Islamic Danger in History

Sounds from North Africa

2010-04-03T04:53:00.000-07:00

Sounds from North Africa

By Bruce Maddy-Weitzman

WHEN LOOKING AT REGIONAL developments and how they might affect their own lives, Israelis understandably tend to fix their gaze eastward. Ironically, since the end of the state of war between Egypt and Israel in 1979, Israelis have become generally indifferent towards the goings-on along the Nile. This is even more the case with regard to events further west, in Algeria and Morocco, the “core” states of North Africa. ... Full story

Lettre d'un pere à sa fille assassinee pour avoir refuse de porter le voile

2010-03-25T12:09:00.000-07:00

from Amazigh World:

Katia Bengana : Une héroïne, un repère, une voie

Meftah est une petite ville à une cinquantaine de kilomètres d’Alger. Nous sommes en 1994. L’Algérie, au plus fort de la terreur islamiste, était à feu et à sang. L’Etat était au bord de l’effondrement. La révolution Khomeiniste était sur le point de se reproduire par la terreur au sud de la méditerranée, alors que l’Occident, faisant le jeu de l’Internationale Islamiste, permettait aux « réseaux de soutien au maquis algérien » de se former sur son sol pendant que le régime militaire d’Alger était en quête d’un compromis avec le GIA, laissant les démocrates, la presse indépendante, les femmes, les travailleurs… seuls face à la bête immonde avec pour seule arme, leur courage et leur ferme détermination, scandée à maintes reprises dans les rues d’Alger, de Tizi-Ouzou et d’autres villes d’Algérie, qu’était ce slogan : « Ni Téhéran, ni Khartoum, Ni Kaboul, l’Algérie sera libre et démocratique ».

Bien que les cibles intégristes les plus en vue étaient d’abord les services de sécurités, les jeunes appelés de l’armée, tous issus des couches populaires, les journalistes, les sommités intellectuelles, les militants démocrates… la femme aura été celle qui, bien avant le début officiel de leur « guerre sainte » en 1992, a subi de plein fouet la barbarie du fascisme vert. En l’absence de statistiques, politique officielle oblige, on parle de plusieurs milliers de femmes assassinées, autant d’autres violées collectivement dont beaucoup étaient devenues mères de plusieurs enfants nés de pères impossibles à déterminer et ayant grandis dans les maquis, loin du moindre contact avec la civilisation, des centaines d’autres femmes étaient réduites à l’état d’esclavage dans les casemates où elles étaient détenues…

Aussi, 1994 aura été l’année qui avait vu la stratégie intégriste se transformer pour en faire des carnages collectifs et des rapts de jeunes filles et des femmes en général le quotidien de populations entières notamment celles qui vivent loin des grands centres urbains. Dans ce sillage, les femmes sans voile (pas seulement) étaient harcelées et menacées en permanence dans leur intégrité physique. Beaucoup se rappelle encore ce jour de 1994, lorsque Alger (et d’autres villes) découvrit ses murs et ses boulevards totalement placardés par des affiches portant la signature du GIA et sommant toutes les femmes de se mettre au voile sous huitaine. Passé ce délai, toute femme sans voile sera exécutée à la première occasion. Beaucoup, se sentant seules et démunies, s’étaient résignées à le porter. D’autres, plus tenaces, continuaient à vaquer, cheveux en l’air, bravant la menace islamiste bien réelle et livrant aux « hommes », souvent circonspects, une leçon de bravoure et de détermination bien rare.

L’une d’elles, s’appelait Katia Bengana, à peine 17 ans, brillante lycéenne à Meftah, une petite ville dans la Mitidja qui était alors surnommée par les hordes islamistes « les territoires libérés » en raison de la quasi absence de l’Etat dans cette région où le GIA régnait en maître absolu. C’est dans ce contexte de terreur où pratiquement toute la gente masculine courbait l’échine pour sauver sa peau, que la jeune Katia reçoit plusieurs avertissements sous forme de menaces afin de la contraindre à se voiler. Elle refusait d’obtempérer affichant une détermination insupportable pour les barbus et qui avait impressionné ses professeurs, ses camarades et une population subissant au quotidien le cauchemar de l’obscurantisme religieux. Elle voulait être libre, elle voulait être digne, elle voulait être femme. Elle fut froidement et lâchement assassinée par une meute de barbus sur le chemin de son lycée le 28 février 1994. Depuis, Katia, accédant à l’immortalité, est devenue un symbole de résistance et d’épanouissement pour toutes les femmes et tous les hommes épris de démocratie et de Liberté.

Après tant d’années, Katia est toujours là, quelque part autour de nous, mais ses parents, résignés dans leur dignité, sont toujours inconsolables. Son père, décide de sortir de son silence, adresse une lettre émouvante à sa fille. Lisez-la et célébrez partout Katia Bengana, cette jeune fille intelligente qui avait tenu tête à des hordes intégristes armées jusqu’aux dents, pour que son sacrifice ne soit jamais vain.

Allas Di Tlelli (alias Halim AKLI)

LETTRE D'UN PERE À SA FILLE ASSASSINEE POUR AVOIR REFUSE DE PORTER LE VOILE (1)

Le 28 février 1994 - le 28 février 2010, voilà déjà 16 ans depuis ton assassinat par l’intégrisme religieux pour avoir refusé de porter le voile... Et depuis cette date, ta mère n’a pas cessé de te pleurer chaque jour que Dieu fait. Aujourd’hui ma chère Katia, je tiens à t’annoncer que ta mère est venue te rejoindre pour de bon dans sa dernière demeure en cette date du 23.01.2008 vers 23 heures environ.

Prends soin de ta mère, ma chère Katia. Fasse Dieu qu’elle ne manque de rien avec toi. Rassure-la que de notre côté tout va bien, et qu’elle n’a pas à se faire de soucis surtout pour Celia, la dernière de la famille. Car ici-bas, tu lui as beaucoup manquée Katia. Elle a manqué de tout à cause de cette politique favorable à l’intégrisme religieux de la part de ceux qui sont censés nous protéger et nous rendre justice. Ta perte cruelle, son chagrin, son désespoir, ses souffrances, ton deuxième assassinat à travers cette réconciliation nationale ont fait que ta mère et moi-même n’avons pas pu tenir le coup. La non-prise en charge de notre situation dramatique par l’Etat, les difficultés matérielles et sociales suite à ta disparition ont fait que ta mère n’a pas pu résister à sa maladie qui n’a pas été prise en charge afin de la sauver d’une mort prématurée par manque de moyens et de désespoir.

Aussi, j’accuse le pouvoir algérien de nous avoir abandonnés à notre sort. J’accuse ceux qui ont relâché et pardonné à ces sanguinaires aux mains tachées de sang. J’accuse le pouvoir algérien pour ses sympathies avec les bourreaux de nos parents. J’accuse cette réconciliation pour la paix qui a glorifié et amnistié ces monstres assassins de plus de deux cent mille civils innocents et autres corporations confondues. J’accuse tous ceux qui ont voté pour ce référendum de la honte. J’accuse cette réconciliation qui a consacré l’impunité et qui a ignoré la justice. J’accuse tous ceux qui ont été indifférents à notre douleur. J’accuse tous ceux qui ont été favorables à cette mascarade de vente concomitante d’êtres humains, de civils et autres pour simplement plaire aux maîtres et par la même occasion obtenir quelques miettes en contrepartie de leur soumission et servitude. J’accuse cette réconciliation qui nous a assassinés une deuxième fois à travers cette idéologie arabo-baâthiste pour faire de nous des Arabes par la force et malgré nous. J’accuse tous ceux qui instrumentalisent la religion pour se maintenir au pouvoir en sacrifiant des civils et autres. J’accuse tous ceux qui utilisent la religion pour y accéder en assassinant des innocents. J’accuse tous ceux qui utilisent la religion pour nous détourner de nos racines, de nos coutumes, de nos traditions et de notre langue historique et ancestrale (...)

M. Bengana (Père de Katia âgée de 17 ans, lycéenne assassinée à Meftah le 28 février 1994 pour avoir refusé de porter le voile)

Note:

(1) Lettre écrite en 2008 et publiée sous le titre "J'accuse". Je me suis autorisée à l'actualiser.

http://www.amazighworld.org/human_rights/index_show.php?id=2050

Visite de Ferhat Mehenni au Québec

2010-03-02T00:27:00.001-08:00

Depuis quelques années, le MAK se déploie avec assurance au sein de la communauté kabyle à l’étranger. En plus de sa présence marquée en Europe, notamment en France, le Mouvement pour l’autonomie de la Kabylie de Ferhat Mehenni s’est trouvé d’excellentes affinités avec la démocratie nord-américaine où la communauté kabyle s’est, pour ainsi dire, intégrée sans se désintégrer. La dernière visite du Président du MAK s’inscrit ainsi dans (...)suite

What REALLY Happened at Tora Bora?

2010-02-18T23:42:00.000-08:00

The Failure to Capture or Kill Osama bin Laden at Tora Bora still hangs over the CIA, U.S. Special Forces of all persuasions, the armed forces commanders in Afghanistan, and the George W. Bush administration.

The Al Qaeda leader escaped across the border to Pakistan's Kurram Agency in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas.

The time of this hunt for bin Laden and his escape was October 12 to 17, 2001.

War in Afghanistan: Assault on Tora Bora Fought in early December 2001, the Battle of Tora Bora saw Coalition and Afghan forces attacking the Tora Bora cave complex in the White Mountains near the Pakistani border....read more

The Battle of Tora Bora: The Definitive Account of How Osama Bin Laden Slipped From Our Grasp The New Republic

How bin Laden got away / The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com

Battle of Tora Bora
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tora_Bora

Berbers, Islam & Christianity

2010-02-15T18:03:00.000-08:00

No mystery as to why Christian missionaries might be having their greatest success in the Kabyle. In Algeria, that remains the Berber heartland. It is where the Berbers, that is those who were not forcibly transformed, during the centuries of Arab rule (interrupted by 132 years of French rule) into "Arabs" (how many of those "Arabs" who now persecute the Berbers realize that they themselves are a generation, or two, or five removed from their clearly Berber origins?)

The cause of the Berbers is hardly known in this country. The writer Kateb Yacine, a Berber who refused to write in Arabic, but chose French, is celebrated in France, especially among Berbers-but unknown in this country, and his anti-Arab rage is not likely to cause his books to be included in the syllabuses of courses on "Francophone" literature given that so many such courses are now taught by French-speaking Arabs.

What is that cause? In the first place, it is linguistic and cultural. In Algeria, where the French rightly saw the Berbers as superior to the Arabs — one French general wrote a book about the "Europeanness" of the Berbers — the Berbers were not discriminated against, but as soon as the French left, the forced arabisation of the Berbers started up at once, as if the French interregnum, with the wider possibilities that French education made possible to both Berbers and Arabs, had never existed. Older people in Algeria speak and use French; the younger ones are forgetting. And meanwhile, the Berbers were forbidden to use their own language, the Berber language, Tamazight, in their schools, in their institutions, and even, at times, they could be punished for using it among themselves, on the street. Berber culture was officially ignored.

About twenty years ago, news of agitation began to reach the outside world. There were riots in Tizi-Ouzou. Reported in France, but hardly anywhere else in the Western world. In America, of course, we had all been sufficiently subject to ARAMCO propaganda (performed as a "public service" by the big oil companies, as part of their propaganda payoff to the Saudis for allowing them to find, produce, and then pay exorbitantly for the oil that happens to lie under the malevolent sands of "Saudi" Arabia), to believe that there is something called "the Arab world" and in this "Arab world" there are no Copts, no Armenians, no Assyrians, no Chaldeans, no Turkmen, no Mandeans, no Maronites, and of course no Berbers, no Jews (no, there never were any Jews in North Africa or the Middle East — they all came to Israel, you see, from Europe), for everyone in the Arab world was an "Arab."

The discovery or re-discovery of a Berber identity (and how many of those North African "Arabs" should begin to realize that they are Berbers? There is, by the way, a genetic marker that, in studies by French geneticists in Tunisia, shows that Berbers and Arabs can be easily distinguished) is or could be an important weapon in unsettling the world of Islam, and perhaps causing the Maghreb to see itself, as it should not as "Arab" but as the victim of Arab imperialism.

For what is Islam if not a vehicle of Arab imperialism, and what are the Berbers, if not the victims of that Arab imperialism, an imperialism far more potent and long-lasting than the European kind, for it attempts to efface the historic identity of whole peoples?

And it makes perfect sense that Berbers in the Kabyle would, having felt along their pulses the Arab imperialism of which Islam is the vehicle, would be more open to the efforts of Christian missionaries, or more likely, are not so much responding to missionary activity, but to their own observations as to what Christianity is like, and what Islam has brought them.

In this respect, one should not underestimate the fact that Berbers now live in France, that they make up most of the membership of such groups as the "Maghrebins Laïques," and that they, not the Arabs whose ethnic identity is so found up with Islam, are capable, in some cases, not of identifying with the Arabs, but more closely with the French. And those Berbers communicate with Berbers at home, or through the Internet. And sometimes they return, to Algeria and Morocco, to see their families, and bring with them their own observations on the relative merits of the Islamic world, a world suffused with Islam, and the non-Islamic world, the one they have experienced in France.

The more the non-Arab Muslims of the world, and 80% of the world’s Muslims are not Arab, come to realize — and it would not be hard to help them to realize, for they will not be able to deny the facts, having experienced so much of it themselves — that Islam is a vehicle for that Arab supremacism, the more likely it is that at least some of them will fall away. And others, who may stick with a kind of "non-Arab" Islam (as if such were possible) will, in so doing, at least help to divide, and therefore to weaken, the Camp of Islam.

Ideally, one would wish this Total System, that has held so many hundreds of millions in thrall, and thwarted over so many centuries so much human potential (think of the art, think of the science, that might have resulted in the absence of the dead hand of Islam on so many people, prevented from so many forms of artistic expression, so many avenues for free and skeptical inquiry that are necessary for the enterprise of science, so much dull fanaticism, so much boredom, so much violence, in posse and in esse) will be seen, by Berbers, by Kurds, by people in the subcontinent (why should Muslims in India not "rediscover" their own history, their Hindu, or Buddhist, or other non-Muslim roots?), by those in Malaysia and the East Indies, with its rich pre-Islamic, Hindu and Buddhist past?

Meanwhile, start reading those Berber sites. And hope that the French state, instead of Sarkozy’s folly of "integrating" its Muslims by government-supported mosques, will try to work on the Berbers, work to make them see the light, work to help them to achieve their own destiny, one different from, and superior to, that of the Arabs whose method of domination comes from, is supplied by, Islam, Islam, Islam.

By Forkinsocket

Article taken from: New English Review, Friday, 18 January 2008

Leave a comment Discuss live in the forums
your comments:
Berbers, Islam & Christianity
22 October 2009, par ait ouahi / ouarzazate /morocco
hello. thanks. yes, that is very obvious to everybody. we suffered a lot since the arrival of the Arabs(islam) to north africa. they bring darkness, desertification, underdeveloppment,racisme...with them. it si them who made us face problems with other cultures. fuck them
addition
answer this message

Berbers, Islam & Christianity
4 July 2009, par Opine
Interesting article -
For recall - Berbers brought Christianity to Europe, and Europeans made North-Africa Arab. Peoples of north-africa may have seen in the Jihad a value, back in the 7th century, but correct the coran and took what’s of value, making fit within the local cultural. In places like Morroco, they translated it to Tamazight, pure and simple. The mixup came with Napoleon 3, who dreamed of his Ismic Kingdom, and though I haven’t read it anywhere, he was a Jihadist by all means who praised Islam. Islam or Arabs haven’t done anything to local peoples, it is their Neo-Republican governments who made it a point to islamize and arabize. It may be by necessity, or more perhaps by sponsorship, because the fact is, this is the case of Algeria: Those who ended-up stealing the liberation from France were somehow prisoners, in "costody", and in cahuts with the Baathists, the product of French and British Governments - i.e. The relays, for remote control. It is this dictators, with chanceleries in western capitals that commit the genocide. I am Kabyle, have lived outside Algeria most of my life, and no Arab has ever shocked me with the denial of my identity, as I state it. It is always, somebody else, "a westerner" who has long abandoned his own identity for food, who would insist. Go figure !
The snakes
answer this message

Berbers, Islam & Christianity
4 July 2009, by Tifirelest
Thanks Opine for your comment, here is a set of interresting comments, the questions here interesting and they denote that our history as Berbers is completely ignored by the world!
The Berber question in North Africa
answer this message

Berbers, Islam & Christianity
5 July 2009, by Opine
Interestingly enough, the group which composed this is the "JIHADWATCH" - Whoever that is - Jihad is the only thing of value in the Coran, but since, I believe that book is a misforged story, the jihad is what attrackted all arabs or moslims’ allied, such as the US and others in Afganistan in the 80s. Now, that said, one needs to explain to me WHY SOME FOLKS ESTABLISH DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS WITH A REGIME SUCH AS THE ONES IN North Africa, and encourage us to fight them - That’s all we do all the time. Clever, but not this time around ! These regimes FEED and GROW the Jihadist, and YOU FOLKS you FEED AND GROW these REGIMES !
As they say,
Deal with it !
answer this message
KABYLIA INFO FORUM ARCHIV ADMIN CONTACT

http://www.north-of-africa.com/article.php3?id_article=594

ALSO!

Look at this!

Kabyles and the Jihad
Should Kabyles be enlisted to help in the war against al Qaeda and other Islamic extremists who operate from the North African nation?

Click New Ally in the War Against Al Qaeda?

IMAZIGHEN (BERBERS) AND JEWS AND THE FORGOTTEN JEWISH REFUGEES FROM THE HATRED OF ARAB-ISLAMIC LANDS

2010-01-13T00:07:00.000-08:00

TV debate on Berber-Israel friendship association

Ahmed Adghrini, Secretary-General of the Moroccan Amazigh Democratic Party:

"With regard to what Yahya said, let me point out, first of all, that he is defending Arab identity, which is of no interest to the Amazigh people. Arab identity is something particular to the Arabs, and does not concern the Amazigh, or North Africans of other identities. Arab identity is specific to the Arabian Peninsula and to the countries concerned with this, but not to the Amazigh or the non-Arab residents of North Africa. That's one thing. With regard to the Jews, I don't have to tell you that their history in our region goes back to 1000 BCE. The history of the Amazigh in North Africa goes back 2,957 years. In 40 years or so, we will have 3,000 years of history behind us, throughout which the Jews lived together with us. For the Jews too, Arab identity is of no concern, just as it is of no concern to the aboriginal residents of North Africa. He was talking about the Arab period in North Africa, whereas we go back thousands of years before that."

Fascinating debate on Al-Allam, an Iranian Arabic TV channel, in which a spokesman for the Moroccan Berber (Amazigh) Association, Ahmed Adghirni, puts up a dignified and reasoned defence of the Amazigh-Israel Friendship Association, to which this blog referred over a year ago. (With thanks: Lily)

Pitted against Adghirni is Yahya abu al-Zakharia, an Arab-Algerian writer. To him, the Jews of Morocco are not native to the Maghreb. They were the 'eyes of French colonialism', who betrayed the mujahaddin. They have shown ingratitude and lack of conscience and repaid Arab protection and kindness by joining Israel's security apparatus!The tension between the two is palpable. Adghirni states that the Association represents the humanist value of longstanding friendship, which 'Arabs had sought to replace with enmity and war'. He even accuses his interlocutor of antisemitism.Watch the whole thing!Transcript here

Labels: Jews/Berbers

posted by bataween @ Sunday, August 12, 2007 0 comments

http://jewishrefugees.blogspot.com/2007/08/tv-debate-on-berber-israel-friendship.html

New Berber-Israeli friendship association

posted by bataween @ Tuesday, July 25, 2006

A new Berber-Israeli friendship association aims to develop relations between Berbers (also known as Amazighs) and Berber-speaking Jews in Israel.According to Boubaker Ouadaadid, a German teacher in Casablanca, the association aims to fight antisemitism in Morocco and to spread Amazigh culture among Jews in Israel."Where I grew up (in the country) there was no difference between Jews and Muslims. We were very close to our Jewish brethren. When I moved to Casablanca, I was shocked by people's attitudes. They were frankly antisemitic. For example they would say, lihoudi hachack. That's one reason why we decided to set up this association."The association aims to organise trips for Moroccan and Israeli Berbers (sic) to meet, encourage economic exchanges between the two countries and promote Israeli aid to rural Berber areas. It bucks the official trend, which aims to foster total rupture between the Moroccan state and Israel and runs counter to the pro-Palestinian sentiment prevailing among the Moroccan people.Ouadaadid, together with Brahim Amekraz, believes that the Palestinian cause has been exploited by the country's policies for personal gain. "We do not feel any animoisity towards Israel. The conflict is between Palestinians and Israelis. The war is taking place thousands of kilometres away. It does not interest us."The Jews who lived in Tinghir, Timit, Ouarzazate and Sefrou used to speak Berber and Hebrew. They sang in Berber at weddings or circumcisions.The founders of the friendship association hope to meet in August. They have members in Casablanca, Rabat, Meknes and Tangiers. In Israel, M. Ouadaadid mentions as his associates Dr Bruce Weitzmann, the researcher Moshe Benarouch and the journalist Mira Africh.

