforms, says the repeated references to "homegrown terrorists" among Muslim communities incites hatred.
"'Homegrown! homegrown!' I mean, this is scary stuff," said Valiante.
"I don't know where the homegrowns are. I move around the community. What frightens us is if this rhetoric doesn't die down and the government takes no notice, we Muslims are in for a rough ride."
But, she added, "Canadians are definitely not going to buy into it wholesale. They're much more well informed. They're much more tolerant."
***
As B'nai Brith argued to Boyd, the federal Charter of Rights and Freedoms provides for faith-based groups to run arbitration courts for family law matters.
"If we are truly to be an open and pluralistic society in Canada, then the different religious practices making up Canada's mosaic must be accommodated."
But as more than a few critics have noted, Islam does not accept the separation of religious and state power, and that brings a whole new set of issues.
***
The leading public advocate of Sharia family courts in Ontario, Syed Mumtaz Ali, has consistently argued that the Charter freedom to practice one's religion "connote(s) a completely different meaning when used in the context of Islam/Muslim religion."
Mumtaz Ali, who did not respond to interview requests for this story, makes the explicit case on the website of the Canadian Society of Muslims.
"There is no separation of state and church, the temporal and the spiritual, unlike the Christian system of secularism. For a Muslim, 'practice' of his/her religion ... is a full-time, 24-hour occupation."
Critics cite such beliefs as fundamentally at odds with assurances that Sharia-based family arbitration will always fall under the mantle of Ontario law and the Charter.
As the Law Commission of Canada noted in a summation of briefs received by Boyd last fall, Mumtaz Ali and his Islamic Institute of Civil Justice have a flawed perception of Charter rights.
"What is unique about Mumtaz Ali's characterization of this issue that is disturbing to many Canadians both Muslim and non-Muslim, is his vision that this process of family arbitration is but one step toward a separate system of justice for Muslims where they would be permitted to govern their own affairs in the realm of civil law.
"Religious freedom and multiculturalism do not imply a right to sovereignty . . . ."
Yet this view of "political Islam" holds a powerful appeal, especially for large Muslim communities isolated and feeling under siege within non-Islamic states.
This has become acute in some European cities, such as Amsterdam, where Muslim immigrants make up as much as 25 per cent of the population.
***
Paul Scheffer, an urban sociologist at the University of Amsterdam, believes Canada is 10 years behind the Netherlands in its discourse on multiculturalism's practical flaws.
The Islamist-fuelled slaughter of film maker Theo van Gogh - and the current trial in which the accused killer is refusing to acknowledge the Dutch court's jurisdiction - is simply highlighting a problem that's been discussed for several years, he said.
"People have never been told that their rights go together with obligations," Scheffer said from his Amsterdam home. "We have simply been looking the other way in the name of tolerance."
Islam, with its fundamental blurring of church and state, is particularly problematic in this regard, argues Scheffer.
"People have to re-invent what it means to be a minority in a secular environment. That's a very difficult and painful process of adaptation."
Scheffer says Canada has done a better job than Europe of integrating immigrants into the economy - he credits Canada's merit-based points system - but argues this country will be "the exception" if it avoids Muslim integration issues down the road.
Valiante, a national vice-president with Canadian Islamic Congress, counters that Canada has nothing to learn about multiculturalism from Europe, where she says too many intellectuals suffer from amnesia.
She held up the example of Spain in the middle ages under the Moors.
"It was one of the most golden ages in Europe, not only knowledge-wise but for how socially integrated the society was with the Jews and the Muslims and Christians living side by side. That is a historical fact."
But it is also a 600-year-old example.
[And an example anyone who knows the history would choose, if Muslim, to avoid bringing up at all. For further information regarding this idiot piece of taqiyya above by Valiante, search Bat Yeor and Robert Spencer on dhimmitude in Spain, read their books, and follow the daily exgesis at http://jihadwatch.org, among other sites of great worth.]
More fundamentally, it simply highlights that the enlightened Moors of the time allowed Christians and Jews to run their own separate legal systems (albeit while paying a special tax to the governing Muslims for the privilege). [This really shouldn't go unchallenged, but we rely on the knowledge of our readers to carry them over this bit of trash.]
In Scheffer's modern example: "Multiculturalism should lead, when you take it seriously, to legal pluralism."
That's precisely the kind of compartmentalized society that Canadians and Europeans both hope to avoid.
As Phillips told his British audience earlier this month, social cohesion is based on three elements: Equality; interaction; and participation.
"This is what we mean when we speak of integration," said, "not some mealy-mouthed process where new migrants are told to leave their identities behind."
http://cnews.canoe.ca/
***
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/pact-umar.html
The Status of Non-Muslims Under Muslim Rule
After the rapid expansion of the Muslim dominion in the 7th century, Muslims leaders were required to work out a way of dealing with Non-Muslims, who remained in the majority in many areas for centuries. The solution was to develop the notion of the "dhimma", or "protected person". The Dhimmi were required to pay an extra tax, but usually they were unmolested. This compares well with the treatment meted out to non-Christians in Christian Europe. The Pact of Umar is supposed to have been the peace accord offered by the Caliph Umar to the Christians of Syria, a "pact" which formed the patter of later interaction.
We heard from 'Abd al-Rahman ibn Ghanam [died 78/697] as follows: When Umar ibn al-Khattab, may God be pleased with him, accorded a peace to the Christians of Syria, we wrote to him as follows:
In the name of God, the Merciful and Compassionate. This is a letter to the servant of God Umar [ibn al-Khattab], Commander of the Faithful, from the Christians of such-and-such a city. When you came against us, we asked you for safe-conduct (aman) for ourselves, our descendants, our property, and the people of our community, and we undertook the following obligations toward you:
We shall not build, in our cities or in their neighborhood, new monasteries, Churches, convents, or monks' cells, nor shall we repair, by day or by night, such of them as fall in ruins or are situated in the quarters of the Muslims.
We shall keep our gates wide open for passersby and travelers. We shall give board and lodging to all Muslims who pass our way for three days.
We shall not give shelter in our churches or in our dwellings to any spy, nor bide him from the Muslims.
We shall not teach the Qur'an to our children.
We shall not manifest our religion publicly nor convert anyone to it. We shall not prevent any of our kin from entering Islam if they wish it.
We shall show respect toward the Muslims, and we shall rise from our seats when they wish to sit.
We shall not seek to resemble the Muslims by imitating any of their garments, the qalansuwa, the turban, footwear, or the parting of the hair. We shall not speak as they do, nor shall we adopt their kunyas.
We shall not mount on saddles, nor shall we gird swords nor bear any kind of arms nor carry them on our- persons.
We shall not engrave Arabic inscriptions on our seals.
We shall not sell fermented drinks.
We shall clip the fronts of our heads.
We shall always dress in the same way wherever we may be, and we shall bind the zunar round our waists
We shall not display our crosses or our books in the roads or markets of the Muslims. We shall use only clappers in our churches very softly. We shall not raise our voices when following our dead. We shall not show lights on any of the roads of the Muslims or in their markets. We shall not bury our dead near the Muslims.
We shall not take slaves who have beenallotted to Muslims.
We shall not build houses overtopping the houses of the Muslims.
(When I brought the letter to Umar, may God be pleased with him, he added, "We shall not strike a Muslim.")
We accept these conditions for ourselves and for the people of our community, and in return we receive safe-conduct.
If we in any way violate these undertakings for which we ourselves stand surety, we forfeit our covenant [dhimma], and we become liable to the penalties for contumacy and sedition.
Umar ibn al-Khittab replied: Sign what they ask, but add two clauses and impose them in addition to those which they have undertaken. They are: "They shall not buy anyone made prisoner by the Muslims," and "Whoever strikes a Muslim with deliberate intent shall forfeit the protection of this pact."
from Al-Turtushi, Siraj al-Muluk, pp. 229-230.
[This was a from hand out at an Islamic History Class at the University of Edinburgh in 1979. Source of translation not given.]
Subscribe To No Dhimmitude
Posts
All Comments
Saturday, July 23, 2005
Friday, July 22, 2005
The Sleep of Reason
Western intellectuals have twisted themselves into a pose they can't get out of gracefully. There is a posture on the Left, an attitude taken up by the Left, a collection of cliches and 'critical analyses' that are so stupid and obviously so that only the worst of the intelligent can make pronouncements from them-- and they do. The dhimmi Left, those who've sold themselves into slavery to the Muslim barbarism, are standing exposed in the cold glare of reality, and they don't even shudder at their own disgusting spectacle.
It's time for us to move on from the 1960s. The 60's pose is torture to hold any longer. We must live in the world as it is, and let's stop pretending that everything is peace and love, because it obviously isn't. There is in the world a deep fascist tendency, and it's spreading, deepening, and bursting out, particularly from the Islamic world, and it's killing innocent passers-by at random. Islam is a form of fascism, and its old hippie cheerleaders are trying to pass it off as something other than exactly what it is. When our intellectual class stoop to self-dhimmification they too become fascists. Let's get over it. Let's regain our reason.
In dealing with the dhimmi Left and their critique of our societies and the relations we have with the Muslim world we are dealing in some sense with intellectuals, people who claim we have to 'understand' our Moslem enemies, to grasp the 'root causes' of their alienation from the world, to find out how and why it happened-- due to our faults, our Modernity, our progress in the past 250 years. But because our intellectuals are so does not mean they're honest intellectuals, and it does not mean they are rational intellectuals. They are, in the case of Karen Armstrong, for example, irrationalist intellectuals, and that irrationalism is a deep form of fascism. We have to look at what our intellctuals write and speak, and we have to understand their root causes before we can understand our own reactions to them. Once we see the nature of fascism, we will see the Left as a fascism all of its own working in concert with the fascist Islam of today.
Below we have three pieces excerpted from essays ranging from liberal suburbia to radical anarchy to pure science. The first piece looks at the nature of fascism as a political movement, gives some background and some bits of biography of some of the intellectuals who, mostly unwittingly, made fascism a social movement even unto our own time. If we look at the essay immediately below and interpret it in terms of Islam and Left dhimmitude the conclusion is clearly that the tradition of the Counter-Enlightenment marches on today on the Left and in the irrational response of the Islamic ummah. This alliance of Left and Islamic fascism is the enemy we must expose to all who will take up positions on the front lines of the battle between Modernity and fascism.
The second set of excerpts show that radical anarchism is an elitist and unimportant movement but that it too, from the Left, recognizes a common enemy in the fascist Left as clearly as do the majority of liberals and social conservatives of the West. Even marginal Left anarchists see clearly the fascism of dhimmitude in the West.
We end this post with a book review on the state of our intellectual classes and the nature of the fascist dhimmitude they practice. Irrationality is the general theme of our thinkers in the West, and it is a fascist response to Modernity. The review we end with is a call to Reason and the re-implemention of reason in our culture, particularly in our universities, places where today irrationality is the norm.
Why is Reason so important? It is the foundation of Modernity, and it is the enemy of fascism. Our Moslem cousins and their fascist dhimmi cheerleaders are intent on destroying Progress and Modernity for the sake of fascist reactionary revival. This is the war between Athens and Sparta continued. It will likely continue for the duration of the existence of Humankind. If we find that rrrationality is preferable to the so-called sterility of Modernity, then we should know exactly where we stand and with whom. If science and reason and progress and modern living are so hateful that we feel we should not continue in that pursuit, then we must take up arms to defeat it. We must join the fascists of Islam and the dhimmi Left. They are continuing the traditions of life as Men have lived it for 5,000 years, and it is we Modernists who are revolutionaries, those who are destroying the old and settled world of proto-fascism and primitive life that we as a species have lived it roughly-- forever. Ours is the life of Reason, and it might be bad.
Our enemies do not think in terms of Reason and Rationality. The fascisms of Islam and dhimmitude are based on hatred, violent emotionalism, outright insanity in modern terms of reference. There is no "understanding" to be found. There is only submission to the urge and Will. But we can at least know that our enemies are insane and filled with hatred so powerfull that they will kill themselves and you in their expressions of that hatred. We can sympathize with the hatred the primitives feel toward the disruption of their traditional lives, and we can provide cash to ease the transitions, we can even offer ourselves up as sacrifices to appease their hatred; but the fact remains that we cannot understand emotion, not theirs, not our own, because we can only feel it or see it at a distance. The choice is ours. We know them as insane and deal with their insanity as it objectively is, or we do not.
Islam is, as Hassan al-Banna, claimed, a total way of life, and it is imposed on the world by the vanguard of Islamic revolutionaries on unwilling people who must thereafter act in accordance with shari'a. But it didn't take al-Banna to theorize totalitarianism into the agenda of Islam. It was there from the start, and it will remain so as truly as totalitarianism is part and parcel of Soviet Communism. Our Left dhimmis are totalitarians and they now support the totalitarianism of Islam. We must see reason in our fight against both. And then we must ask "What is to be done?"
"Political Ideologies and the Democratic Ideal"
Terrence Ball and Richard Dagger.
Longman Publishing: New York. 1998.
Chapter 7: Fascism
The sleep of reason brings forth monsters.
Goya
[F]or totalitarianism is the attempt to take complete control of a society--not just its government, but all its social, cultural, and economic institutions--in order to fulfill an ideological vision of how society ought to be organized and life ought to be lived.
***
Mussolini and the Italian Fascists coined the word "totalitarian." They did this to define their revolutionary aims and to distinguish their ideology from liberalism and socialism, which they saw as advocates of democracy.
***
...in their view the masses were to exercise power not by thinking, speaking, or voting for themselves, but by following their leaders to glory. As one of Mussolini's many slogans put it, credere, obbedire, combattere-- believe, obey, fight. Nothing more was asked, nothing more was desired of the people. By embracing totalitarianism, then, fascists also rejected democracy.
***
Like the Reactionaries of the early 1800s, they also rejected the faith in reason that they thought formed the foundation for liberalism and socialism alike. Reason is less reliable, both Mussolini and Hitler declared, than intuitions and emotions--what we sometimes call "gut instincts." This is why Mussolini exhorted his followers to "think with your blood."
***
[F]ascism in its most distinctive forms has been openly revolutionary, eager not only to change society, but to change it dramatically. This by itself sets fascists apart from conservatives, who cannot abide rapid and radical change. So, too, does the fascist plan to concentrate power in the hands of a totalitarian state led by a single party and a supreme leader.
***
Although fascism did not emerge as a political ideology until the 1920s, its roots reach back over a century to the reaction against the intellectual and cultural movement that dominated European thought in the eighteenth century--the Enlightenment. The thinkers of the Enlightenment dreamed a dream of reason. Taking the scientific discoveries of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries as their model and inspiration, the Enlightenment philosophers claimed that the application of reason could remove all the social and political evils that stood in the way of happiness and progress. Reason can light the minds of men and women, they proclaimed, freeing them from ... ignorance and error and superstition. The two great political currents that flow from the Enlightenment are liberalism and socialism. Different as they are in other respects, these two ideologies are alike in sharing the premises of the Enlightenment. These premises include:
1. Humanism-the idea that human beings are the source and measure of value, with human life valuable in and of itself. As Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) put it, human beings belong to the "kingdom of ends." Each person is an end-in-himself, in Kant's words, not something that others may use, like a tool, as a means of accomplishing their own selfish ends.
2. Rationalism-the idea that human beings are rational creatures and that human reason, epitomized in scientific inquiry, can solve all mysteries and reveal solutions to all the problems that men and women face.
3. Secularism-the idea that religion may be a source of comfort and insight, but not of absolute and unquestionable truths for guiding public life. The Enlightenment thinkers differed from one another in their religious views. Some, like John Locke and Kant, remained Christians; others, like Voltaire (1694-1778), rejected Christianity but believed in a God who had created a world as well-ordered as a watch, which the "divine watchmaker" had wound and left to run; still others were atheists. But even those who took their Christianity seriously regarded religion as something to be confined largely to private life, and therefore out of place in politics. The irreligious among the Enlightenment philosophers simply dismissed religion as an outmoded superstition that must give way to rational and scientific ideas.
4. Progressivism-the idea that human history is the story of progress, or improvement-perhaps even inevitable improvement-in the human condition. Once the shackles of ignorance and superstition have been broken, human reason will be free to order society in a rational way, and life will steadily and rapidly become better for all.
5. Universalism-the idea that there is a single, universal, human nature that binds all human beings together, despite differences of race, culture, or religious creed. Human beings are all equal members of Kant's "kingdom of ends" who share the same essential nature. including preeminently the capacity for reason.
***
A diverse group of thinkers some call the Counter-Enlightenment mounted this attack on the Enlightenment.2 Among them were the linguist Johan Gottfried von Herder (1744-1803), the royalists and reactionaries Joseph de Maistre (1753-1821) and Louis Gabriel de Bonald (1754-1840), the Marquis de Sade (1740-1814), now notorious as a libertine and pornographer, and racial theorists like Joseph-Arthur de Gobineau (1816-1882).
***
They were united, for instance, in denouncing "universalism" as a myth. Human beings are not all alike, they said; the differences that distinguish groups of people from one another run very deep. Indeed, these differences---0f sex, race, language, culture, creed, and nationality-actually define who and what people are, shaping how they think of themselves and other people. Some of the Counter-Enlightenment thinkers stressed differences of one sort, while others focused on other kinds. For Herder, linguistic and cultural differences mattered most; for Gobineau, it was race; and for de Sade, it was gender. Men, de Sade observed, do not admit women to the "kingdom of ends." They treat them as means, as objects to be used, abused, and humiliated-and this is as it should be. Fittingly, our words "sadism" and "sadistic" come from the name de Sade.
***
The Counter-Enlightenment critics brought similar complaints against the Enlightenment's faith in reason. The problem with rationalism, they said, is that it flies in the face of all human experience. The prevalence of unreason, of superstition and prejudice, shows that reason itself is too weak to be relied on. Most people, most of the time, use reason not to examine matters critically and dispassionately, but to rationalize and excuse their desires and deepen their prejudices. With this in mind, the Counter-Enlightenment writers often deplored the Enlightenment assault on religion. Some of them wrote from sincere religious conviction, but others simply held that religious beliefs are socially necessary fictions. The belief in heaven and hell, they maintained, may be all that keeps most people behaving as well as they do; to lose that belief may be to lose all hope of a civilized and orderly society. If that means that government must support an established church and persecute dissenters, then so be it.
***
[H]umans are fundamentally nonrational, even irrational, beings; they are defined by their differences---0f ... race, sex, religion, language, and nationality; and they are usually locked in conflict with one another, a conflict sparked by their deep-seated and probably permanent differences. Taken one by one, there is nothing necessarily "fascist" about any element of this picture. Combining the elements, however, gives us a picture of human capacities and characteristics that prepared the way for the emergence of fascism.
