Category Archives: Nation of Islam

US Government Losing Its Marbles

Is this for real? As news breaks that the Bush administration continues to sell America to our enemies, Hugh Fitzgerald, clarifies the issues at hand. Read his article, and shudder at the sheer audacity of our government to wink & nod every time the Saudis feign a cough:

quillpen
The American Genius
The Bush Administration announces in the same breath that "over ten years" Israel will receive "$30 billion in weapons," and that Saudi Arabia will get "$20 billion" in weapons to stave off Iran (over what time period? 10 years, like the Israelis? Or more like a year or two?). And it announces also that, furthermore, a country that is in every way hostile to us, Egypt, will receive "$13 billion" in weapons as a gift.

What shall we say about this? Israel is not only a temporary ally but a permanent ally. It is a permanent part of the West and central to the West's history, at this point, and must be kept alive not only for our own moral sanity, but also because its disappearance, or reduction to dhimmitudinous despair and reliance on Arab Muslim willingness to allow it to survive would whet, not sate, Arab and Muslim appetites. But this weapons transfer, billed as "$30 billion," in fact is misleading. Over ten years that amounts to $3 billion a year in weapons aid, which is only one-quarter over the amount now given, and gratefully received. (And need one point out how many advances, in aerospace technology, and in everything from unmanned aircraft to explosives-resistant vehicles that ought to have been, but were not bought, by the Pentagon for use in Iraq, are developed by the Israelis for their, and of course our, use?)

Saudi Arabia, per contra, is our enemy. A permanent enemy, because it is a country whose people are suffused with the most uncompromising, violent, and malevolent—for Infidels—version of Islam. For in Saudi Arabia they take their Islam very, very seriously. Saudi Arabia is not worried about an invasion by Iran. Such fears are phony. The whole hysteria, coordinated with Egypt and Jordan, about the "Shi'a crescent" is merely designed to get the Americans to focus only on Iran (and its current accomplice, Syria) and to ignore the much larger threat, outside the local business in Iraq, that Sunni Islam poses to Infidels. It is designed to get them to ignore also that above all other states, Saudi Arabia is the world's Muslims’ chief financier, paying for mosques, madrasas, propaganda, campaigns of Da'wa, and the buying up of Western hirelings who in the capitals of the West—and certainly in Washington—work to do the Saudi bidding. They work to prevent intelligent understanding of the menace of Jihad and of Islam to our legal and political institutions and to our physical security.

It is absurd to think that the Saudis will master this equipment, but not absurd to think that such weaponry could fall into the hands of Arabs and other Muslims who can master some of it. In any case, the mere possession of such weapons would have to be taken into account by Israeli military planners, and will make their own task even more hellishly difficult, and they don't deserve to have that outcome. When the United States protested about a sale of aerospace technology, developed by the Israelis, to China, Israel, at great cost to its own fledgling aerospace dreams, promptly cancelled the sale—thereby angering China and permanently damaging any hope of future sales to such a market. But Israel listened and heeded our desires. We, however, or at least this and other American administrations, have not ever heeded Israel's pleas on the same score.

And what is also bad is the signal to Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia should be read the riot act. Saudi Arabia should be told it is not "our ally," and if it wishes to be defended, it will obviously have to rely, in the end, on us—not on weapons that could fall into hands even more malevolent than the Al-Saud (just as the weapons we sold the Shah, that "pillar of stability" in the Persian Gulf, fell into the clutches of the Islamic Republic of Iran). Thus if these weapons are delivered, we would have to be ready to intervene in order to make sure those weapons were not seized, or transferred, to others. Saudi Arabia was a loyal supporter of the Taliban (and one of only two countries to recognize the Taliban government, besides Pakistan). Saudi Arabia must be forced to stop funding mosques and madrasas, stop funding the hate literature against Infidels that have been found in those mosques and those madrasas, stop funding those campaigns of Da'wa that target prisoners, that target all the psychically and economically marginal.