Read article in full (French)

Further reading on Amazigh (Berber) Jews

Labels: Jews/Berbers

posted by bataween @ Tuesday, July 25, 2006 2 comments

THE FORGOTTEN JEWISH REFUGEES FROM ARAB-ISLAMIC PERSECUTION

In just 50 years, almost a million Jews, whose communities stretch back up to 3,000 years, have been 'ethnically cleansed' from Arab countries. These refugees outnumber the Palestinian refugees two to one, but their narrative has all but been ignored. Unlike Palestinian refugees, they fled not war, but systematic persecution. Seen in this light, Israel, which absorbed most of these Jewish refugees, is the legitimate expression of the self-determination of an oppressed indigenous, Middle Eastern people.

Th[e] [Jewish Refugees] website is dedicated to preserving the memory of the near-extinct Jewish communities. It will attempt to pass on the stories of the Jewish refugees and their current struggle for recognition and restitution. Awareness of the injustice done to these Jews can only advance the cause of peace and reconciliation.

(Iran: once an ally of Israel, Iran is now an implacable enemy and numbers of Iranian Jews have fallen drastically from 80,000 to 20,000 since the 1979 Islamic revolution. Their plight - and that of all other communities threatened by Islamism - does therefore fall within the scope of this blog.)

http://jewishrefugees.blogspot.com/2007/08/tv-debate-on-berber-israel-friendship.html

Departing Jews marked Egypt's 'cultural Holocaust'

A 'crushing, brilliant book' is how Alana Newhouse in the International Herald Tribune describes Lucette Lagnado's memoir, 'The Man in the White Sharkskin Suit'. The man in question, Lucette's father, never recovered from the experience of being uprooted, while the departure of the Jews marked 'a cultural Holocaust' for Egypt.
"In her new memoir, "The Man in the White Sharkskin Suit," Lucette Lagnado relates how her father, Leon, first reacted upon escaping the dangerous anti-Semitic environment of Nasser's Egypt in 1962: "Ragaouna Masr," he cried, as their boat left the Alexandria harbor - "Take us back to Cairo."
"It's a sad moment, but one would be forgiven for finding it melodramatic. After all, we know how the story ends: the family settles in America and, judging at least by the ascent of Lucette, their youngest daughter, as a prize-winning Wall Street Journal reporter, they presumably enjoy success and happiness. That this assumption is so far off the mark - that the reality of the Lagnados' fate is so far from the triumphalism that Americans have come to expect from immigrant narratives - is one of many reasons to read this crushing, brilliant book.
"Lagnado traces the story of a family so connected to Cairo that they held on until they were forced out, thankfully alive. "Alas, what no one could stop was the cultural Holocaust - the hundreds of synagogues shuttered for lack of attendance, the cemeteries looted of their headstones, the flourishing Jewish-owned shops abandoned by their owners, the schools suddenly bereft of any students." Some will blanch at her use of the word "Holocaust" here, arguing that only the World War II murders of European Jews are worthy of this term. But the wholesale destruction of Middle Eastern Jewish life, along with the even more devastating evisceration of individual lives, was nothing short of a catastrophe - and not only for the Jews.
"Leon Lagnado, like many others, had a love affair with his city, and "The Man in the White Sharkskin Suit" is a story about what happens when two such lovers are torn apart. The man of the title is, of course, Leon. Fluent in seven languages and full of charisma, he was the consummate man-about-town. He spent his days immersed in a web of discreet business deals - all conducted in such privacy that even family members couldn't describe his profession - and his nights gallivanting at the city's hot spots.

"But Leon was also a good Jew, as it were, one who went to synagogue every morning. "It was as if two people resided within one sharkskin suit," Lagnado writes, "one who was pious and whose vestments resembled those of the priests at the Great Temple, all white and sparkling and pure, and the very different creature who led a secret, intensely thrilling life."(...)

"Lagnado is equally adept at maintaining suspense, particularly as the skies begin to darken for Egypt's Jews after Gamal Abdel Nasser's rise to power. Leon resisted leaving for a decade and then did so only after harassment and discrimination extinguished all hope for his family's future in Cairo. Beaten down, they shuffled weakly through Alexandria, Athens, Genoa, Naples, Marseilles, Paris, Cherbourg and Manhattan, before finally landing in Brooklyn. But an easy union between Leon and America was not to be. Heartbroken and infirm, he failed to impress the social workers and bureaucrats in charge of helping new immigrants, leading to a string of humiliations and failures. The "boulevardier of Cairo" never regained his footing, and the already thin threads holding his family together frayed irrevocably. Lagnado recounts the irony of their Passover Seder in Brooklyn: "No matter how loudly we sang, our holiday had become not a celebration of the exodus from Egypt but the inverse - a longing to return to the place we were supposedly glad to have left."

Read article in full
This review also in The New York Times
Interview of Lucette Lagnado in The Forward
Labels: Jews of Egypt
posted by bataween @ Sunday, August 12, 2007 1 comments

First published 9-5-2007 at the original Islamic Danger Blog as
http://islamic-danger.blogspot.com/2007/09/imazighen-berbers-and-jews-and.html

RACE AND ETHNICITY IN AFGHANISTAN AND PAKISTAN

2009-11-16T16:01:00.000-08:00

from http://punjabi.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1176

[first published at the original "Islamic Danger" on October 4, 2007]

[If you want insight into happenings on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, in the "tribal areas" of Waziristan, in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and in India-Pakistan relations, you will find reading this post and more views in the forum itself (punjabi.net link shown above) worthwhile.]

This comes from a forum. Although I have not checked the speaker's facts, they ring true and can be related to current events and those described in
ISLAM IN THE PUNJAB (of India) THE MOSLEM MUGHALS (TURKIC/MONGOLS)
IN THE PUNJAB)

. . . phindko and saraiki are languages not ethnic groups or a race of people. there are pakhtuns who speak hindko and saraiki and punjabis also. hindko and saraiki are punjabi dialects of pakistan but have a lot of pashto and farsi words. how many times am i going to tell u that i am not an afghan or pakhtun but a mughal (sunni mughal) kaum from dera ismail khan. there are jats rajputs pakhtun, qureshi, mughals, bolochis, afghan refugees etc all living in dera ismail khan. the afghan pakhtuns are friendly with their brothers of nwfp and the tribal areas who are also pakhtuns. and are related and families living on both sides of the durrand line. it's only the tajiks and uzbeks and hazaras who hate pakhtuns and pakistanis. and anyway tajiks and uzbeks all these people are not afghans anyway because their are decendents of turks mongols and are not the sons of afghana the pakhtuns are the true afghans the sons of afghana. i'm a mughal that means that i am a decendent of the mughals who were a mix of turk/persian/afghan - pakhtun and since we invaded pakistan/india there is a good chance i also have rajput concubine maternal genes. but my blood is pure from hindu man. but never the less my family/clan and kaum are always mistaken as pakhtuns and don't look like indians u can easily tell the afghan and central asian ancestory. the mughal and pakhtuns (waziris) were known to take hindu (rajput) women away. sahar u are an indian, there are afghan refugees tajiks uzbeks living in dera ismail khan and many have become settled opened shops and do business carpets jewellery etc. and regarding pakhtuns whether from pakistan or afghanistan they have nothing against the pakistan people. i should know because we live with these people and have had disputes tribal warfare with these people and also have done business with them. most of the construction work and truck haulage in our area of pakistan is done by us mughal/pakhtuns and we regularly see afghan refugees and do business with them. regarding indian origin yes the punjabis and sindhis do have indian blood but mughal, awans, qureshi, abbasi, sheikhs, ghoris, etc are not of the indian stock but the decendants of the muslim invaders. i know u being an indian that u want to associate with your former rulers and masters. i will say one thing my forefathers timur lang and babar remember the mound of skulls in dehli. i hope that helps. and there is no region called afghania in pakistan it is known as FATA or NWFP but we call it pakhtoonkhwa or pakhtunistan. and it is pakhtun not pathan by u indians and british least call these lion people by the correct name.

http://punjabi.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1176

There's more back-and-forth about this subject at the forum website given immediately above . Insults fly, and insight is given into inter-ethnic-racial relations in the Pakistan-Afghanistan-Hindu/Indian sphere.

. . AND . . .

A NOTE ABOUT THE PASHTUNS:

Ironically the Pashton/Pathan/Pashto people mentioned by the mughal-descended speaker above have preponderous evidence of being descendants of two or more of the ten "Lost Tribes" of Ancient Israel. Although today Pashtuns are thoroughly Islamicised, and because of that not to be trusted to be friendly towards today's Israelis and Jews, like all peoples that have fallen victim to Islam, there is evidence to point to the veracity of the widely-held belief of Pashtun origins.

Here is a good place to get started looking at this phenomenon. Although the Pashtuns are not the only people of (supposedly) Jewish origins that have been Islamicised to such a degree that their koranic Jew-hatred equals or exceeds that of the Islamic Arabs--the Jewish Berber tribes of North Africa come to mind--the Pashtuns apparently can be distinguished that they (like the Christian descendants of Spanish Jews) keep some Judaic traditions--whether aware of their origins or not.

"I love Israel, for my forefathers were most probably Israelites"

…Says Pashtun-historian from India Dr. Navras Jaat Aafreedi

By Alexander Maistrovoy

http://middleeastfacts.com/guests/maistrovoy_09jul07a.php

40 years ago, in triumphant nation of Israel of 1967, in the Jewish community of India occurred an extraordinary event: the President of India Dr. Zakir Hussain made a highly surprising visit to the Ohel David Synagogue of Pune, Maharashtra, which was celebrating its centenary. The significance of the event and the title of the guest were incommensurable and caused a lot of surprise. Why?

Dr. Navras Jaat Aafreedi has his own explanation. Dr. Zakir Hussain, one of the most famous sons of India, honored with the India's highest civilian award, the Bharat Ratna, was a member of a Pathan/Pakhtun/Pashtun tribe – the Afridi. And the Afridi tribe is identified with the lost tribe of Ephraim, one of the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel.

Navras Jaat Aafreedi is an Indian citizen, a representative of the Afridi tribe too, and an historian. He isn’t 30 yet but he has Ph.D. on Medieval & Modern Indian History, and his research topic was: "The Indian Jewry and the Self-Professed ‘Lost Tribes of Israel’ in India". His book of the same title is the third serious major work ever by a Gentile (non-Jew) on this subject. Now he is doing his Post-Doctoral Research at Tel Aviv University.

Navras began his research of the connection between Afridi Pathans/Pakhtuns from Malihabad in Lucknow district (state Uttar Pradesh) and the Ephraim tribe. Pakhtuns settled here in the mid XVIII century and they are about 1200 today. It is a drop in the ocean compared to about 45 million Pashtuns of the world. Pathans/Pakhtuns/Pashtuns mainly live in the highlands of Afghanistan and Pakistan and are divided into 60 tribes and 400 clans.

* * *
Afridi tribe is one of the largest (about three million) and very martial. They controlled the famous Khyber and the Kohat passes, collected tribute from caravans and became famous for their fearlessness and selflessness in the battles with everyone who tried to conquer Afghanistan: from Mughal troops in the XVI and XVII centuries to Britons in the XIX and Russians in the XX century.

For hundreds of years Afridis have called themselves Bani Israel (Pushto for the Hebrew B'nei Yisrael meaning Children of Israel) and believe that they originated from the Ephraim tribe. Lately, the hatred of Jews in the Islamic world made the young generation of Pashtuns give up their beliefs. But Navras quotes a number of Jewish immigrants from Afghanistan who testify to the prevalence of many Jewish rituals and customs among the Afridi Pathans, e.g., the lighting of candles on Shabbat, keeping long side locks, wearing shawls resembling the tallith, circumcision on the eighth day after birth, and Levirate.

He refers to great Jewish writers like Saadia Ga’on and Moses Ibn Ezra, who mention Afghanistan and the Pathan territories in Pakistan as the home of Jews descended from the lost tribes, and to a number of medieval Arabic and Farsi texts. In the XIX century some British travelers and officers, like Sir Alexander Brunes and J.P.Ferrier, wrote about the Israelite origin of Afghan tribes.

. . . Continued at

http://middleeastfacts.com/guests/maistrovoy_09jul07a.php

There's a lot more there, if this intrigues you, as it does me. lw.

More links to this can be found at:

http://www.hujra.net/index.php?topic=4771.0;wap2

AND more yet from

GOOGLE Search for Pashtun Afridis Ephraim

should you be research-minded.

The Quranic Concept of War

2009-11-15T10:09:00.000-08:00

by JOSEPH C. MYERS
06 May, 2007
A review of BG S. K. Malik's book "The Quranic Concept of War."1

Copied from Islam Watch
http://www.islam-watch.org/Others/Quranic-Concept-of-War.htm

“The universalism of Islam, in its all-embracing creed, is imposed on the believers as a continuous process of warfare, psychological and political, if not strictly military. . . . The Jihad, accordingly, may be stated as a doctrine of a permanent state of war, not continuous fighting.” — Majid Khadduri2

Political and military leaders are notoriously averse to theory, but if there is a theorist about war who matters, it remains Carl von Clausewitz, whose Vom Kriege (On War) has shaped Western views about war since the middle of the nineteenth century.”3 Both points are likely true and problematic since we find ourselves engaged in war with people not solely imbued with western ideas and values or followers of western military theorists. The Hoover Institution’s Paul Sperry recently stated, “Four years into the war on terror, US intelligence officials tell me there are no baseline studies of the Muslim prophet Muhammad or his ideological or military doctrine found at either the CIA or Defense Intelligence Agency, or even the war colleges.”4

Would this be surprising? When it comes to warfighting military audiences tend to focus on the military and power aspects of warfare; the tangibles of terrain, enemy, weather, leadership, and troops; quantifiables such as the number of tanks and artillery tubes—the correlation of forces. Analysts steer toward the familiar rather than the unfamiliar; people tend to think in their comfort zones. The study of ideology or philosophy is often brushed aside, it’s not the “stuff of muddy boots;” it is more cerebral than physical and not action oriented. Planners do not assess the “correlation of ideas.” The practitioners are too busy.

Dr. Antulio Echevarria recently argued the US military does not have a doctrine for war as much as it has a doctrine for operations and battles.5 The military has a deficit of strategic, and, one could add, philosophic thinking. In the war against Islamist terrorism, how many have heard of the Muslim Brotherhood’s “Project”?6 Is the political philosophy of Ayatollah Khomeini, who was in fact well-grounded in western political theory and rigorously rejected it, studied in our military schools? Are there any implications to his statement in 1981 that “Iran . . . is determined to propagate Islam to the whole world”?7

108-09

To understand war, one has to study its philosophy; the grammar and logic of your opponent. Only then are you approaching strategic comprehension. To understand the war against Islamist terrorism one must begin to understand the Islamic way of war, its philosophy and doctrine, the meanings of jihad in Islam—and one needs to understand that those meanings are highly varied and utilitarian depending on the source.

With respect to the war against the global jihad and its associated terror groups, individual terrorists, and clandestine adherents, one should ask if there is a unique method or attitude to their approach to war. Is there a philosophy, or treatise such as Clausewitz’s On War that attempts to form their thinking about war? Is there a document that can be reviewed and understood in such a manner that we may begin to think strategically about our opponent. There is one work that stands out from the many.

The Quranic Concept of War

The Quranic Concept of War, by Brigadier General S. K. Malik of the Pakistani Army provides readers with unequalled insight. Originally published in Pakistan in 1979, most available copies are found in India, or in small non-descript Muslim bookstores.8 One major point to ponder, when thinking about The Quranic Concept of War, is the title itself. The Quran is presumed to be the revealed word of God as spoken through his chosen prophet, Mohammed. According to Malik, the Quran places warfighting doctrine and its theory in a much different category than western thinkers are accustomed to, because it is not a theory of war derived by man, but of God. This is God’s warfighting principles and commandments revealed. Malik’s attempts to distill God’s doctrine for war through the examples of the Prophet. By contrast, the closest that Clausewitz comes to divine presentation is in his discussion of the trinity: the people, the state, and the military. In the Islamic context, the discussion of war is at the level of revealed truth and example, well above theory—God has no need to theorize. Malik notes, “As a complete Code of Life, the Holy Quran gives us a philosophy of war as well. . . . This divine philosophy is an integral part of the total Quranic ideology.”9

Historiography

In The Quranic Concept of War, Malik seeks to instruct readers in the uniquely important doctrinal aspects of Quranic warfare. The Quranic approach to war is “infinitely supreme and effective . . . [and] points towards the realization of universal peace and justice . . . and makes maximum allowance to its adversaries to co-operate [with Islam] in a combined search for a just and peaceful order.”10 For purposes of this review, the term “doctrine” refers to both religious and broad strategic approaches, not methods and procedures. Malik’s work is a treatise with historical, political, legalistic, and moralistic ramifications on Islamic warfare. It seemingly is without parallel in the western sense of warfare since the “Quran is a source of eternal guidance for mankind.”11

The approach is not new to Islamists and other jihad theorists fighting according to the “Method of Mohammed” or hadith. The lessons learned are recorded

109/10

and form an important part of Quranic surah and jihadist’s scholarship.12 Islamic scholars both Muslim and non-Muslim will find much to debate in terms of Malik’s view of jihad doctrine and Quranic warfare. Malik’s work is essentially modern scholarship; although he does acknowledge the classical views of jihad in many respects.13

Malik’s arguments are clearly parochial, often more editorial than scholarly, and his tone is decidedly confident and occasionally supremacist. The reach and influence of the author’s work is not clear although one might believe that given the idealism of his treatise, his approaches to warfare, and the role and ends of “terror” his text may resonate with extremist and radicals prone to use terroristic violence to accomplish their ends. For that reason alone, the book is worth studying.

Introduction

The preface by Allah Bukhsh K. Brohi, the former Pakistani ambassador to India, offers important insights into Malik’s exposition. In fact, Brohi’s 13-page preface lays the foundation for the books ten chapters. Malik places Quranic warfare in an academic context relative to that used by western theorists. He analyzes the causes and objects of war, as well as war’s nature and dimensions. He then turns attention to the ethics and strategy of warfare. Toward the end of the book he reviews the exercise of Quranic warfare based on the examples of the Prophet Mohammed’s military campaigns and concludes with summary observations. There are important jus en bellum and jus ad bellum implications in the author’s writings, as well as in his controversial ideas related to the means and objectives of war. It is these concepts that warrant the attention of planners and strategist.

Zia-Ul-Haq (1924-88), the former President of Pakistan and Pakistani Army Chief of Staff, opens the book by focusing on the concept of jihad within Islam and explaining it is not simply the domain of the military:

Jehad fi sabilallah is not the exclusive domain of the professional soldier, nor is it restricted to the application of military force alone.

This book brings out with simplicity, clarity and precision the Quranic philosophy on the application of military force within the context of the totality that is JEHAD. The professional soldier in a Muslim army, pursuing the goals of a Muslim state, cannot become ‘professional’ if in all his activities he does not take the ‘colour of Allah,’ The nonmilitary citizen of a Muslin state must, likewise, be aware of the kind of soldier that his country must produce and the only pattern of war that his country’s armed forces may wage.14

General Zia states that all Muslims play a role in jihad, a mainstream concept of the Quran, that jihad in terms of warfare is a collective responsibility of the Muslim ummah, and is not restricted to soldiers. General Zia emphasizes how the concept of Islamic military professionalism requires “godly character” in order to be fully achieved. Zia then endorses Malik’s thesis as the “only pattern of war,” or approach to war that an Islamic state may wage.