***
The final element in the cultural and intellectual background of fascism was irrationalism. This term captures the conclusions of a variety of very different thinkers who all came to agree with the thinkers of the Counter-Enlightenment that emotion and desire play a larger part in the actions of people than reason. Among these thinkers was Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), the founder of psychoanalysis, whose observations of his patients-and even of himself-led him to detect the power of instinctive drives and "the unconscious" in human conduct. In a similar vein the American philosopher and psychologist William James (1842-1910) held that most people have a "will to believe." Exactly what they believe is less important to them, James said, than that they believe in something. Psychologically speaking, people need something-- almost anything, in fact-- in which to believe. For the one thing that human beings cannot endure is a life devoid of some larger purpose or meaning.
Another social theorist who contributed to the development of irrationalism--and one who seems to have had a special influence on Mussolini--was the French social psychologist, Gustav Le Bon (1841-1931). In his classic work, The Crowd (1895), Le Bon argued that human behavior in crowds is different from their behavior as individuals. Acting collectively and therefore anonymously, people will participate in acts of barbarism that they would never engage in as lone individuals. The psychology of lynch-mobs, for example, is quite different from the psychology of the individuals who compose that mob. People acting en masse and in mobs are not restrained by individual conscience or moral scruple. A mob psychology, or a "herd instinct," takes over and shuts down individual judgments regarding right and wrong.
In a similar spirit, Pareto examined the social factors influencing individual judgment and behavior, concluding that emotions, symbols, and what he called "sentiments" are more important than material or economic factors. And Mosca suggested that people are moved more by slogans and symbols, flags and anthems --by "political formulae" as he called them --than by reasoned argument and rational debate.
All these thinkers -- Freud and James, Le Bon, Pareto, and Mosca -- were more immediately concerned with explaining how people acted than in leading people to action.
Not so Georges Sorel (1847-1922), a French engineer turned social theorist and political activist, Sorel [qv. no dhimmitude] insisted that people are more often moved to action by political "myths" than by appeals to reason, To...bring about major social changes, it is necessary to find a powerful myth that can inspire people to act. For Sorel, the idea of a nationwide "general strike" could prove to be such a myth. The "general strike" was a myth, in other words, in that there was no guarantee that it would really lead to the revolutionary overthrow of the bourgeoisie and capitalism. If enough people could be brought to believe in the myth of the general strike, however, their efforts, inspired by this belief, would indeed lead to a successful revolution. What matters most, Sorel concluded, is not the reasonableness of a myth, but its emotional power, for it is not reason but emotion that leads most people to act. And when the people act en masse, they can smash almost any obstacle in their path,
This was advice that Mussolini, Hitler, and other fascist leaders quite obviously took to heart. The slogans, the mass demonstrations, the torchlight parades-- all were designed to stir the people at their most basic emotional and instinctive levels. But stir them to do what? To create powerful nation states, then mighty empires, all under the leadership of the fascist elite. So it was not only irrationalism, but elitism and nationalism and the attitudes of the Counter-Enlightenment, too, that came together in the early twentieth century in the totalitarian ideology of fascism.
***
It is the work of professional intellectuals to think, and they think on behalf of the general public, a job as specifically definable as that of plumbers or airline pilots. Intellectuals provide us with the connections and the going to and from of thoughts that govern our daily lives. We are mostly too busy in our lives to think of the so-called big questions, and we rely on the inteelectuals of our societies to do that work for us. We assume they do their work honestly. We have been sadly betreayed in our trust, not just in the past 30 years but mostly throughout our history. It is up to us to ensure the correction of evil ideas, ideologies, and political agendas that threaten us even if we are not inteelctuals and don't have time to fuss with the details. we msut know what we can and act in our own best interests regardless of what our intellectuals tell us about ourselves and our world.
Below is a look at an anarchist's view of power, social relations, and intellectuals, and in it we see yet another approach to the problem of Irrationalism in the West in this time. If we look at the excerptsw as reflective of the minds of Muslims we'll see clearly the scope of unreason that we must deal with, and perhaps we'll begin to get a sense of how to respond to the threat of Islamic and dhimmi fascists in our midsts.
http://www.theidyllic.com/php/article.php?article=15
One need not reject the claims of a Hobbes or a Burke that humans are creatures of passion rather than reason to recognize that the most severe crimes perpetrated by individuals pale in comparison to those committed by organizations led by some sort of institutionalized authority. The modern serial killer is insignificant when contrasted with the death squad member or secret policeman. The greatest crimes of all are, of course, committed by the institution of the state, what Nietzsche characterized as a "cold monster". It is of the utmost importance to recognize that even persons of "normal" psychological make-up or moral temperament can be driven to act in the most atrocious ways when prodded by group norms or the direction of malignant leaders. This is borne out by the relevant studies in social psychology, particularly those of Stanley Milgram.(7) Hannah Arendt described this phenomena as "the banality of evil", a process whereby the most senseless and irrational forms of inhumanity acquire an aura of normalcy and take place within an atmosphere of dull mechanization.(8)
***
As power has never been quite so centralized as it is at present, the anarchist critique is now more relevant than ever. The essence of the traditional anarchist position is that the state is no more than a criminal gang writ large. The state exists to control territory, protect an artificially privileged ruling class, exploit its subjects or expand its power. Any other claims by or on behalf of the state are simply a matter of evasion, obfuscation, or perhaps mere naivete.
***
One of the most distinguishing characteristics of anarchists is the smallness of their ranks. This is likely rooted in the tendency of most anarchists, of whatever school, to focus on ideological abstractions and a type of intellectual elitism that disregards the sentiments and sensibilities of ordinary people. Most people are not intellectuals. Most people are not interested in ideology. Most people are not the rugged self-reliant individualists idealized by libertarians or the faithful crusaders for social justice that serve as left-wing archetypes. Instead, the nature of most people is to focus on their immediate day-to-day business. Most people seek security, identity and self-actualization in groups and get their ideas about what constitutes "right and wrong" from cues taken from peers, members of their own in-groups and perceived leaders and authority figures. The strongest attachments of this type seem to be family, ethnicity, religion, culture, language, geography and, to some degree, economic function and social class. Particularistic attachments of these types are commonly disregarded by leftist and libertarian intellectuals (and by establishment liberals and neoconservatives!) as reactionary, backward, overly parochial or provincial, ignorant and superstitious and even bigoted and hateful. Yet it is precisely these types of particularism that provide the social glue that holds organic and authentic human societies and cultures together.
***
Our struggle against Islam began the day Napoleon landed at Alexandria, Egypt in 1798. From that day to this and until the end, Islam, kicked in the teeth and beaten, was psychotic, and there is no turning back. The State of isreal, the War in Iraq, the Coca Cola labels maligning Allah, none of these things make any real difference other than that they are compounds of the napoleonic invasion. Napoleon brought, for the first time, Modernity to the islamic world, and there is no turning back. Islam lost its mind totally, and it cannot regain any pretense again of normalcy. Modernity came knocking, and the door opened in spite of Islam's best efforts to keep it out for good. Now we are at war, and there is no end until one side or the other is totally victorious. either the world of Modernity triumphs or the world slides back into primitivsim. We cannot co-exist. We will be ratrional or we will be enslaved.
Many of our finest intellectuals in the West hate Modernity. They side with the fascists of Islam. below we'll see some of what that means to us in our daily lives. It comes down to simple things such as the irrationalism of trivia, for example, the "New Age" pretentions of our anti-modernist longings for authenticity, a fascist ideological thread brought to us thanks to Heidegger, of whom most of us know nothing at all, but who is implanted deeply in our social discourse regardless. We think orf the daily horoscopes in the paper as harmless or even silly but we don't think often of the political implications that it leads to, the furtherence of irrationalatity and the eventual disgust with Modernity, the repetitive harping of emotionalism over reason, and the decline of Reason into fascism, the love of barbarism, the excusing of violence and the acceptance of Islamic hatred of Modernity that our dhimmis claim as valid and right. We might get sucked in by our intellectuals, sucked into a vortex of fascism unexamined and unconsidered simply because we're busy and reliant upon the good-will of our intellectual class to give us the best products of fertile and excellent minds working professionally to make our intellectual ethos for us. Unfortuneatley, we ended up with dhimmis who are ruining the world not only for us but for the slaves of primitivism themselves. The dhimmis are selling out the primitives of the world as happily as they are selling out the trusting populations of the West. The dhimmis of our intellectual classes are struggling agianst Modernity and Reason. Below we'll see some reactions from those who value science and logic, reason and evidence, rationality and progress, and we'll see that they are concerned with those whom we here refer to as dhimmis.
http://www.humanists.net/
Smoke and Mirrors in the Halls of Academe
A Review of Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and its Quarrel with Science
Paul R. Gross and Norman Levitt
Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994, 313 pages.
by Pat Duffy Hutcheon
Gross and Levitt have courageously tackled a subject which many worried academics have avoided studiously in the vain hope that it would somehow quietly go away. The issue is the rising tide of hostility within universities to the disciplined scientific approach to knowing. As the authors demonstrate, this hostility has been gaining ground for almost three decades -- and in the very place where the ordinary, trusting citizen would least expect it. It appears that a major source of what now amounts to a virtual epidemic of relativism and irrationalism is the very institution that has been assigned the privileged role of bastion of reliable knowledge and instigator of informed and reasoned inquiry: the university system of the industrialized West. Readers unfamiliar with what has been happening may find some of what they encounter in this important and timely book so incredible that they will be inclined to discount it. But anyone concerned about the future of our universities -- and, indeed, of the society they serve -- would be well advised to read Higher Superstition carefully and to consider the implications of its message.
The book is organized into chapters which include the following: (1) a brief review of the history and politics relevant to the topic at hand; (2) a general overview of the defining features of the "cultural constructivist" attack on science; (3) an introduction to "postmodernism" -- identified as a sort of "catch-all" phrase for a specific cultural constructivist approach pioneered within literary theory and subsequently enveloping the general field of cultural studies; (4) a critique of fundamentalist feminism (a radical branch of the womens' movement which seems to have assumed all the "perspectivist" premises and postures of postmodernism); (5) a critique of anti-science environmentalism; and (6) a discussion of a number of versions of social activism that have become impatient and disillusioned with the fact that science cannot create immediate Utopias. The latter include some currents within the AIDS movement, the extremist proponents of "animal rights", and the Afro-centrism which has become so popular in American universities.
In spite of the subtitle, this is not a matter of left versus right as usually defined in the political arena of the larger society. Gross and Levitt make this point themselves, recognizing that any scholars seriously committed to solving social problems would seem to be deliberately crippling their own enterprise -- and betraying their deepest traditions -- if they forsake the scientific mode of inquiry for the New Age and "postmodern" doctrines now dominating the social sciences and humanities. They remind us that, throughout history, authoritative scientific inquiry -- far from being the enemy of social progress -- has invariably been the most powerful of weapons against exploitative authoritarianisms, whether social or intellectual. They also recognize that one of the two influential anti-science currents in the larger society today is led by the Creationists, who are right-wing in the traditional sense of the term.
As Gross and Levitt explain the issue, "We are using academic left to designate those people whose doctrinal ideosyncracies sustain the misreadings of science, its methods, and its conceptual foundations that have generated what nowadays passes for a politically progressive critique of it ( p.9)". They suggest that the term "left-wing" is justified because many of these people are former Marxists who have sought a congenial ideological home within the modern university. "Marxism, as understood by the American Left," they say, "has mutated from a revolutionary program driven by a strong sense of economic forces, to a philosophical impulse that mixes with other strains -- feminist, deconstructionist, Foucaldian, Laconian, ecological, and so forth -- to create the eclectic view of postmodern radicalism ( p.221)".
The authors caution that no designation of the proponents of today's anti-science current within academia can be hard and fast. "Each practitioner assembles his or her arsenal from favorite polemical bits and pieces -- a little Marxism to emphasize the twinship of science with economic exploitation, a little feminism to arraign the sexism of scientific practice, a little deconstruction to subvert the traditional reading of scientific theory, perhaps a bit of Afro-centrism to undermine the notion that scientific achievement is inevitably linked to European cultural values ( p.11)." The movement is joined by one common purpose, however, as Gross and Levitt make clear time and again in the examples they bring to bear on the argument. It is to "demystify?" science, to undermine its authority and to assign priority to competing and incompatible modes of knowing. We are reminded that this is not a new theme. "The notion that science is poisoned knowledge, the fruit of a Faustian bargain, has been with us for a long time, and its cry has more often come from reactionaries than from progressives ( p.219)."
The authors present a lucid summary of the history of the scientific method of inquiry, noting two major nineteenth century roots of today's "postmodernism". They trace the left-wing version of anti-science to the seductive Romantic exaltation of understanding over reason, as well as to Karl Marx's successful conscription of the prestige (minus the substance) of science to his own polemical ends. They look to more recent history to account for the prevalence, within modern departments of humanities and social/cultural studies, of academics with an anti-scientific mind set. A virtual "ball of exponential growth" in this direction was set rolling, they say, with the influx of doctrinaire militants during the late sixties, when North American universities were expanding rapidly. For anyone familiar with the power structure of the university, it is not difficult to accept the argument that, during the following twenty-five years, the entire process of recruitment into academic careers -- and that of "peer review" in academic journals, and the tenure and promotion tied to all this -- underwent alteration in a direction that selected and rewarded those with a vaguely mystical anti-scientific, holistic and "perspectivist" frame of reference.
This model which has gained such political success in the hothouse of academia is one that interprets the scientific world view as merely a product of the ideology controlling the society in which research is being conducted. Far from being a fruitful method of building reliable knowledge, science is, according to the postmodernists, "rather a parable, an allegory, that inscribes a set of social norms and encodes, however, subtly, a mythic structure justifying the dominance of one class, one race, one gender over another ( p.46)." Scientific verification is a matter of political/social authority only. Most amazing of all, the authors say, postmodernists disregard the obvious fact that science works, and that the propositions flowing from their own garbled obfuscations have been shown time and time again to have "all the explanatory power of the Tooth-Fairy Hypothesis ( p.47)."
To many scientists, perhaps the most amusing aspect of the posturing of postmodernists is their use of scientific concepts and authorities as grist for their ideological mills, even though they seem to lack elementary understanding of the premises, theories and bodies of knowledge involved. As an example of this, Gross and Levitt refer to the mountains of relativistic nonsense that have been written about Heisenberg's "uncertainty principle." They note wistfully that all this might have been avoided if Heisenberg had chosen a less emotive term. I would suggest that the same can be said about "chaos" theory. Nietzsche is (rightly) cited as an earlier prototype of the type of dangerously muddled, solipsistic and magical thinking that we find in today's postmodernism. The authors point out that Godel (another postmodernist saint) turns out -- on closer scrutiny -- to be an unadulterated Platonist, apparently believing that "an eternal 'not" was laid up in heaven where virtuous logicians hope to meet it hereafter ( p.102)."
The last section of the book raises a number of important questions. For example: What about the responsibility of scientists to ensure that university courses labeled as sciences are, in fact, teaching legitimate empirical methodology and reliable facts? What about the responsibility of all academics to be vigilant about the standards of excellence, and of evidence, applied throughout the university in the performance of its cultural function of providing intellectual and moral leadership? And finally, is it possible that the situation has now regressed so far that the only solution will be a schism within the system, with colleges of science providing their own courses in the humanities and the social/cultural studies?
This book will be sad reading for theorists and researchers in the exact sciences. For scientifically oriented social scientists like myself, however, it is much worse. It amounts to a tragic confirmation of personal experience. Gross and Levitt speak of attempting to recover lost territory for the scientific approach -- of physical scientists standing up for those of their colleagues in the social disciplines who are fighting the battle against relativism and irrationality. It is true that, for some time now, the struggle of a minority of social scientists to maintain scientific integrity within their professional communities has been a lonely one. It has been especially lonely for those, like myself, who have been attempting to define and justify an alternative approach to that of postmodernism. In my 1996 book, Leaving the Cave, I have proposed the scientific model of evolutionary naturalism -- built upon reliable knowledge from the life sciences and insights from the soundest work available in the social sciences, and incorporating the open-ended, self-correcting method of disciplined scientific inquiry.
I believe it is necessary to demonstrate that what the various versions of cultural constructivism offer is merely a grotesque metaphor for the real thing: scientific cultural studies capable of producing compelling evidence about the causes and consequences of human behavior. It is the absence of reliable knowledge that makes our social problems appear so intractable that "Cargo Cult" delusions can be peddled to gullible students as attractive options. The popularity of postmodernism today is, more than anything, a measure of the failure of the social sciences during the twentieth century.
***
One of the central tenets of fascism is irrationalism. There's little more to say than that we cannot understand irrationality rationally. We can attempt to intellectualize irrationality but the fact is that the world holds roughtly a billion Moslems who are having what amounts to a two year old's violent temper tantrum. We have to respond to that the way a mature and decent parent would respond to a child going uncontrolably insane. Our problem is that the Moslem world is huge and physically mature. They are insane, and violently so. The dhimmi intellectuals seem to like it. They excuse it. They pretend that it's our fault, that we took away the Moslems' favorite toy or some such, and that if only we stop what we're doing and make amends then all will again be right with the world. but it will never again be right. This is our time to either spread the revolutions of odernity or lose all that Humanity has gained in the past 250 years.
If we do not stop the insanity of the Islamic world, firstly by dismissing our dhimmi Left intellectuals as scum-bags, and then by controlling forcably the Moslem world, regardless of their reactions to that, then we are doomed to be ruled by lunatic and violent children out of control.
It's time for us to move on from the 1960s. The 60's pose is torture to hold any longer. We must live in the world as it is, and let's stop pretending that everything is peace and love, because it obviously isn't. There is in the world a deep fascist tendency, and it's spreading, deepening, and bursting out, particularly from the Islamic world, and it's killing innocent passers-by at random. Islam is a form of fascism, and its old hippie cheerleaders are trying to pass it off as something other than exactly what it is. When our intellectual class stoop to self-dhimmification they too become fascists. Let's get over it. Let's regain our reason.
In dealing with the dhimmi Left and their critique of our societies and the relations we have with the Muslim world we are dealing in some sense with intellectuals, people who claim we have to 'understand' our Moslem enemies, to grasp the 'root causes' of their alienation from the world, to find out how and why it happened-- due to our faults, our Modernity, our progress in the past 250 years. But because our intellectuals are so does not mean they're honest intellectuals, and it does not mean they are rational intellectuals. They are, in the case of Karen Armstrong, for example, irrationalist intellectuals, and that irrationalism is a deep form of fascism. We have to look at what our intellctuals write and speak, and we have to understand their root causes before we can understand our own reactions to them. Once we see the nature of fascism, we will see the Left as a fascism all of its own working in concert with the fascist Islam of today.
Below we have three pieces excerpted from essays ranging from liberal suburbia to radical anarchy to pure science. The first piece looks at the nature of fascism as a political movement, gives some background and some bits of biography of some of the intellectuals who, mostly unwittingly, made fascism a social movement even unto our own time. If we look at the essay immediately below and interpret it in terms of Islam and Left dhimmitude the conclusion is clearly that the tradition of the Counter-Enlightenment marches on today on the Left and in the irrational response of the Islamic ummah. This alliance of Left and Islamic fascism is the enemy we must expose to all who will take up positions on the front lines of the battle between Modernity and fascism.