The Saudis do not now do, and never have done, the United States any favors. We buy their oil at the market price. They have fooled successive American policymakers, who wanted to be fooled. They were helped along in being fooled by so many who, directly or indirectly, at the time or soon after, have been paid off by the Saudis, the government, or its institutions, or rich individuals.

The way to "protect" the Al-Saud and the oilfields is quite different. It is to sell Saudi Arabia an insurance policy. We will guarantee the safety of the rulers and of the oil. It will cost: let's say $50-100 billion annually. Too much, you say? Well, since Saudi Arabia takes in about one billion dollars a day, and since the rich Saudis have invested a lot overseas, have perhaps a trillion or more socked away, they can certainly afford $50-$100 billion. Okay, how about a little souk-haggling, in that case? Let's give them a deal—$75 billion a year. How's that? As long as you agree with the concept, we can at a later date decide just how much we intend to recoup, for the Iraq calamity and squandering of $880 billion, from the fabulous rich Saudis.

And what about Egypt? Can it seriously be maintained that Egypt needs those weapons because the army of Shi'a Iran may march right across northern Iraq, and Jordan, and Israel, and march right into Egypt? Really? Or is it possible that Egypt needs those weapons because Iranian troops will be coming up from the Sudan? Or that somehow the Sunnis of Egypt, who are deeply distrustful and intensely dislike the Iranian Shi'a for being non-Arabs and for being Shi'a, would somehow be converted by Shi'a missionaries? And if that were the case, why would giving Egypt the most advanced weaponry help in stopping those missionary efforts?

Egypt has fought four major wars with Israel, and has been responsible for nearly 20,000 separate fedayin attacks in the period 1949-1956 on Israel. It has been, and remains, the most dangerous neighbor Israel has. Egypt does not go to war not because its people have reconciled themselves to Israel's existence—if anything, they have become since the Sinai handover even more virulent in their officially-sanctioned and officially-promoted hatred of Israel and Zionists and "Jews." Yet the Administration thinks that giving weapons to Egypt, a country whose poor will not benefit one whit from the airplanes and missiles Egypt will receive, will somehow be accepted by the American people and by Congress, that we will all be unable to see right through this.

The lumped announcement of the one legitimate arms delivery planned—that to our ally and friend Israel—at the same time, in the same breath, with the announcement of the gift of advanced weaponry to Israel's constant threat Egypt, and the sale of advanced weaponry to the funder of the worldwide Jihad, Saudi Arabia, shows an Administration that is terminally exhausted. It cannot think straight about Islam. It cannot begin to start to think straight about the dangers it is creating for an ally, and for the larger Infidel world. It can't begin to get a grip and think in terms of the Camp of Infidels and the Camp of Islam, and how to do whatever it takes to weaken the latter and strengthen the former.

Instead, it has swallowed the Sunni Arab line about the need for countering the Shi'a threat (as if there were not, for Infidels, a greater Sunni threat), which means the threat to the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia, and to Bahrain, and among the Shi'a agitating in Lebanon, or those Shi'a minorities in Yemen and Kuwait. And of course they also mean the threat in Iraq, if the Shi'a are permitted to keep their new gains, and the Sunnis to be forced to accept the new order. That is why, just as the Shi'a exiles were the ones who helped inveigle the Bush Administration to go into Iraq, it is now the turn of the Sunnis, to inveigle us—against our own best interests—to stay.

The Administration keeps amazing us with its ignorance and inability to see the whole picture.

And in its list of recipients of the arms, the Bush Administration puts one in mind of the scene in a Woody Allen film, in which he is in at a kiosk in New York telling the newsdealer that "I'd like a copy of The Times Literary Supplement, and The New York Review Books, and The Hudson Review and also Partisan Review and, oh, could you just throw in a copy of Slut."

Race Matters To Muslims

This is an excerpt from The Illustrated Pig blog found here.

Black Muslims enslaved
Black Muslims enslaved

The color of one's skin has suddenly become relevant to religion. Muslim activists have been trying to convince our African American citizens that Islam is the religion of the black man, that Islam is African and that Mohammed was black. Needless to say, Muslims only make these claims to blacks; among whites they take a different approach!