110/11

Battling Counter-initiatory Forces

In the preface Ambassador Brohi details what might be startling to many readers. He states that Malik has made “a valuable contribution to Islamic jurisprudence” or Islamic law, and an “analytic restatement of the Quranic wisdom on the subject of war and peace.” Brohi implies that Malik’s discussion, though a valuable new version, is an approach to a theme already well developed.15

Brohi then defines jihad, “The most glorious word in the Vocabulary of Islam is Jehad, a word which is untranslatable in English but, broadly speaking, means ‘striving’, ‘struggling’, ‘trying’ to advance the Divine causes or purposes.” He introduces a somewhat cryptic concept when he explains man’s role in a “Quranic setting” as energetically combating forces of evil or what may be called, “counter-initiatory” forces which are at war with the harmony and the purpose of life on earth.16 For the true Muslin the harmony and purpose in life are only possible through man’s ultimate submission to God’s will, that all will come to know, recognize, and profess Mohammed as the Prophet of God. Man must recognize the last days and acknowledge tawhid, the oneness of God.17

Brohi recounts the classic dualisms of Islamic theology; that the world is a place of struggle between good and evil, between right and wrong, between Haq and Na-Haq (truth and untruth), and between halal and haram (legitimate and forbidden). According to Brohi, it is the duty of man to opt for goodness and reject evil. Brohi appeals to the “greater jihad,” a post-classical jihad doctrine developed by the mystical Sufi order and other Shia scholars.18

Brohi places jihad in the context of communal if not imperial obligation; both controversial formulations:

When a believer sees that someone is trying to obstruct another believer from traveling the road that leads to God, spirit of Jehad requires that such a man who is imposing obstacles should be prevented from doing so and the obstacles placed by him should also be removed, so that mankind may be freely able to negotiate its own path that leads to Heaven.” To do otherwise, “by not striving to clear or straighten the path we [Muslims] become passive spectators of the counter-initiatory forces imposing a blockade in the way of those who mean to keep their faith with God.19

This viewpoint appears to reflect the classic, collective duty within jihad doctrine, to defend the Islamic community from threats—the concept of defensive jihad. Brohi is saying much more than that; however, he is attempting to delineate the duty—the proactive duty—to clear the path for Islam. It is necessary not only to defend the individual believer if he is being hindered in his faith, but also to remove the obstacles of those counter-initiatory forces hindering his Islamic development. This begs the question of what is actually meant by the initiatory forces. The answer is clear to Brohi; the force of initiative is Islam and its Muslim members. “It is the duty of a believer to carry forward the Message of God and to bring it to notice of his fellow-men in handsome ways. But if someone attempts to obstruct him from doing so he is entitled as a matter of defense, to retaliate.”20

111/12

This formulation would appear to turn the concept of defense on its head. To the extent that a Muslim may proclaim Islam and proselytize, or Islam, as a faith, seeks to extend its invitation and reach—initiate its advance—but is unable to do so, then that represents an overt threat justifying—a defensive jihad. According to Brohi, this does not result in the “ordinary wars which mankind has been fighting for the sake of either revenge or for securing . . . more land or more booty . . . [this] striving must be [is] for the sake of God. Wars in the theory of Islam are . . . to advance God’s purposes on earth, and invariably they are defensive in character.” In other words, everywhere the message of God and Islam is or can be hindered from expansion, resisted or opposed by some “obstruction” (a term not clearly defined) Islam is intrinsically entitled to defend its manifest destiny.21

While his logic is controversial, Brohi is not unique in his extrapolation. His theory in fact reflects the argument of Rashid Rida, a conservative disciple of the Egyptian Muhammad Abduh. In 1913 Abduh published an article evaluating Islam’s early military campaigns and determined that Islam’s early neighbors “prevented the proclamation of truth” engendering the defense of Islam. “Our religion is not like others that defend themselves . . . but our defense of our religion is the proclamation of truth and the removal of distortion and misrepresentation of it.”22

No Nation is Sovereign

The exegesis of the term jihad is often debated. Some apologists make clear that nowhere in the Quran does the term “Holy War” exist; that is true, but it is also irrelevant. War in Islam is either just or unjust and that justness depends on the ends of war. Brohi, and later Malik, make clear that the ends of war in Islam or jihad are to fulfill God’s divine purpose. Not only should that be a holy purpose, it must be a just war in order to be “Holy War.”23

The next dualism Brohi presents is that of Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb, the house of submission and the house of war. He describes the latter, as “perpetuating defiance of the Lord.” While explaining that conditions for war in Islam are limited (a constrained set of circumstances) he notes that “in Islam war is waged to establish supremacy of the Lord only when every other argument has failed to convince those who reject His will and work against the very purpose of the creation of mankind.”24 Brohi quotes the Quranic manuscript Surah, al-Tawba:

Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.25

Acknowledging western critics who believe that Islam is in a state of perpetual struggle with the non-Islamic world, Brohi counters in a clearly dismissive tone by explaining that man is the slave to God, and defying God is treason under Islamic law. Those who defy God should be removed from humanity like a cancerous growth. Islam requires believers “to invite non-believers to the fold of Islam” by using “persuasion” and “beautiful methods.” He continues, “the first duty” of a Muslim

112/13

is dawa, a proclamation to conversion by “handsome ways.” It is only after refusing dawa and the invitation to Islam that “believers have no option but in self-defense to wage a war against those threatening aggression.”

Obviously, much turns on how threats and aggression are characterized. It is difficult to understand, however, based on the structure of his argument, that Brohi views non-believers and their states as requiring conversion over time by peaceful means; and when that fails, by force. He is echoing the doctrine of Abd al-Salam Faraj, author of Al-Farida al-Ghaibah, better known as The Neglected Duty, a work that is widely read throughout the Muslim world.26

Finally, Brohi examines the concept of the ummah and the international system. “The idea of Ummah of Mohammad, the Prophet of Islam, is incapable of being realized within the framework of territorial states.” This is a consistent view that underpins many works on the concept of the Islamic state.27 For Muslims, the ummah is a transcendent religious and cultural society united and reflecting the unity (tawhid) of Islam; the idea of one God, indivisible, one community, one belief, and one duty to live and become godly. According to the Prophet, “Ummah participates in this heritage by a set pattern of thought, belief and practice . . . and supplies the spiritual principle of integration of mankind—a principle which is supra-national, supra-racial, supra-linguistic and supra-territorial.”28

With respect to the “law of war and peace in Islam” Brohi writes it “is as old as the Quran itself. . . . ” In his analysis of the law of nations and their international dealings, he emphasizes that in “Islamic international law this conduct [war and peace] is, strictly speaking, regulated between Muslims and non-Muslims, there being, from Islamic perspective, no other nation. . . . ” In other words, war is between Muslims and non-Muslims and not in actuality between states. It is transnational. He adds, “In Islam, of course, no nation is sovereign since Allah alone is the only sovereign in Whom all authority vests.”29 Here Brohi is echoing what Islamic scholars such as Majid Khadduri have described as the “dualism of the universal religion and universal state that is Islam.”30

The Divine Philosophy on War

General Malik begins by categorizing human beings into three archetypes: those who fear Allah and profess the Faith; those who reject the Faith; and those who profess, but are treacherous in their hearts. Examples of the Prophet and the instructions to him by God in his early campaigns should be studied to fully understand these three examples in practice. The author highlights the fact that the “divine philosophy on war” was revealed gradually over a 12 year period, its earliest guidance dealing with the causes and objects of war, while later guidance focused on Quranic strategy, the conduct of war, and the ethical dimensions of warfare.31

In Chapter Three, Malik reviews several key thoughts espoused by western scholars related to the causes of war. He examines the ideologies of Lenin, Geoffery Blainey, Quincy Wright, and Frederick H. Hartman each of whom spoke about war in a historical or material context with respect to the nature of the state system. Malik finds these explanations wanting and turns to the Quran for explanation, “war could only be

113/14

waged for the sake of justice, truth, law, and preservation of human society. . . . The central theme behind the causes of war . . . [in] the Holy Quran, was the cause of Allah.”32

The author recounts the progression of revelations by God to the Prophet that “granted the Muslims the permission to fight . . . .” Ultimately, God would compel and command Muslims to fight: “Fight in the cause of Allah.” In his analysis of this surah Malik highlights the fact that “new elements” were added to the causes of war: that in order to fight, Muslims must be “fought first;” Muslims are not to “transgress God’s limits” in the conduct of war; and everyone should understand that God views “tumult and oppression” of Muslims as “worse than slaughter.”33 This oppression was exemplified by the denial of Muslim’s right to worship at the Sacred Mosque by the early Arab Koraish, people of Mecca. Malik describes the situation in detail, “. . . the tiny Muslim community in Mecca was the object of the Koraish tyranny and oppression since the proclamation of Islam. . . . The enemy repression reached its zenith when the Koraish denied the Muslims access to the Sacred Mosque (the Ka’aba) to fulfill their religious obligations. This sacrilegious act amounted to an open declaration of war upon Islam. These actions eventually compelling the Muslims to migrate to Medina twelve years later, in 622 AD. . . .”34

Malik argues that the pagan Koraish tribe had no reason to prohibit Muslim worship, since the Muslims did not impede their form of worship. This historical example helps to further define the concept that “tumult and oppression is worse than slaughter” and as the Quran repeats, “graver is it in the sight of Allah to prevent access to the path of Allah, to deny Him, to prevent access to the Sacred Mosque, and drive out its members.” Malik also notes the Quran distinguishes those who fight “in the cause of Allah and those who reject Faith and fight in the cause of evil.”35 In terms of Quranic just war theory, war must be waged “only to fight the forces of tyranny and oppression.”36

Challenging Clausewitz’s notion that “policy” provides the context and boundary of war; Malik says it is the reverse, “‘war’ forced policy to define and determine its own parameters” and since that discussion focuses on parochial issues such as national interests, and the vagaries of state to state relations it is a lesser perspective. In the divine context of the Quran war orients on the spread of “justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere.” According to the author war is to be fought aggressively, slaughter is not the worst evil. In the course of war every opportunity for peace should be pursued and reciprocated. That is every remonstrance of peace by the enemies of Islam, but only as prescribed by the Quran’s “clear-cut philosophy and methodology” for preserving peace.37

Understanding the context in which the Quran describes and defines “justice and peace” is important. Malik refers the reader to the battle of Badr to elucidate these principles. There is peace with those pagans who cease hostilities, and war continues with those who refuse. He cites the following surah, “as long as these stand true to you, stand ye true to them, for Allah doth love the righteous.”38 Referring to the precedent setting Hodaibayya treaty in the ninth year of the hijra, or pilgrimages to Mecca, Malik outlines how Allah and the Prophet abrogated those treaties with the pagan Meccans.

114/15

Pagans who accepted terms voluntarily without a treaty were respected. Those who refused, the Quran directed, were to be slain wherever found. This precedent and “revelations commanded the Muslims to fulfill their treaty commitments for the contracted period but put them under no obligations to renew them.”39 It also established the precedent that Muslims may conclude treaties with non-believers, but only for a temporary period.40 Commenting on western approaches to peace, Malik views such approaches as not standing the “test of time” with no worthwhile role to play even in the future.41 The author’s point is that peace between states has only secular, not divine ends; and peace in an Islamic context is achieved only for the promotion of Islam.

As the Prophet gained control of Mecca he decreed that non-believers could assemble or watch over the Sacred Mosque. He later consolidated power over Arabia and many who had not yet accepted Islam, “including Christians and Jew, [they] were given the option to choose between war and submission.” These non-believers were required to pay a poll-tax or jizya and accept the status of dhimmitude [servitude to Islam] in order to continue practicing their faith. According to Malik the taxes were merely symbolic and insignificant. In summarizing this relationship the author states, “the object of war is to obtain conditions of peace, justice, and faith. To do so it is essential to destroy the forces of oppression and persecution.”42 This view is in keeping with that outlined by Khadduri, “The jihad, it will be recalled, regarded war as Islam’s instrument to transform the dar al-harb into dar al-Islam . . . in Islamic legal theory, the ultimate objective of Islam is not war per se, but the ultimate establishment of peace.”43

The Nature of War

Malik argues that the “nature and dimension of war” is the greatest single characteristic of Quranic warfare and distinguishes it from all other doctrines. He acknowledges Clausewitz’s contribution to the understanding of warfare in its moral and spiritual context. The moral forces of war, as Clausewitz declared, are perhaps the most important aspects in war. Reiterating that Muslims are required to wage war “with the spirit of religious duty and obligation,” the author makes it clear that in return for fighting in the way of Allah, divine, angelic assistance will be rendered to jihad warriors and armies. At this point The Quranic Concept of War moves beyond the metaphysical to the supernatural element, unlike anything found in western doctrine. Malik highlights the fact that divine assistance requires “divine standards” on the part of the warrior mujahideen for the promise of Allah’s aid to be met.44

The author then builds upon the jihad warrior’s role in the realms of divine cause, purpose, and support, to argue that in order for the Muslim warrior to be unmatched, to be the bravest and the most fearless; he can only do so through the correct spiritual preparation, beginning with total submission to God’s will. The Quran reveals that the moral forces are the “real issues involved in the planning and conduct of war.”45 Malik quotes the Quran: “Fighting is prescribed for you . . . and ye dislike a thing which is good for you and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not.”

The Quran instructs the jihad warrior “to fight . . . with total devotion and never contemplate a flight from the battlefield for fear of death.” The jihad warrior,

115/16

who dies in the way of Allah, does not really die but lives on in heaven. Malik emphasizes this in several Quranic verses. “Think not of those who are slain in Allah’s way as dead. . . . Nay, they live finding their sustenance in the Presence of the Lord.” Malik also notes that “Not equal are those Believers . . . Allah has granted a higher grade to those who strive and fight . . . .”46

The Quranic dimensions of war are “revolutionary,” conferring on the jihad warrior a “personality so strong and overbearing as to prove themselves equal to, indeed dominate, every contingency in war.”47 This theme of spiritual preparation and pure belief has appeared in the prolific jihad writings of Usaman Dan Fodio in the early 1800s and repeated by the Saudi writer Abdallah al-Qadiri in 1992, both emphasizing the role of the “greater jihad.” Becoming a purer and more disciplined Muslim serves the cause of Islam better in peace and war.48

Malik, like Brohi, acknowledges critics who say that Islam has been “spread by the sword,” but he responds that Islam is spread through restraint in war and in “the use of force [that] have no parallel.” He then argues that restraint in warfare is a “two-sided affair.” Where the enemy (not defined) fails to exercise restraints and commits “excesses” (not defined) then “the very injunction of preserving and promoting peace and justice demands the use of limited force . . . . Islam permits the use of the sword for such purpose.”49 Since Malik is speaking in the context of active war and response to the “excesses of war” it is unclear what he means by “limited force” or response.

The author expands on the earlier ideas that moral and spiritual forces are predominate in war. He contrasts Islamic strategic approaches with western theories of warfare oriented toward the application of force, primarily in the military domain, as opposed to Islam where the focus is on a broader application of power. Power in Malik’s context is the power of jihad, which is total, both in the conduct of total war and in its supporting strategy; referred to as “total or grand strategy.” Malik provides the following definition, “Jehad is a continuous and never-ending struggle waged on all fronts including political, economic, social, psychological, domestic, moral and spiritual to attain the objectives of policy.”50 The power of jihad brings with it the power of God.

The Quranic concept of strategy is therefore divine theory. The examples and lessons to be derived from it may be found in the study of the classics, inspired by such events as the battles of the Prophet, e.g., Badr, Khandaq, Tabuk, and Hudaibiyya. Malik again references the divine assistance of Allah and the aid of angelic hosts. He refers to the battles of Hunain and Ohad as instances where seeming defeat was reversed and Allah “sent down Tranquility into the hearts of believers, that they may add Faith to their Faith.” Malik argues that divine providence steels the jihadi in war, “strengthens the hearts of Believers.” Calmness of faith, “assurance, hope, and tranquility” in the face of danger is the divine standard.51

Strike Terror into their Hearts

Malik uses examples to demonstrate that Allah will strike “terror into the hearts of Unbelievers.”52 At this point he begins to develop his most controversial and conjectural Quranic theory related to warfare—the role of terror. Readers need to understand that the author is thinking and writing in strategic terms, not in the vernacular

116/17

of battles or engagements. Malik continues, “when God wishes to impose His will on his enemies, He chooses to do so by casting terror into their hearts.”53 He cites another verse, “against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts) of the enemies of Allah . . . .” Malik’s strategic synthesis is specific: “the Quranic military strategy thus enjoins us to prepare ourselves for war to the utmost in order to strike terror into the hearts of the enemies, known or hidden, while guarding ourselves from being terror-stricken by the enemy.”54 Terror is an effect; the end-state.

Malik identifies the center of gravity in war as the “human heart, [man’s] soul, spirit, and Faith.” Note that Faith is capitalized, meaning more than simple moral courage or fortitude. Faith in this sense is in the domain of religious and spiritual faith; this is the center of gravity in war. The main weapon against this Islamic concept of center of gravity is “the strength of our own souls . . . [keeping] terror away from our own hearts.” In terms of achieving decisive and direct decisions preparing for this type of battlefield first requires “creating a wholesome respect for our Cause”—the cause of Islam. This “respect” must be seeded in advance of war and conflict in the minds of the enemies. Malik then introduces the informational, psychological, or perception management concepts of warfare. Echoing Sun Tzu, he states, that if properly prepared, the “war of muscle,” the physical war, will already be won by “the war of will.”55 “Respect” therefore is achieved psychologically by, as Brohi suggested earlier, “beautiful” and “handsome ways” or by the strategic application of terror.

When examining the theme of the preparatory stage of war, Malik talks of the “war of preparation being waged . . . in peace,” meaning that peacetime preparatory activities are in fact part of any war and “vastly more important than the active war.” This statement should not be taken lightly, it essentially means that Islam is in a perpetual state of war while peace can only be defined as the absence of active war. Malik argues that peace-time training efforts should be oriented on the active war(s) to come, in order to develop the Quranic and divine “Will” in the mujahid. When armies and soldiers find limited physical resources they should continue and emphasize the development of the “spiritual resources” as these are complimentary factors and create synergy for future military action.

Malik’s most controversial dictum is summarized in the following manner: in war, “the point where the means and the end meet” is in terror. He formulates terror as an objective principal of war; once terror is achieved the enemy reaches his culminating point. “Terror is not a means of imposing decision upon the enemy; it is the decision we wish to impose . . . .” Malik’s divine principal of Islamic warfare may be restated as “strike terror; never feel terror.” The ultimate objective of this form of warfare “revolves around the human heart, [the enemies] soul, spirit, and Faith.”56 Terror “can be instilled only if the opponent’s Faith is destroyed . . . . It is essential in the ultimate analysis, to dislocate [the enemies] Faith.” Those who are firm in their religious conviction are immune to terror, “a weak Faith offers inroads to terror.” Therefore, as part of preparations for jihad, actions will be oriented on weakening the non-Islamic’s “Faith,” while strengthening the Islamic’s. What that weakening or “dislocation” entails in practice remains ambiguous. Malik concludes, “Psychological dislocation is temporary; spiritual dislocation is permanent.” The soul of man can only be touched by terror.57

117/18

Malik then moves to a more academic discussion of ten general categories inherent in the conduct of Islamic warfare. These categories are easily translatable and recognizable to most western theorists; planning, organization, and conduct of military operations. In this regard, the author offers no unique insight. His last chapter is used to restate his major conclusions, stressing that “The Holy Quran lays the highest emphasis on the preparation for war. It wants us to prepare ourselves for war to the utmost. The test . . . lies in our capability to instill terror into the hearts of our enemies.”58

Evaluation of The Quranic Concept of War

While the extent and reach of Malik’s thesis cannot be confirmed in the Islamic world neither can it be discounted. Though controversial, his citations are accurately drawn from Islamic sources and consistent with classical Islamic jurisprudence.59 As Malik notes, “Quranic military thought is an integral and inseparable part of the total Quranic message.”60 Policy planners and strategists striving to understand the nature of the “Long War” should consider Malik’s writings in that light.

Malik makes clear that the Quran provides the doctrine, guidance, and examples for the conduct of Quranic or Islamic warfare. “It gives a strategy of war that penetrates deep down to destroy the opponents’ faith and render his physical and mental faculties totally ineffective.”61 Malik’s thesis focuses on the fact that the primary reason for studying the Quran is to gain a greater understanding of these concepts and insights. The Prophet Mohammed, as the Quran attests, changed the intent and objective of war—raising the sphere of war to a Godly plane and purpose; the global proclamation and spread of Islam. This obviously rejects the Clausewitizian politics and policy dyad: that war is simply policy of the state.

Quranic warfare is “just war.” It is jus en bellum and jus ad bellum if fought “in the way of Allah” for divine purposes and the ends of Islam. This contradicts the western philosophy of just war theory. Another important connotation is that jihad is a continuum, across peace and war. It is a constant and covers the spectrum from grand strategy to tactical; collective to the individual; from the preparatory to the execution phases of war.

Malik highlights the fact that the preservation of life is not the ultimate end or greatest good in Quranic warfare. Ending “tumult and oppression,” achieving the war aims of Islam through jihad is the desired end. Dying in this cause brings direct reward in heaven for the mujahid, sacrifice is sacred. It naturally follows that death is not feared in Quranic warfare; indeed, “tranquility” invites God’s divine aid and assistance. The “Base” of the Quranic military strategy is spiritual preparation and “guarding ourselves against terror.”62 Readers may surmise that the training camps of al Qaeda (The Base) were designed as much for spiritual preparation as military. One needs only to recall the example of Mohammed Atta’s “last night” preparations.63

The battleground of Quranic war is the human soul—it is religious warfare. The object of war is to dislocate and destroy the [religious] “Faith” of the enemy. These principals are consistent with objectives of al Qaeda and other radical Islamic organizations. “Wars in the theory of Islam are . . . to advance God’s purposes on earth, and invariably they are defensive in character.”64 Peace treaties in theory are

118/19

temporary, pragmatic protocols. This treatise acknowledges Islam’s manifest destiny and the approach to achieving it.

General Malik’s thesis in The Quranic Concept of War can be fundamentally described as “Islam is the answer.” He makes a case for war and the revitalization of Islam. This is a martial exegesis of the Quran. Malik like other modern Islamists are, at root, romantics. They focus on the Quran for jihad a doctrine that harkens back to the time of the Prophet and the classical-jihadist period when Islam enjoyed its most successful military campaigns and rapid growth.

The book’s metaphysical content borders on the supernatural and renders “assured expectations” that cannot be evaluated or tested in the arena of military experience. Incorporating “divine intervention” into military campaigns, while possibly advantageous, cannot be calculated as an overt force multiplier. Critics may also point to the ahistorical aspect of Malik’s thesis; that Islam is in a state of constant struggle with the non-Islamic world. There are examples of Muslim armies serving side by side with Christian armies in combat and campaigns are numerous, with Iraq being but a recent example.65

Malik’s appraisal of the Quran as a source of divine revelation for victory in war can likewise be criticized by historical example. Were it fully true and operationalized then the 1,400 years of Islamic military history might demonstrate something beyond its present state. War and peace in Islam has ebbed and flowed as has the conduct of war across all civilizations, ancient and modern. Islam as an independent military force has been in recession since 1492, although the latest jihadist’s threat of terror against the international system is, at least in part, a possible reaction to this long recession. Malik’s thesis essentially recognizes this historical pattern; indeed, Malik’s book may be an attempt to reverse this trend. The events of 9/11 may be seen as a validation of Malik’s thesis regarding the spiritual preparation and the use of terror. The attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were intended to seed “respect” (fear) in the minds of Islam’s enemies. These acts were not only directed at Western non-believers, but also the Muslim leaders who “profess the faith but are treacherous in their hearts” (allies and supporters of the United States). The barbarity of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and others in Iraq reflect a focus on extreme terror designed to wilt the will of Islam’s enemies.