The second set of excerpts show that radical anarchism is an elitist and unimportant movement but that it too, from the Left, recognizes a common enemy in the fascist Left as clearly as do the majority of liberals and social conservatives of the West. Even marginal Left anarchists see clearly the fascism of dhimmitude in the West.
We end this post with a book review on the state of our intellectual classes and the nature of the fascist dhimmitude they practice. Irrationality is the general theme of our thinkers in the West, and it is a fascist response to Modernity. The review we end with is a call to Reason and the re-implemention of reason in our culture, particularly in our universities, places where today irrationality is the norm.
Why is Reason so important? It is the foundation of Modernity, and it is the enemy of fascism. Our Moslem cousins and their fascist dhimmi cheerleaders are intent on destroying Progress and Modernity for the sake of fascist reactionary revival. This is the war between Athens and Sparta continued. It will likely continue for the duration of the existence of Humankind. If we find that rrrationality is preferable to the so-called sterility of Modernity, then we should know exactly where we stand and with whom. If science and reason and progress and modern living are so hateful that we feel we should not continue in that pursuit, then we must take up arms to defeat it. We must join the fascists of Islam and the dhimmi Left. They are continuing the traditions of life as Men have lived it for 5,000 years, and it is we Modernists who are revolutionaries, those who are destroying the old and settled world of proto-fascism and primitive life that we as a species have lived it roughly-- forever. Ours is the life of Reason, and it might be bad.
Our enemies do not think in terms of Reason and Rationality. The fascisms of Islam and dhimmitude are based on hatred, violent emotionalism, outright insanity in modern terms of reference. There is no "understanding" to be found. There is only submission to the urge and Will. But we can at least know that our enemies are insane and filled with hatred so powerfull that they will kill themselves and you in their expressions of that hatred. We can sympathize with the hatred the primitives feel toward the disruption of their traditional lives, and we can provide cash to ease the transitions, we can even offer ourselves up as sacrifices to appease their hatred; but the fact remains that we cannot understand emotion, not theirs, not our own, because we can only feel it or see it at a distance. The choice is ours. We know them as insane and deal with their insanity as it objectively is, or we do not.
Islam is, as Hassan al-Banna, claimed, a total way of life, and it is imposed on the world by the vanguard of Islamic revolutionaries on unwilling people who must thereafter act in accordance with shari'a. But it didn't take al-Banna to theorize totalitarianism into the agenda of Islam. It was there from the start, and it will remain so as truly as totalitarianism is part and parcel of Soviet Communism. Our Left dhimmis are totalitarians and they now support the totalitarianism of Islam. We must see reason in our fight against both. And then we must ask "What is to be done?"
"Political Ideologies and the Democratic Ideal"
Terrence Ball and Richard Dagger.
Longman Publishing: New York. 1998.
Chapter 7: Fascism
The sleep of reason brings forth monsters.
Goya
[F]or totalitarianism is the attempt to take complete control of a society--not just its government, but all its social, cultural, and economic institutions--in order to fulfill an ideological vision of how society ought to be organized and life ought to be lived.
***
Mussolini and the Italian Fascists coined the word "totalitarian." They did this to define their revolutionary aims and to distinguish their ideology from liberalism and socialism, which they saw as advocates of democracy.
***
...in their view the masses were to exercise power not by thinking, speaking, or voting for themselves, but by following their leaders to glory. As one of Mussolini's many slogans put it, credere, obbedire, combattere-- believe, obey, fight. Nothing more was asked, nothing more was desired of the people. By embracing totalitarianism, then, fascists also rejected democracy.
***
Like the Reactionaries of the early 1800s, they also rejected the faith in reason that they thought formed the foundation for liberalism and socialism alike. Reason is less reliable, both Mussolini and Hitler declared, than intuitions and emotions--what we sometimes call "gut instincts." This is why Mussolini exhorted his followers to "think with your blood."
***
[F]ascism in its most distinctive forms has been openly revolutionary, eager not only to change society, but to change it dramatically. This by itself sets fascists apart from conservatives, who cannot abide rapid and radical change. So, too, does the fascist plan to concentrate power in the hands of a totalitarian state led by a single party and a supreme leader.
***
Although fascism did not emerge as a political ideology until the 1920s, its roots reach back over a century to the reaction against the intellectual and cultural movement that dominated European thought in the eighteenth century--the Enlightenment. The thinkers of the Enlightenment dreamed a dream of reason. Taking the scientific discoveries of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries as their model and inspiration, the Enlightenment philosophers claimed that the application of reason could remove all the social and political evils that stood in the way of happiness and progress. Reason can light the minds of men and women, they proclaimed, freeing them from ... ignorance and error and superstition. The two great political currents that flow from the Enlightenment are liberalism and socialism. Different as they are in other respects, these two ideologies are alike in sharing the premises of the Enlightenment. These premises include:
1. Humanism-the idea that human beings are the source and measure of value, with human life valuable in and of itself. As Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) put it, human beings belong to the "kingdom of ends." Each person is an end-in-himself, in Kant's words, not something that others may use, like a tool, as a means of accomplishing their own selfish ends.
2. Rationalism-the idea that human beings are rational creatures and that human reason, epitomized in scientific inquiry, can solve all mysteries and reveal solutions to all the problems that men and women face.
3. Secularism-the idea that religion may be a source of comfort and insight, but not of absolute and unquestionable truths for guiding public life. The Enlightenment thinkers differed from one another in their religious views. Some, like John Locke and Kant, remained Christians; others, like Voltaire (1694-1778), rejected Christianity but believed in a God who had created a world as well-ordered as a watch, which the "divine watchmaker" had wound and left to run; still others were atheists. But even those who took their Christianity seriously regarded religion as something to be confined largely to private life, and therefore out of place in politics. The irreligious among the Enlightenment philosophers simply dismissed religion as an outmoded superstition that must give way to rational and scientific ideas.
4. Progressivism-the idea that human history is the story of progress, or improvement-perhaps even inevitable improvement-in the human condition. Once the shackles of ignorance and superstition have been broken, human reason will be free to order society in a rational way, and life will steadily and rapidly become better for all.
5. Universalism-the idea that there is a single, universal, human nature that binds all human beings together, despite differences of race, culture, or religious creed. Human beings are all equal members of Kant's "kingdom of ends" who share the same essential nature. including preeminently the capacity for reason.
***
A diverse group of thinkers some call the Counter-Enlightenment mounted this attack on the Enlightenment.2 Among them were the linguist Johan Gottfried von Herder (1744-1803), the royalists and reactionaries Joseph de Maistre (1753-1821) and Louis Gabriel de Bonald (1754-1840), the Marquis de Sade (1740-1814), now notorious as a libertine and pornographer, and racial theorists like Joseph-Arthur de Gobineau (1816-1882).
***
They were united, for instance, in denouncing "universalism" as a myth. Human beings are not all alike, they said; the differences that distinguish groups of people from one another run very deep. Indeed, these differences---0f sex, race, language, culture, creed, and nationality-actually define who and what people are, shaping how they think of themselves and other people. Some of the Counter-Enlightenment thinkers stressed differences of one sort, while others focused on other kinds. For Herder, linguistic and cultural differences mattered most; for Gobineau, it was race; and for de Sade, it was gender. Men, de Sade observed, do not admit women to the "kingdom of ends." They treat them as means, as objects to be used, abused, and humiliated-and this is as it should be. Fittingly, our words "sadism" and "sadistic" come from the name de Sade.
***
The Counter-Enlightenment critics brought similar complaints against the Enlightenment's faith in reason. The problem with rationalism, they said, is that it flies in the face of all human experience. The prevalence of unreason, of superstition and prejudice, shows that reason itself is too weak to be relied on. Most people, most of the time, use reason not to examine matters critically and dispassionately, but to rationalize and excuse their desires and deepen their prejudices. With this in mind, the Counter-Enlightenment writers often deplored the Enlightenment assault on religion. Some of them wrote from sincere religious conviction, but others simply held that religious beliefs are socially necessary fictions. The belief in heaven and hell, they maintained, may be all that keeps most people behaving as well as they do; to lose that belief may be to lose all hope of a civilized and orderly society. If that means that government must support an established church and persecute dissenters, then so be it.
***
[H]umans are fundamentally nonrational, even irrational, beings; they are defined by their differences---0f ... race, sex, religion, language, and nationality; and they are usually locked in conflict with one another, a conflict sparked by their deep-seated and probably permanent differences. Taken one by one, there is nothing necessarily "fascist" about any element of this picture. Combining the elements, however, gives us a picture of human capacities and characteristics that prepared the way for the emergence of fascism.
***
The final element in the cultural and intellectual background of fascism was irrationalism. This term captures the conclusions of a variety of very different thinkers who all came to agree with the thinkers of the Counter-Enlightenment that emotion and desire play a larger part in the actions of people than reason. Among these thinkers was Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), the founder of psychoanalysis, whose observations of his patients-and even of himself-led him to detect the power of instinctive drives and "the unconscious" in human conduct. In a similar vein the American philosopher and psychologist William James (1842-1910) held that most people have a "will to believe." Exactly what they believe is less important to them, James said, than that they believe in something. Psychologically speaking, people need something-- almost anything, in fact-- in which to believe. For the one thing that human beings cannot endure is a life devoid of some larger purpose or meaning.
Another social theorist who contributed to the development of irrationalism--and one who seems to have had a special influence on Mussolini--was the French social psychologist, Gustav Le Bon (1841-1931). In his classic work, The Crowd (1895), Le Bon argued that human behavior in crowds is different from their behavior as individuals. Acting collectively and therefore anonymously, people will participate in acts of barbarism that they would never engage in as lone individuals. The psychology of lynch-mobs, for example, is quite different from the psychology of the individuals who compose that mob. People acting en masse and in mobs are not restrained by individual conscience or moral scruple. A mob psychology, or a "herd instinct," takes over and shuts down individual judgments regarding right and wrong.
In a similar spirit, Pareto examined the social factors influencing individual judgment and behavior, concluding that emotions, symbols, and what he called "sentiments" are more important than material or economic factors. And Mosca suggested that people are moved more by slogans and symbols, flags and anthems --by "political formulae" as he called them --than by reasoned argument and rational debate.
All these thinkers -- Freud and James, Le Bon, Pareto, and Mosca -- were more immediately concerned with explaining how people acted than in leading people to action.
Not so Georges Sorel (1847-1922), a French engineer turned social theorist and political activist, Sorel [qv. no dhimmitude] insisted that people are more often moved to action by political "myths" than by appeals to reason, To...bring about major social changes, it is necessary to find a powerful myth that can inspire people to act. For Sorel, the idea of a nationwide "general strike" could prove to be such a myth. The "general strike" was a myth, in other words, in that there was no guarantee that it would really lead to the revolutionary overthrow of the bourgeoisie and capitalism. If enough people could be brought to believe in the myth of the general strike, however, their efforts, inspired by this belief, would indeed lead to a successful revolution. What matters most, Sorel concluded, is not the reasonableness of a myth, but its emotional power, for it is not reason but emotion that leads most people to act. And when the people act en masse, they can smash almost any obstacle in their path,
This was advice that Mussolini, Hitler, and other fascist leaders quite obviously took to heart. The slogans, the mass demonstrations, the torchlight parades-- all were designed to stir the people at their most basic emotional and instinctive levels. But stir them to do what? To create powerful nation states, then mighty empires, all under the leadership of the fascist elite. So it was not only irrationalism, but elitism and nationalism and the attitudes of the Counter-Enlightenment, too, that came together in the early twentieth century in the totalitarian ideology of fascism.
***
It is the work of professional intellectuals to think, and they think on behalf of the general public, a job as specifically definable as that of plumbers or airline pilots. Intellectuals provide us with the connections and the going to and from of thoughts that govern our daily lives. We are mostly too busy in our lives to think of the so-called big questions, and we rely on the inteelectuals of our societies to do that work for us. We assume they do their work honestly. We have been sadly betreayed in our trust, not just in the past 30 years but mostly throughout our history. It is up to us to ensure the correction of evil ideas, ideologies, and political agendas that threaten us even if we are not inteelctuals and don't have time to fuss with the details. we msut know what we can and act in our own best interests regardless of what our intellectuals tell us about ourselves and our world.
Below is a look at an anarchist's view of power, social relations, and intellectuals, and in it we see yet another approach to the problem of Irrationalism in the West in this time. If we look at the excerptsw as reflective of the minds of Muslims we'll see clearly the scope of unreason that we must deal with, and perhaps we'll begin to get a sense of how to respond to the threat of Islamic and dhimmi fascists in our midsts.
http://www.theidyllic.com/php/article.php?article=15
One need not reject the claims of a Hobbes or a Burke that humans are creatures of passion rather than reason to recognize that the most severe crimes perpetrated by individuals pale in comparison to those committed by organizations led by some sort of institutionalized authority. The modern serial killer is insignificant when contrasted with the death squad member or secret policeman. The greatest crimes of all are, of course, committed by the institution of the state, what Nietzsche characterized as a "cold monster". It is of the utmost importance to recognize that even persons of "normal" psychological make-up or moral temperament can be driven to act in the most atrocious ways when prodded by group norms or the direction of malignant leaders. This is borne out by the relevant studies in social psychology, particularly those of Stanley Milgram.(7) Hannah Arendt described this phenomena as "the banality of evil", a process whereby the most senseless and irrational forms of inhumanity acquire an aura of normalcy and take place within an atmosphere of dull mechanization.(8)
***
As power has never been quite so centralized as it is at present, the anarchist critique is now more relevant than ever. The essence of the traditional anarchist position is that the state is no more than a criminal gang writ large. The state exists to control territory, protect an artificially privileged ruling class, exploit its subjects or expand its power. Any other claims by or on behalf of the state are simply a matter of evasion, obfuscation, or perhaps mere naivete.
***
One of the most distinguishing characteristics of anarchists is the smallness of their ranks. This is likely rooted in the tendency of most anarchists, of whatever school, to focus on ideological abstractions and a type of intellectual elitism that disregards the sentiments and sensibilities of ordinary people. Most people are not intellectuals. Most people are not interested in ideology. Most people are not the rugged self-reliant individualists idealized by libertarians or the faithful crusaders for social justice that serve as left-wing archetypes. Instead, the nature of most people is to focus on their immediate day-to-day business. Most people seek security, identity and self-actualization in groups and get their ideas about what constitutes "right and wrong" from cues taken from peers, members of their own in-groups and perceived leaders and authority figures. The strongest attachments of this type seem to be family, ethnicity, religion, culture, language, geography and, to some degree, economic function and social class. Particularistic attachments of these types are commonly disregarded by leftist and libertarian intellectuals (and by establishment liberals and neoconservatives!) as reactionary, backward, overly parochial or provincial, ignorant and superstitious and even bigoted and hateful. Yet it is precisely these types of particularism that provide the social glue that holds organic and authentic human societies and cultures together.
***
Our struggle against Islam began the day Napoleon landed at Alexandria, Egypt in 1798. From that day to this and until the end, Islam, kicked in the teeth and beaten, was psychotic, and there is no turning back. The State of isreal, the War in Iraq, the Coca Cola labels maligning Allah, none of these things make any real difference other than that they are compounds of the napoleonic invasion. Napoleon brought, for the first time, Modernity to the islamic world, and there is no turning back. Islam lost its mind totally, and it cannot regain any pretense again of normalcy. Modernity came knocking, and the door opened in spite of Islam's best efforts to keep it out for good. Now we are at war, and there is no end until one side or the other is totally victorious. either the world of Modernity triumphs or the world slides back into primitivsim. We cannot co-exist. We will be ratrional or we will be enslaved.
Many of our finest intellectuals in the West hate Modernity. They side with the fascists of Islam. below we'll see some of what that means to us in our daily lives. It comes down to simple things such as the irrationalism of trivia, for example, the "New Age" pretentions of our anti-modernist longings for authenticity, a fascist ideological thread brought to us thanks to Heidegger, of whom most of us know nothing at all, but who is implanted deeply in our social discourse regardless. We think orf the daily horoscopes in the paper as harmless or even silly but we don't think often of the political implications that it leads to, the furtherence of irrationalatity and the eventual disgust with Modernity, the repetitive harping of emotionalism over reason, and the decline of Reason into fascism, the love of barbarism, the excusing of violence and the acceptance of Islamic hatred of Modernity that our dhimmis claim as valid and right. We might get sucked in by our intellectuals, sucked into a vortex of fascism unexamined and unconsidered simply because we're busy and reliant upon the good-will of our intellectual class to give us the best products of fertile and excellent minds working professionally to make our intellectual ethos for us. Unfortuneatley, we ended up with dhimmis who are ruining the world not only for us but for the slaves of primitivism themselves. The dhimmis are selling out the primitives of the world as happily as they are selling out the trusting populations of the West. The dhimmis of our intellectual classes are struggling agianst Modernity and Reason. Below we'll see some reactions from those who value science and logic, reason and evidence, rationality and progress, and we'll see that they are concerned with those whom we here refer to as dhimmis.
http://www.humanists.net/
Smoke and Mirrors in the Halls of Academe
A Review of Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and its Quarrel with Science
Paul R. Gross and Norman Levitt
Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994, 313 pages.
by Pat Duffy Hutcheon
Gross and Levitt have courageously tackled a subject which many worried academics have avoided studiously in the vain hope that it would somehow quietly go away. The issue is the rising tide of hostility within universities to the disciplined scientific approach to knowing. As the authors demonstrate, this hostility has been gaining ground for almost three decades -- and in the very place where the ordinary, trusting citizen would least expect it. It appears that a major source of what now amounts to a virtual epidemic of relativism and irrationalism is the very institution that has been assigned the privileged role of bastion of reliable knowledge and instigator of informed and reasoned inquiry: the university system of the industrialized West. Readers unfamiliar with what has been happening may find some of what they encounter in this important and timely book so incredible that they will be inclined to discount it. But anyone concerned about the future of our universities -- and, indeed, of the society they serve -- would be well advised to read Higher Superstition carefully and to consider the implications of its message.
The book is organized into chapters which include the following: (1) a brief review of the history and politics relevant to the topic at hand; (2) a general overview of the defining features of the "cultural constructivist" attack on science; (3) an introduction to "postmodernism" -- identified as a sort of "catch-all" phrase for a specific cultural constructivist approach pioneered within literary theory and subsequently enveloping the general field of cultural studies; (4) a critique of fundamentalist feminism (a radical branch of the womens' movement which seems to have assumed all the "perspectivist" premises and postures of postmodernism); (5) a critique of anti-science environmentalism; and (6) a discussion of a number of versions of social activism that have become impatient and disillusioned with the fact that science cannot create immediate Utopias. The latter include some currents within the AIDS movement, the extremist proponents of "animal rights", and the Afro-centrism which has become so popular in American universities.