Knowing that these are well thought-out falsifications, intended only to draw blacks towards Islam, If we are to accept or reject Islam, it should be based on Islam's own merits, rather than color or origin.

The claim that "there is no racism in Islam, we are all one..." is a blatant lie. From the very inception of Islam, and for its entire history, Muslims have made up the largest numbers of slave traders and engaged in the greatest slave trading campaigns in history. Even today, slavery continues in many parts of the Muslim world. Just about the only places in the world today where you will still find slavery practised are in the Muslim world.

Muhammad was a slave owner, and he traded in slaves. Throughout the Hadith, Black people are referred to as slaves. In fact, in the Arabic language it is impossible to distinguish between a Black person and a slave.

Even in modern times, in Saudi Arabia the homeland of Islam, the common word for "black" is "Abd" meaning slave. The same word used for a slave is the word for a Black man. In the Hadith Muhammad is quoted as referring to Black people as "raisin heads."

Mohammed referred to blacks as slaves. He even owned several black slaves. Bilal, Abu Hurairah, Usama Ebn Zayyed, and a "Ghullaam" (youth) named Rabbah, were among Mohammed's slaves.

Just take a look at how the White Arab (muslims) are treating your black brothers in Dafur, or see how your black brothers are treated in Egypt or Saudia. You are a disgrace to the black man, if you have forgotten it was the white Muslim Arabs that captured your fore-fathers and sold them to the slave traders.

Are you a Muslim because of your hate towards spooks, if so, you should remember that Muslims where raping Africa long before spooks arrived. By saying that Islam is the religion of the black man, Muslim activists are only showing their true color of hate and racism.

Don't let this deceive you.

Muslims don't care for your skin color, they are only using that to gain control over you. For if Muslims really care for blacks, why are black Muslims kidnapping their black Christian brothers these days in Sudan, butchering the weak and selling the healthy as slaves.

Tabari II:21
"Ham [Africans] begat all those who are black and curly-haired, while Japheth [Turks] begat all those who are full-faced with small eyes, and Shem [Arabs] begat everyone who is handsome of face with beautiful hair. Noah prayed that the hair of Ham's descendants would not grow beyond their ears, and that whenever his descendants met Shem's, the latter would enslave them."

The difference between Islam and the teachings of Jesus Christ is great. The choice is clear, the choice is yours.

Tabari II:11
"Shem, the son of Noah was the father of the Arabs, the Persians, and the Greeks; Ham was the father of the Black Africans; and Japheth was the father of the Turks and of Gog and Magog who were cousins of the Turks. Noah prayed that the prophets and apostles would be descended from Shem and kings would be from Japheth. He prayed that the African's color would change so that their descendants would be slaves to the Arabs and Turks."

(John 8:32)
"Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."

As has been stated before by many others far more fluent in the tongues of debate than I, Islam is the engine of Arab supremacy and Arab imperialism. A ruthless totalitarian political machine. This is Islam over the ages. Fourteen hundred years of using the same method of operations in an all-out war against all those who are not in servitude to this machine, however inept or feeble it has occasionally become in certain periods.

Illustrated Pig has its facts confirmed with Muslim aggression spotted all over the planet today. Malcolm X was wrong. He was misled. He didn't have all the facts. And he was killed for some of these facts by a group called the Nation of Islam founded in the 1920s by a man known as W.D. Fard, a group that has been marginalized and its members called "false" Muslims by nearly every theocratic Imam who even bothers speaking out on the topic.

Africans of any faith should take heed.

Malcolm Was Dead Wrong, Until He Was Dead Right

Malcolm's History
Malcolm's History
BLACK AMERICANS, ISLAMIC DA'WA authored by Hugh Fitzgerald

Given Islam’s record on slavery, black Americans should think twice about converting. And there are other considerations. Islam does not permit music, though here and there folk music has been allowed. But music having to do with religious worship is absolutely forbidden. When black Americans convert, they are throwing out all of Gospel music, doubly wicked in Muslim eyes: the music itself is forbidden, and this particular church music takes its texts from Old Testament stories (stories involving Jews, and the Promised Land). It is curious that real Muslims regarded (and may still regard) Elijah Muhammad's Black Muslims as not the real thing, partly because of the claims made on behalf of Elijah Muhammad himself, and partly because of the music that occasionally was allowed (and may still be) at certain gatherings of followers.