Malik and Brohi both emphasize the defensive nature of jihad in Islam, but this position appears to be more a defense of a manifest destiny inevitably resulting in conflict. In their rendering of jihad both, not surprisingly, owe an intellectual debt to the Pakistani Islamist theorist, Abu al-Ala al-Mawdudi. Al-Mawdudi is an important intellectual precursor to the Muslim Brotherhood, Sayyid Qutb, and other modern Islamic revivalists. As al-Mawdudi notes, “Islamic jihad is both offensive and defensive” oriented on liberating man from humanistic tyranny.66

The author’s most controversial and, perhaps, most noteworthy assertion, is the distinction of “terror” as an ends rather than as a means to an end. The soul can only be touched by terror. Malik’s divine principal of war may be summarized in the dictum “strike terror; never feel terror.” Yet, he does not describe any specific method of delivering terror into the heart of Islam’s enemies. His view of terror seems to conflict with his earlier, limited, discussion of the concept of restraint in warfare and what actually

119/20

constitutes “excesses” on the part of an enemy. It also conflicts with the character and nature of response that the author says is demanded. Malik leaves many of these pertinent issues undefined under a veneer of legitimating theory.

In spite of certain ambiguities and theoretical weaknesses, this work should be studied and valued for its insight and analysis relate to jihadists’ concepts and the asymmetric approach to war that radical Muslims may adapt and execute. With respect to global jihad terrorism, as the events of 9/11 so vividly demonstrated, there are those who believe and will exercise the tenets of The Quranic Concept of War.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NOTES

1. Brigadier S. K. Malik, The Quranic Concept of War (Lahore, Pakistan: Associated Printers, 1979). Quranic War or Quranic Warfare refers to Malik’s treatment in his book.

2. Majid Khadduri, War and Peace in the Law of Islam (Baltimore, Md.: John Hopkins Press, 1955), p. 64.

3. R. D. Hooker, “Beyond Vom Kriege: The Character and Conduct of Modern War,” Parameters, 35 (Summer 2005), 4.

4. Paul Sperry, “The Pentagon Breaks the Islam Taboo,” FrontPage Magazine, 14 December 2005, http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20539.

5. Antulio Echevarria, Towards an American Way of War (Carlisle, Pa.: US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute, March 2004).

6. Patrick Poole, “The Muslim Brotherhood ‘Project,’” FrontPage Magazine, 11 May 2006, http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=22415.

7. Farhand Rajaee, Islamic Values and World View: Khomeyni on Man the State and International Politics,” (Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1983), p 71.

8. Irfan Yusuf, “Theories on Islamic Books You Wouldn’t Read About,” Canberra Times, 21 July 2005, http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/detail.asp?class=your%20say&subclass=general&category=editorial%20 opinion&story_id=410105&y=2005&m=7.

9. Malik, pp. I-ii.

10. Ibid., p. 1.

11. Ibid., pp. I-ii.

12. See for example the discussion by Dr. Mary R. Habeck, “Jihadist Strategies in the War on Terrorism,” The Heritage Foundation, 8 November 2004, http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/hl855.cfm.

13. David Cook, Understanding Jihad, (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 2005). There is approximately 1,400 years of jihad scholarship beginning with Mohammed and his military campaigns. Classical approaches to jihad as described by Mohammed’s successors, Abu Bakr for example, and the challenges presented by the struggles of succession to Mohammed.

14. Malik “Forward.”

15. Ibid., “Preface,” p. I.

16. Ibid., p. I. Note the Christian concept of the Trinity contained in the Nicene Creed is considered polytheistic according to Islam. The Trinity is not tawhid.

17. John Esposito, Islam, the Straight Path (3d ed.; New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1998), pp. 12-14, 89.

18. Bernard Lewis, The Political Language of Islam (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1988), p. 72; Khadduri, pp. 65, 70-72; Cook, Understanding Jihad, pp. 35-39.

19. Brohi, “Preface,” p. ii.

20. Ibid., p. iii.

21. Ibid., p. iii.

22. Cook, pp. 95-96. Cook places these concepts of jihad doctrine in the lineage of contemporary and radical theory.

23. The indexed term for jihad is redirected to the term “Holy War” in this classic book of Islamic law or sharia by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, Reliance of the Traveller, ed. and trans. Nuh Ha Mim Keller (Beltsville, Md.: Amana Publication, 1997).

24. Malik, “Preface,” p. v.

25. Ibid., p. vii.

26. Cook, p. 107; Christoper Henzel, “The Origins of al Qaeda’s Ideology: Implications for US Strategy,” Parameters, 35 (Spring 2005), 69-80.

27. Ishtiaq Ahmed, The Concept of an Islamic State: An Analysis of the Ideological Controversy in Pakistan (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1987).

120/21

28. Malik, “Preface,” p. x. While in the Western tradition the state is viewed as a territorial and political body, based on “temporal elements such as shared memory, language, race, or the mere choice of its members.” Khomeini rejected this view, seeing the secular, political state and nationalism as Western constructs of imperialistic design to damage the cohesion of the ummah and impede the “advancement of Islam.” Rajaee, pp. 7, 67-71.

29. Ibid., p. x.

30. Khadduri, p. 63.

31. Malik, p. 6.

32. Ibid., p. 20.

33. Ibid., pp. 20-21. (Baqara: 190).

34. Malik, p. 11.

35. Ibid., p. 22. (Baqara: 217) and (Nissaa: 76).

36. Ibid., p. 23.

37. Ibid., p. 29.

38. Malik, p. 29. (Tauba: 7).

39. Ibid., p. 31.

40. Khadduri, p. 212. Jurists disagree on the allowable duration of treaties, the operative concept is that the dar al-Harb must be reduced to dar al-Islam over time.

41. Malik, p. 27.

42. Ibid., pp. 33-34.

43. Khadduri, p. 141.

44. Malik, p. 40

45. Ibid., pp. 37-38. (Baqara: 216).

46. Ibid., pp. 42-44. (Al-I-Imran: 169-70) and (Nissa: 95).

47. Ibid., pp. 42-44.

48. Cook, pp. 77, 124.

49. Malik, p. 49.

50. Ibid., p. 54.

51. Ibid., p. 57.

52. Malik, p. 57.

53. Ibid., p. 57.

54. Ibid., p. 58.

55. Ibid., p. 58.

56. Ibid., pp. 58-59.

57. Ibid., p. 60.

58. Ibid., p. 144.

59. Rudolph Peters, Jihad in Classical and Modern Islam (Princeton, N.J.: Markus Weiner Publishers, 1996), pp. 44-51, 128.

60. Malik, p. 3.

61. Ibid., p. 146.

62. Ibid., p.58.

63. “In Hijacker’s Bags, a Call to Planning, Prayer and Death,” Washington Post, 28 September 2001.

64. Malik, “Preface,” p. iii.

65. Four notable examples are the Crimean War where French, British and Ottoman Forces allied against the Russians; Fuad Pasha of the Ottoman Army served as a coalition partner with French Army during the 1860 Rebellion in Syria; more recently Muslim Arab and Kabyle soldiers served in the Harkis of the French Army in the French-Algerian War; and, of course, today in Iraq. Malik would address some of these events as alliances of convenience serving Islam’s interests in accord with the Quran and Sharia Law, others as takfir or treason.

66. Cook, pp. 99-103. Peters, p. 130.

The Reviewer: Lieutenant Colonel Joseph C. Myers is the Senior Army Advisor to the Air Command and Staff College, Maxwell AFB, Alabama. A graduate of the US Military Academy he holds a Master of Arts from Tulane University. In 2004 he completed a Senior Army Fellowship at the George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies. Previous assignments include Army Section Chief, US Military Group, Argentina. He also served as Chief of the South America Division and Senior Military Analyst for Colombia at the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Muhammad the torturer

2009-10-25T02:49:00.000-07:00

by yellarebbi

Like in the case of pedophilia-pederasty the practice of torture is widespread in the muslim world ‎even in the most secular nations such as Turkey ‎where the torture of kurdish prisoners is well ‎documented.

Some so-called ‘moderate muslims’ ‎protest that islamist groups such as GIA (Algeria) ‎Janjiweed (Sudan), Taliban(Afghanistan) OR Iraqi ‎alqaida who commited massacres of innocents, ‎using the most abominable methods of torture and ‎mutilation, do not represent true islam which is,according to them, a ‎religion of peace, compassion and love. I am afraid I have ‎to say that it is they (‘’the moderate muslams’’) who ‎are false muslims because they do not follow the ‎example of their prophet who was an examplar toruturer ‎and mass murderer.the islamists who commited ‎such horrendous acts of torture and mutilation ‎follow the example of the prophet muhammad and ‎his companions as layed down in his Sira,Hadith and ‎the Koran.‎

someone may ask me here about France and her ‎systematic use of torture during the algerian war. I ‎would reply that I have no doubts that the french ‎army officers were heavily influenced by the local ‎islamic tradition.‎

therefore, as in the cases of pederasty-pedophilia and ‎murder-assassination of artists the origins of this ‎practice lie in the conduct of Muhammad himself, ‎the ‘’compassionate’’ prophet of Allah the ‎‎‘’Merciful’’.‎

Besides being a pedophile, an ethnic cleanser, an ‎assassin-murderer of poets and artists , ‎muhammad was also a torturer no different from ‎any islamic dictator-torturer of today’s islamic and ‎arabic countries. ‎

There are many koranic verses which call for torture ‎of prisoners . among them I cite:‎

‎‘’strike off every fingertip of them.’’On the fingertips ‎and underneath the nails are nerve ends that ‎transmit extreme pain , which makes this torture ‎technique a favorite among the torturers.‎

Praise and thanks are due to Allah-Muhammad for ‎having been the first to have discovered and used ‎this technique!!!!!‎

Another verse:‎

Koran 5:34:‎

‎“slay , crucify and cut the hands and feet of the ‎captive-unbelievers..." ‎

And there are many cases where Muhammad ‎ordered prisoners to be crucified and ‎dismembered in his presence, such as this one ‎recounted in Sahih Bukhari

Volume 1, Book 4, Number 234:

Anas said, "Some people of 'Ukl or 'Uraina tribe…killed ‎the shepherd of the Prophet and stole away all his ‎camels. The news reached the Prophet early in the morning and he sent his men in their pursuit ‎and they were captured and brought at noon. He then ‎ordered to have their hands and feet cut off , and then have their eyes branded with heated ‎pieces of iron,

They were put in an a ditch and when they asked for ‎water, no water was given and they died a very painful ‎slow death."‎

There is also the case a Jewish prisoner on the Kinana bin al-Rabi3 who was tortured to ‎death under the orders of muhammad , as recounted in Sira ‎of ibn Ishaq(muhammad’s biography by ibn ishaq):‎

‎‘’Kinana bin al-Rabi3, who had the custody of the ‎treasure of Bani al-Nadir, was brought to the apostle who ‎asked him about it. He denied that he knew where it was. ‎A Jew came (T. was brought) to the apostle and said that ‎he had seen Kinana going round a certain ruin every ‎morning early. When the apostle said to Kinana, "Do you ‎know that if we find you have it I shall kill you?" he said ‎Yes. The apostle gave orders that the ruin was to be ‎excavated and some of the treasure was found. When he ‎asked him about the rest he refused to produce it, so the ‎apostle gave orders to al-Zubayr b. al-`Awwam, "Torture ‎him until you extract what he has," so he kindled a fire ‎with flint and steel on his chest until he was nearly dead. ‎Then the apostle delivered him to Muhammad b. ‎Maslama and he struck off his head, in revenge for his ‎brother Mahmud. ‘’(Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah, ‎translated as, The Life of Muhammad, (tr. A. ‎Guillaume), Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1998, p. ‎‎515.)‎

Probably the most known form of ritual islamic torture is ‎the islamic stoning . Muhammad himself stoned with his ‎own hands many women and men . among the stoning ‎hadiths suffice to cite the following:‎

Boukahri Volume 2, Book 23, Number 413:

Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar :

‎ the Prophet once ordered a man and a ‎woman who have committed sexual ‎intercourse to be stoned to death ,..."‎

The foregoing is very embarassing to today’s ‎muslim scholars, that is why you never find a ‎mention of it in their writings , and the majority ‎of muslims are still uneware of this dark side of ‎their ‘’compassionate’’ prophet of their god, ‎Allah the ‘’Merciful’’.‎

http://www.kabylia.info/muhammad-islam-torture/muhammad-torturer

Posted Sat, 08/29/2009 - 15:34 by yellarebbi

Hugh Fitzgerald: The Arabs, The Berbers & Africa

2009-10-05T16:52:00.000-07:00

From New English Review, comes the following article:
The Arabs, The Berbers & Africa
by Hugh Fitzgerald

It is no mystery as to why Christian missionaries might be having their greatest success in the Kabyle. In Algeria, that remains the Berber heartland. It is where the Berbers are concentrated, that is those who were not forcibly transformed, during the centuries of Arab rule (interrupted by 132 years of French rule) into "Arabs." (How many of those "Arabs" who now persecute the Berbers realize that they themselves are a generation, or two, or five removed from their clearly Berber origins?)

The cause of the Berbers is hardly known in this country. The writer Kateb Yacine, a Berber who refused to write in Arabic, but chose French, is celebrated in France, especially among Berbers -- but unknown in this country, and his anti-Arab rage is not likely to cause his books to be included in the syllabuses of courses on "Francophone" literature given that so many such courses are now taught by French-speaking Arabs.

What is that cause? In the first place, it is linguistic and cultural. In Algeria, where the French rightly saw the Berbers as superior to the Arabs -- one French general wrote a book about the "Europeanness" of the Berbers -- the Berbers were not discriminated against, but as soon as the French left, the forced arabisation of the Berbers started up at once, as if the French interregnum, with the wider possibilities that French education made possible to both Berbers and Arabs, had never existed. Older people in Algeria speak and use French; the younger ones are forgetting. And meanwhile, the Berbers were forbidden to use their own language, Tamazight, in their schools or in their institutions, and even, at times, they could be punished for using it among themselves, on the street. Berber culture was officially ignored.

About twenty years ago, news of agitation began to reach the outside world. There were riots in Tizi-Ouzou that were reported in France, but hardly anywhere else in the Western world. In America, of course, we had all been sufficiently subject to ARAMCO propaganda (performed as a "public service" by the big oil companies, as part of their propaganda payoff to the Saudis for allowing them to find, produce, and then pay exorbitantly for the oil that happens to lie under the malevolent sands of "Saudi" Arabia), to believe that there is something called "the Arab world" and in this "Arab world" there are no Copts, no Armenians, no Assyrians, no Chaldeans, no Turkmen, no Mandeans, no Maronites, and of course no Berbers, no Jews (no, there never were any Jews in North Africa or the Middle East -- they all came to Israel, you see, from Europe), for everyone in the Arab world was an "Arab."

The discovery or re-discovery of a Berber identity (and how many of those North African "Arabs" should begin to realize that they are Berbers?) is or could be an important weapon in unsettling the world of Islam, and perhaps causing the Maghreb to see itself, as it should not as "Arab" but as the victim of Arab imperialism.

For what is Islam if not a vehicle of Arab imperialism, and what are the Berbers, if not the victims of that Arab imperialism, an imperialism far more potent and long-lasting than the European kind, for it attempts to efface the historic identity of whole peoples?

And it makes perfect sense that Berbers in the Kabyle would, having felt along their pulses the Arab imperialism of which Islam is the vehicle, would be more open to the efforts of Christian missionaries, or more likely, are not so much responding to missionary activity, but to their own observations as to what Christianity is like, and what Islam has brought them.

In this respect, one should not underestimate the fact that Berbers now live in France, that they make up most of the membership of such groups as the "maghrebins laiques," and that they, not the Arabs whose ethnic identity is so bound up with Islam, are capable, in some cases, not of identifying with the Arabs, but more closely with the French. And those Berbers communicate with Berbers at home, or through the Internet. And sometimes they return, to Algeria and Morocco, to see their families, and bring with them their own observations on the relative merits of the Islamic world, a world suffused with Islam, and the non-Islamic world, the one they have experienced in France.

The more the non-Arab Muslims of the world, and 80% of the world's Muslims are not Arab, come to realize -- and it would not be hard to help them to realize, for they will not be able to deny the facts, having experienced so much of it themselves -- that Islam is a vehicle for that Arab supremacism, the more likely it is that at least some of them will fall away. And others, who may stick with a kind of "non-Arab" Islam (as if such were possible) will, in so doing, at least help to divide, and therefore to weaken, the Camp of Islam.

Ideally, one would wish this Total System, that has held so many hundreds of millions in thrall, and thwarted over so many centuries so much human potential (think of the art, think of the science, that might have resulted in the absence of the dead hand of Islam on so many people, prevented from so many forms of artistic expression, so many avenues for free and skeptical inquiry that are necessary for the enterprise of science, so much dull fanaticism, so much boredom, so much violence, in posse and in esse) will be seen, by Berbers, by Kurds, by people in the subcontinent (why should Muslims in India not "rediscover" their own history, their Hindu, or Buddhist, or other non-Muslim roots?), by those in Malaysia and the East Indies, with its rich pre-Islamic, Hindu and Buddhist past?

Meanwhile, start reading those Berber sites. And hope that the French state, instead of Sarkozy's folly of "integrating" its Muslims by government-supported mosques, will try to work on the Berbers, work to make them see the light, work to help them to achieve their own destiny, one different from, and superior to, that of the Arabs whose method of domination comes from, is supplied by, Islam, Islam, Islam.

We should help those in North Africa (and in France) who know, are well aware, of their Berber identity. And they will point out, in the ways that they think most effective, that many of those "Arabs" are in fact one or two or five generations away from being Berbers. DNA is coming to the rescue. There is a genetic marker that, in studies by French geneticists in Tunisia, shows that Berbers and Arabs can be easily distinguished. Some who proudly identify themselves as "Arabs" will resist. But others may listen. And as they recognize the violence, the "culture of death" of Islam, as in Algeria, perhaps those who wish to make a break from Islam, and recognize that such a break is hardest of all for Arabs, and that another identity needs to be accepted, invented, believed in, will manage to discover, and embrace, their Berber "roots."

It seems fanciful, just as it seems fanciful that Iranians, those who are not merely disgusted with the mullahs running things, but are coming to be disgusted with Islam -- that "gift of the Arabs" --- itself, may wish to rediscover Zoroastrianism. Not because of any particular wonderfulness in what Zoroastrianism has to offer, but simply because it offers another identity (see Bernard Lewis's excellent "The Multiple Identities of the Middle East"), in a part of the world, and among people, who believe that "everyone simply has to be something." And that "something" cannot be, as it is in the advanced West, a collection of ideas or ideals -- as an American might define himself as loyal to the American Constitution, and wishing to defend the political and legal institutions of this country, fortunately fashioned by an inimitable group of geniuses, and fortunately, not yet made complete hash even by those who embody the degradation of the democratic dogma.

Many Frenchmen wrote about the differences they perceived between Arabs and Berbers. French photographers routinely took pictures of Berbers in their Berber dress; the Arabs were much less willing. French military men wrote about the Berbers as "un peuple europeen."

Some Berbers came not to resist their definition as "Arabs" the way some Copts and Maronites have had a false "Arab identity" pushed on them, or have semi-accepted it, an "identity" constructed out of nothing more than the fact that they are speakers, "users," of Arabic, and may have Arabic names forced on them over time. Indeed, there are differences between Arabs who have become Christians (as a few did in the 19th and early 20th centuries) and those Arabic-using Christians -- Maronites, Copts, Assyrians, Chaldeans -- who are not Arabs, but some of whom have, in order to survive in an ever-threatening Muslim sea, had to find their role as "Arabs" or even, in the manner of the Christian Syrian Michel Aflaq (one of the founders of Ba'athism), hyper-Arabs, as promoters of an Arab identity, pan-Arabism, the whole works -- as an alternative to Islam (they were fooling themselves, because pan-Arabism for Muslim Arabs was never a real alternative to Islam, but merely a temporary goal, a subset, of the goal of a reunified Muslim world).

Not every ill that befell the non-Muslims in the Muslim world, or non-Arabs in the Muslim Arab world, can be attributed to colonial powers. There were French then, during the time of the "presence francaise" that brought schools, hospitals, modern agriculture, and other elements of modern civilization, to North Africa (in Morocco and Tunisia, over about half-a-century; in Algeria, over a 132-year period) who were quite capable of distinguishing Berbers from Arabs, and it was not their pressure that caused some Berbers to forget their own identity, any more than it was France as the guarantor of the Christians in Lebanon and Syria who caused some to make themselves hyper-Arabs. Aflaq founded the Ba'ath party with two associates not when the French seemed to be there to stay, but when it was clear that they would, in a few years, be leaving.

Aflaq's "Ba'athism" came to dominate only two countries, and for two similar reasons. The first was Syria, with a large Christian population, and with a powerful military caste, the Alawites, who were not regarded as orthodox Muslims, were indeed disliked by orthodox Muslims for the obvious elements of syncretism in their worship (go to an Alawite village and see the pictures of Mary everywhere), Alawites who had been miserable under the Turkish rule but under that of the French formed part of the Troupes speciales, and were trained to fight, and when the French left, the Alawites remained in the army, and the air force (Hafez al-Assad) and gradually took over, in the way that people or groups always take over in the Muslim Middle East -- through the application, or threat, of military force. In Syria Ba'athism disguises, is the facade, for the rule by the Alawites.