In spite of the subtitle, this is not a matter of left versus right as usually defined in the political arena of the larger society. Gross and Levitt make this point themselves, recognizing that any scholars seriously committed to solving social problems would seem to be deliberately crippling their own enterprise -- and betraying their deepest traditions -- if they forsake the scientific mode of inquiry for the New Age and "postmodern" doctrines now dominating the social sciences and humanities. They remind us that, throughout history, authoritative scientific inquiry -- far from being the enemy of social progress -- has invariably been the most powerful of weapons against exploitative authoritarianisms, whether social or intellectual. They also recognize that one of the two influential anti-science currents in the larger society today is led by the Creationists, who are right-wing in the traditional sense of the term.
As Gross and Levitt explain the issue, "We are using academic left to designate those people whose doctrinal ideosyncracies sustain the misreadings of science, its methods, and its conceptual foundations that have generated what nowadays passes for a politically progressive critique of it ( p.9)". They suggest that the term "left-wing" is justified because many of these people are former Marxists who have sought a congenial ideological home within the modern university. "Marxism, as understood by the American Left," they say, "has mutated from a revolutionary program driven by a strong sense of economic forces, to a philosophical impulse that mixes with other strains -- feminist, deconstructionist, Foucaldian, Laconian, ecological, and so forth -- to create the eclectic view of postmodern radicalism ( p.221)".
The authors caution that no designation of the proponents of today's anti-science current within academia can be hard and fast. "Each practitioner assembles his or her arsenal from favorite polemical bits and pieces -- a little Marxism to emphasize the twinship of science with economic exploitation, a little feminism to arraign the sexism of scientific practice, a little deconstruction to subvert the traditional reading of scientific theory, perhaps a bit of Afro-centrism to undermine the notion that scientific achievement is inevitably linked to European cultural values ( p.11)." The movement is joined by one common purpose, however, as Gross and Levitt make clear time and again in the examples they bring to bear on the argument. It is to "demystify?" science, to undermine its authority and to assign priority to competing and incompatible modes of knowing. We are reminded that this is not a new theme. "The notion that science is poisoned knowledge, the fruit of a Faustian bargain, has been with us for a long time, and its cry has more often come from reactionaries than from progressives ( p.219)."
The authors present a lucid summary of the history of the scientific method of inquiry, noting two major nineteenth century roots of today's "postmodernism". They trace the left-wing version of anti-science to the seductive Romantic exaltation of understanding over reason, as well as to Karl Marx's successful conscription of the prestige (minus the substance) of science to his own polemical ends. They look to more recent history to account for the prevalence, within modern departments of humanities and social/cultural studies, of academics with an anti-scientific mind set. A virtual "ball of exponential growth" in this direction was set rolling, they say, with the influx of doctrinaire militants during the late sixties, when North American universities were expanding rapidly. For anyone familiar with the power structure of the university, it is not difficult to accept the argument that, during the following twenty-five years, the entire process of recruitment into academic careers -- and that of "peer review" in academic journals, and the tenure and promotion tied to all this -- underwent alteration in a direction that selected and rewarded those with a vaguely mystical anti-scientific, holistic and "perspectivist" frame of reference.
This model which has gained such political success in the hothouse of academia is one that interprets the scientific world view as merely a product of the ideology controlling the society in which research is being conducted. Far from being a fruitful method of building reliable knowledge, science is, according to the postmodernists, "rather a parable, an allegory, that inscribes a set of social norms and encodes, however, subtly, a mythic structure justifying the dominance of one class, one race, one gender over another ( p.46)." Scientific verification is a matter of political/social authority only. Most amazing of all, the authors say, postmodernists disregard the obvious fact that science works, and that the propositions flowing from their own garbled obfuscations have been shown time and time again to have "all the explanatory power of the Tooth-Fairy Hypothesis ( p.47)."
To many scientists, perhaps the most amusing aspect of the posturing of postmodernists is their use of scientific concepts and authorities as grist for their ideological mills, even though they seem to lack elementary understanding of the premises, theories and bodies of knowledge involved. As an example of this, Gross and Levitt refer to the mountains of relativistic nonsense that have been written about Heisenberg's "uncertainty principle." They note wistfully that all this might have been avoided if Heisenberg had chosen a less emotive term. I would suggest that the same can be said about "chaos" theory. Nietzsche is (rightly) cited as an earlier prototype of the type of dangerously muddled, solipsistic and magical thinking that we find in today's postmodernism. The authors point out that Godel (another postmodernist saint) turns out -- on closer scrutiny -- to be an unadulterated Platonist, apparently believing that "an eternal 'not" was laid up in heaven where virtuous logicians hope to meet it hereafter ( p.102)."
The last section of the book raises a number of important questions. For example: What about the responsibility of scientists to ensure that university courses labeled as sciences are, in fact, teaching legitimate empirical methodology and reliable facts? What about the responsibility of all academics to be vigilant about the standards of excellence, and of evidence, applied throughout the university in the performance of its cultural function of providing intellectual and moral leadership? And finally, is it possible that the situation has now regressed so far that the only solution will be a schism within the system, with colleges of science providing their own courses in the humanities and the social/cultural studies?
This book will be sad reading for theorists and researchers in the exact sciences. For scientifically oriented social scientists like myself, however, it is much worse. It amounts to a tragic confirmation of personal experience. Gross and Levitt speak of attempting to recover lost territory for the scientific approach -- of physical scientists standing up for those of their colleagues in the social disciplines who are fighting the battle against relativism and irrationality. It is true that, for some time now, the struggle of a minority of social scientists to maintain scientific integrity within their professional communities has been a lonely one. It has been especially lonely for those, like myself, who have been attempting to define and justify an alternative approach to that of postmodernism. In my 1996 book, Leaving the Cave, I have proposed the scientific model of evolutionary naturalism -- built upon reliable knowledge from the life sciences and insights from the soundest work available in the social sciences, and incorporating the open-ended, self-correcting method of disciplined scientific inquiry.
I believe it is necessary to demonstrate that what the various versions of cultural constructivism offer is merely a grotesque metaphor for the real thing: scientific cultural studies capable of producing compelling evidence about the causes and consequences of human behavior. It is the absence of reliable knowledge that makes our social problems appear so intractable that "Cargo Cult" delusions can be peddled to gullible students as attractive options. The popularity of postmodernism today is, more than anything, a measure of the failure of the social sciences during the twentieth century.
***
One of the central tenets of fascism is irrationalism. There's little more to say than that we cannot understand irrationality rationally. We can attempt to intellectualize irrationality but the fact is that the world holds roughtly a billion Moslems who are having what amounts to a two year old's violent temper tantrum. We have to respond to that the way a mature and decent parent would respond to a child going uncontrolably insane. Our problem is that the Moslem world is huge and physically mature. They are insane, and violently so. The dhimmi intellectuals seem to like it. They excuse it. They pretend that it's our fault, that we took away the Moslems' favorite toy or some such, and that if only we stop what we're doing and make amends then all will again be right with the world. but it will never again be right. This is our time to either spread the revolutions of odernity or lose all that Humanity has gained in the past 250 years.
If we do not stop the insanity of the Islamic world, firstly by dismissing our dhimmi Left intellectuals as scum-bags, and then by controlling forcably the Moslem world, regardless of their reactions to that, then we are doomed to be ruled by lunatic and violent children out of control.
Thursday, July 21, 2005
Losing Their Minds
We often laugh at the kooky conspiracy theories the Moslems come up with to explain away anything they don't know how to deal with in the world of sane people. The examples are myriad, and below we'll provide one writer's view of reality that rivals that of any paranoid schizophrenic in a state of vivid psychosis. The problem here is that the writer is a normal Muslim living in the West, perhaps living in your neighbourhood. He's normal in an insane enviornment. He is, therefore, an insane person in the greater world. He is culturally psychotic.
What about us? What kind of culture do we sustain daily? Ours is a liberal bourgeios democracy in which all people are free to express themselves within the framework of the law, which has a broad scope. That, as we've argued for years on end, is a good thing, and we continue to make argue the merits of liberal democracy and free speech. We do not suggest imprisoning the writer below for expresing his views; we do call to your attention, though, to the insanity of his argument, and it is here that we question the agenda, political and social, of those who defend that argument as coherent and valid, as in any way legitimate. It is the dhimmi Left who write the second half of the story below, the Irrationalist, Counter-Enlightenment, fascist side of the story we are about to read.
It is our argument that the insanity of the Muslim mind is matched exactly by the fetish of Irrationalism stemming from the Romantic tradition of the 18th and 19th centuries in Europe, a violent reaction against the Age of Reason and the concepts of Modernity and Progress, that impel the Left today to take up the causes of Islam and philobarbarism as their own. Whether the arguments of the fascist Islamic community, the ummah, are literally insane is of no importance to the dhimmi Left: they are forced by their position of anti-Dodernity to accept the insanity of their co-fascist partners as legitimate in the struggle they all wage against modernity.
Without belabouring the point further we present the mind of Islam in the West.
[Unfortuneately, due to travel and unfamiliar computers at this time we are not able to include the accompanying photos. Sorry for the ineptitude here.]
http://antimasons.8m.com/
INTRODUCTION
Historically the control & manipulation of the political opinion was the FreeMasons main weapon in gaining control of countries & states. Once in control of the rulers & politicians of the country, laws & political structures could be changed in accordance with their agenda. However restricting the body not necessarily mean restricting the mind, the freemason recognizes that their plan for Global government hinges completely on subduing the masses to their agenda & thus eliminating opposition to their cause & the greatest threat to their plan posing more danger than any army or law is a threat of a free thinking mind. In order to eliminate this threat & to achieve their objectives, the Masons have got a plan, to control every aspect of the human life,your Life
& the weapons they are using against you are in your very homes, entertaining you and your children & gradually indoctrinating you without you even realizing. In today's society people are spending more & more time engaged with the modern media, television, cinema, computer games, the internet. Popular fiction & popular music are integral part of our lives. yet these provide a vast expanse on information which you are taking either consciously or subconsciously into your mind information on socity ranging from ideals & morals & difference between right & wrong to the way economies & the societies should be structured, pass before you every single day. This media play a significant role in providing a basis determining individual's view of the world and everything that exists.thus any one group in complete control of information placed in these media will in effect the power to indoctrinate the entire population of this world to their way of thinking & it is this fact the FreeMasons are exploiting.
The Masons are using the entertainment industry in particular to condition people to their way of thinking. The methods they use are many but their goal is same to impose their ideology, beliefs onto you in such away that you begin to think as if its your own. Evidence of their presence within popular entertainment is wide spread. Masonic involvemant in the induatry is not a new thing. Mozart, a FreeMason himself created a symphony which was an open display of FreeMasonry. The symphony is based on an ancient story taken from the Egyptian mathology. "Isas & ACyrus". The pagan rights of Egyptain methology formed through the Kabal, one of the fundamental aspects of FreeMasonry. It is from these same pagan origins of Egypt that the symbol of the one eye stems.
EN TERTAINMENT INDUSTRY
Michael Jackson known as the king of pop..... regarded as the great entertainer of all times. responsible for selling best selling album in the world may not be known to be linked with the Freemasons, however , the cover of his "Dangerous" album has some interesting features. On it the FreeMasonic symbol of one eye can be found. It also contains a picture of a watery lake, behind which lay burning flames. It seems though anyone entering the water would really been entering into the fire. The cover also has a picture of a bald headed man well known to be the Aleister Crowley. Aleister Crowley himself was a FreeMason who became a Satanist and wrote a book "The New Law Of Man" which stated in it that it would one day replace the Quran as the law of man. Links between the FreeMasonry & the occult dont end here. The producs of the Masonically controlled music industry are riddled with the Satanic messages. Backtracking is the means of placing the recorded messages into the soundtracks in such a way that they only become clear when the track is played backwards. When its played forward however, the listener would be totally unaware that a message is being played. Although the listener may be unaware, the subconscious mind can pick up and understand the messages & in the long term these can be stored in the subconscious mind & may effect the person's behaviour or judgement. In many ways backtracking is form of hypnotism or brain washing & has the power to be very destructive.
It has been observed that the Free Masons are fighting their war against Islam through music. English rock bands are used for this purpose. These bands are admired by Muslim youth throughout the world...what a pity...It has been observed that these songs contain black magic. The listener never knows whats happening but if the lyrics of the song are played backwards, they contain magical words. This has been proved recently when Madonna's song "Like a Prayer" was played backwards it contained words "Oh Satan help"...
Another very popular song "Hotel California" by Eagles has also got such words while played backwards. The California of the song is not a hotel. There is actually a street in America called California. It is on this very street that the headquarters of the Church were founded. But it was the type of Church one may think instead it is Church that some may call "The Church of Satan". It was headed & founded by Anthony Sanzdelevi, the author of the Satanic bible. It appears that the teachings of this church may have become the belief of many famous personalities in the entertainment industry, from rock groups to other artists.
Met Growning the creator of the most famous cartoons The Simpsons is a self confessed anarchist. He has himself admitted that he wanted to get his own political ideas across within his own work but he wanted to do it in such a way that people find it easy to accept his ideas & the means he chose for this was the cartoon "The Simpsons". There are many lessons programmed to us. These include disregard for authority, either parental or governmental, the bad manners & disobedience is the ways of attaining status amongst people & the ignorance is cool whereas the knowledge is unfashionable. However there was Masonic teachings in episode in particular. in which the father of family "Homer Simpson" get obsessed by a group of people known as "Stone Cutters" or should they be called FreeMasons. Upon joining the group, his fellow members find a birthmark on him, the mark which makes the rest of the group declare him to be the chosen one. But his power & glory, he the Homer Simpson starts to think as if he is a God.
"Who is wonder it there is a God, & now I know there is & its me."
Some may say that it is nothing more than the children's cartoon just a harmless fun, but the influence it has on its audience makes it a good mean of propaganda, indoctranating the people without their even realizing. This is admitted by the creators of this cartoon that they are propagating their political ideas.
Ideas spread through domestic TV can go far more wider than movies & cinemas. It is through this media that the new concept is being introduced.......The concept of one global leader.
Hollywood movie based on novel "A Man that would one day be knig " is a story of two soldiers who journey to a country at the edge of the India the country that was once known to contain riches. Upon reaching country the men are caprured by locals known as Kafirs (based on their country Kafiristan). When the two men are about to be killed, the necklace is discovered from one of the soldiers, containing the FreeMason sign of all seeing one eye. The Kafirs call him as their God & attribute to him the divine attribute of immortality. The man first regards himself as a King & then after getting powers as the God.
If we think for a moment, our Prophet also told us in Hadith about a men who would come out of Kafirs(non beleivers) who would be recognized by his one eye & would be made world leader, claiming first to be a king & later to be a God & he would be seen immortal until appointed time.
In another movie this idea is propagated is "The Independence Day" that is known to be the seventh highest ranking films of all times. It is a fiction story about alien invasion on earth. However deep within the film, subliminal messages can be found indicating the FreeMasonic presence & FreeMasonic agenda. In film thier is military base called "Area51" it is from here that military offensive is launched on which salvation of the whole world & future of its inhabitants lie. The installation contains a pyramid on which is engraved a symbol of one eye. Film show USA as the forerunner in eatablishing a global offensive involving all the nations of the world & which is controlled by one man one overall leader.
So dear Muslim brothers & sisters where we stand right now. Just think about it for a moment sincerely.
GREAT SEAL OF THE UNITED STATES
According to Encarta Encyclopedia Great Seal of US is described as:
"Great Seal of the United States, official seal of the United States government....
This seal is also engraved on the dollar note of US.
Now what does the Pyramid carrying one eye on its top means. Prophet Muhammad (SAW) 1400 years back warned us about Dajjal in following words:
Narrated by Ibn Umar
Once Allah's Apostle stood amongst the people, glorified and praised Allah as He deserved and then mentioned the Dajjal saying, "I warn you against him (i.e. the Dajjal) and there was no prophet but warned his nation against him. No doubt, Noah warned his nation against him but I tell you about him something of which no prophet told his nation before me. You should know that he is one-eyed, and Allah is not one-eyed."
Hadith 4.553(Sahih Bukhari Hadith)
HALLA
The Jews were known for their practice of black arts of Kabala. They have used their black art on the Muslims for many centuries in different ways. It is a known fact, that if you read the Quranic Aayats backwards it may help you in black magic. So the name mentioned above "HALLA", is the name of a yougart product used in Pakistan. If it is read backwards it spells "ALLAH", so the Muslims themselves are helping the freemasons and they don't even know about it.
COCA-COLA & PEPSI
These are the most commonly used cold drinks in the world. If you ever see coca-cola written in Urdu or Arabic,you just might notice with a thorough observation that it says "LA MAKKAH, LA MUHAMMAD", (meaning no Makkah, no Muhammad) another freemasonic work.
PEPSI : P enny Earned for the P rotection & Security of Israel
So each Pepsi bought means, one penny earned by Israel (another freemasonic headquater).
NIKE AIR
Nike the worlds best shoe making company launched a product in which the word "AIR" was written in such a way on the backside of the shoe, if observed closely looks as "Allah" written in Arabic.
Now a days media can be used as the most powerful weapon in the world, best used by freemasons. In an American advertisement a woman wearing a new jeans launched by that co. is presenting it in an exotic fashion, and you can see Muslims bowing towards that woman.
MASONIC TEMPLES
There have been many Masonic Temples observed all around the world. A masonic church may look like a pyramid or has masonic symbols, if you closely observe the church present in Islamabad (f-8/4), the church's architecture looks like a pyramid and it has masonic symbols on it's walls.
UNBELEI VEABLE
Recently in Pakistan a child was born who had only one eye on the forehead and had crooked legs and he died after birth. It can be referred to the existance of the Dajjal and his awaited arrival.
***
The nonsense above is merely a selection of the lunacy the writer presents in his essay on Masonic conspiracies. what makes this remarkable is that it's not different from the rest of the Musleim world-view generally. The arguements by analogy come from the times of Aristotle, from the times of the Ptolemaic Universe, from the earliest beginnings of intellectual pretentions; and all of it is based on Irrationalism and European Romantic traditon. The mind at work above is the mind of the Europeans of the 17th century and before, the witch burners, book burners, Jew burners. The Muslim world is primitive, and within it are primitive minds, insane by comparison to our world.
We must understand the root causes and the social injustice and the poverty and hopelessness that forces the oppressed to lash out in any way they can to redeem their pride. Yeah, sure. Except that there is literally no way to understand it. The fatal flaw of the argument is that in Islam there is no understanding, there is only submission, submission to irrationality, to feelings, to impulses, to catastrophic rages, to attitudes, to postures and poses and imaginings. There is literally nothing to understand, and to try is to defeat oneself from the immediate beginning.
No one can "understand" irrationality. It is beyond understanding. That's the whole point of irrationality as an ideology.
We'll look at the dhimmi Left's irrationality next time.