When black Americans discard Christianity for the sake of Islam, because they are fooled into believing that Islam is somehow the correct vehicle of protest, they manifest ignorance of the whole horrible Arab slave trade. That trade began earlier and ended (where it did end) later than the European slave trade. Also, it was, because it involved the castration on site of so many black African children, much greater in scope. The mortality rate was something like 90%, so that only 1 out of 10 black male children seized and castrated by the Arab slavers actually made it to the slave markets of Riyadh, Cairo, Baghdad, Damascus, Algiers, Istanbul, and similar centers of Islam. See "The Hideous Trade" by Jan Hogedoorn.

Those Afro-Americans who are made the obvious target of a campaign of Da'wa (as are immigrants from Latin America), and who choose to embrace Islam, are unwittingly, with that "reversion" to Islam (one in which they are seldom presented with the full meaning, or texts, of Islam), also turning their back on, discarding, jettisoning, the place of Biblical imagery and of the Bible in the history of black America.

Decades ago, when the Black Muslims first got started (and because of Elijah Muhammad's own claims, and other doctrinal irregularities, Arab Muslims never considered them to be "real Muslims" and even today are contemptuous of "Black Muslims" as opposed to "black Muslims"), much was made of their ability to supposedly "straighten people" out—have them wear coats and ties, give up drugs and alcohol, and so on. Well, perhaps. But what it also did is cause them to abandon their entire pre-Islamic history, and to thus sever ties with their own past, their own relatives who remained Christians or part of a Christian or Judeo-Christian tradition.

Finally, let's talk about racism. Anyone who has spent even a week in the Arab states of the Gulf, or taken a summer course in Arabic in Cairo or Damascus, knows that the most racist, most skin-color aware societies on earth, are those of the Arabs—despite all the talk of a "universalist" religion. One student of my acquaintance, who had taken courses with, and been brainwashed by, Bruce Lawrence of Duke University, to regard Islam as a great thing, then spent a summer in an Arab country. He came back completely disabused—no greater racists, he insisted, had he ever met in his life. He was from rural South Carolina.

Why this information is not more widely written about in the press, including the black press, by black ministers who should try to hold onto their flocks and not let wanderers be seduced by the siren-song of Islam, which for more than a thousand years has meant nothing but kidnapping followed by enslavement or death at the hands of Arab slavers, is beyond me. And even today Arabs continue to show their contempt and hatred for blacks, not only in the enslavement of black Africans by Arabs in Mali and Mauritania, but by the Libyan mobs that attacked black African students and lynched a black diplomat a few years ago; by the Moroccans who have been known to deal with black African migrant workers by taking them and dropping them in the middle of the desert with no possible way of survival; and of course by the behavior of that member in good standing of the Arab League, the government of the Sudan, which over 20 years, killed or starved to death nearly 2 million black Africans in the southern Sudan, with survivors often enslaved.

Ask Francis Bok, ask all the "Lost Boys" now in the United States. Now they have extended their genocidal campaign to fellow Muslims in Darfur—fellow Muslims, but black Africans, and so dispensable. As the Egyptian Zaki Badawi recently said, "they were not real Muslims." And that was the end of his comment—apparently that was enough for him to lose any interest in their being victims of mass murder.

There's much more to add. But the Islamic Da’wa campaign in America involves the clever targeting of blacks. The Boston Mosque was placed right across from Roxbury Community College, and part of the "deal" was for the mosque members to offer "free lectures" to students at Roxbury Community College and 2,500 "books on Islam" (you can guess which kind) for the college's library. In other words, the Mosque's backers were planning on using it as a center for conducting Da'wa among the black population of Boston. One wonders if the Rev. Eugene Rivers, or other ministers, have taken note of the history of Islam, of the tenets of Islam, of the menace of Islam to the wellbeing of those whom they instruct and guide and elevate and offer solace to.