In Iraq, Ba'athism took a different turn. There, the Sunnis knew that they were numerically far inferior to the Shi'a, but they were put in control of modern Iraq, by the British, and never lost their grip.

The Hashemite king, Feisal a Sunni, was put in control of Iraq, and aided throughout the 1920s by British troops, and such British civilians as the celebrated Gertrude Bell, until finally, the expense of suppressing the tribes, and the obvious hopelessness of it all, caused the British to leave. It was Winston Churchill who described Mesopotamia (Iraq) as an "ungrateful volcano." And when the British left, the local Arabs solemnly promised not to harm the local Christians, and five months after the last British troops pulled out, Muslim Arabs killed up to 100,000 largely helpless Assyrians. (William Saroyan wrote a book about it).

Everywhere Muslims spreading Islam are careful to present it as the vehicle for whatever grievance the potential local converts may have. If it is black prisoners in the United States, then Islam is presented as the vehicle both of "social justice" (see how Muslim ruling classes everywhere seize the national wealth, see how the poor are treated in Muslim countries), and against "racism.” And the Infidels do little or nothing. Have you seen any campaigns of deliberate counter-Da’wa anywhere in the prisons or elsewhere? It would be easy to show, and to keep showing, perhaps by organizing the “Lost Boys” of the Sudan, that anti-black racism, of the purest and most virulent kind, is found among the Arabs. Anyone who has studied in an Arab country returns amazed at what is said, and not a few are shaken. Anyone who looks into the history of African slavery soon discovers that the Arab slave trade began earlier, and ended later, than that of the Europeans – or rather, ended formally later, but actually continues, in several countries, to this day. Why is this not screamed from every housetop? Why have the countries of the advanced world, that have poured $400 billion into aid to black Africa, not tried to halt the spread of the most retrograde force, a force which encourages the habit of mental submission, and which, in its inshallah-fatalism, is in fact fatal to economic development, not tried to stop the spread of Islam? If they have the wellbeing of black Africans at heart, they must begin to understand, and to share their understanding, that Islam has been, is, and always will be, a force that hinders, with that inshallah-fatalism and that habit of mental submission, any possibility of either economic or intellectual development.

The evidence is there. What sustained the Muslims for centuries, at a low level, was simply the accumulated intellectual capital of those peoples whom they conquered, and slowly leached of life, and of property as well. Now North Africa and the Middle East are virtually without the non-Muslims who once provided a certain supply of Jizyah, and what sustains the Arabs and Muslims are two things, and only two things; the new disguised Jizyah of Western foreign aid (which should be ended, and used to meet the new expenses of monitoring Muslim populations in the West), and the manna of oil wealth, entirely undeserved, and the only conceivable way that the Arabs and Muslims might acquire great wealth – through an accident of geology. Are the peoples of black Africa misled into thinking that they, too, somehow share in that wealth?

There was a very large and intelligent, because it focused on small-scale, doable projects, aid effort by Israel in black Africa. It was the most successful of all such foreign aid efforts. It was widespread. It was widely welcomed. But it came to an end, after the Six-Day War, under Arab pressure, and bribery – the same bribery that caused several dozen African states, under Arab command, to break diplomatic relations with Israel. Some of those African states no doubt thought that the Arabs would share just a little of that vast unearned wealth – if only to replace what Israel, a tiny country, had so remarkably provided. It was not to be. It will never be. The Arabs are trying in Africa to dominate the Continent. They are patient. They are methodical. In West Africa, where Islam is already dominant, as in uranium-rich Niger, they have transformed the easygoing, syncretistic practice of Islam to something much more akin to what can be seen in Saudi Arabia. And everywhere mosques are becoming subject to the strictures of those who pay for them, or pay the imams – and that usually means the Saudis. In some countries that once had a clear Christian majority, such as the Ivory Coast, the Christians are feeling besieged by Muslims who come in from the north, and the French government under Chirac supported not the local black Christians, and understood their fear, but rather attempted to appease the world’s Muslims.

In East Africa, when the black Africans rose up against their Arab masters in Zanzibar and Pemba some decades ago (the slave trade by the Arabs in East Africa had been centered there – indeed, the Sultan of Muscat and Oman had for a time ruled directly from Zanzibar), little was made of this in the West. No one discussed the long history of the Arab slave trade, with its practice of castrating black children when they were first caught, and then taking them by slave coffle or dhow to the slave markets of Islam, a trip which about 10% survived (see “The Hideous Trade” by Jan Hogedorn). And so the Arabs have continued their march southward. The Sudan had very few Arabs in the southern part one hundred years ago. But steadily they have taken territory, pushed back, killed, black Africans. 1.8 million non-Muslim blacks were killed, or deliberately starved to death, in the southern Sudan in the last two decades. Not content with that, not content with having seized complete control of the oil wealth that lies under the Christian and animist areas of the artificial state of Sudan, the Arabs are now trying to seize, by mass murder, the lands as well of the Muslim, but non-“Arab” blacks of Darfur. The campaign of mass rape, destruction of property, and killing of every man, woman and child they can get their hands on has been reported and reported, and reported. It has been reported without any understanding of Islam as a vehicle for Arab supremacism (the nicholas-kristofs of this world do not bother to figure out what is going on, what ideology prompts the Janjaweed and the Sudanese government that supports it, or the other Arab and Muslim governments that run interference for that Sudanese government), but are content with writing endless columns of easy anguish.

Egypt supports the Sudanese, while pretending not to, and so does the Arab League which welcomes the reduction, in the southern Sudan and from Darfur, of non-Arabs and non-Muslims to a state of hopelessness and surrender, where they continue to live at all. For Egypt and the Arabs have their eyes not merely on the Sudan, but on Ethiopia, the famous Christian kingdom, now rapidly becoming Islamized. Egypt has no intention of letting the Christian government of Ethiopia help its own people by, at long last, diverting some of the headwaters of the Nile for irrigation. The Egyptians think the Nile belongs, from its very source onward, to them and only to them. The water wars have been declared –but only by the Arab side.

Americans and other Infidel peoples should be supporting Ethiopian efforts to halt the spread of Islam, or of the purest kind of Islam, whether in Somalia or in Ethiopia itself, and to help Ethiopia remain a Christian kingdom that can help prevent the takeover of southern East Africa by Islam. Muslims owe their loyalty to the umma al-islamiyya, to fellow Muslims. It would make sense, in Africa, for the Americans not only to have handfuls of advisors and troops here and there, but to engage in propaganda. This propaganda, which happens to be the truth simply megaphoned to make a point, should describe in vivid detail the history of the Arab slave trade. It should explain to Africans that slavery is permanently sanctioned by both Qur’an and Sunnah, and can therefore never, within Islam, be banished. It should detail the continuing racism of the Arabs. And it should show how Islam stands in the way of economic and other kinds of development in two ways: in the encouragement of the habit of mental submission, central to Islam, and in the inshallah-fatalism that limits economic activity, and how Islam has relied on two kinds of manna: the Jizyah that is demanded from, or voluntarily supplied by, non-Muslims, and the oil wealth that has resulted from an accident of geology. And despite the ten trillion dollars that the Arab and Muslim states have received from oil revenues since 1973, not a single one has managed to create a real economy, not a single one has ceased to be hopelessly dependent on oil.

Islam, as it spreads, will merely guarantee that the countries and peoples of sub-Saharan Africa will be forced to endure the political, economic, social, moral, and intellectual failures of Muslim states and societies – failures whose source can be found in Islam itself.

Do we wish black Africa well, or ill? If we do wish to help the peoples of black Africa, preventing or halting the spread of Islam makes sense. And it makes sense for us to help the Berbers regain their history, their language and their culture, and it makes sense for us, in other ways, as well.

http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/15319/sec_id/15319

(Feb. 2008)

WHO--AND WHAT--ARE THE ARABS?

2009-10-01T10:59:00.000-07:00

We hear much about the "Arabs," and with much concern and tears (from the "nations") about the so-called "Palestinian" Arabs.

What are they? The "Ishmaelites"--as the one who thought up the Moslem "religion" (a political ideology disguised as a spiritual faith) claimed to be?

The following excerpts are from THE ORIGIN AND IDENTITY OF THE ARABS by Avraham Sándor at THINK-ISRAEL http://www.think-israel.org/imninalu.araboriginidentity.html

NOTE: These are only excerpts--Please refer to the original linked to above for the complete story

The "Arabs"

Arab myths concerning the Patriarchs

Historic and archaeologic evidences show that the ancient Arabian peoples did not leave any written testimony of themselves before they received the influence of Assyria, around the 8th-7th century b.c.e., and all what we know about them until then has been recorded by external sources and accounts of eyewitnesses. The peoples of Arabia had no records of their own genealogies, which have been artificially invented in Islamic times as well as the alleged pre-Islamic history without any real knowledge concerning location and period, besides the imaginary character of the events. There are many examples that show the inaccuracy of Islamic traditional concepts, based on hearsay from unreliable sources. Just to mention a couple of them, one is that the qur'an identifies Miryam the sister of Aharon with Miryam the mother of Yeshua as if she was the same person, when actually there are about 1400 years that separate the two Miryams; another is that in sura "al-qasas" (38), Haman is said to be Pharaoh's vizier, mistaking both time and place, because actually Haman was a minister of the Persian king when there was no longer any Pharaoh in Egypt. The same sura asserts that Pharaoh intended to build a tower, a story based on Josephus' account about Nimrod (Antiquities, I: 4). There are hundreds of resounding errors like these which are not to be listed here since it is not the intention of this essay to make any process to religious conceptions, but only to present the historic truth.

Concerning the two Arabian forefathers, we can say that Qahtan may be well identified with the Biblical Yoqtan, but Adnan seems to be rather legendary, and as allegedly is only one of Ishmaels' descendants -- not even one of his twelve sons -- he cannot be the ancestor of all the Northern Arabians. The geographic distribution of the Ishmaelites indeed leave a vast "empty" space between them and the Yoqtanite peoples, namely, the whole Central Arabia. The southernmost Ishmaelite tribe was Teyma', whose capital was located about 400 kilometres north from Yathrib (Medinah). Yet, Arab traditions assert that Ishmael was with his father Avraham in Mekka (that is more than 700 kilometres south of Teyma'), a claim that is utterly groundless, without the least hint of possibility to find any historic support.

The only existing written record concerning the person of Ishmael is found in the Bible, witnessing that he dwelled in the region of Paran, north of Midyan. This account was written by Mosheh, who spent half of his life in the very land where Ishmael lived and had undoubtedly more accurate information than the Arab writers that invented the tales about Avraham and Ishmael more than 2000 years after Mosheh. The Scriptures as well describe Avraham's movements in a very accurate way, from his departure from Ur haKashdim to Haran, then to Canaan, his journeys to Egypt and Gherar, his expedition to rescue his nephew, and every place where he sojourned -- none of them is in Arabia. He kept attached to his Akkadian family settled in Northern Mesopotamia and not to any allegedly sacred place in Arabia. Having described all Avraham's movements in detail, would Mosheh not mention a trip involving a distance over 1000 kilometres away from Canaan (and the same length for the way back)? And supposing, for the sake of argument, that Avraham actually travelled to Mekka, if Mosheh ignored such a journey it undoubtedly means that it was completely irrelevant, without any Divine purpose.

The fact is that the name of Ishmael was unknown in Central Arabia in pre-Islamic times, and the Arabic form Isma'il, beginning with an aleph shows that it passed through the Greek and is not directly derived from the Semitic/Aramaic original name Yishmael, with an initial yod -- the change of a consonant/semivowel into a vowel is explained only if a Semitic name has been translated into a western language and then from the western form into another Semitic tongue, which is the case of Hebrew into Greek and then into Arabic. Indeed, there is no mention of Avraham or Ishmael in any ancient Arabian inscription, neither Sabean nor Minean, nor Safaitic, nor Lihyanite, nor Thamudic and not even Nabatean.

The Arabs got acquainted with the existence of Avraham and Ishmael only through the Jewish and Christian sources from which Islam drew its own scriptures. Therefore, according to overwhelming historic, archaeologic, scriptural and scientific evidence, neither Avraham nor Ishmael have ever been in Arabia from Midyan southwards.

Arabs today--the ideological heirs of the Nazi Mufti of Jerusalem--decide that the Temple never existed and that Jews have neither connection to it nor to Jerusalem: PMW: No Jewish connection to Western Wall: PA academic - Just the usual denial of reality that leads to nothing but further conflict. It's also a pure case of inversion where the truth is that the Muslim exaltation of Jerusalem is a purely political a-historical invention derived for no other reason than to make sure no one else gets it. This is the kind of guy a lot of universities here in the West would love to have in as a guest for "balance" and a different perspective.
Continued at . . .
http://www.solomonia.com/blog/archive/2009/08/pmw-no-jewish-connection-to-western-wall/

What Arab Civilization?

2009-09-27T17:36:00.000-07:00

by Peter BetBasoo

[excerpt]

Islam the religion itself was significantly molded by Assyrians and Jews (see Nestorian Influence on Islam and Hagarism: the Making of the Islamic World).

Arab/Islamic civilization is not a progressive force, it is a regressive force; it does not give impetus, it retards. The great civilization you describe was not an Arab/Muslim accomplishment, it was an Assyrian accomplishment that Arabs expropriated and subsequently lost when they drained, through the forced conversion of Assyrians to Islam, the source of the intellectual vitality that propelled it. What other Arab/Muslim civilization has risen since? What other Arab/Muslim successes can we cite?

You state, "and perhaps we can learn a lesson from his [Suleiman] example: It was leadership based on meritocracy, not inheritance. It was leadership that harnessed the full capabilities of a very diverse population that included Christianity, Islamic, and Jewish traditions." In fact, the Ottomans were extremely oppressive to non-Muslims. For example, young Christian boys were forcefully taken from their families, usually at the age of 8-10, and inducted into the Janissaries, (yeniceri in Turkish) where they were Islamized and made to fight for the Ottoman state. What literary, artistic or scientific achievements of the Ottomans can we point to? We can, on the other hand, point to the genocide of 750,000 Assyrians, 1.5 million Armenians and 400,000 Greeks in World War One by the Kemalist "Young Turk" government. This is the true face of Islam.

Arabs/Muslims are engaged in an explicit campaign of destruction and expropriation of cultures and communities, identities and ideas. Wherever Arab/Muslim civilization encounters a non-Arab/Muslim one, it attempts to destroy it (as the Buddhist statues in Afghanistan were destroyed, as Persepolis was destroyed by the Ayotollah Khomenie). This is a pattern that has been recurring since the advent of Islam, 1400 years ago, and is amply substantiated by the historical record. If the "foreign" culture cannot be destroyed, then it is expropriated, and revisionist historians claim that it is and was Arab, as is the case of most of the Arab "accomplishments" you cited in your speech. For example, Arab history texts in the Middle East teach that Assyrians were Arabs, a fact that no reputable scholar would assert, and that no living Assyrian would accept. Assyrians first settled Nineveh, one of the major Assyrian cities, in 5000 B.C., which is 5630 years before Arabs came into that area. Even the word 'Arab' is an Assyrian word, meaning "Westerner" (the first written reference to Arabs was by the Assyrian King Sennacherib, 800 B.C., in which he tells of conquering the "ma'rabayeh" -- Westerners. See The Might That Was Assyria, by H. W. F. Saggs).

Even in America this Arabization policy continues. On October 27th a coalition of seven Assyrian and Maronite organizations sent an official letter to the Arab American Institute asking it to stop identifying Assyrians and Maronites as Arabs, which it had been deliberately doing.

There are minorities and nations struggling for survival in the Arab/Muslim ocean of the Middle East and Africa (Assyrians, Armenians, Coptics, Jews, southern Sudanese, Ethiopians, Nigerians...), and we must be very sensitive not to unwittingly and inadvertently support Islamic fascism and Arab Imperialism, with their attempts to wipe out all other cultures, religions and civilizations. It is incumbent upon each one of us to do our homework and research when making statements and speeches about these sensitive matters.

I hope you found this information enlightening. For more information, refer to the web links below. You may contact me at keepa@ninevehsoft.com for further questions.

Thank you for your consideration.

Peter BetBasoo

Excerpt from [a] letter . . . sent to Carly Fiorina, CEO of Hewlett Packard Corporation, in response to a speech given by her on September 26, 2001.

Complete letter at http://www.ninevehsoft.com/fiorina.htm
and at
http://www.joinourfight.com/joinourfight/dispatcher?userAction=10&countryCode=US&articleId=4

Conte de la péninsule arabique

2009-09-13T15:56:00.000-07:00

afrique-du-nord.com
http://www.afrique-du-nord.com/article.php3?id_article=1813

A) De l’authenticité du corpus coranique.

La révélation s’est faite en arabe qoraïchite, une des variantes des "patois" arabes et yéménites. Les premiers transcripteurs ont été les compagnons, notamment Ubbay ibn Kab et surtout Ziad ibn Thabit. Ils se sont attachés à consigner par écrit les sourates. Leurs transcriptions ont dans la plupart des cas été faites avec l’aide des récitants qui connaissaient chacun des sourates ou morceaux de sourates (versets plus ou moins longs). On les consigna donc sur des morceaux d’os de chameau, des morceaux de cuir, des feuilles de palmiers, etc.

Les successeurs de Mahomet, les premiers califes (Abu Bakr, Omar et Othman et Ali) vont tour à tour collecter les différentes transcriptions. Ainsi, après la mort de Mahomet, il y eut ce qui peut être considéré probablement comme une première « compilation », faite par Ziad à la demande d’Abu Bakr, le beau-père de Mahomet et 1er calife. Elle le fut "sur des feuilles", sans autre précision. La collecte de ces feuilles est sujette à controverse : pour certains auteurs de hadiths, c’est Abu Bakr qui en fut le premier détenteur, alors que pour d’autres, dont le fameux Bukhari, ce serait Othman, le troisième calife. Celui-ci en aurait fait la version officielle et définitive qu’on a appelé depuis la vulgate othmanienne. Celle qui serait encore en vigueur chez les sunnites. Mais nombre de versions (différentes pour la plupart) existent, en cette période où chacun semble vouloir être calife à la place du calife (comme l’Iznogoud de la BD) et successeur de celui qui n’a pas de successeur. Tandis que pour les chiites, la collecte en aurait été faite par le gendre de Mahomet, Ali. Comme j’ignore presque tout du chiisme, je n’en dirais pas plus.

En 644, Omar, second calife et lui aussi beau-père de Mahomet, tente de faire détruire tous les autres "corpus", dans le but de contrer les chiites, sauf évidemment ceux détenus pas Hafsa : personne ne songerait à s’attaquer à la veuve de Mahomet. Il n’y parvint qu’à moitié mais le temps a continué le travail pour lui : le fruit du labeur de copiste de certains compagnons, ayant échappé à la destruction, a été égaré pour toujours.

Ibn Mussad, un des récitants de Mahomet, connaissait une soixantaine de sourates par coeur. Il refuse à son tour de détruire son corpus, ayant constaté des différences dans le classement des sourates, ainsi que de nombreuses modifications dans le texte. Il sera considéré ainsi comme chiite. Abu Mussa aussi apporte sa contradiction : son texte recensé comporte de nombreuses variantes qu’il était en outre le seul à mentionner. Ibn Abbas, cousin de Mahomet, avait l’habitude de tout consigner sur Mahomet et ses compagnons. Ses écrits contredisent en beaucoup de points ceux de la vulgate othmanienne. Il est considéré par les Soumis comme l’exégète le plus complet et le plus grand des savants de son époque. Ils omettent simplement de signaler qu’il se révéla surtout être un petit brigand des sables qui, en abandonnant son poste de gouverneur de Bassorah, est parti avec ... la caisse, comme un vulgaire voleur. Lui le grand Uléma ! Parmi les collectionneurs, il faut aussi citer Asma, fille de Umays, dont on reparlera à propos des hadiths.

A la mort de Omar, les feuilles qu’il détenaient revinrent à sa fille (et veuve de Mahomet), la belle Hafsa. En plus de sa beauté, elle était une des très rares femmes de l’époque à être instruite, ce qui était suffisant pour instiller un doute sur des manipulations possibles. Ce n’est que 20 ans après sa mort que le calife de Médine, Marwan, fit détruire les feuilles qu’elle hérita de son père, arguant de ce prétexte : "je crains qu’avec le temps, quelques sceptiques n’émettent des doutes sur la véracité de ces feuilles". Donc, pour supprimer le doute, le plus simple est de supprimer la cause du doute, les feuilles ! Pour guérir une maladie, supprimons le nom de la maladie. Mais il avait pressenti le danger bien réel : les fameuses feuilles de Hafsa contredisaient trop la vulgate othmanienne.

Que dire dans ces conditions de cette "vulgate officielle" qui ne cessait pourtant pas d’être remaniée et qui comportait tant de variantes ? Sachant que tout ce beau monde avait chacun une lecture bien personnelle, qui était interprétée par chacun des autres comme sans valeur, ce qui a conduit les Soumis à se rebeller les uns contre les autres. Pourtant Dieu ne leur avait-il pas enjoint de ne pas s’entretuer, de garder leur cif tranchant pour les Juifs, les Chrétiens et les insoumis ? Une solution, il faut réviser la vulgate d’Othman. On s’attela alors à ce travail (ce tripatouillage) qui consiste entre autres à introduire la notation des voyelles brèves (ces signes placés au dessus ou en dessous des lettres), on ajouta les signes diacritiques (ce qui équivaut pour le français à placer des signes comme cédilles et trémas), on rectifia les fautes d’orthographe et les erreurs de transcription dues aux copistes, etc. C’est lors de ces révisions qu’on donna aussi des titres aux sourates. Autre modification, des plus importantes : à l’époque Abbasside, vers 750, on changea complètement de style en adoptant le style de Coufa au détriment de l’originel, le style du Hedjaz. Les graphies anciennes vont disparaître complètement.