What about us? What kind of culture do we sustain daily? Ours is a liberal bourgeios democracy in which all people are free to express themselves within the framework of the law, which has a broad scope. That, as we've argued for years on end, is a good thing, and we continue to make argue the merits of liberal democracy and free speech. We do not suggest imprisoning the writer below for expresing his views; we do call to your attention, though, to the insanity of his argument, and it is here that we question the agenda, political and social, of those who defend that argument as coherent and valid, as in any way legitimate. It is the dhimmi Left who write the second half of the story below, the Irrationalist, Counter-Enlightenment, fascist side of the story we are about to read.
It is our argument that the insanity of the Muslim mind is matched exactly by the fetish of Irrationalism stemming from the Romantic tradition of the 18th and 19th centuries in Europe, a violent reaction against the Age of Reason and the concepts of Modernity and Progress, that impel the Left today to take up the causes of Islam and philobarbarism as their own. Whether the arguments of the fascist Islamic community, the ummah, are literally insane is of no importance to the dhimmi Left: they are forced by their position of anti-Dodernity to accept the insanity of their co-fascist partners as legitimate in the struggle they all wage against modernity.
Without belabouring the point further we present the mind of Islam in the West.
[Unfortuneately, due to travel and unfamiliar computers at this time we are not able to include the accompanying photos. Sorry for the ineptitude here.]
http://antimasons.8m.com/
INTRODUCTION
Historically the control & manipulation of the political opinion was the FreeMasons main weapon in gaining control of countries & states. Once in control of the rulers & politicians of the country, laws & political structures could be changed in accordance with their agenda. However restricting the body not necessarily mean restricting the mind, the freemason recognizes that their plan for Global government hinges completely on subduing the masses to their agenda & thus eliminating opposition to their cause & the greatest threat to their plan posing more danger than any army or law is a threat of a free thinking mind. In order to eliminate this threat & to achieve their objectives, the Masons have got a plan, to control every aspect of the human life,your Life
& the weapons they are using against you are in your very homes, entertaining you and your children & gradually indoctrinating you without you even realizing. In today's society people are spending more & more time engaged with the modern media, television, cinema, computer games, the internet. Popular fiction & popular music are integral part of our lives. yet these provide a vast expanse on information which you are taking either consciously or subconsciously into your mind information on socity ranging from ideals & morals & difference between right & wrong to the way economies & the societies should be structured, pass before you every single day. This media play a significant role in providing a basis determining individual's view of the world and everything that exists.thus any one group in complete control of information placed in these media will in effect the power to indoctrinate the entire population of this world to their way of thinking & it is this fact the FreeMasons are exploiting.
The Masons are using the entertainment industry in particular to condition people to their way of thinking. The methods they use are many but their goal is same to impose their ideology, beliefs onto you in such away that you begin to think as if its your own. Evidence of their presence within popular entertainment is wide spread. Masonic involvemant in the induatry is not a new thing. Mozart, a FreeMason himself created a symphony which was an open display of FreeMasonry. The symphony is based on an ancient story taken from the Egyptian mathology. "Isas & ACyrus". The pagan rights of Egyptain methology formed through the Kabal, one of the fundamental aspects of FreeMasonry. It is from these same pagan origins of Egypt that the symbol of the one eye stems.
EN TERTAINMENT INDUSTRY
Michael Jackson known as the king of pop..... regarded as the great entertainer of all times. responsible for selling best selling album in the world may not be known to be linked with the Freemasons, however , the cover of his "Dangerous" album has some interesting features. On it the FreeMasonic symbol of one eye can be found. It also contains a picture of a watery lake, behind which lay burning flames. It seems though anyone entering the water would really been entering into the fire. The cover also has a picture of a bald headed man well known to be the Aleister Crowley. Aleister Crowley himself was a FreeMason who became a Satanist and wrote a book "The New Law Of Man" which stated in it that it would one day replace the Quran as the law of man. Links between the FreeMasonry & the occult dont end here. The producs of the Masonically controlled music industry are riddled with the Satanic messages. Backtracking is the means of placing the recorded messages into the soundtracks in such a way that they only become clear when the track is played backwards. When its played forward however, the listener would be totally unaware that a message is being played. Although the listener may be unaware, the subconscious mind can pick up and understand the messages & in the long term these can be stored in the subconscious mind & may effect the person's behaviour or judgement. In many ways backtracking is form of hypnotism or brain washing & has the power to be very destructive.
It has been observed that the Free Masons are fighting their war against Islam through music. English rock bands are used for this purpose. These bands are admired by Muslim youth throughout the world...what a pity...It has been observed that these songs contain black magic. The listener never knows whats happening but if the lyrics of the song are played backwards, they contain magical words. This has been proved recently when Madonna's song "Like a Prayer" was played backwards it contained words "Oh Satan help"...
Another very popular song "Hotel California" by Eagles has also got such words while played backwards. The California of the song is not a hotel. There is actually a street in America called California. It is on this very street that the headquarters of the Church were founded. But it was the type of Church one may think instead it is Church that some may call "The Church of Satan". It was headed & founded by Anthony Sanzdelevi, the author of the Satanic bible. It appears that the teachings of this church may have become the belief of many famous personalities in the entertainment industry, from rock groups to other artists.
Met Growning the creator of the most famous cartoons The Simpsons is a self confessed anarchist. He has himself admitted that he wanted to get his own political ideas across within his own work but he wanted to do it in such a way that people find it easy to accept his ideas & the means he chose for this was the cartoon "The Simpsons". There are many lessons programmed to us. These include disregard for authority, either parental or governmental, the bad manners & disobedience is the ways of attaining status amongst people & the ignorance is cool whereas the knowledge is unfashionable. However there was Masonic teachings in episode in particular. in which the father of family "Homer Simpson" get obsessed by a group of people known as "Stone Cutters" or should they be called FreeMasons. Upon joining the group, his fellow members find a birthmark on him, the mark which makes the rest of the group declare him to be the chosen one. But his power & glory, he the Homer Simpson starts to think as if he is a God.
"Who is wonder it there is a God, & now I know there is & its me."
Some may say that it is nothing more than the children's cartoon just a harmless fun, but the influence it has on its audience makes it a good mean of propaganda, indoctranating the people without their even realizing. This is admitted by the creators of this cartoon that they are propagating their political ideas.
Ideas spread through domestic TV can go far more wider than movies & cinemas. It is through this media that the new concept is being introduced.......The concept of one global leader.
Hollywood movie based on novel "A Man that would one day be knig " is a story of two soldiers who journey to a country at the edge of the India the country that was once known to contain riches. Upon reaching country the men are caprured by locals known as Kafirs (based on their country Kafiristan). When the two men are about to be killed, the necklace is discovered from one of the soldiers, containing the FreeMason sign of all seeing one eye. The Kafirs call him as their God & attribute to him the divine attribute of immortality. The man first regards himself as a King & then after getting powers as the God.
If we think for a moment, our Prophet also told us in Hadith about a men who would come out of Kafirs(non beleivers) who would be recognized by his one eye & would be made world leader, claiming first to be a king & later to be a God & he would be seen immortal until appointed time.
In another movie this idea is propagated is "The Independence Day" that is known to be the seventh highest ranking films of all times. It is a fiction story about alien invasion on earth. However deep within the film, subliminal messages can be found indicating the FreeMasonic presence & FreeMasonic agenda. In film thier is military base called "Area51" it is from here that military offensive is launched on which salvation of the whole world & future of its inhabitants lie. The installation contains a pyramid on which is engraved a symbol of one eye. Film show USA as the forerunner in eatablishing a global offensive involving all the nations of the world & which is controlled by one man one overall leader.
So dear Muslim brothers & sisters where we stand right now. Just think about it for a moment sincerely.
GREAT SEAL OF THE UNITED STATES
According to Encarta Encyclopedia Great Seal of US is described as:
"Great Seal of the United States, official seal of the United States government....
This seal is also engraved on the dollar note of US.
Now what does the Pyramid carrying one eye on its top means. Prophet Muhammad (SAW) 1400 years back warned us about Dajjal in following words:
Narrated by Ibn Umar
Once Allah's Apostle stood amongst the people, glorified and praised Allah as He deserved and then mentioned the Dajjal saying, "I warn you against him (i.e. the Dajjal) and there was no prophet but warned his nation against him. No doubt, Noah warned his nation against him but I tell you about him something of which no prophet told his nation before me. You should know that he is one-eyed, and Allah is not one-eyed."
Hadith 4.553(Sahih Bukhari Hadith)
HALLA
The Jews were known for their practice of black arts of Kabala. They have used their black art on the Muslims for many centuries in different ways. It is a known fact, that if you read the Quranic Aayats backwards it may help you in black magic. So the name mentioned above "HALLA", is the name of a yougart product used in Pakistan. If it is read backwards it spells "ALLAH", so the Muslims themselves are helping the freemasons and they don't even know about it.
COCA-COLA & PEPSI
These are the most commonly used cold drinks in the world. If you ever see coca-cola written in Urdu or Arabic,you just might notice with a thorough observation that it says "LA MAKKAH, LA MUHAMMAD", (meaning no Makkah, no Muhammad) another freemasonic work.
PEPSI : P enny Earned for the P rotection & Security of Israel
So each Pepsi bought means, one penny earned by Israel (another freemasonic headquater).
NIKE AIR
Nike the worlds best shoe making company launched a product in which the word "AIR" was written in such a way on the backside of the shoe, if observed closely looks as "Allah" written in Arabic.
Now a days media can be used as the most powerful weapon in the world, best used by freemasons. In an American advertisement a woman wearing a new jeans launched by that co. is presenting it in an exotic fashion, and you can see Muslims bowing towards that woman.
MASONIC TEMPLES
There have been many Masonic Temples observed all around the world. A masonic church may look like a pyramid or has masonic symbols, if you closely observe the church present in Islamabad (f-8/4), the church's architecture looks like a pyramid and it has masonic symbols on it's walls.
UNBELEI VEABLE
Recently in Pakistan a child was born who had only one eye on the forehead and had crooked legs and he died after birth. It can be referred to the existance of the Dajjal and his awaited arrival.
***
The nonsense above is merely a selection of the lunacy the writer presents in his essay on Masonic conspiracies. what makes this remarkable is that it's not different from the rest of the Musleim world-view generally. The arguements by analogy come from the times of Aristotle, from the times of the Ptolemaic Universe, from the earliest beginnings of intellectual pretentions; and all of it is based on Irrationalism and European Romantic traditon. The mind at work above is the mind of the Europeans of the 17th century and before, the witch burners, book burners, Jew burners. The Muslim world is primitive, and within it are primitive minds, insane by comparison to our world.
We must understand the root causes and the social injustice and the poverty and hopelessness that forces the oppressed to lash out in any way they can to redeem their pride. Yeah, sure. Except that there is literally no way to understand it. The fatal flaw of the argument is that in Islam there is no understanding, there is only submission, submission to irrationality, to feelings, to impulses, to catastrophic rages, to attitudes, to postures and poses and imaginings. There is literally nothing to understand, and to try is to defeat oneself from the immediate beginning.
No one can "understand" irrationality. It is beyond understanding. That's the whole point of irrationality as an ideology.
We'll look at the dhimmi Left's irrationality next time.
Wednesday, July 20, 2005
Losing our Heads
Saudi Arabia is our enemy. Saudi Arabians generally, the Saudi Arabian people, are born into and raised up on sermons of hatred and visions of murder of so-called infidels. Saudi Arabians have killed us in our thousands, and they continue to plot to kill us as oten agains as they are able. That's half of what they live for. It's half of their reason for living. These Stone Age monsters live in a state of primitiveness that few other people on Earth can claim even for their most dispossessed citizens. And Saudi Arabians are killing at random to spread their mental illness to the rest of the world. Saudi Arabians are pouring money into every pocket they can find to spread the deen by da'wa to the world. They spread like a plague, killing at random those they contact.
We all, those of us who know this story at all, know the Sword Verse, Koran 9:5 and the others, and we likely know of the Freedom House Reports on Saudi Arabia. Those of us who study and learn from Spencer and Fitzgerald and we who've read and studied for varying lengths of time among us certainly by now have a good understanding of the case regarding Saudi Arabia. We know the general picture very well. So below we'll move in for a look at the life of one particular Saudi Arabian, a man who lives in the neighbourhood, who is more or less a regular guy. Saudi Arabian regular, that it.
We know people by the friends they have. Maybe that's unfair. Maybe it's unfair to one's friends. In the case of Saudi Arabia, we cannot, we must not, allow our leaders to refer to the Sauds as our friends.
Saudi Arabians are our enemies, every man among them.
But they're all different! Except that every one of them is the "Property of the Saudi Arabian Government." The locals can be Arabians of all sorts, but the Saudi Arabians are our enemies. Yes, they're all people just like you and just like me, just folks, but when they are the property of the Kingdom of saudi Arabia they are our enemies.
Meet one:
http://www.arabnews.com/
Kingdom's Leading Executioner Says: 'I Lead a Normal Life'
Mahmoud Ahmad, Arab News Staff —
JEDDAH, 5 June 2003 — Saudi Arabia's leading executioner Muhammad Saad Al-Beshi will behead up to seven people in a day.
"It doesn't matter to me: Two, four, 10 — As long as I'm doing God's will, it doesn't matter how many people I execute," he told Okaz newspaper in an interview.
He started at a prison in Taif, where his job was to handcuff and blindfold the prisoners before their execution. "Because of this background, I developed a desire to be an executioner," he says.
He applied for the job and was accepted.
His first job came in 1998 in Jeddah. "The criminal was tied and blindfolded. With one stroke of the sword I severed his head. It rolled meters away." Of course he was nervous, then, he says, as many people were watching, but now stage fright is a thing of the past.
He says he is calm at work because he is doing God's work. "But there are many people who faint when they witness an execution. I don't know why they come and watch if they don't have the stomach for it.
"Me? I sleep very well," he adds.
Does he think people are afraid of him? "In this country we have a society that understands God's law," he says. "No one is afraid of me. I have a lot of relatives, and many friends at the mosque, and I live a normal life like everyone else. There are no drawbacks for my social life."
Before an execution, nonetheless, he will go to the victim's family to obtain forgiveness for the criminal. "I always have that hope, until the very last minute, and I pray to God to give the criminal a new lease of life. I always keep that hope alive."
Al-Beshi will not reveal how much he gets paid per execution as this is a confidential agreement with the government. But he insists that the reward is not important. "I am very proud to do God's work," he reiterates.
However, he does reveal that a sword will cost something in the region of SR20,000. "It's a gift from the government. I look after it and sharpen it once in a while, and I make sure to clean it of bloodstains.
"It's very sharp. People are amazed how fast it can separate the head from the body."
By the time the victims reach the execution square they have surrendered themselves to death, he says, though they may hope to be forgiven at the last minute. "Their hearts and minds are taken up with reciting the Shahada." The only conversation with the prisoner is when he tells him to say the Shahada.
"When they get to the execution square, their strength drains away. Then I read the execution order, and at a signal I cut the prisoner's head off."
He has executed numerous women without hesitation, he explains. "Despite the fact that I hate violence against women, when it comes to God's will, I have to carry it out."
There is no great difference between executing men and women, except that the women wear hijab, and nobody is allowed near them except Al-Beshi himself when the time for execution comes.
When executing women he will use either gun or sword. "It depends what they ask me to use. Sometimes they ask me to use a sword and sometimes a gun. But most of the time I use the sword," he adds.
As an experienced executioner, 42-year-old Al-Beshi is entrusted with the task of training the young. "I successfully trained my son Musaed, 22, as an executioner and he was approved and chosen," he says proudly. Training focuses on the way to hold the sword and where to hit, and is mostly through observing the executioner at work.
An executioner's life, of course, is not all killing. Sometimes it can be amputation of hands and legs. "I use a special sharp knife, not a sword," he explains. "When I cut off a hand I cut it from the joint. If it is a leg the authorities specify where it is to be taken off, so I follow that."
Al-Beshi describes himself as a family man. Married before he became an executioner, his wife did not object to his chosen profession. "She only asked me to think carefully before committing myself," he recalls. "But I don't think she's afraid of me," he smiles. "I deal with my family with kindness and love. They aren't afraid when I come back from an execution. Sometimes they help me clean my sword."
A father of seven, he is a proud grandfather already. "I have a married daughter who has a son. He is called Haza, and he's my pride and joy. And then there are my sons. The oldest one is Saad, and of course there is Musaed, who'll be the next executioner," he adds.
Copyright: Arab News © 2003 All rights reserved. Site designed by: arabix and powered by Eima IT
***
Each time we read here about Saudi Arabia we should keep al-Beshi's story in mind. He is the arm of Shari'a. He is part the soul of Islam. He is the heart of Saudi Arabia. There are too many like him, not just in Saudi Arabia itself but everywhere across the face of the world. The Saudi Arabians preach hatred against the West, against Jews, Christians, women, homosexuals, Blacks, even Shi'ites and Sufis. The list doesn't end there. They preach hatred, they finance hatred, they buy our politicians. Saudi Arabians preach hatred and practice taqiyya in our schools and universities, in mosques in our cities, on our streets, even in our prisons. These people are not our friends. They not only hate, but they destroy, wound, hack, burn, kill.
They will cut off your head if they get a chance.
Every slave of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a possible al-Beshi. Too many of them actually are state financed executioners who sleep just fine. And they train their grand children to keep up the work.
They are not our friends.
We all, those of us who know this story at all, know the Sword Verse, Koran 9:5 and the others, and we likely know of the Freedom House Reports on Saudi Arabia. Those of us who study and learn from Spencer and Fitzgerald and we who've read and studied for varying lengths of time among us certainly by now have a good understanding of the case regarding Saudi Arabia. We know the general picture very well. So below we'll move in for a look at the life of one particular Saudi Arabian, a man who lives in the neighbourhood, who is more or less a regular guy. Saudi Arabian regular, that it.
We know people by the friends they have. Maybe that's unfair. Maybe it's unfair to one's friends. In the case of Saudi Arabia, we cannot, we must not, allow our leaders to refer to the Sauds as our friends.
Saudi Arabians are our enemies, every man among them.
But they're all different! Except that every one of them is the "Property of the Saudi Arabian Government." The locals can be Arabians of all sorts, but the Saudi Arabians are our enemies. Yes, they're all people just like you and just like me, just folks, but when they are the property of the Kingdom of saudi Arabia they are our enemies.
Meet one:
http://www.arabnews.com/
Kingdom's Leading Executioner Says: 'I Lead a Normal Life'
Mahmoud Ahmad, Arab News Staff —
JEDDAH, 5 June 2003 — Saudi Arabia's leading executioner Muhammad Saad Al-Beshi will behead up to seven people in a day.
"It doesn't matter to me: Two, four, 10 — As long as I'm doing God's will, it doesn't matter how many people I execute," he told Okaz newspaper in an interview.
He started at a prison in Taif, where his job was to handcuff and blindfold the prisoners before their execution. "Because of this background, I developed a desire to be an executioner," he says.
He applied for the job and was accepted.