Begin with slavery. Slavery was implicitly recognized by the American Constitution. But it is so no longer. Fortunately, the Constitution has always been subject both to formal modification (amendments) through the express will of the people, and to judicial interpretation ("It is a constitution we are expounding" wrote Chief Justice John Marshall in Marbury v. Madison). There is no way to modify the passages in Qur'an, the sayings and acts of Muhammad in the Hadith and Sira, that allow, permit, even offer rules for, the institution of slavery.

Muhammad himself, and his Companions, owned slaves—the slaves taken in battle. It is not possible, therefore, for any Believer to denounce slavery as a moral evil, for that would be to condemn Muhammad. And he is uswa hasana, the Model for All Mankind. So it just can't be done.

Within recent months, lest anyone forget, a leading Saudi imam wrote that slavery is an essential part of Islam, recognized and accepted, and to abandon that idea is an insult to Islam. Believers know, though they will not always talk about (they are engaged in deception about the nature of Islam, concious or semi-conscious, round-the-clock—sometimes not only to Infidels, but even to themselves), the fact that under Islam, slavery has a place that cannot be denied. Slavery has received permanent textual justification—and those texts, deemed sacred by Believers, are also immutable.

Black Americans, like other Americans, like Infidels everywhere, who because of the actions of Muslims themselves, and despite the efforts of the political leaders in the Western world to repeat pious nonsense about the real nature of Islam, are beginning to realize that as a vehicle for the expression of discontent, Islam is not exactly ideal. For Islam represents the greatest successful imperialism—Arab imperialism—in human history.

After those it directly conquered in the Middle East and North Africa and Hindustan, the greatest victims have so far not been white Europeans, but black Africans, hideously seized, castrated, dragged to the Muslim slave markets by coffle and dhow, with 90% of them dying on the way. Islam demands that converts ("reverts") simply regard with indifference or hostility their entire non-Islamic past. That leaves the non-Arab convert alone—with no music, no art, no history, with essentially nothing but Islam.

There are many available vehicles of protest—of expressing, articulately, discontent or dismay. The ballot box is possibly the best. There are ways to protest effectively things as they are, including the cult of Growth and of the "free market" as the answer to everything, and the grotesque elevation of Homo Economicus, Economic Man, narrowly conceived, as the new Golden Calf. It is possible to be enraged by illegitimate disparities of wealth (and nowhere are such disparities of wealth more obvious than within the Arab Muslim lands).

But Islam is not a vehicle of protest. Rather, it is an expression of total alienation, of giving up entirely from the circumambient society, and cutting oneself off from one's history. And practitioners of Da'wa in this country have, it should be obvious, certain identifiable target populations, starting with black Americans—especially those in prisons, for whom a center of stability and cultural life has been the church. Causing people to cut themselves off from that center of black life and culture would cruelly do more than merely "change their faith." It might just possibly undo them altogether, leaving them as recruits for the Army of Islam, deliberately alienated from their own past.

It is important to keep in mind the nature of Islam as a vehicle of Arab supremacism, of cultural and linguistic imperialism as well as of economic and poltical imperialism. Look at the historic treatment of black Africans by Arabs—look at the slave entrepot of Zanzibar, the seizure even today of black oil wealth in the Sudan, the massacres of the Ibos in the Biafra War by Egyptian pilots strafing villages, the history of Arab slavers over a thousand years, and the open, rampant racism of Arab societies, which so surprised and horrified Eldridge Cleaver during his stay in Algeria.

Those attitudes of racism, that use of Islam as a vehicle for Arab supremacism—not only against black Africans, but also against Kurds, Berbers, and all other non-Arab Muslims as well—should be the object of careful study, by all those who are tempted by the siren-song of Islam. And the long history of Arab enslavement of black Africans that continues to the present day and has no end, should not be put out of sight, or out of mind.