Toutes ces révisions ne peuvent pas être sans conséquences sur le sens initial du "message" originel ! D’autant que s’ajoutent à cela tant de conflits sociaux, de conspirations, de conjurations qui ne sont pas sans effet sur le texte, en perpétuelle remise en cause. Guerre de clans et conflits entre Aïcha et Ali, vendetta des Ommeyades contre Othman, conjuration des Alides contre le même Othman, encerclé dans sa "Maison", révolte des "Ambitieux" menés par Muawiya, et surtout les batailles restées célèbres comme celle des Chameaux (Aïcha y assista sur un chameau protégé d’une "armure de fer", d’où le nom), bataille de Siffin, extermination des Kharijites (les Sortants) lors de la bataille de Nawrawan, etc, sans oublier l’assassinat d’Ali, dans sa ville de Coufa, à l’intérieur-même de ce lieu réservé au culte de Dieu qu’est la mosquée. La suite ne sera guère mieux. C’est dans ce climat délétère que se dégagèrent les 4 écoles religieuses du sunnisme, la hanafite, la malékite, la shafiite et la hanbalite.

En résumé, les transcriptions détenues tour à tour par Abu Bakr et Omar furent jugées incomplètes et imparfaites par la plupart des prescripteurs. Vinrent ensuite les guerres entre les différents courants, guerres idéologiques et guerres d’ambitions, guerres entre tribus et clans, avec le cif et avec le verbe. En plus de tous les tripatouillages non recensés et non répertoriés, tous les marchandages, les règlements de compte, etc... Plus d’autres tripatouillages supposés, par les adeptes d’Ali. Ainsi, de tout ce fatras et cet imbroglio va sortir l’orthodoxie des Mahometans. Il faut aussi savoir que près de 3 siècles séparent lapremière collecte faite par Othman de la version "complète et officielle" du "Chefs des Lecteurs" de Baghdad, Ibn Muhajid, mort en 936. Les différentes versions intermédiaires ont par ailleurs été sujettes à d’interminables querelles entre grammairiens, entre exégètes et entre grammairiens et exégètes, au fur et mesure que le système d’écriture se diversifie et se complique.

B) De l’authenticité des hadiths.

Pour les hadiths, il faut savoir que leurs transcriptions ont été faites sur une échelle de temps très longue, presque 2 siècles. Les premiers transcripteurs sont les compagnons, qui s’attachent à consigner par écrit les actions, comportements quotidiens, paroles, gestes, allusions, etc de Mahomet.

Où on reparle de Asma : elle fut la troisième épouse de Abu Bakr avant d’être mariée à Ali, dont la première épouse est Fatima, fille de Mahomet (ces mariages croisés, "en famille", étaient monnaie courante à l’époque !) . Personnage important, car il était admis que Fatima lui aurait conté plusieurs traditions liées à son père. Elle est ainsi devenue une des principales sources de hadiths. Avec Aïcha, la prolixe, qui meurt 46 ans après son prophète de mari et qui, à ce titre, est considérée comme une source très précieuse. Où il apparaît qu’on peut faire confiance aux femmes, malgré la sourate qui veut que leur témoignage ne peut être valide que si elles sont 2 à le faire simultanément ! Ne chipotons pas, considérons qu’en tant que veuve de Mahomet, Aïcha a gagné ses galons de conteuse crédible. Ces récits, étoffés au fil du temps, constituent avec le texte coranique ce qu’on dénomme la sunna (la tradition), que chaque sunnite se doit donc de suivre aveuglément. Ainsi, si Mahomet urine d’une certaine manière ou mastique une datte pour en faire une bouillie à donner au nourrisson, cela est consigné et les Soumis devront reproduire son geste à travers les temps et toute la Umma devra s’y conformer. Les récits ainsi rapportés forment les hadiths, transcrits vaille que vaille à travers ces presque 2 siècles.

Face au danger d’éclatement de l’islam par les nombreuses guerres et querelles internes, il devint urgent de les recenser et d’en vérifier l’authenticité. Le mot est lâché : authenticité ! Comment faire pour certifier un texte quand les protagonistes sont morts. On imagina une chaîne de "garants", qui devaient être composée d’au moins 3 personnes : un "exégète" (compagnon, épouse, ami), un témoin oculaire et un participant, la chaîne pouvant aller jusqu’à 4 ou 5 rapporteurs (ou même plus ?), qui pouvaient être un transmetteur, un affranchi ou encore un élève d’un des "lecteurs" de Mahomet ). Ainsi, un hadith authentifié peut commencer de cette manière : "Untel a dit à Untel, qui l’a rapporté à Untel, qui l’a transmis à Untel que le Prophète ...". Chaîne à 4 garants. Pour qu’il soit considéré comme sahih (sain) donc être authentifié, il suffit que le premier Untel soit une épouse, un compagnon (nom donné aux premiers convertis d’avant Médine) ou un ansar (compagnon d’après la période médinoise). Peu importe alors si le dernier rapporteur a vécu 30, 40 ans ou plus après le premier. Les transmetteurs n’étaient pas contemporains de Mahomet, ils vécurent pour certains au VIIIème et IXème siècles de l’ère chrétienne, tel Hafs ben Suleyman, mort en 874, ou encore Hisham ben Amar, mort en 860.

On comprend aisément que les transcriptions, les chaînes de garants, les polémiques aient donné des textes pour le moins sujets à caution, où le hasard et les modifications aléatoires jouent un rôle trop important, loin de la volonté déclarée d’établir un texte véridique. Pour un esprit rationnel enclin au pragmatisme, la question d’authenticité dans ces conditions ne peut être certifiée, compte tenu de tous les aléas liés aux transcriptions ainsi qu’aux sources. Et dans ce cas, on ne parlerait alors que de probabilités. Mais il n’en va pas de même pour les Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Daoud, Tirmidhi et les autres ! Et, si Bukhari et Muslim sont considérés comme "rigoureux", c’est-à-dire intègres dans les limites plus qu’aléatoires qu’ils sont fixés eux-même, il en va tout autrement pour d’autres, tel Tirmidhi, pourtant reconnu, qui ne s’embarrasse pas de fioritures en n’exigeant pas un garant reconnu ou encore comme al-Nasaï qui se satisfait d’un garant qui ne serait pas déclaré incrédible par tous les autres. Pourtant, les hadiths de Tirmidhi sont considérés sahih et al-Nasaï était un élève de Abu-Daud.

Voilà ce bel ensemble qui est appelé Sunna, composé de ce texte "véridique", cette "parole descendue de Dieu", par Dieu lui-même "derrière un voile", ou par l’intermédiaire de l’ange Gabriel aux 600 Ailes, dans "la langue inaltérable et inaltérée" du désert arabique, au VIIème siècle de l’ère chrétienne, avec son chapelet de traditions tout aussi abracadabrantes ... et qui perdurent jusqu’à ce jour. Un ensemble de textes pour idolâtres et uniquement pour eux. Mais, au fait, l’idolâtrie n’est-elle pas contraire aux principes édictés par ce Dieu "plein de sagesse et de bon sens" ? Un ensemble de textes qui a pour fondement, pour fondation, un livre où ne figure pas une seule fois le mot honneur mais où il a été donné neuf noms à l’enfer :

An Nar ( sourate 2 verset 24)

Al Jahim (sourate 2 verset 119)

Jahannama (sourate 2 verset 206)

As Saïr (sourate 4 verset 10)

As Samum (sourate 52 verset 27)

Saqar (sourate 54 verset 48)

Sidjine (sourate 83 verset 7).

Hawiyah (sourate 101 verset 9).

Al Hutamah ( sourate 104 verset 4)

Afin que les Soumis n’oublient pas de se frapper le front contre le sol, pour y échapper !

La prochaine fois, je vous conterai les histoires plus crédibles de "vreruc y-uggi ad y-ekk imensi, yebbwi-as taghat-is wecen" ou de ce petit garçon que ses parents essayent de perdre avec ses frères dans la forêt. A lire sans le moindre esprit critique, sinon on n’y croit pas !

Electron libre.

Sources parmi d’autres : L’islam cet inconnu par Roger Caratini, éd. Michel Lafon (2001) - al-islam.com (site officiel du Ministère saoudien du culte) - islammedia.free.fr - islamreligion.com

Les commentaires reçus :
Heureux enfants !
http://www.afrique-du-nord.com/article.php3?id_article=1813

16 juillet 2009

Berbers, Islam & Christianity

2009-07-20T05:49:00.000-07:00

From http://www.north-of-africa.com/article.php3?id_article=594

3 July 2009

No mystery as to why Christian missionaries might be having their greatest success in the Kabyle. In Algeria, that remains the Berber heartland. It is where the Berbers, that is those who were not forcibly transformed, during the centuries of Arab rule (interrupted by 132 years of French rule) into "Arabs" (how many of those "Arabs" who now persecute the Berbers realize that they themselves are a generation, or two, or five removed from their clearly Berber origins?)

The cause of the Berbers is hardly known in this country. The writer Kateb Yacine, a Berber who refused to write in Arabic, but chose French, is celebrated in France, especially among Berbers-but unknown in this country, and his anti-Arab rage is not likely to cause his books to be included in the syllabuses of courses on "Francophone" literature given that so many such courses are now taught by French-speaking Arabs.

What is that cause? In the first place, it is linguistic and cultural. In Algeria, where the French rightly saw the Berbers as superior to the Arabs — one French general wrote a book about the "Europeanness" of the Berbers — the Berbers were not discriminated against, but as soon as the French left, the forced arabisation of the Berbers started up at once, as if the French interregnum, with the wider possibilities that French education made possible to both Berbers and Arabs, had never existed. Older people in Algeria speak and use French; the younger ones are forgetting. And meanwhile, the Berbers were forbidden to use their own language, the Berber language, Tamazight, in their schools, in their institutions, and even, at times, they could be punished for using it among themselves, on the street. Berber culture was officially ignored.

About twenty years ago, news of agitation began to reach the outside world. There were riots in Tizi-Ouzou. Reported in France, but hardly anywhere else in the Western world. In America, of course, we had all been sufficiently subject to ARAMCO propaganda (performed as a "public service" by the big oil companies, as part of their propaganda payoff to the Saudis for allowing them to find, produce, and then pay exorbitantly for the oil that happens to lie under the malevolent sands of "Saudi" Arabia), to believe that there is something called "the Arab world" and in this "Arab world" there are no Copts, no Armenians, no Assyrians, no Chaldeans, no Turkmen, no Mandeans, no Maronites, and of course no Berbers, no Jews (no, there never were any Jews in North Africa or the Middle East — they all came to Israel, you see, from Europe), for everyone in the Arab world was an "Arab."

The discovery or re-discovery of a Berber identity (and how many of those North African "Arabs" should begin to realize that they are Berbers? There is, by the way, a genetic marker that, in studies by French geneticists in Tunisia, shows that Berbers and Arabs can be easily distinguished) is or could be an important weapon in unsettling the world of Islam, and perhaps causing the Maghreb to see itself, as it should not as "Arab" but as the victim of Arab imperialism.

For what is Islam if not a vehicle of Arab imperialism, and what are the Berbers, if not the victims of that Arab imperialism, an imperialism far more potent and long-lasting than the European kind, for it attempts to efface the historic identity of whole peoples?

And it makes perfect sense that Berbers in the Kabyle would, having felt along their pulses the Arab imperialism of which Islam is the vehicle, would be more open to the efforts of Christian missionaries, or more likely, are not so much responding to missionary activity, but to their own observations as to what Christianity is like, and what Islam has brought them.

In this respect, one should not underestimate the fact that Berbers now live in France, that they make up most of the membership of such groups as the "Maghrebins Laïques," and that they, not the Arabs whose ethnic identity is so found up with Islam, are capable, in some cases, not of identifying with the Arabs, but more closely with the French. And those Berbers communicate with Berbers at home, or through the Internet. And sometimes they return, to Algeria and Morocco, to see their families, and bring with them their own observations on the relative merits of the Islamic world, a world suffused with Islam, and the non-Islamic world, the one they have experienced in France.

The more the non-Arab Muslims of the world, and 80% of the world’s Muslims are not Arab, come to realize — and it would not be hard to help them to realize, for they will not be able to deny the facts, having experienced so much of it themselves — that Islam is a vehicle for that Arab supremacism, the more likely it is that at least some of them will fall away. And others, who may stick with a kind of "non-Arab" Islam (as if such were possible) will, in so doing, at least help to divide, and therefore to weaken, the Camp of Islam.

Ideally, one would wish this Total System, that has held so many hundreds of millions in thrall, and thwarted over so many centuries so much human potential (think of the art, think of the science, that might have resulted in the absence of the dead hand of Islam on so many people, prevented from so many forms of artistic expression, so many avenues for free and skeptical inquiry that are necessary for the enterprise of science, so much dull fanaticism, so much boredom, so much violence, in posse and in esse) will be seen, by Berbers, by Kurds, by people in the subcontinent (why should Muslims in India not "rediscover" their own history, their Hindu, or Buddhist, or other non-Muslim roots?), by those in Malaysia and the East Indies, with its rich pre-Islamic, Hindu and Buddhist past?

Meanwhile, start reading those Berber sites. And hope that the French state, instead of Sarkozy’s folly of "integrating" its Muslims by government-supported mosques, will try to work on the Berbers, work to make them see the light, work to help them to achieve their own destiny, one different from, and superior to, that of the Arabs whose method of domination comes from, is supplied by, Islam, Islam, Islam.

By Forkinsocket

Article taken from: New English Review, Friday, 18 January 2008

your comments:

Berbers, Islam & Christianity
4 July 2009, par Opine
Interesting article -
For recall - Berbers brought Christianity to Europe, and Europeans made North-Africa Arab. Peoples of north-africa may have seen in the Jihad a value, back in the 7th century, but correct the coran and took what’s of value, making fit within the local cultural. In places like Morroco, they translated it to Tamazight, pure and simple. The mixup came with Napoleon 3, who dreamed of his Ismic Kingdom, and though I haven’t read it anywhere, he was a Jihadist by all means who praised Islam. Islam or Arabs haven’t done anything to local peoples, it is their Neo-Republican governments who made it a point to islamize and arabize. It may be by necessity, or more perhaps by sponsorship, because the fact is, this is the case of Algeria: Those who ended-up stealing the liberation from France were somehow prisoners, in "costody", and in cahuts with the Baathists, the product of French and British Governments - i.e. The relays, for remote control. It is this dictators, with chanceleries in western capitals that commit the genocide. I am Kabyle, have lived outside Algeria most of my life, and no Arab has ever shocked me with the denial of my identity, as I state it. It is always, somebody else, "a westerner" who has long abandoned his own identity for food, who would insist. Go figure !
The snakes
answer this message

Berbers, Islam & Christianity
4 July 2009, by Tifirelest
Thanks Opine for your comment, here is a set of interresting comments, the questions here interesting and they denote that our history as Berbers is completely ignored by the world!
The Berber question in North Africa
answer this message

Berbers, Islam & Christianity
5 July 2009, by Opine
Interestingly enough, the group which composed this is the "JIHADWATCH" - Whoever that is - Jihad is the only thing of value in the Coran, but since, I believe that book is a misforged story, the jihad is what attrackted all arabs or moslims’ allied, such as the US and others in Afganistan in the 80s. Now, that said, one needs to explain to me WHY SOME FOLKS ESTABLISH DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS WITH A REGIME SUCH AS THE ONES IN North Africa, and encourage us to fight them - That’s all we do all the time. Clever, but not this time around ! These regimes FEED and GROW the Jihadist, and YOU FOLKS you FEED AND GROW these REGIMES !
As they say,
Deal with it !
answer this message

http://www.north-of-africa.com/article.php3?id_article=594

Muhammad’s Monsters: The War of Islam against Minorities in the Middle East and North Africa

2009-07-16T17:05:00.000-07:00

from north-of-africa.com

16 July 2009

The rapid and triumphal Islamization of the Middle East beginning in the seventh century, west to North Africa, north to the Caucasus, and east to China, is one of the most profound, permanent, and awesome conquests in history. This military and religious campaign welded a collective consciousness and consti¬tuted a political strategy whose primary concepts included: Muslim holy war (jihad), the Islamic territorial abode (dar al-Islam), and martyrdom (shuhada) on the one hand, juxtaposed to infidels (kuf¬far), tolerated non-Muslim scriptuaries (ahl al-dhimma), and the non-Islamic territorial abode of warfare (dar al-harb). The mission of Islam was spearheaded by the “sword of Muhammad” in order to impose Allah’s last revelation over all mankind and throughout the world. Among the various methods employed, in particular in the Middle East terrain but not only, were deportation, colo¬nization, conversion, repression, and at times massacre of native populations.1

The transformation of the broad Mideastern environment was a process of many centuries that culminated in the defacing and refashioning of many lands and peoples. Byzantine Asia Minor, Armenian Anatolia, and much of Kurdistan, became Muslim Turkey. The Sudan as the land of Kush, Nubia, and Black Africa assumed an Islamic and Arab face. Lebanon’s Pheonician and Christian heritage has been swamped by Islam and Arabism. Mesopotamia, Assyria, and part of Kurdistan were in the grip of Arab-Muslim Iraq. The pre-Islamic Berber/Imazighen/Kabyle character of North Africa struggles in the face of integralist and violent Islam. And Israel, reverberating with the Hebrew-Jewish legacy in the Holy Land, confronts the Islamic contention that Palestine is a sacred waqf domain belonging to the Muslims alone.

While the debate continues regarding the actual historical treatment meted out by Muslims to non-Muslims, Jews and Christians in particular,2 the spirit of our times in the late 20th and early 21st century is dominated overwhelmingly by Islamic fundamentalism linked to a comprehensive Muslim assault for glory and power. The names of Ayatollah Khoumeni (Iran), Osama bin-Laden (Afghanistan), Sheikh Hasan Nasrallah (Lebanon), and Hasan Turabi (Sudan), are some from among the heroic revolutionaries in the Muslim pantheon of iconic figures. Resonating into the boroughs of London, the arrondissements of Paris, and the neighborhoods of Jersey City, Detroit, and Chicago, Islamic movements and mes sages carve out their territory of influence in the quest for ultimate domination within the public domain of discourse and politics.

This is so in the remaining bastions of the (so-called) Christian West and with every greater immediacy and fury within and a bit beyond the Middle East. In May 1998, Libyan leader Muammar Qadhdafi declared that Jews and Christians hate Muslims and insult Muhammad, the prophet of Islam. In the light of this charge, and that by Saddam Hussein of Iraq that Israel defiles Muslim and Christian sanctuaries, the Islamic world is expected to take the road of jihad in order to achieve peace and justice in the world.3 The mujahid bin-Laden, evoking the slogan of the “Great Islamic Republic” throughout the Middle East, repeated the militant refrain in Peshawar in September 2000, calling for war against Jews in Palestine and Christian Americans in Saudi Arabia.4 A year later, the September 11, 2001, Islamic terror attacks in the United States brought home the seriousness and immediacy of bin-Laden’s intentions. His al-Qaidah movement had struck ruthlessly at the political and economic centers of American power.

Meanwhile, attacks in the Far East against Christians and churches in Indonesia, and in Nigeria and the Ivory Coast in Africa, in the year 2000 signaled the scope of the Islamic offensive. The Pakistani “Army of the Righteous” stated the need for jihad against non-Muslims, especially Jews and Hindus, while the march of Allah’s soldiers continued in Bosnia and Kossovo, Chechnya and Kashmir, Palestine and Lebanon.

Of special importance in this regard is the Christian character of Lebanon and the Jewish ethos of Israel as primary targets of Islam’s war against the traditional infidel communities. In 1980, at an Islamic Summit Conference in the Pakistani city of Lahore, the goal was set to have the Middle East totally Islamic with the elimination of the Christians of the Orient and the Jews of Israel. This imperialistic if not genocidal intention appears high on the Muslim agenda until today, considering the pace and direction of events in both occupied Lebanon and intifada-infested Israel.

In an interesting development, the Tibetan Dali Lama condemned both Christians and Muslims in January 2001 for their practice of actively seeking converts. The non-aggressive religions of Hinduism and Buddhism apparently fear for their future. But it is evidently clear that the truly aggressive religion in this era is not Christianity, but rather putative and militant Islam with its explicit agenda of expansion worldwide.

Islam in its formative historical stage surfaced as a conquering and colonizing religious movement that arrogated public space and political power for itself alone. This serves as a model for reproduction in any future era thereafter, subject to the exigencies of power opportunities that are available to the Muslims. There are no fixed frontiers to delimit the scope of the future expansive drive, nor are there any moral or juridical restrictions in pursuing the war. Rather, the exaltation of battle by whatever means is designed to vindicate Islam’s global primacy. The horrors of victory, perhaps for the victors and the vanquished alike, are tangential to the satisfaction of exacting tribute and earning respect from the cringing adversaries of Islam. In this scenario, the minorities in the Middle East are fated, as capitalists for Marx, to disappear in the dustbin of history.