His first job came in 1998 in Jeddah. "The criminal was tied and blindfolded. With one stroke of the sword I severed his head. It rolled meters away." Of course he was nervous, then, he says, as many people were watching, but now stage fright is a thing of the past.
He says he is calm at work because he is doing God's work. "But there are many people who faint when they witness an execution. I don't know why they come and watch if they don't have the stomach for it.
"Me? I sleep very well," he adds.
Does he think people are afraid of him? "In this country we have a society that understands God's law," he says. "No one is afraid of me. I have a lot of relatives, and many friends at the mosque, and I live a normal life like everyone else. There are no drawbacks for my social life."
Before an execution, nonetheless, he will go to the victim's family to obtain forgiveness for the criminal. "I always have that hope, until the very last minute, and I pray to God to give the criminal a new lease of life. I always keep that hope alive."
Al-Beshi will not reveal how much he gets paid per execution as this is a confidential agreement with the government. But he insists that the reward is not important. "I am very proud to do God's work," he reiterates.
However, he does reveal that a sword will cost something in the region of SR20,000. "It's a gift from the government. I look after it and sharpen it once in a while, and I make sure to clean it of bloodstains.
"It's very sharp. People are amazed how fast it can separate the head from the body."
By the time the victims reach the execution square they have surrendered themselves to death, he says, though they may hope to be forgiven at the last minute. "Their hearts and minds are taken up with reciting the Shahada." The only conversation with the prisoner is when he tells him to say the Shahada.
"When they get to the execution square, their strength drains away. Then I read the execution order, and at a signal I cut the prisoner's head off."
He has executed numerous women without hesitation, he explains. "Despite the fact that I hate violence against women, when it comes to God's will, I have to carry it out."
There is no great difference between executing men and women, except that the women wear hijab, and nobody is allowed near them except Al-Beshi himself when the time for execution comes.
When executing women he will use either gun or sword. "It depends what they ask me to use. Sometimes they ask me to use a sword and sometimes a gun. But most of the time I use the sword," he adds.
As an experienced executioner, 42-year-old Al-Beshi is entrusted with the task of training the young. "I successfully trained my son Musaed, 22, as an executioner and he was approved and chosen," he says proudly. Training focuses on the way to hold the sword and where to hit, and is mostly through observing the executioner at work.
An executioner's life, of course, is not all killing. Sometimes it can be amputation of hands and legs. "I use a special sharp knife, not a sword," he explains. "When I cut off a hand I cut it from the joint. If it is a leg the authorities specify where it is to be taken off, so I follow that."
Al-Beshi describes himself as a family man. Married before he became an executioner, his wife did not object to his chosen profession. "She only asked me to think carefully before committing myself," he recalls. "But I don't think she's afraid of me," he smiles. "I deal with my family with kindness and love. They aren't afraid when I come back from an execution. Sometimes they help me clean my sword."
A father of seven, he is a proud grandfather already. "I have a married daughter who has a son. He is called Haza, and he's my pride and joy. And then there are my sons. The oldest one is Saad, and of course there is Musaed, who'll be the next executioner," he adds.
Copyright: Arab News © 2003 All rights reserved. Site designed by: arabix and powered by Eima IT
***
Each time we read here about Saudi Arabia we should keep al-Beshi's story in mind. He is the arm of Shari'a. He is part the soul of Islam. He is the heart of Saudi Arabia. There are too many like him, not just in Saudi Arabia itself but everywhere across the face of the world. The Saudi Arabians preach hatred against the West, against Jews, Christians, women, homosexuals, Blacks, even Shi'ites and Sufis. The list doesn't end there. They preach hatred, they finance hatred, they buy our politicians. Saudi Arabians preach hatred and practice taqiyya in our schools and universities, in mosques in our cities, on our streets, even in our prisons. These people are not our friends. They not only hate, but they destroy, wound, hack, burn, kill.
They will cut off your head if they get a chance.
Every slave of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a possible al-Beshi. Too many of them actually are state financed executioners who sleep just fine. And they train their grand children to keep up the work.
They are not our friends.
Tuesday, July 19, 2005
Nazis and Moslems
All Muslims are fascists. It's not a secret, and it's easy to understand that Islam is a fascist poligion if one has read at least some of the archived posts here. In coming posts we'll continue to examine the nature of fascism as an ideology, and we'll continue to show Islam as fascism, obviously so by intelligent and responsible definition. If Islam is a fascsim, then all Moslems are fascists.
Hitler was a fascist. Mussolini wasn't a Nazi. Haj Amin was a fascist Muslim. He was also a Nazi. Not all Muslims are Nazis, though some are. haj amin, Mufti of Jerusalem was a full-blown Nazi in the 1930s and 40s, going so far as Germany to support his own and the Nazi cause. Haj Amin, Yassir Arafat's uncle, was a Nazi, and many of his fellow war-time Muslim leaders were Nazi collaborators and sympathizers. Not all were Nazis but all were fascists, some above and beyond the call of primitive fascist Islam, Nasser and Sadat of Egypt, for example.
Below we'll visit the first of many works on the Nazi/Islamic alliance, one that lives to this day between Muslims and Right-wing neo-Nazis in the West. Many people dismiss the idea of Islam being a fascist poligion, refusing to read the evidence, relying on prejudice and public opion to guide them, claiming to have moderate and decent Muslim friends, hearkening to President Geo. W. Bush's contention that Islam is a religion of peace hijacked by ta small minority of terrorists. Sorry, folks, fascism is more than an insult: it's a meaningful term and we've defined it and are defining it and backing up our definitions with documents one simply cannot refute. Not all Muslims are Nazis. Haj Amin is.
If we look at the leadership of the Palestinians, so-called, and see their behaviour, nevermind the nonsense they speak in English but the acts of the men, we'll see they do not differ from Haj Amin in any great detail. And the Leadership of the entirety of islma is fascist and often Naziesque. Some of the accompanying graphics do not appear in this reprint. We'll do our best to fix that as time allows. The question remaining now is whether what happened in World war Two is relvant today. Our argument is obviouslyy yes, that little or nothing has changed in the Islamic world's view of reality; that there is no social or philosophical progress in the moribund poligion of Islam; and that the Nazi inclinations of 60 years ago are unchanged today. One is free to disagree with that premise--here. The truth is to be seen in the practice of the modern-day muslims and one will see that it differs very little at all from the behaviours of 628, 1939 or 2001. This is some of the history.
If we look at the leadership of the Palestinians, so-called, and see their behaviour, nevermind the nonsense they speak in English but the acts of the men, we'll see they do not differ from Haj Amin in any great detail. And the Leadership of the entirety of islma is fascist and often Naziesque.
Some of the accompanying graphics do not appear in this reprint. We'll do our best to fix that as time allows.
The question remaining now is whether what happened in World war Two is relevant today. Our argument is obviously yes, that little or nothing has changed in the Islamic world's view of reality; that there is no social or philosophical progress in the moribund poligion of Islam; and that the Nazi inclinations of 60 years ago are unchanged today. One is free to disagree with that premise--here. The truth is to be seen in the practice of the modern-day muslims and one will see that it differs very little at all from the behaviours of 628, 1939 or 2001. This is some of the history:
[I apologize for the computer errors below that I missed. Will correct them asap.]
Thursday, October 14, 2004 12:25
Islamonazism!!!!!!!!!
ARIELBERG
Islamonazism and Islamofascism are terms used to describe the use of Nazi and/or fascist terminology, beliefs and propaganda by Islamic religious and political leaders, generally manifesting itself in calls for the destruction of the state of Israel and the genocide of its citizens and "infidels" (non-Muslims) in general.
Historical Background
Pre- and during WWII Grand Mufti Haj Muhammed Amin al-Husseini with Hitler
Islamonazism began to develop during the time of the German Third Reich, as evidenced by the close relationship between Adolf Hitler-led Nazis and a number of Arab leaders, most notably, the Jerusalem Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini who was known as the "Arab Führer".
Dr. Serge Trifkovic documents the similarities between Al Husseini's brand of radical Islam and Nazism in his book The Sword of the Prophet. He noted parallels in both ideologies: anti-Semitism, quest for world dominance, demand for the total subordination of the free will of the individual, belief in the abolishment of the nation-state in favor of a "higher" community (in Islam, the ummah or community of all believers; in Nazism, the herrenvolk or master race), and belief in undemocratic governance by a "divine" leader (an Islamic caliph, or Nazi Führer).
According to documentation from the Nuremberg and Eichmann trials, the Nazi Germany SS helped finance al-Husseini's efforts in the 1936-1939 revolt in Palestine. Adolf Eichmann actually visited Palestine and met with al-Husseini at that time and subsequently maintained regular contact with him later in Berlin.
In 1940, al-Husseini requested the Axis powers to acknowledge the Arab right "... to settle the question of Jewish elements in Palestine and other Arab countries in accordance with the national and racial interests of the Arabs and along the lines similar to those used to solve the Jewish question in Germany and Italy.
Islamonazism and Islamofascism are terms used to describe the use of Nazi and/or fascist terminology, beliefs and propaganda by Islamic religious and political leaders, generally manifesting itself in calls for the destruction of the state of Israel and the genocide of its citizens and "infidels" (non-Muslims) in general.
Historical Background
Pre- and during WWII
Grand Mufti Haj Muhammed Amin al-Husseini with Hitler Islamonazism began to develop during the time of the German Third Reich, as evidenced by the close relationship between Adolf Hitler-led Nazis and a number of Arab leaders, most notably, the Jerusalem Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini who was known as the "Arab Führer". Dr. Serge Trifkovic documents the similarities between Al Husseini's brand of radical Islam and Nazism in his book The Sword of the Prophet. He noted parallels in both ideologies: anti-Semitism, quest for world dominance, demand for the total subordination of the free will of the individual, belief in the abolishment of the nation-state in favor of a "higher" community (in Islam, the ummah or community of all believers; in Nazism, the herrenvolk or master race), and belief in undemocratic governance by a "divine" leader (an Islamic caliph, or Nazi Führer). According to documentation from the Nuremberg and Eichmann trials, the Nazi Germany SS helped finance al-Husseini's efforts in the 1936-1939 revolt in Palestine. Adolf Eichmann actually visited Palestine and met with al-Husseini at that time and subsequently maintained regular contact with him later in Berlin. In 1940, al-Husseini requested the Axis powers to acknowledge the Arab right "... to settle the question of Jewish elements in Palestine and other Arab countries in accordance with the national and racial interests of the Arabs and along the lines similar to those used to solve the Jewish question in Germany and Italy.
"Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Haj Amin al-Husseini reviewing Bosnian-Muslim troops - a unit of the Handschar (Saber) division of the Waffen SS which he personally recruited for Hitler, 1943
Muslim Croats from the Handschar SS divisionWhile in Baghdad, Syria, al-Husseini aided the pro-Nazi revolt of 1941. He then spent the rest of World War II as Hitler's special guest in Berlin, advocating the extermination of Jews in radio broadcasts back to the Middle East and recruiting Balkan Muslims in Bosnia-Herzegovina (the Handschar Division) and Albania (Skanderbeg Division) and smaller units from throughout the Muslim world from Chechnya to Uzbekistan as the German army SS units that tried to wipe out Jewish communities throughout the region. His Arab Legions later participated in the massacres of thousands of partisan Serbs, Jews and Gypsies. This was only taking the first step in Heinrich Himmler's planned grand alliance between Nazi Germany and the Islamic world. One of his closest aides, Obergruppenführer Gottlob Berger, boasted that "a link is created between Islam and National Socialism on an open, honest basis. It will be directed in terms of blood and race from the North, and in the ideological-spiritual sphere from the East."The Nazis provided Al Husseini with luxurious accommodations in Berlin and a monthly stipend in excess of $10,000. In return, he regularly appeared on German radio touting the Jews as the "most fierce enemies of Muslims," and implored an adoption of the Nazi "final solution" by Arabs. After the Nazi defeat at El Alamein in 1942, al-Husseini broadcast radio messages on Radio Berlin calling for continued Arabic resistance to Allied forces. In time, he came to be known as the "Führer\'s Mufti" and the "Arab Führer".
"Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Haj Amin al-Husseini reviewing Bosnian-Muslim troops - a unit of the Handschar (Saber) division of the Waffen SS which he personally recruited for Hitler, 1943 Muslim Croats from the Handschar SS division
While in Baghdad, Syria, al-Husseini aided the pro-Nazi revolt of 1941. He then spent the rest of World War II as Hitler's special guest in Berlin, advocating the extermination of Jews in radio broadcasts back to the Middle East and recruiting Balkan Muslims in Bosnia-Herzegovina (the Handschar Division) and Albania (Skanderbeg Division) and smaller units from throughout the Muslim world from Chechnya to Uzbekistan as the German army SS units that tried to wipe out Jewish communities throughout the region. His Arab Legions later participated in the massacres of thousands of partisan Serbs, Jews and Gypsies. This was only taking the first step in Heinrich Himmler's planned grand alliance between Nazi Germany and the Islamic world. One of his closest aides, Obergruppenführer Gottlob Berger, boasted that " a link is created between Islam and National Socialism on an open, honest basis. It will be directed in terms of blood and race from the North, and in the ideological-spiritual sphere from the East."The Nazis provided Al Husseini with luxurious accommodations in Berlin and a monthly stipend in excess of $10,000. In return, he regularly appeared on German radio touting the Jews as the "most fierce enemies of Muslims," and implored an adoption of the Nazi "final solution" by Arabs. After the Nazi defeat at El Alamein in 1942, al-Husseini broadcast radio messages on Radio Berlin calling for continued Arabic resistance to Allied forces. In time, he came to be known as the "Führer's Mufti" and the "Arab Führer".
In the annual protest against the Balfour Declaration held in 1943 at the Luftwaffe hall in Berlin, the Mufti praised the Germans because they "know how to get rid of the Jews, and that brings us close to the Germans and sets us in their camp is that, up to today.
"Echoing Muhammad after the battle of Badr, on March 1, 1944 the Mufti called in a broadcast from Berlin: "Arabs! Rise as one and fight for your sacred rights. Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, history and religion. This saves your honor."
At the Nuremberg Trials, Eichmann's deputy Dieter Wisliceny (subsequently executed as a war criminal) testified:"The Mufti was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and adviser of Eichmann and Himmler in the execution of this plan. ... He was one of Eichmann's best friends and had constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard him say, accompanied by Eichmann, he had visited incognito the gas chamber of Auschwitz.
"With the collapse of Nazi Germany in 1945, the Mufti moved to Egypt where he was received as a national hero. After the war al-Husseini was indicted by Yugoslavia for war crimes, but escaped prosecution. The Mufti was never tried because the Allies were afraid of the storm in the Arab world if the hero of Arab nationalism was treated as a war criminal.
Post-WWIIDuring the war, Arab Nazi parties were founded throughout the Middle East. The most influential one was Young Egypt which was established in 1933. Young Egypt imitated the German Nazi party in their ideology, slogans, processionals, and anti-Semitic actions. When the war was over, a member of Young Egypt named Gamal Abdul Nasser led the coup in 1952 that overthrew the Egyptian government. He made Egypt a safe haven for Nazi war criminals and, in 1964, he established the Palestinian Liberation Organization.
In the annual protest against the Balfour Declaration held in 1943 at the Luftwaffe hall in Berlin, the Mufti praised the Germans because they "know how to get rid of the Jews, and that brings us close to the Germans and sets us in their camp is that, up to today. "Echoing Muhammad after the battle of Badr, on March 1, 1944 the Mufti called in a broadcast from Berlin: "Arabs! Rise as one and fight for your sacred rights. Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, history and religion. This saves your honor." At the Nuremberg Trials, Eichmann's deputy Dieter Wisliceny (subsequently executed as a war criminal) testified:"The Mufti was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and adviser of Eichmann and Himmler in the execution of this plan. ... He was one of Eichmann's best friends and had constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard him say, accompanied by Eichmann, he had visited incognito the gas chamber of Auschwitz. "With the collapse of Nazi Germany in 1945, the Mufti moved to Egypt where he was received as a national hero. After the war al-Husseini was indicted by Yugoslavia for war crimes, but escaped prosecution. The Mufti was never tried because the Allies were afraid of the storm in the Arab world if the hero of Arab nationalism was treated as a war criminal. Post-WWII During the war, Arab Nazi parties were founded throughout the Middle East. The most influential one was Young Egypt which was established in 1933. Young Egypt imitated the German Nazi party in their ideology, slogans, processionals, and anti-Semitic actions. When the war was over, a member of Young Egypt named Gamal Abdul Nasser led the coup in 1952 that overthrew the Egyptian government. He made Egypt a safe haven for Nazi war criminals and, in 1964, he established the Palestinian Liberation Organization.
Quote: "This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacare which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacares and the crusades." Arab League Secretary General Azam Pasha, May 15, 1948
It is no accident that a number of Nazi war criminals found refuge in Muslim nations. Take the notorious Otto Skorzeny, an SS officer who led the rescue of Benito Mussolini from captivity, was described by the OSS, predecessor to the CIA, as "the most dangerous man in Europe," and later found service under General Nasser in Egypt.
Major Nazi sympathizers of this era also include Ahmad Shukeiri, the first chairman of the PLO; Anwar Sadat, future president of Egypt; and the founders of the Pan-Arab socialist Ba'ath party, currently ruling Syria and until recently Iraq. One of the Ba'ath founders, Sami al Jundi, has since recalled of this time: "
We were racists, admiring Nazism, reading their books and sources of their thought... We were the first who thought of translating Mein Kampf."Many of the Nazi sympathizers of this era have never repudiated their beliefs; some still openly parade them.
Eventually the leadership of the PLO was taken over by a man named Rahman Abdul Rauf al-Qudwa al-Husseini. Al-Husseini was a nephew and great admirer of Haj Amin al-Husseini. He was born in Cairo in 1929 and grew up in the Gaza strip. His mother, Hamida, was a cousin of the Grand Mufti. Due to internal Arab strife, his father Abdul Rauf al-Qudwa was forced to flee Gaza where the family took refuge in Egypt. Al-Husseini's cousin was Faisal al-Husseini who was the grandson of Haj Amin al-Husseini and the PLO representative in Jerusalem who has directed attacks on the Jews praying at the Western Wall.",1]
Quote:
"This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacare which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacares and the crusades." Arab League Secretary General Azam Pasha, May 15, 1948
It is no accident that a number of Nazi war criminals found refuge in Muslim nations. Take the notorious Otto Skorzeny, an SS officer who led the rescue of Benito Mussolini from captivity, was described by the OSS, predecessor to the CIA, as "the most dangerous man in Europe," and later found service under General Nasser in Egypt. Major Nazi sympathizers of this era also include Ahmad Shukeiri, the first chairman of the PLO; Anwar Sadat, future president of Egypt; and the founders of the Pan-Arab socialist Ba'ath party, currently ruling Syria and until recently Iraq. One of the Ba'ath founders, Sami al Jundi, has since recalled of this time: " We were racists, admiring Nazism, reading their books and sources of their thought... We were the first who thought of translating Mein Kampf."Many of the Nazi sympathizers of this era have never repudiated their beliefs; some still openly parade them. Palestinians holding a handmade Nazi flagEventually the leadership of the PLO was taken over by a man named Rahman Abdul Rauf al-Qudwa al-Husseini. Al-Husseini was a nephew and great admirer of Haj Amin al-Husseini. He was born in Cairo in 1929 and grew up in the Gaza strip. His mother, Hamida, was a cousin of the Grand Mufti. Due to internal Arab strife, his father Abdul Rauf al-Qudwa was forced to flee Gaza where the family took refuge in Egypt. Al-Husseini's cousin was Faisal al-Husseini who was the grandson of Haj Amin al-Husseini and the PLO representative in Jerusalem who has directed attacks on the Jews praying at the Western Wall.