1. Dhimmis:

(a) Jews

Islam in its koranic and traditional self-consciousness considered the monotheistic religious communities of Jews and Christians worthy of no more than a “protected and tolerated” status under Muslim rule. However, with the modern political founding of a Jewish State of Israel and a predominantly Christian state of Lebanon, the normative hierarchy of power was overturned when the inferior, subjugated dhimmi minorities arrogated the right to govern themselves, and even to dominate Muslims as less-than-equal citizens in both Israel and Lebanon. An uncompromising Muslim response was deemed necessary, and certainly legitimate, to re-establish the primacy of Islam in these two Mideastern countries.

Both Pan-Arab nationalism and local Palestinian nationalism had rejected the Zionist claim to Jewish statehood in 1948 and developed a variety of political and military approaches to undermine and unravel Israel’s existence. Islam, though active in the pre-1948 struggle, emerged more recently as an alternative and yet complementary Palestinian framework of belief and dedication, mobilization and warfare, against the rebellious al-yahud of irremediable and obstreperous character. Though a majority in their land and state, the Jews of Israel would be reduced to their minority status in order to re-confirm Muslim primacy.

There were different ways by which the integrity of Jewish identity and the security of Jewish life were disparaged and denied in the past. Jews in Arab lands were considered at times no more than “Arab Jews” in a sweeping assimilative embrace. Living within the parameters of Islamic civilization seemed emblematic of Jews being virtual “Muslim Jews.” But the stridency of the modern Palestinian Muslim movements, with their doctrinal rejection of Israel and their violent mode of armed struggle, sharpened the active war of Islam against the Jewish people.

Modern Zionism, as the national liberation movement of the Jewish people, is defamed in the Muslim world as a colonial aggression and invasion that must be repelled by the defensive jihad of Islam.5 According to the Palestinian Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) in Article 13 of its covenant, any concession of the land of Palestine is a concession of the religion of Islam. This linkage of politics and religion is a central theme in classical Islam culled for active application. When the liberation of Palestine is achieved through jihad, the rule of Allah will descend and shape the moral and religious life of the Muslims, as the alien Jews will be defeated. Sheikh Ahmad Yasin of Hamas had stated in 1989 that “the solution [to the conflict] is a Palestinian Islamic state on all of Palestine where Arabs, Jews, and Christians will live under Islamic rule.”6 This recalls the model of the dhimma (the apocryphal/historical Muslim pact with infidels) that dogmatically denies equality, dignity, or independence to non-Muslim minorities.

The outburst of Intifada al-Aqsa in September 2000 revealed the surging energy of Palestinian Muslims to confront Israel in a spirit of sacrifice and devotion, with hundreds dead and many more hundreds wounded in the fi rst few months thereafter. Jerusalem, as the third holiest city in Islam, was the political target in this new phase of warfare. The Aqsa mosque situated on the Jewish Temple Mount (Har Ha-bayit), known by the Muslims as Haram al-Sharif, evoked a koranic image and the legend of Muhammad’s nocturnal visit to the Holy City. Sheikh Ikrima Sabri, Arafat-appointed mufti of Jerusalem and Palestine, called for “sacrifice until Allah’s victory” and considered the Jews as cowards. To liberate al-Aqsa at the cost of child martyrs is an honor to the parents of the shuhud.7

The Islamic ethos of warfare throughout Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, and even within pre-1967 Israeli borders as well, merged from within with the national Palestinian ethos of “armed struggle” (PLO Covenant, Art. 9). It also converged from without with the religious furor emanating from the Islamic Republic of Iran and its promotion of terrorism globally, the virulent Islamic hostility in Egypt to Israel, and Hizbullah’s Shi`ite victory against the Israeli army in south Lebanon, from which the IDF withdrew in late May 2000. In December of that year at a “Jerusalem Day” celebration in solidarity with the Palestinian intifada, Hizbullah’s Secretary-General Hasan Nasrallah referred to Israel as “a cancer that needs to be removed at its roots.”8 The intense conviction of religious truth that fills Muslim hearts and minds bolsters the Islamic and Palestinian ambition of politicide against Jewish Israel. The Jews who survived as a pseudo-tolerated minority have no right to assert themselves as a sovereign majority people.

For its part, Yasser Arafat’s Palestinian Authority established in the context of the Oslo Accord from 1993 continues its animosity and rejection of Israel in the traditional Islamic idiom. The school texts used in the educational system in Palestinian-controlled areas, as in the towns of Ramallah, Kalkilya, and Hebron, portray Jews as “the enemies of the prophets and the believers,” morally stained by “fanaticism” and “treachery,” and committed to “racial discrimination.” The Western Wall is not a Jewish site, but part of the Haram precinct, and the land of Palestine belongs to the Muslims and their brother Christians [sic.].9 The formal and written PLO commitment to peace with Israel was not followed by the promotion of a message of accommodation, respect, and co-existence. Israel, demonized as the predator and pariah from the past, remained castigated as the Palestinians’ enemy even after the peace process was launched in Washington. War against the Jews characterized, as before, the new era of peace.

(b) Christians

The “religious and ethnic cleansing” by Islam of what once was the Christian Orient, or largely the Byzantine Orthodox Middle East, is but a euphemism for cultural and human genocide and the willful decimation of primordial native peoples. Once the majority population, Christians in the beginning of the 21st century constitute just three percent of the region’s inhabitants, numbering approximately 15 million, facing more than 350 million Muslims in Turkey, Iran, and all the Arab countries. The religious and historical cradle of Christianity has long become the Muslim-Arab heartland, and even symbolic Bethlehem and Nazareth, which long retained Christian majorities, have succumbed to Muslim majority domination. The basic trend among Eastern Christians in the 20th-century was immigration to the West. This population movement was stimulated by endemic physical insecurity, indiscriminate plunder, religious persecution, and political discrimination directed against virtually all the Christian communities across the region. In fact, the same forces of exclusion and oppression operate in the beginning of our 21st century as well.

• The Armenian genocide of 1915-16 by the Turks, which led to the death of a million and a half people, merits primary mention due to the scope of this horrific crime against humanity. The ancient Armenian people had be come a small and vulnerable minority in its homeland. The historical nexus of circumstances and incompatibilities gave birth to a policy of deportation with instances of fanatical Muslim mobs crying “Allahu Akbar” (God is great), as they burned and butchered the defenseless Christians in the cities of Ayntab and Birecik.10 Turkish nationalism and Islamic passion turned on the Armenians with a satanic ferociousness.

• The massacre at Simel in Iraq of some 600 Assyrian Christians - though Assyrian sources claim close to 3,000 were murdered in the immediate vicinity - in early August 1933 marked the denouement in the history of an ancient Eastern community. Claiming independence in the area of the Lower Zab and Nineveh area but promised only minority guarantees after World War I, the Assyrians were abandoned by the British to the new Iraqi regime, Sunni by religion and Arab by national consciousness.

Meanwhile, in the area of Tur Abdin in southeastern Turkey in the 1990s, Muslim fundamentalists under the name Hizbullah spread their net of terror, seized Christian villages, forced women to wear the veil, and murdered priests. Abouna Symeon, a monk, related that the Muslims say, “We should go back to Europe where Christians come from . . . as if our ancestors weren’t here for centuries before the first Muslim settled here.”11 More recently, an Assyrian Suryani priest, Yusuf Akbulut, in Diyarbekir, was put on trial for calling on Turkey to recognize the Ottoman murder of the Armenians during World War I, and charging also that the Turks had used the Kurds to kill Christians.

Hiding the truth of the past has served in conjunction with destroying any future hope for the ancient Christian communities of the Fertile Crescent, across Armenia, Assyria, and Kurdistan, in the mountains of Hakkiari and Urmia, in the valley of Sapna and the village of Amadiya. Assyrian refugees in London prefer to refer to their lost homeland as “Mesopotamia,” recalling the Assyrian Kingdom from 612 B.C.E., rather than call it Iraq with its Arab Muslim significance under the ruthless Baathist regime of Saddam Hussein.12

Under the mournful circumstances, the dream of a national revival and return can filter but in the recesses of Assyrian imagination while divorced from the political realities of the contemporary Middle East.

The Maronites of Lebanon, with a profound historical religious and national presence in the mountain stronghold of Bsharre and Zghorta, Jubail and Kesrouan, have been confronted by the resurgence of militant Islam in recent decades. Faced with Palestinian terrorists and Syrian occupiers, Lebanon’s Christians also struggled with Iranian-supported Shi`ite movements that, in particular Hizbullah, seek to establish an Islamic Republic. Sheikh Fadallah and other religious authorities consider the Khoumeini revolution in Iran a precedent, certainly an inspiration, for their spiritual and political aspirations in the “land of the cedars.”

The outbreak of Lebanese-Palestinian warfare in April 1975 began, appropriately enough in this Islamic zeitgeist, with PLO shooting at a church ceremony in the East Beirut Christian neigh borhood of Ayn Rummanah, killing four Maronites. Palestinian massacres of Christians followed in 1976 in Damour, exhibiting gang-rapes and mutilated bodies, and in Ayshiyyah, exhibiting burnt bodies in the church. The fighting and slaughter continued, and hundreds of thousands of Christians fled the country. Beginning in the 1980s, Hizbullah conducted warfare against native Christians and the Israeli military presence in south Lebanon. When Sheikh Nasrallah’s own son was killed in battle in 1997, he expressed his paternal sadness but added that according to Islam, true life begins in Paradise with the martyr’s death.13 Meanwhile, in the northern city of Tripoli, where the Islamic Unity movement (Tawhid) is active, the 90 percent Sunni majority harassed the Christian shopkeepers and pasted pictures of Muslim leaders on public walls.

Lebanon, constituted after World War I as a primarily Christian state, symbolized the strengths and hopes of Christians through out the region. But the downfall of Lebanon in recent decades is a sobering indication of the advance of Islamic power and Arab influence. Noteworthy in its irony, in addition, is the fact that both small Israel and Lebanon, as the two Western-oriented democratic countries in the region, and representing the Judaic and Christian civilizations in the ancient Orient, have been victimized by the forces of a ferocious brand of Islam. A popular Arab-Muslim refrain regarding the mournful fate of the Jews and the Christians threatens “first the Saturday people and then the Sunday people” targeted by Islam stalking its prey.

Egypt is the home of the largest single Eastern Christian community, overwhelmingly, of the Orthodox Copt church, that is estimated at over five million within a total population of ap proximately 70 million people. The spirit of Arab nationalism and Islamic revivalism have contributed manifestly to shaping the public domain as culturally inhospitable, discriminating in employment and political office-holding, restrictive in religious privileges and practice, and threatening the physical security of Christians.

Egypt has a deep Islamic identity, not only an overwhelming Muslim majority population, in a period of intense popular religious consciousness. The Muslim Brotherhood represents the sweep of Egypt’s national Islamic identity, and other militant and violent groups actively engage in escalating the tone in Islamic discourse. The constitutional amendment which in 1980 recognized that “the Islamic shari`ah [law] is the principal source of legislation,” and the assassination of President Sadat as a “heretic” by the jihad organization, were each in their own way acts that demonstrated Islam grabbing the political high ground in Egyptian society. The Christians, by implication, felt the increasingly suffocating and intimidating atmosphere.

The Copts of Egypt have requested that the state authorities grant them human and minority rights. But Copts have for many years been excluded from high political, administrative, and military posts. They have called for media broadcasting whose message would recognize their legitimate place in Egyptian life; but instead, public figures call for imposing the traditional jizya poll-tax on Christians, while Sheikh Omar Abd-el Rahman, of the 1993 Twin Towers bombing notoriety, reportedly issued fatawat to kill the Christians of Egypt.

The language of political oppression and linguistic doublespeak employed in Egypt, and then internationally, identifies Muslim assaults against Christians as mere “sectarian tension” (fitna ta`ifiyya) in a way intended to hide the identity of the aggressor and the victim.14

The starkest instance of recent years was the pogrom against the Copts in Kosheh and neighboring communities in Upper Egypt in late December 1999-early January 2000. What began as an argument between a Christian fabric merchant and a Muslim customer ended with the killing of 22 Copts. Chillingly reminiscent from other times and peoples was a rumor instigating the violence to the effect that Christians had poisoned the wells. In March it was reported that the Kosheh killers had been acquitted in court.15 Traditional Islamic legalism frowns upon convicting a Muslim who injured or even murdered a dhimmi.

The condition of the Copts is deteriorating in all domains of Egyptian society. Other examples include attacks against churches, as at Kaser Rashwan in El-Fayoum province in August 2000, im position of Friday and not Sunday as the day off from school as in the Christian village of El-Biadieah in March that year, forced conversions of Christians to Islam, and political intimidation of Christian figures like the patriarch of the Coptic Catholic Church to publicly support the Mubarak regime.

The Sudan in Black Africa, and its southern zone in particular, is the focus of another case in the war of Islam against Christianity in these troubled times. Since 1955, a civil war between the Arab-Muslim north and the African-Christian/animist south has left two million dead and hundreds of thousands of refugees in neighboring countries. In addition, more than three million Sudanese, overwhelmingly in the south, were at risk in the year 2000 from famine and drought. It was the proclamation of Islamic law in 1983 by General Numeiri, and the doctrinaire role of the National Islamic Front led by Hasan Turabi thereafter, that signaled the intensification of the life-and-death struggle for freedom and identity for the southerners. Headed by American-educated John Garang from the large Dinka tribe, the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement and its military SPLA wing, then renewed the guerrilla war against the Khartoum regime, in the hands of Gen. Omar Hassan Al-Bashir since seizing power in 1989. The long war is largely forgotten by the world.

A complex web of cultural, religious, and economic issues sheds light on the longevity and horror of the suffering and struggle. The historical 19th-century slave trade in southern Sudan, conducted by unrepentant Arab traders/missionaries,16 continues in the throes of present-day warfare with the government’s purpose to break the popular back of the southern rebellion and convert the captives to Islam. Abducted boys, uprooted from their native environment, are brought north to Khartoum and forced to become Muslims, while some are sent back to the south for missionary or military purposes.17 The war in the south down to Equatorial province and Juba, the local capital, is unrelenting, with the Sudanese Army and its Muslim militias unwilling to tolerate an end other than the complete domination of the southerners, if not their physical - certainly cultural and religious - annihilation. We note that prior to the British withdrawal from Sudan in 1955-56 the south officially spoke English (not Arabic), had Sunday and not Friday as the day of rest, and freedom for Christianity was the dominant motif of the educational and religious milieu. But the independence of Sudan in 1956 signified the enslavement of the south.

The discovery of oil in the southern area of Bentiu complicated and exacerbated the north-south conflict, for it girded the military loins of Khartoum to preserve control over the region. Yet the SPLA, joined with Nubian and other opposition forces within the National Democratic Alliance, pursues the struggle in the area of Kassala in the east in an attempt to cut off Khartoum from its hinterland and then force a political settlement acceptable to southern aspirations and interests. Meanwhile, the program of Islamization and Arabization remains at the core of the Sudan government’s strategy, a policy of ethnic cleansing as Arab tribesmen push African inhabitants further south, especially away from the oil site of Bentiu. International oil interests and large numbers of Chinese security personnel stationed in support of the Khartoum regime bode ill for the southern struggle.

The vision of a new Sudan, as proposed by John Garang, is an idyllic image of a pluralistic country that recognizes autonomy for the south, freedom of religion for non-Muslims, and national unity for the country as a whole.18 But when land falls under dar al-Islam and is sanctified for Muslim rule, it is inconceivable that it would be voluntarily relinquished in a magnanimous act for conflict-resolution. Moreover, it is an Islamic imperative to expand into lands not yet populated by Muslims and transform them through mosque construction, religious conversion, and dhimmi subjugation. This is indeed the historical script and political prescription concerning the events transpiring in the Sudan during many decades of continued warfare.

2. Heterodox/Heretical Non-Muslims

(a) Alawites/Nusairis

According to legend, a Shi`ite from southern Iraq called Ibn-Nusair fashioned a radical interpretation of Islam’s origins and dogmas in the tenth century in a way that launched a new sect. His doctrine concerning the deification of `Ali, Muhammad’s cousin and son-in-law in Mecca, on the one hand, and the existence of a trinity of celestial powers on the other, stood in absolute contra diction to orthodox Islamic belief.19 There arose, therefore, a new community of faith with highly syncretic features of Christian and pagan and perhaps Persian vintage, worshiping nature, promoting mixed dancing with unveiled women, as a schismatic Shi`ite sect set free from its presumably initial Islamic moorings. There were never mosques in the Nusairi mountain enclave in northwestern Syria, no sign of prayer, and no pilgrimage to Mecca.

This minority had apparently turned into an apostate community from Islam, and that act of heresy was met by hostility and rejection by the religious and political authorities in the Muslim East. A fatwah by Ibn-Taimiyya in the 14th-century considered the Nusairis an aberration and forbade to bury them in Muslim cemeteries or to eat meat from their slaughtered animals. In his view, the Nusairis were more infidel than Jews and Christians.20 Efforts by the Mamluks and the Ottomans to have them accept Islam failed.

In the 20th century, the Nusairis, now commonly known as Alawites, sought recognition for their separate identity within their own regional autonomous zone in Syria; and yet alternatively, depending on the political situation, they wanted acceptance from knowledged Alawites as Muslims and later in the early 1970s, under far different political circumstances, Imam Musa Sadr in Lebanon declared that the sect is part of the Shi`a branch of Islam. This religious maneuver remained, we may assume, farcical in the eyes of the large Muslim Sunni population in Syria where Hafi z al-Asad, a son of the Alawites from the mountain village of Qardaha, ruled with an iron fist. The Muslims considered Asad’s Baathist regime an atheistic anathema in the hands of a heretical minority dictatorship that represented only 12 percent of the Syrian population.

Events in Syria, like the massacre of 20,000 people in the stir of Muslim Brotherhood rebelliousness in Hama in 1982, illustrated the incongruity of Alawi rule over a society suffused with Islamic faith and Arab nationalist fervor. The fact that Asad, prior to his death in June 2000, was successful in transferring power to his son Beshar does not assure the long-term ability of the Alawite sect to impose its domination over the Muslims of Syria. Th e day of reckoning may come when Islam, as in its imperial past, recovers Damascus and the country from its apostate rulers from the mountain.

(a) Druzes

The appearance of the Druze sect in early 11th-century Egypt was a manifestation of a Shi`ite-Fatimid/Isma`ili faith and regime that elevated the caliphal fi gure of Al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah to divine status. This fundamental distortion of orthodox Sunni Islam led to the persecution (mihna) of the new community, which then set its sights on acquiring a safe haven in the southern mountainous area of Lebanon, in Jabal `Amil and Wadi al-Taym. Th e new Druze religion departed from Islam, though at times the adherents pretended to be regular Muslims (taqiyah), but actually divorced themselves from Koran and shari`ah law. Religion had given birth to this new com munity, leaving the Druzes hardly more than allegorical Muslims, with monotheistic faith but without the doctrinal and behavioral paraphernalia of Islam.21 The Bani Ma`aruf, as they call themselves, consider their particular monotheism within an existing mono theistic Middle East to be a special brand, as a philosophical and syncretic quality fills the Druze spiritual universe with a fragrance of depth, eclecticism, and unadulterated purity.

The history of the Druzes is one of an introverted, secret sect surrounded, and sometimes endangered, by the Sunni Muslim majority in Lebanon, Syria, and beyond. Their religious leaders (Uqqal) preserved the collective integrity of this small minority group and, with lay military chieftains, always fought attempts, as in the effort by the Ottoman Turks at the turn of the 20th century, to impose Islam upon the Druzes in the southern Syrian Hawran region. At a minimum, the Druzes were put under Muslim religious authorities even though they claimed that they are independent of the shari`ah.

After Israel’s establishment, the Druze minority in the Carmel and Galilee areas was allowed to administer their own communal courts, no longer subordinated to Islamic law. This development was a result of the Jewish-Druze relationship which had begun in the 1930s, and reflected traditional Druze anxiety with Sunni Muslims, in this case the Palestinian Arabs. The Druze ended up agreeing to full conscription into the Israeli army. In the background of this fascinating military brotherhood between two small Mideastern peoples is the symbiosis in the biblical tale of Moses and Jethro his father-in-law, whom the Druze claim as their spiritual ancestor.

(a) Alevis

This highly mysterious group, which may number as much as ten or more million people in Turkey, seems to be an off shoot of Shi`ism but with an extreme emphasis on the divinity of “Ali.” De void of basic Islamic practices, like fasting in the month of Ramadan or mosque attendance, the Alevis reject shari`ah law and assume the proprietorship of an esoteric religious tradition, which may have absorbed Christian and pagan ideas. They also do not intermarry with Sunnis in Turkey.

When Muslim fundamentalism surfaced powerfully in Turkish society and politics, the Alevis cautiously maintained a low public profile. At the end of the 1990s, however, and though generally considered of non-Turkish ethnic identity, they adopted a more visible presence in Turkish cities and towns, erecting houses of worship known as cemevi, as in Ankara the capital.22 They may consider that the constitutional character of Turkey as a secular republic will always buttress them while containing the challenge of Islam as a rival political doctrine. This will then allow the wayward Alevis the opportunity to feel free to declare their religious identity without inviting any menacing Islamic response.

3. Non-Arab Muslims

(a) Kurds

The imperial rule of Islam dominated Kurdistan and its millennial-old native Kurds in the days of the Abbasid caliphate, the Ottoman sultanate, and the Safavid dynasty, and so, too, under their successor states - Iraq, Turkey, and Iran - in later and contemporary periods of Middle Eastern history. In the heights of their rugged mountain hearth the Kurds, subjugated by the Arab conquest, accepted Sunni Islam but in a way that their core collective identity remained rooted in their particular cultural, ecological, and ethnic way of life. Religious and national identity are often fused, as for Eastern Orthodoxy and Russian identity, or Catholicism and Irish nationality. In the Middle East, Arab nationalism has a Sunni Islamic hue, as if to be an Arab is to be a Muslim, or to be an Iranian is to be a Shi`ite.23 What then of Muslim Kurds?