When Rahman Abdul Rauf al-Qudwa al-Husseini enrolled at the University of Cairo in 1951, he decided to conceal his true identity and registered under the name Yasser Arafat. He would carry on the Mufti's legacy in his goal of annihilating Israel. \r\nSaddam Hussein was also a protégé of the Mufti through his uncle and father-in-law Khairallah Tulfah, who, along with Gen. Rashid Ali and the so-called "golden square" cabal of pro-Nazi officers, participated in the Mufti-inspired failed coup against the pro-British government of Iraq in 1941.
Modern Islamonazism1995 Arabic edition of Mein Kampf Today, it can be evidenced in the proliferation of Nazi or Judeophobic literature (Mein Kampf and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion remain best-sellers in many Arab nations), propaganda (blaming the Jewish community for events it has no connection to such as the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks) and calls for genocide against the Jewish citizens of Israel and "infidels" (non-Muslims) in general.
Furthermore, many prominent Muslim leaders, whether officially in power or merely influential, have expounded Nazi ideology and used similar tactics to rouse their adherents in their pronouncements that Islam should be the world standard and strict lines of authority with heavy penalties for disobedience remain common. The brightest examples of employing these tactics and belief system is the deposed in the early 2002 Taliban regime in Afghanistan; genocide of non-Muslims in Darfur, Sudan by Janjaweed Islamic militias with the silent approval of the Sudanese Government; genocide of Christians in then Indonesian East Timor in the 1970s-1990s. \r\nQuest for world domination
Adolf Hitler's Nazi regime is hailed by many in the Arab world, largely because of its genocidal approach to the Jewish community. Palestinians, locked in a decades-long battle with Israel, have even adopted Nazi paraphernalia. The association between today's Palestinians and the Nazi movement dates back to the early days of Hitler's Third Reich, when the Mufti of Jersualem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, forged close and lasting ties with the German Nazis, as described above.
When Rahman Abdul Rauf al-Qudwa al-Husseini enrolled at the University of Cairo in 1951, he decided to conceal his true identity and registered under the name Yasser Arafat. He would carry on the Mufti's legacy in his goal of annihilating Israel. Saddam Hussein was also a protégé of the Mufti through his uncle and father-in-law Khairallah Tulfah, who, along with Gen. Rashid Ali and the so-called "golden square" cabal of pro-Nazi officers, participated in the Mufti-inspired failed coup against the pro-British government of Iraq in 1941. Modern Islamonazism1995 Arabic edition of Mein Kampf Today, it can be evidenced in the proliferation of Nazi or Judeophobic literature (Mein Kampf and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion remain best-sellers in many Arab nations), propaganda (blaming the Jewish community for events it has no connection to such as the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks) and calls for genocide against the Jewish citizens of Israel and "infidels" (non-Muslims) in general. Furthermore, many prominent Muslim leaders, whether officially in power or merely influential, have expounded Nazi ideology and used similar tactics to rouse their adherents in their pronouncements that Islam should be the world standard and strict lines of authority with heavy penalties for disobedience remain common. The brightest examples of employing these tactics and belief system is the deposed in the early 2002 Taliban regime in Afghanistan; genocide of non-Muslims in Darfur, Sudan by Janjaweed Islamic militias with the silent approval of the Sudanese Government; genocide of Christians in then Indonesian East Timor in the 1970s-1990s. Quest for world dominationAdolf Hitler's Nazi regime is hailed by many in the Arab world, largely because of its genocidal approach to the Jewish community. Palestinians, locked in a decades-long battle with Israel, have even adopted Nazi paraphernalia. The association between today's Palestinians and the Nazi movement dates back to the early days of Hitler's Third Reich, when the Mufti of Jersualem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, forged close and lasting ties with the German Nazis, as described above.
The Arab world does more than just mimic the actions of Adolf Hitler's Nazi regime, as shown here with the "Heil Hitler" salute, their religious and political leaders frequently employ Nazi rhetoric, mixed with radical Islamic fundamentalism, to foster hatred for the Jewish world and, particularly, Israel.
Muslims saluting Nazi style
Throughout the western world, many have noted that extreme Islam bears much in common with Nazi ideology and political process. Politicians from major parties throughout Europe become aware of the dangers Islam brings to their countries. In the United States, the Chairman of Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Omar M. Ahmad told a crowd of California Muslims in July 1998, "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran... should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth."
Muslim demonstration in Luton, England
As with the rise of the Nazis, extreme elements have captured the disaffected with familiar themes of placing blame and claiming superiority. Western sensibilities, it is often argued, have played a part - as they did in the rise of the Nazi regime - with many comparisons being made to the appeasement policies of the 1930s to the actions taken by current governments and world bodies.
Shaykh Rashid al Ghanuchi, Head of the Al-Nahda Islamic movement of Tunis, said in 2002: "Many Islamists associate democracy with foreign intervention and non-belief. But democracy is a set of mechanisms to guarantee freedom of thought and assembly and peaceful competition for governmental authority through ballot boxes. The Islamic movement's negative attitude toward democracy is holding it back. We have no modern experience in Islamic activity that can replace democracy. The Islamization of democracy is the closest thing to implementing Shura (consultation). Those who reject this thought have not produced anything different than the one-party system of rule.
The Arab world does more than just mimic the actions of Adolf Hitler's Nazi regime, as shown here with the "Heil Hitler" salute, their religious and political leaders frequently employ Nazi rhetoric, mixed with radical Islamic fundamentalism, to foster hatred for the Jewish world and, particularly, Israel. Muslims saluting Nazi styleThroughout the western world, many have noted that extreme Islam bears much in common with Nazi ideology and political process. Politicians from major parties throughout Europe become aware of the dangers Islam brings to their countries. In the United States, the Chairman of Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Omar M. Ahmad told a crowd of California Muslims in July 1998, "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran... should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth." Muslim demonstration in Luton, EnglandAs with the rise of the Nazis, extreme elements have captured the disaffected with familiar themes of placing blame and claiming superiority. Western sensibilities, it is often argued, have played a part - as they did in the rise of the Nazi regime - with many comparisons being made to the appeasement policies of the 1930s to the actions taken by current governments and world bodies. Shaykh Rashid al Ghanuchi, Head of the Al-Nahda Islamic movement of Tunis, said in 2002: "Many Islamists associate democracy with foreign intervention and non-belief. But democracy is a set of mechanisms to guarantee freedom of thought and assembly and peaceful competition for governmental authority through ballot boxes. The Islamic movement's negative attitude toward democracy is holding it back. We have no modern experience in Islamic activity that can replace democracy. The Islamization of democracy is the closest thing to implementing Shura (consultation). Those who reject this thought have not produced anything different than the one-party system of rule.
"Islamic leaders are constantly trying to put a blame for the failure of their economical, political and ideological systems on the West and Israel inciting more violence and hate toward "infidels" or non-believers. The former Malaysian Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir Mohammad in his opening speech at a 57-nation Islamic summit in Malaysia urged Muslims to unite against Jews who, he said, rule the world by "proxy" - comments criticized by Jewish and some of the Western leaders as an invitation to violence.
The Associated Press quoted Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles, California, as saying, "Mahathir's speech today is an absolute invitation for more hate crimes and terrorism against Jews. That's serious.
"Palestinian Authority and Hamas Palestinian forces under Arafat doing Nazi salute
While there is discussion in many circles (political, historical, religious, semantics) over the use of the word "Nazi" in modern day society, with the term being applied frequently and incorrectly to virtually any leader, government or organization based on unpopular policies, the proliferation of genocidal rhetoric and aims of domination amongst some Arab groups argues for its inclusion in this instance.
Former Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar, who orchestrated attacks against Israel, until his assassination by the IDF, praised a Palestinian bomber and gave insight into Hamas aims, telling followers, "she is not going to be the last (attacker) because the march of resistance will continue until the Islamic flag is raised, not only on the minarets of Jerusalem, but over the whole universe.
"Palestinian boy wearing suicide beltThis philosophy is also often seen in religious broadcasts,"
"Islamic leaders are constantly trying to put a blame for the failure of their economical, political and ideological systems on the West and Israel inciting more violence and hate toward "infidels" or non-believers. The former Malaysian Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir Mohammad in his opening speech at a 57-nation Islamic summit in Malaysia urged Muslims to unite against Jews who, he said, rule the world by "proxy" - comments criticized by Jewish and some of the Western leaders as an invitation to violence. The Associated Press quoted Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles, California, as saying, "Mahathir's speech today is an absolute invitation for more hate crimes and terrorism against Jews. That's serious. "Palestinian Authority and Hamas Palestinian forces under Arafat doing Nazi salute While there is discussion in many circles (political, historical, religious, semantics) over the use of the word "Nazi" in modern day society, with the term being applied frequently and incorrectly to virtually any leader, government or organization based on unpopular policies, the proliferation of genocidal rhetoric and aims of domination amongst some Arab groups argues for its inclusion in this instance. Former Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar, who orchestrated attacks against Israel, until his assassination by the IDF, praised a Palestinian bomber and gave insight into Hamas aims, telling followers, "she is not going to be the last (attacker) because the march of resistance will continue until the Islamic flag is raised, not only on the minarets of Jerusalem, but over the whole universe. "Palestinian boy wearing suicide beltThis philosophy is also often seen in religious broadcasts, "
A young man said to me: 'I am 14 years old, and I have four years left before I blow myself up'... We, the Muslims on this good and blessed land, are all - each one of us - seekers of Martyrdom... The Koran is very clear on this: The greatest enemies of the Islamic nation are the Jews, may Allah fight them... Blessings for whoever assaulted a soldier... Blessings for whoever has raised his sons on the education of Jihad and Martyrdom, blessings for whoever has saved a bullet in order to stick it in a Jew's head..." said Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi on a Palestinian television boradcast in August 2001. Months earlier, he had urged Palestinians to commit suicide bombings to kill Jews in the name of Islam, "Blessings to whoever put a belt of explosives on his body or on his sons' and plunged into the midst of the Jews, crying 'Allahu Akbar, praise to Allah, There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is His messenger.
"Too, the Nazis would recognize the philosophy of indoctrinating the young.
Palestinian textbooks make it quite clear that Islam is to be accepted by all people. "Islam is Allah's religion for all human beings. It should be proclaimed and invitepeopl to join it wisely and through appropriate preaching and friendly discussions. However, such methods may encounter resistance and the preachers may be prevented from accomplishing their duty... then, Jihad and the use of physical force against the enemies become inevitable", proclaimed an 11th grade textbook, Islamic Culture, issued by the Palestinian Authority's Ministry of Education in 2003.
Further Reading*
Serge Trifkovic, The Sword of the Prophet: History, Theology, Impact on the World, Regina Orthodox Press, 2002, ISBN: 1928653111
* Antonio J. Munoz, Lions of the Desert: Arab Volunteers in the German Army, 1941-1945, Axis Europa Books, 2002, ISBN: 1891227033Helpful Links
[more at link.]
Hitler was a fascist. Mussolini wasn't a Nazi. Haj Amin was a fascist Muslim. He was also a Nazi. Not all Muslims are Nazis, though some are. haj amin, Mufti of Jerusalem was a full-blown Nazi in the 1930s and 40s, going so far as Germany to support his own and the Nazi cause. Haj Amin, Yassir Arafat's uncle, was a Nazi, and many of his fellow war-time Muslim leaders were Nazi collaborators and sympathizers. Not all were Nazis but all were fascists, some above and beyond the call of primitive fascist Islam, Nasser and Sadat of Egypt, for example.
Below we'll visit the first of many works on the Nazi/Islamic alliance, one that lives to this day between Muslims and Right-wing neo-Nazis in the West. Many people dismiss the idea of Islam being a fascist poligion, refusing to read the evidence, relying on prejudice and public opion to guide them, claiming to have moderate and decent Muslim friends, hearkening to President Geo. W. Bush's contention that Islam is a religion of peace hijacked by ta small minority of terrorists. Sorry, folks, fascism is more than an insult: it's a meaningful term and we've defined it and are defining it and backing up our definitions with documents one simply cannot refute. Not all Muslims are Nazis. Haj Amin is.
If we look at the leadership of the Palestinians, so-called, and see their behaviour, nevermind the nonsense they speak in English but the acts of the men, we'll see they do not differ from Haj Amin in any great detail. And the Leadership of the entirety of islma is fascist and often Naziesque. Some of the accompanying graphics do not appear in this reprint. We'll do our best to fix that as time allows. The question remaining now is whether what happened in World war Two is relvant today. Our argument is obviouslyy yes, that little or nothing has changed in the Islamic world's view of reality; that there is no social or philosophical progress in the moribund poligion of Islam; and that the Nazi inclinations of 60 years ago are unchanged today. One is free to disagree with that premise--here. The truth is to be seen in the practice of the modern-day muslims and one will see that it differs very little at all from the behaviours of 628, 1939 or 2001. This is some of the history.
If we look at the leadership of the Palestinians, so-called, and see their behaviour, nevermind the nonsense they speak in English but the acts of the men, we'll see they do not differ from Haj Amin in any great detail. And the Leadership of the entirety of islma is fascist and often Naziesque.
Some of the accompanying graphics do not appear in this reprint. We'll do our best to fix that as time allows.
The question remaining now is whether what happened in World war Two is relevant today. Our argument is obviously yes, that little or nothing has changed in the Islamic world's view of reality; that there is no social or philosophical progress in the moribund poligion of Islam; and that the Nazi inclinations of 60 years ago are unchanged today. One is free to disagree with that premise--here. The truth is to be seen in the practice of the modern-day muslims and one will see that it differs very little at all from the behaviours of 628, 1939 or 2001. This is some of the history:
[I apologize for the computer errors below that I missed. Will correct them asap.]
Thursday, October 14, 2004 12:25
Islamonazism!!!!!!!!!
ARIELBERG
Islamonazism and Islamofascism are terms used to describe the use of Nazi and/or fascist terminology, beliefs and propaganda by Islamic religious and political leaders, generally manifesting itself in calls for the destruction of the state of Israel and the genocide of its citizens and "infidels" (non-Muslims) in general.
Historical Background
Pre- and during WWII Grand Mufti Haj Muhammed Amin al-Husseini with Hitler
Islamonazism began to develop during the time of the German Third Reich, as evidenced by the close relationship between Adolf Hitler-led Nazis and a number of Arab leaders, most notably, the Jerusalem Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini who was known as the "Arab Führer".
Dr. Serge Trifkovic documents the similarities between Al Husseini's brand of radical Islam and Nazism in his book The Sword of the Prophet. He noted parallels in both ideologies: anti-Semitism, quest for world dominance, demand for the total subordination of the free will of the individual, belief in the abolishment of the nation-state in favor of a "higher" community (in Islam, the ummah or community of all believers; in Nazism, the herrenvolk or master race), and belief in undemocratic governance by a "divine" leader (an Islamic caliph, or Nazi Führer).
According to documentation from the Nuremberg and Eichmann trials, the Nazi Germany SS helped finance al-Husseini's efforts in the 1936-1939 revolt in Palestine. Adolf Eichmann actually visited Palestine and met with al-Husseini at that time and subsequently maintained regular contact with him later in Berlin.
In 1940, al-Husseini requested the Axis powers to acknowledge the Arab right "... to settle the question of Jewish elements in Palestine and other Arab countries in accordance with the national and racial interests of the Arabs and along the lines similar to those used to solve the Jewish question in Germany and Italy.
Islamonazism and Islamofascism are terms used to describe the use of Nazi and/or fascist terminology, beliefs and propaganda by Islamic religious and political leaders, generally manifesting itself in calls for the destruction of the state of Israel and the genocide of its citizens and "infidels" (non-Muslims) in general.
Historical Background
Pre- and during WWII
Grand Mufti Haj Muhammed Amin al-Husseini with Hitler Islamonazism began to develop during the time of the German Third Reich, as evidenced by the close relationship between Adolf Hitler-led Nazis and a number of Arab leaders, most notably, the Jerusalem Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini who was known as the "Arab Führer". Dr. Serge Trifkovic documents the similarities between Al Husseini's brand of radical Islam and Nazism in his book The Sword of the Prophet. He noted parallels in both ideologies: anti-Semitism, quest for world dominance, demand for the total subordination of the free will of the individual, belief in the abolishment of the nation-state in favor of a "higher" community (in Islam, the ummah or community of all believers; in Nazism, the herrenvolk or master race), and belief in undemocratic governance by a "divine" leader (an Islamic caliph, or Nazi Führer). According to documentation from the Nuremberg and Eichmann trials, the Nazi Germany SS helped finance al-Husseini's efforts in the 1936-1939 revolt in Palestine. Adolf Eichmann actually visited Palestine and met with al-Husseini at that time and subsequently maintained regular contact with him later in Berlin. In 1940, al-Husseini requested the Axis powers to acknowledge the Arab right "... to settle the question of Jewish elements in Palestine and other Arab countries in accordance with the national and racial interests of the Arabs and along the lines similar to those used to solve the Jewish question in Germany and Italy.
"Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Haj Amin al-Husseini reviewing Bosnian-Muslim troops - a unit of the Handschar (Saber) division of the Waffen SS which he personally recruited for Hitler, 1943
Muslim Croats from the Handschar SS divisionWhile in Baghdad, Syria, al-Husseini aided the pro-Nazi revolt of 1941. He then spent the rest of World War II as Hitler's special guest in Berlin, advocating the extermination of Jews in radio broadcasts back to the Middle East and recruiting Balkan Muslims in Bosnia-Herzegovina (the Handschar Division) and Albania (Skanderbeg Division) and smaller units from throughout the Muslim world from Chechnya to Uzbekistan as the German army SS units that tried to wipe out Jewish communities throughout the region. His Arab Legions later participated in the massacres of thousands of partisan Serbs, Jews and Gypsies. This was only taking the first step in Heinrich Himmler's planned grand alliance between Nazi Germany and the Islamic world. One of his closest aides, Obergruppenführer Gottlob Berger, boasted that "a link is created between Islam and National Socialism on an open, honest basis. It will be directed in terms of blood and race from the North, and in the ideological-spiritual sphere from the East."The Nazis provided Al Husseini with luxurious accommodations in Berlin and a monthly stipend in excess of $10,000. In return, he regularly appeared on German radio touting the Jews as the "most fierce enemies of Muslims," and implored an adoption of the Nazi "final solution" by Arabs. After the Nazi defeat at El Alamein in 1942, al-Husseini broadcast radio messages on Radio Berlin calling for continued Arabic resistance to Allied forces. In time, he came to be known as the "Führer\'s Mufti" and the "Arab Führer".
"Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Haj Amin al-Husseini reviewing Bosnian-Muslim troops - a unit of the Handschar (Saber) division of the Waffen SS which he personally recruited for Hitler, 1943 Muslim Croats from the Handschar SS division
While in Baghdad, Syria, al-Husseini aided the pro-Nazi revolt of 1941. He then spent the rest of World War II as Hitler's special guest in Berlin, advocating the extermination of Jews in radio broadcasts back to the Middle East and recruiting Balkan Muslims in Bosnia-Herzegovina (the Handschar Division) and Albania (Skanderbeg Division) and smaller units from throughout the Muslim world from Chechnya to Uzbekistan as the German army SS units that tried to wipe out Jewish communities throughout the region. His Arab Legions later participated in the massacres of thousands of partisan Serbs, Jews and Gypsies. This was only taking the first step in Heinrich Himmler's planned grand alliance between Nazi Germany and the Islamic world. One of his closest aides, Obergruppenführer Gottlob Berger, boasted that " a link is created between Islam and National Socialism on an open, honest basis. It will be directed in terms of blood and race from the North, and in the ideological-spiritual sphere from the East."The Nazis provided Al Husseini with luxurious accommodations in Berlin and a monthly stipend in excess of $10,000. In return, he regularly appeared on German radio touting the Jews as the "most fierce enemies of Muslims," and implored an adoption of the Nazi "final solution" by Arabs. After the Nazi defeat at El Alamein in 1942, al-Husseini broadcast radio messages on Radio Berlin calling for continued Arabic resistance to Allied forces. In time, he came to be known as the "Führer's Mufti" and the "Arab Führer".
In the annual protest against the Balfour Declaration held in 1943 at the Luftwaffe hall in Berlin, the Mufti praised the Germans because they "know how to get rid of the Jews, and that brings us close to the Germans and sets us in their camp is that, up to today.
"Echoing Muhammad after the battle of Badr, on March 1, 1944 the Mufti called in a broadcast from Berlin: "Arabs! Rise as one and fight for your sacred rights. Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, history and religion. This saves your honor."
At the Nuremberg Trials, Eichmann's deputy Dieter Wisliceny (subsequently executed as a war criminal) testified:"The Mufti was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and adviser of Eichmann and Himmler in the execution of this plan. ... He was one of Eichmann's best friends and had constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard him say, accompanied by Eichmann, he had visited incognito the gas chamber of Auschwitz.
"With the collapse of Nazi Germany in 1945, the Mufti moved to Egypt where he was received as a national hero. After the war al-Husseini was indicted by Yugoslavia for war crimes, but escaped prosecution. The Mufti was never tried because the Allies were afraid of the storm in the Arab world if the hero of Arab nationalism was treated as a war criminal.
Post-WWIIDuring the war, Arab Nazi parties were founded throughout the Middle East. The most influential one was Young Egypt which was established in 1933. Young Egypt imitated the German Nazi party in their ideology, slogans, processionals, and anti-Semitic actions. When the war was over, a member of Young Egypt named Gamal Abdul Nasser led the coup in 1952 that overthrew the Egyptian government. He made Egypt a safe haven for Nazi war criminals and, in 1964, he established the Palestinian Liberation Organization.
In the annual protest against the Balfour Declaration held in 1943 at the Luftwaffe hall in Berlin, the Mufti praised the Germans because they "know how to get rid of the Jews, and that brings us close to the Germans and sets us in their camp is that, up to today. "Echoing Muhammad after the battle of Badr, on March 1, 1944 the Mufti called in a broadcast from Berlin: "Arabs! Rise as one and fight for your sacred rights. Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, history and religion. This saves your honor." At the Nuremberg Trials, Eichmann's deputy Dieter Wisliceny (subsequently executed as a war criminal) testified:"The Mufti was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and adviser of Eichmann and Himmler in the execution of this plan. ... He was one of Eichmann's best friends and had constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard him say, accompanied by Eichmann, he had visited incognito the gas chamber of Auschwitz. "With the collapse of Nazi Germany in 1945, the Mufti moved to Egypt where he was received as a national hero. After the war al-Husseini was indicted by Yugoslavia for war crimes, but escaped prosecution. The Mufti was never tried because the Allies were afraid of the storm in the Arab world if the hero of Arab nationalism was treated as a war criminal. Post-WWII During the war, Arab Nazi parties were founded throughout the Middle East. The most influential one was Young Egypt which was established in 1933. Young Egypt imitated the German Nazi party in their ideology, slogans, processionals, and anti-Semitic actions. When the war was over, a member of Young Egypt named Gamal Abdul Nasser led the coup in 1952 that overthrew the Egyptian government. He made Egypt a safe haven for Nazi war criminals and, in 1964, he established the Palestinian Liberation Organization.
Quote: "This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacare which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacares and the crusades." Arab League Secretary General Azam Pasha, May 15, 1948
It is no accident that a number of Nazi war criminals found refuge in Muslim nations. Take the notorious Otto Skorzeny, an SS officer who led the rescue of Benito Mussolini from captivity, was described by the OSS, predecessor to the CIA, as "the most dangerous man in Europe," and later found service under General Nasser in Egypt.
Major Nazi sympathizers of this era also include Ahmad Shukeiri, the first chairman of the PLO; Anwar Sadat, future president of Egypt; and the founders of the Pan-Arab socialist Ba'ath party, currently ruling Syria and until recently Iraq. One of the Ba'ath founders, Sami al Jundi, has since recalled of this time: "
We were racists, admiring Nazism, reading their books and sources of their thought... We were the first who thought of translating Mein Kampf."Many of the Nazi sympathizers of this era have never repudiated their beliefs; some still openly parade them.
Eventually the leadership of the PLO was taken over by a man named Rahman Abdul Rauf al-Qudwa al-Husseini. Al-Husseini was a nephew and great admirer of Haj Amin al-Husseini. He was born in Cairo in 1929 and grew up in the Gaza strip. His mother, Hamida, was a cousin of the Grand Mufti. Due to internal Arab strife, his father Abdul Rauf al-Qudwa was forced to flee Gaza where the family took refuge in Egypt. Al-Husseini's cousin was Faisal al-Husseini who was the grandson of Haj Amin al-Husseini and the PLO representative in Jerusalem who has directed attacks on the Jews praying at the Western Wall.",1]
Quote:
"This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacare which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacares and the crusades." Arab League Secretary General Azam Pasha, May 15, 1948
It is no accident that a number of Nazi war criminals found refuge in Muslim nations. Take the notorious Otto Skorzeny, an SS officer who led the rescue of Benito Mussolini from captivity, was described by the OSS, predecessor to the CIA, as "the most dangerous man in Europe," and later found service under General Nasser in Egypt. Major Nazi sympathizers of this era also include Ahmad Shukeiri, the first chairman of the PLO; Anwar Sadat, future president of Egypt; and the founders of the Pan-Arab socialist Ba'ath party, currently ruling Syria and until recently Iraq. One of the Ba'ath founders, Sami al Jundi, has since recalled of this time: " We were racists, admiring Nazism, reading their books and sources of their thought... We were the first who thought of translating Mein Kampf."Many of the Nazi sympathizers of this era have never repudiated their beliefs; some still openly parade them. Palestinians holding a handmade Nazi flagEventually the leadership of the PLO was taken over by a man named Rahman Abdul Rauf al-Qudwa al-Husseini. Al-Husseini was a nephew and great admirer of Haj Amin al-Husseini. He was born in Cairo in 1929 and grew up in the Gaza strip. His mother, Hamida, was a cousin of the Grand Mufti. Due to internal Arab strife, his father Abdul Rauf al-Qudwa was forced to flee Gaza where the family took refuge in Egypt. Al-Husseini's cousin was Faisal al-Husseini who was the grandson of Haj Amin al-Husseini and the PLO representative in Jerusalem who has directed attacks on the Jews praying at the Western Wall.
When Rahman Abdul Rauf al-Qudwa al-Husseini enrolled at the University of Cairo in 1951, he decided to conceal his true identity and registered under the name Yasser Arafat. He would carry on the Mufti's legacy in his goal of annihilating Israel. \r\nSaddam Hussein was also a protégé of the Mufti through his uncle and father-in-law Khairallah Tulfah, who, along with Gen. Rashid Ali and the so-called "golden square" cabal of pro-Nazi officers, participated in the Mufti-inspired failed coup against the pro-British government of Iraq in 1941.
Modern Islamonazism1995 Arabic edition of Mein Kampf Today, it can be evidenced in the proliferation of Nazi or Judeophobic literature (Mein Kampf and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion remain best-sellers in many Arab nations), propaganda (blaming the Jewish community for events it has no connection to such as the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks) and calls for genocide against the Jewish citizens of Israel and "infidels" (non-Muslims) in general.
Furthermore, many prominent Muslim leaders, whether officially in power or merely influential, have expounded Nazi ideology and used similar tactics to rouse their adherents in their pronouncements that Islam should be the world standard and strict lines of authority with heavy penalties for disobedience remain common. The brightest examples of employing these tactics and belief system is the deposed in the early 2002 Taliban regime in Afghanistan; genocide of non-Muslims in Darfur, Sudan by Janjaweed Islamic militias with the silent approval of the Sudanese Government; genocide of Christians in then Indonesian East Timor in the 1970s-1990s. \r\nQuest for world domination
Adolf Hitler's Nazi regime is hailed by many in the Arab world, largely because of its genocidal approach to the Jewish community. Palestinians, locked in a decades-long battle with Israel, have even adopted Nazi paraphernalia. The association between today's Palestinians and the Nazi movement dates back to the early days of Hitler's Third Reich, when the Mufti of Jersualem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, forged close and lasting ties with the German Nazis, as described above.
When Rahman Abdul Rauf al-Qudwa al-Husseini enrolled at the University of Cairo in 1951, he decided to conceal his true identity and registered under the name Yasser Arafat. He would carry on the Mufti's legacy in his goal of annihilating Israel. Saddam Hussein was also a protégé of the Mufti through his uncle and father-in-law Khairallah Tulfah, who, along with Gen. Rashid Ali and the so-called "golden square" cabal of pro-Nazi officers, participated in the Mufti-inspired failed coup against the pro-British government of Iraq in 1941. Modern Islamonazism1995 Arabic edition of Mein Kampf Today, it can be evidenced in the proliferation of Nazi or Judeophobic literature (Mein Kampf and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion remain best-sellers in many Arab nations), propaganda (blaming the Jewish community for events it has no connection to such as the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks) and calls for genocide against the Jewish citizens of Israel and "infidels" (non-Muslims) in general. Furthermore, many prominent Muslim leaders, whether officially in power or merely influential, have expounded Nazi ideology and used similar tactics to rouse their adherents in their pronouncements that Islam should be the world standard and strict lines of authority with heavy penalties for disobedience remain common. The brightest examples of employing these tactics and belief system is the deposed in the early 2002 Taliban regime in Afghanistan; genocide of non-Muslims in Darfur, Sudan by Janjaweed Islamic militias with the silent approval of the Sudanese Government; genocide of Christians in then Indonesian East Timor in the 1970s-1990s. Quest for world dominationAdolf Hitler's Nazi regime is hailed by many in the Arab world, largely because of its genocidal approach to the Jewish community. Palestinians, locked in a decades-long battle with Israel, have even adopted Nazi paraphernalia. The association between today's Palestinians and the Nazi movement dates back to the early days of Hitler's Third Reich, when the Mufti of Jersualem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, forged close and lasting ties with the German Nazis, as described above.
The Arab world does more than just mimic the actions of Adolf Hitler's Nazi regime, as shown here with the "Heil Hitler" salute, their religious and political leaders frequently employ Nazi rhetoric, mixed with radical Islamic fundamentalism, to foster hatred for the Jewish world and, particularly, Israel.
Muslims saluting Nazi style
Throughout the western world, many have noted that extreme Islam bears much in common with Nazi ideology and political process. Politicians from major parties throughout Europe become aware of the dangers Islam brings to their countries. In the United States, the Chairman of Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Omar M. Ahmad told a crowd of California Muslims in July 1998, "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran... should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth."
Muslim demonstration in Luton, England
As with the rise of the Nazis, extreme elements have captured the disaffected with familiar themes of placing blame and claiming superiority. Western sensibilities, it is often argued, have played a part - as they did in the rise of the Nazi regime - with many comparisons being made to the appeasement policies of the 1930s to the actions taken by current governments and world bodies.
Shaykh Rashid al Ghanuchi, Head of the Al-Nahda Islamic movement of Tunis, said in 2002: "Many Islamists associate democracy with foreign intervention and non-belief. But democracy is a set of mechanisms to guarantee freedom of thought and assembly and peaceful competition for governmental authority through ballot boxes. The Islamic movement's negative attitude toward democracy is holding it back. We have no modern experience in Islamic activity that can replace democracy. The Islamization of democracy is the closest thing to implementing Shura (consultation). Those who reject this thought have not produced anything different than the one-party system of rule.
The Arab world does more than just mimic the actions of Adolf Hitler's Nazi regime, as shown here with the "Heil Hitler" salute, their religious and political leaders frequently employ Nazi rhetoric, mixed with radical Islamic fundamentalism, to foster hatred for the Jewish world and, particularly, Israel. Muslims saluting Nazi styleThroughout the western world, many have noted that extreme Islam bears much in common with Nazi ideology and political process. Politicians from major parties throughout Europe become aware of the dangers Islam brings to their countries. In the United States, the Chairman of Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Omar M. Ahmad told a crowd of California Muslims in July 1998, "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran... should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth." Muslim demonstration in Luton, EnglandAs with the rise of the Nazis, extreme elements have captured the disaffected with familiar themes of placing blame and claiming superiority. Western sensibilities, it is often argued, have played a part - as they did in the rise of the Nazi regime - with many comparisons being made to the appeasement policies of the 1930s to the actions taken by current governments and world bodies. Shaykh Rashid al Ghanuchi, Head of the Al-Nahda Islamic movement of Tunis, said in 2002: "Many Islamists associate democracy with foreign intervention and non-belief. But democracy is a set of mechanisms to guarantee freedom of thought and assembly and peaceful competition for governmental authority through ballot boxes. The Islamic movement's negative attitude toward democracy is holding it back. We have no modern experience in Islamic activity that can replace democracy. The Islamization of democracy is the closest thing to implementing Shura (consultation). Those who reject this thought have not produced anything different than the one-party system of rule.
"Islamic leaders are constantly trying to put a blame for the failure of their economical, political and ideological systems on the West and Israel inciting more violence and hate toward "infidels" or non-believers. The former Malaysian Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir Mohammad in his opening speech at a 57-nation Islamic summit in Malaysia urged Muslims to unite against Jews who, he said, rule the world by "proxy" - comments criticized by Jewish and some of the Western leaders as an invitation to violence.
The Associated Press quoted Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles, California, as saying, "Mahathir's speech today is an absolute invitation for more hate crimes and terrorism against Jews. That's serious.
"Palestinian Authority and Hamas Palestinian forces under Arafat doing Nazi salute
While there is discussion in many circles (political, historical, religious, semantics) over the use of the word "Nazi" in modern day society, with the term being applied frequently and incorrectly to virtually any leader, government or organization based on unpopular policies, the proliferation of genocidal rhetoric and aims of domination amongst some Arab groups argues for its inclusion in this instance.
Former Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar, who orchestrated attacks against Israel, until his assassination by the IDF, praised a Palestinian bomber and gave insight into Hamas aims, telling followers, "she is not going to be the last (attacker) because the march of resistance will continue until the Islamic flag is raised, not only on the minarets of Jerusalem, but over the whole universe.
"Palestinian boy wearing suicide beltThis philosophy is also often seen in religious broadcasts,"
"Islamic leaders are constantly trying to put a blame for the failure of their economical, political and ideological systems on the West and Israel inciting more violence and hate toward "infidels" or non-believers. The former Malaysian Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir Mohammad in his opening speech at a 57-nation Islamic summit in Malaysia urged Muslims to unite against Jews who, he said, rule the world by "proxy" - comments criticized by Jewish and some of the Western leaders as an invitation to violence. The Associated Press quoted Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles, California, as saying, "Mahathir's speech today is an absolute invitation for more hate crimes and terrorism against Jews. That's serious. "Palestinian Authority and Hamas Palestinian forces under Arafat doing Nazi salute While there is discussion in many circles (political, historical, religious, semantics) over the use of the word "Nazi" in modern day society, with the term being applied frequently and incorrectly to virtually any leader, government or organization based on unpopular policies, the proliferation of genocidal rhetoric and aims of domination amongst some Arab groups argues for its inclusion in this instance. Former Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar, who orchestrated attacks against Israel, until his assassination by the IDF, praised a Palestinian bomber and gave insight into Hamas aims, telling followers, "she is not going to be the last (attacker) because the march of resistance will continue until the Islamic flag is raised, not only on the minarets of Jerusalem, but over the whole universe. "Palestinian boy wearing suicide beltThis philosophy is also often seen in religious broadcasts, "
A young man said to me: 'I am 14 years old, and I have four years left before I blow myself up'... We, the Muslims on this good and blessed land, are all - each one of us - seekers of Martyrdom... The Koran is very clear on this: The greatest enemies of the Islamic nation are the Jews, may Allah fight them... Blessings for whoever assaulted a soldier... Blessings for whoever has raised his sons on the education of Jihad and Martyrdom, blessings for whoever has saved a bullet in order to stick it in a Jew's head..." said Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi on a Palestinian television boradcast in August 2001. Months earlier, he had urged Palestinians to commit suicide bombings to kill Jews in the name of Islam, "Blessings to whoever put a belt of explosives on his body or on his sons' and plunged into the midst of the Jews, crying 'Allahu Akbar, praise to Allah, There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is His messenger.
"Too, the Nazis would recognize the philosophy of indoctrinating the young.
Palestinian textbooks make it quite clear that Islam is to be accepted by all people. "Islam is Allah's religion for all human beings. It should be proclaimed and invitepeopl to join it wisely and through appropriate preaching and friendly discussions. However, such methods may encounter resistance and the preachers may be prevented from accomplishing their duty... then, Jihad and the use of physical force against the enemies become inevitable", proclaimed an 11th grade textbook, Islamic Culture, issued by the Palestinian Authority's Ministry of Education in 2003.
Further Reading*
Serge Trifkovic, The Sword of the Prophet: History, Theology, Impact on the World, Regina Orthodox Press, 2002, ISBN: 1928653111
* Antonio J. Munoz, Lions of the Desert: Arab Volunteers in the German Army, 1941-1945, Axis Europa Books, 2002, ISBN: 1891227033Helpful Links
[more at link.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)