The consequences of this linkage between nationality and religion are for certain minorities, like Muslim Kurds, harsh and fatal. Such a minority is, at one and the same time, denied any independent or honorable national significance while subordinated to the overarching religious community of which it is a member but that is dominated by another people. In the words of Firat, a Kurd, in a private communication from January 2001:

“Islam is actually the main reason that the Kurds can not unite [because they are nominal Muslims with other non-Kurd Muslims under the common faith of Islam], and one of the main reasons that Kurds do not have a country of their own [as they are subjected, as in Iraq and Syria, to the pan-Arab political framework].”

Kurds were traditionally not considered mainstream, observant, and loyal Muslims by dominant Muslims like the Arabs. First, we have the exceptional case of the Yezidis in the valley of Lalish north of Mosul, with their pre-Islamic faith or apostasy from Islam, worshiping the peacock angel Melek Tawus, who as recently as the 1990s feared the construction of a mosque in Dohuk, northern Iraq, as a sign of impending religious persecution.24 Secondly, saint worship and holy shrines were more predominant than shari`ah conformity and mosque attendance for the Ahl-e Haqq Kurdish adherents, as in Kermanshah in western Iran. Thirdly, Sufi mystical orders, like the Qadiri and Naqshbandi, muted formal Islamic commitment in favor of spiritual and moral exercises. Fourthly, popular Kurdish culture, it seems, only tangentially conformed to Islamic norms and probably more often diverged from them, as eccentrically engaging in mixed bathing.25

In the 20th century, the Kurds demanded and fought in vain in their pursuit of statehood as an expression of the surge of ethno nationalism in their ranks. Conducting minority insurgency with great tenacity over many decades in Turkey, Iran, and Iraq produced, however, no political gain. With a fundamental denial of the very existence of the coherent ethnic-linguistic community of over ten million Kurds in the country, Turkey practiced a harsh policy of cultural repression and physical deportation. The indictment and imprisonment of sociologist Ismail Besikci became the cause célèbre in the struggle for Kurdish recognition in the 1980s. In Iraq, three million Kurds fought a guerrilla war under the charge of Mustafa Barzani, but the campaign collapsed in 1975. The variety of Kurdish parties/militias - KDP, PUK, PKK - continued armed struggle across the Kurdistan homeland, but division within and brutal re pression without left the Kurds subjugated to the repressive states under which they live. In 1988, Saddam Hussein’s forces unleashed the Anfal campaign to destroy his non-Arab Kurdish compatriots The gassing of 5,000 villagers in Halabja became the symbol of Iraq’s “final solution” policy against the Kurds. In 1992, in the aftermath of the Gulf War and the liberation of Kuwait from Iraq’s clutches, the Kurds were able to establish a regional administration, but not more than that, with its capital in Arbil.

(b) Amazighen - Berbers/Kabyle

The struggle of the native Imazighen (especially Berbers in Morocco and Kabyles in Algeria) against the Arab-Muslim invasion of North Africa from the seventh and eighth centuries continued with out interruption into the period of the contemporary state-system. Based on an ancient oral language (Tamazight) rooted in the historical geography of Kabylia, the Rif, and Atlas mountains in particular, preserving an indigenous culture of ethnic fidelity and customary law, this minority of 15 million people persists, some times rebels, but lacks independence and statehood. These Berber communities adopted Sunni Islam early on, but their commitment to the faith was traditionally considered weaker than love of their Berber hearth and their tenacity in maintaining Berber identity at all costs. They apparently lent money at interest, despite the Islamic prohibition, and considered saints rather than learned ulema the venue for sanctity and blessing.26

The Algerian war for independence from French colonial ism (1954-62) found Kabylians, like Belkacem Krim, Ramdane Abane, and Hocine Ait-Ahmed, in the forefront of the armed FLN struggle. They dedicated their energies for a free Algeria that would accommodate the Berber minority, its language and culture, as a respectable component of the country’s national profile. Instead, Algeria with a certain jacobin centralized apparatus was soon defined as an “Arab-Muslim” entity that conjured up an old-new cultural-linguistic colonialism. Furthermore, the connection between language and sanctity regarding the dominant role of Arabic as the state language marginalized the Berber tongue as a parochial folk fossil. It was virtually impossible to speak Berber in the Algerian public domain, though approximately eight to nine million speak it in their homes.

It was this repressive situation that led Mouloud Mammeri in the 1970s to initiate his struggle for legitimizing the Berber language and poetry as expressions of a revived culture. So, too, the courageous efforts of Lounes Matoub, who never felt Arabic to be his own language, to speak and sing in his native though stigmatized Berber dialect as an act of resistance. But Matoub, aged 42, was murdered in June 1998, perhaps by state security forces, perhaps by Islamic terrorists, with the civil war in Algeria raging since 1992, and targeting any and everyone.27 Known for his anti-Islamist sentiments and proud Kabyle identity, Matoub once recalled how it was intimidating to utter a word in the Berber language on a bus in Algiers. He made an effort not to learn Arabic, and at his funeral the mourners chanted, “We are not Arabs!”

The Berber minority has been defiant in the face of violence and repression, demanding “democracy and culture” in a pluralistic ethnic Algeria. The people of Kabylia demonstrated in late April 2001 to commemorate the “Berber Spring” from 1980 in a proud act of ethnic self-affirmation. But in confrontations with the Algerian security forces, 126 unarmed youth were killed. The Berbers face both Islamic and state terror with terrible human losses.

In Morocco, where the Berbers traditionally enjoyed liberty in the rural Bled es-Siba areas, the war against French rule in the 1950s arose within a context of national and Islamic unity of the entire population. Yet independence meant the Arabization of Morocco in rejection of the French and Berber languages - even though the Berber proportion of the total population is estimated as high as 40 percent. The Alawite monarchy served as a unifying Arab-Islamic institution, and assumes this political pretension for the new king Muhammad VI, since his ascension to the throne in 1999. Inasmuch as the dynasty claims descent from Muhammad the prophet of Islam, and the king identifies himself in the classical caliphal role as “commander of the faithful” (Amir al-Mu`minin), he is a unifying point of reference for all Muslims, Arabs, and Berbers alike.

The implication of these aspects in contemporary Moroccan society and politics is the diminution of the Berbers’ status and their language in national life. Amazigh families in the south of Morocco have been displaced with Arabs, and Amazigh place-names have been purged and replaced with Arab ones. Only Arabic is an official language and it is even prohibited for Imazighen to record traditional names in birth registers. It is reported that many younger Berbers are not able to speak any one of their three Tamazight dialects which yet constitute one language, and that moreover the language is a handicap in the economic realm for which spoken Arabic is required.28

4. Power and Rights

The treatment of minorities in Middle Eastern Muslim countries is part of a comprehensive strategy of exclusion, homogenization, and repression in the public and political arenas. Traditionally autocratic authoritarian regimes, from Algeria to Iran, engage in policies that deny or restrict human rights for all persons and peoples. The regime rather than an active citizenry stands at the center of politics. It is often, though not always, the case that Islamic law or Muslim norms serve as a legitimizing pillar in the imposition of a single code of behavior that buttresses the regime.

In Saudi Arabia, where Islamic punishments (hudud) are applied, seven Nigerians charged with bank robbery in May 2000 were summarily beheaded.29 In Sudan, whose penal code is inspired by shari`ah law, 19 men had limbs amputated for the same crime of bank robbery in late January 2001.30 In the same period, the Palestinian Authority under Yasser Arafat executed two Palestinians (one in front of a large cheering crowd in Nablus) who were accused of collaboration with Israeli secret services. Beyond the aspect of judicial arbitrariness in the procedures preceding the sentencing, it is suspected that such punishments are the result of inner clan rivalries among the Palestinians and not necessarily the product of a commitment to Palestinian national solidarity.

In the domain of thought and culture, free-thinkers and public critics have been victims of government repression that reflects Islamic concerns. In the year 2000, Egyptian authorities arrested well known human rights activist and scholar Saad al-Din al-Ibrahim on charges of fomenting divisions and tensions in the country due to his promotion of civil and minority, that is, Coptic, rights. He was later sentenced to a prison term. Author Salaheddin Mohsen, also of Egypt, was also sentenced to three years in prison in January 2001 because his writings were deemed offensive to Islam. These examples illustrate that Islam represents intellectual and political rectitude even though the government, headed by President Husni Mubarak, itself represses Islamic movements who use violence to achieve their objectives. Official Egypt, like monarchical Jordan, accommodates Islam, while at the same time containing its anti regime animus.

While Islam is a powerful force of repression within Arab countries, it is also a catalyst for expansion and a virtual assault on the West beyond the Middle East. The decay of Christianity as a political civilizational entity, along with its porous democratic ethos, exposes Western countries to Islamic penetration in Europe and North America.31 September 11 as a seminal rupture in the consciousness of the United States looms large in this regard. This is of a piece with the vulnerability and weakness of Christian com munities in the Muslim world. In the 19th century and even earlier, Russia, France, and Britain took an active interest in the safety and welfare of Oriental Christians; in the 20th century, national self determination and decolonization served to liberate the Arabs and Muslims, but block the road for Christian minority freedom. The independence of Iraq and Egypt, among other countries, placed Arabs above non-Arabs, and Muslims above non-Muslims.

The halcyon days of European concern for Christians and even military intervention on their behalf, as with the French military expedition to Lebanon in 1861, vanished from the arena of practical politics. When the United States intervened in the Persian Gulf in 1990-1991 on behalf of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, it demonstrated its global and regional strategic priorities; and when it accommodated Syrian occupation of Beirut and almost all of Lebanon in the same years, it obtusely abandoned Christians (and others) to a foreign and oppressive regime. Nonetheless, it is worth mentioning the initiative of the American Congress in the 1990s to express concern for enfeebled Christians in the Middle East, and for Lebanon in particular, in declaratory and legislative decisions.

International organizations, particularly the United Nations and its agencies, have lacked the requisite determination and resources to assure the rights of minorities in the Middle East. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights from 1948 made no reference to “minority rights,” while the right to “self-determination” itself is judged inferior to the right of a state to maintain its national and territorial integrity. The rights of indigenous peoples have been recognized, but no country is agreeable to the notion that such peoples should enjoy the option of secession against the right of the state to assert its complete sovereign prerogatives over its entire territory. The Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, in Article 27, does acknowledge the right of minorities “to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practice their own religion, or to use their own language.”32 Yet a centralized political regime, anxious about the majority-minority rift within the country, will not agree to grant extensive rights to a dissident group which might thereafter threaten the survival of the country. Nor are some states even willing to recognize the minority’s separate existence: Turkey traditionally called the Kurds “mountain Turks,” while Egypt mockingly considers Copts a natural part of the Egyptian people and therefore unworthy of special rights or considerations. The goal of freedom and dignity for all old Middle Eastern peoples is a noble vision. The most reasonable solution, however, may be one in which the state refrains from interference in the life of the minority so long as it recognizes the right of the state to its sovereign existence.33 In the religious and political milieu of the Muslim and Arab Middle East, more than this - and even this - seems hardly feasible in the days ahead.

By Mordechai Nisan

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Endnotes

1 On the status of non-Muslims in the eyes of Islam, see Yohanan Friedmann, “Classifi cation of Unbelievers in Sunni Muslim Law and Tradition,” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam, Vol. 22 (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, Th e Hebrew University 1998), p. 163-195. For a general historical overview, see Bat Ye’or, Th e Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam: From Jihad to Dhimmitude (London: Associated University Presses, 1996). 2 A recent contribution to this historical debate appears in M.A. Muhibbu- Din, “Ahl al-Kitab and Religious Minorities in the Islamic State: Historical Context and Contemporary Challenges,” Journal of Muslim Minority Aff airs, Vol. 20, No. 1 (2000): p. 111-127. 3 Th e Associated Press, May 1, 1998, quoted in Middle East Quarterly, Vol. VII, No. 4 (December 2000): p. 85; and Jerusalem Post, December 25, 2000. 4 Pakistan Observer, September 2, 2000; and a report from Th e Copts: Christians of Egypt, Vol. 17, Nos. 1 & 2 (January 1990): p. 3. 5 Sheikh Abdallah Azzam, born in Palestine in 1941 and assassinated in Pakistan in 1989, wrote a compelling fatwah (Islamic legal decision) on the subject called “Defense of the Muslim Lands,” (translated from the original Arabic) distributed on Internet site . 6 Ronni Shaked and Aviva Shabi, Hamas: From Faith in Allah to the Path of Terror [Hebrew] (Jerusalem: Keter, 1994), p. 112. 7 Al-Ahram al-Arabi, October 28, 2000, quoted by Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), Dispatch no. 151, November 8, 2000. 8 Daily Star, Beirut, December 22, 2000, quoted in the Monthly Digest, published by Th e Jerusalem Institute For Western Defence, Vol. 13, No. 1 (January 2001): p. 7. 9 Research on Palestinian textbooks is conducted by Th e Center for Monitor- ing the Impact of Peace, and most of the above quotations are drawn from the Center’s Newsletter, issue 4, available on their Internet site . 10 See the authoritative study by Vahakn N. Dadrian, Th e History of the Armenian Genocide (Oxford: Berghahn, 1995), p. 147-151. 11 Op. cit., Dalrymple, p. 97. 12 Madawi Al-Rasheed, “The Myth of Return: Iraqi Arab and Assyrian Refugees in London,” Journal of Refugee Studies,Vol. 7, Nos. 2/3 (1994): p. 199-219. 13 Nasrallah interviews in Al-Safi r, Beirut, September 16, 1997, and Der Spiegel, October 20, 1997. 14 Aequalitas, Vol. 4, No. 1 (March-April 1999): p. 6, published by the Cana- dian-Egyptian Organization for Human Rights, Chomedey-Laval, Quebec. Note also from the CEOHR, “A Communication on Violations of the Rights of the Copts in Egypt presented to the Center for Human Rights-United Nations Offi ce at Geneva,” April 9, 1996. 15 Information from and Cairo Times, January 13-19, 2000, p. 6-8. 16 Alice Moore-Harell, “Slave Trade in the Sudan in the Nineteenth Century and its Suppression in the Years 1877-80,” Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 34, No. 2 (April 1998): p. 113-128. 17 Author’s interview in January 2001 with an anonymous rebel referred to as Philip who fought in the bush with the Sudan People’s Liberation Army. 18 John Garang, Th e Vision of the New Sudan: Questions of Unity and Identity, edited by Elwathig Kameir (Cairo: Consortium for Policy Analysis and Development Strategies, 1997). 19 Meir Bar-Asher and Aryeh Kofsky, “Th e Nusayri Doctrine of `Ali’s Divin- ity and the Nusayri Trinity According to an Unpublished Treatise from the 7th/13th Centuries,” Der Islam, vol. 72, no. 2 (1995): p. 258-292. 20 Rene Dussaud, Histoire Et Religion Des Nosairis (Paris: Librairie Emile Bouillon, 1900), esp. p. 29-30. 21 Silvestre De Sacy, Exposé de la Religion Des Druzes (Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert, 1964, orig. 1838). 22 Krisztina Kehl-Bodrogi, “Th e New Garments of Alevism,” ISIM Newsletter (5/00): p. 23. 23 Henry Munson, “Islamism and Nationalism,” ISIM Newsletter (5/00): p. 10. 24 Christine Allison, “Oral History in Kurdistan: Th e Case of the Badinani Yezidis,” Th e Journal of Kurdish Studies, Vol. II, 1996-1997, p. 37-48. See also John S. Guest, Survival Among the Kurds: A History of the Yezidis (London: Kegan Paul, 1993). 25 C.J. Edmonds, Kurds, Turks, and Arabs: Politics, Travel, and Research in North Eastern Iraq 1919-1925 (London: Oxford University Press, 1957), p. 204-205. 26 Th e Encyclopaedia of Islam, Vol. II (London: Luzac, 1927), p. 596-602. 27 On Lounes Matoub and his murder, see the Internet site of the World Algerian Action Coalition and the report in the Washington Times, June 29, 1998. In the Kabylian city of Tizi-Ouzou, Berber rioters destroyed public property in an outburst of collective anger. 28 Yamina El Kirat, “Some Causes of the Beni Iznassen Berber Language Loss,” Langues et Stigmatisation Sociale Au Maghreb - Peuples Mediteraneans, Vol. 79 (Avril-Juin 1997) : p. 35-53. 29 Guardian (Nigeria), May 20, 2000, reported in the Monthly Digest of News from the Moslem World issued by Th e Jerusalem Institute for Western Defence, vol. 12, no. 6 (June 2000): p. 11. 30 Th e Sudan Victims of Torture Group (SVTG) of London reported this information on February 2, 2001, that was distributed by Internet site . 31 I examined this subject in my book Identity and Civilization: Essays on Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1999), esp. p. 144-153. 32 Patrick Th ornberry, “Th e UN Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belong- ing to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities: Background, Analysis, Observations, and an Update,” in Alan Philips and Allan Rosas, editors, Universal Minority Rights (Finland: Abo Akademi University Institute for Human Rights, 1995), p. 20. 33 For a thoughtful discussion, see Anthony D. Smith, “Ethnic Nationalism and the Plight of Minorities,” Journal of Refugees Studies, vol. 7, no. 2/3 (1994): p. 186-198; also my article “Th e Minority Plight,” Middle East Quarterly, vol. III, no. 3 (September 1996): p. 25-34.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.S. - This article is taken from the Book, David Bukay (Editor), Muhammad’s Monsters: A Comprehensive Guide to RADICAL ISLAM for Western Audiences, 2004.

http://www.north-of-africa.com/article.php3?id_article=593

Leave a comment Discuss live in the forums
your comments:
Muhammad’s Monsters: The War of Islam against Minorities in the Middle East and North Africa
12 December 2009, par Ajenjar
Algerians have at last understood that they have been reduced to slaves by Islam, that’s why more and more Algerian are turning their backs on the terrorist and oppressive pseudo-religion Islam, which a real grave for humanite.
Muslims Turn to Christ in Algeria - CBN Report !
answer this message

Muhammad’s Monsters: The War of Islam against Minorities in the Middle East and North Africa
23 July 2009, par Jon P.
Please publish OR remove my comment entirely - Jon P. Thanks.
answer this message

Muhammad’s Monsters: The War of Islam against Minorities in the Middle East and North Africa
23 July 2009, by NOA
Azul
It has to be a mistake. Please send it again!
Regards
answer this message

Muhammad’s Monsters: The War of Islam against Minorities in the Middle East and North Africa
22 July 2009, par Jon P.
Interesting !
How much of that is the result of Western European cooperation with these monsters? If they are viewed as such (monsters) why is it that the UN and other Western Countries continue to cooperate with these regimes ?
1/2 view
answer this message

The clash between civilization and backwardness, between the civilized and the primitive, between barbarity and rationality.

2009-07-12T01:43:00.000-07:00

by Wafa Sultan
adapted and edited from http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD110706 and taken from [the] February 21, 2006, MEMRITV . . . clip featuring an interview with Arab-American psychiatrist Wafa Sultan on Al-Jazeera TV. During the interview, Dr.Ibrahim Al-Khouli accused Sultan of being a "heretic" for attacking current aspects of Islamic society.

This English adaptation can be considered the equivalent of "Le choc entre la civilisation et l’arriération, entre le civilisé et le primitif, entre la barbarie et la rationalité. " by Wafa SULTAN, the preceding post at this blog, reprinted from Kabylia Info, where it was posted on Mon, 07/06/2009 - 13:16 by Fernas

The clash we are witnessing around the world is not a clash of religions, or a clash of civilizations. It is a clash between two opposites, between two eras. It is a clash between a mentality that belongs to the Middle Ages and another mentality that belongs to the 21st century. It is a clash between civilization and backwardness, between the civilized and the primitive, between barbarity and rationality. It is a clash between freedom and oppression, between democracy and dictatorship. It is a clash between human rights, on the one hand, and the violation of these rights, on other hand. It is a clash between those who treat women like beasts, and those who treat them like human beings. What we see today is not a clash of civilizations. Civilizations do not clash, but compete.

The Muslims are the ones who began using this expression. The Muslims are the ones who began the clash of civilizations. The Prophet of Islam said: 'I was ordered to fight the people until they believe in Allah and His Messenger.' When the Muslims divided the people into Muslims and non-Muslims, and called to fight the others until they believe in what they themselves believe, they started this clash, and began this war. In order to stop this war, they must reexamine their Islamic books and curricula, which are full of calls for takfir and fighting the infidels.

My colleague has said that he never offends other people's beliefs. What civilization on the face of this earth allows him to call other people by names that they did not choose for themselves? Once, he calls them Ahl Al-Dhimma; another time he calls them the 'People of the Book'; and yet another time he compares them to apes and pigs, or he calls the Christians 'those who incur Allah's wrath.' Who told you that they are 'People of the Book?' They are not the People of the Book, they are people of many books. All the useful scientific books that you have today are theirs, the fruit of their free and creative thinking. What gives you the right to call them 'those who incur Allah's wrath,' or 'those who have gone astray,' and then come here and say that your religion commands you to refrain from offending the beliefs of others?

I am not a Christian, a Muslim, or a Jew. I am a secular human being. I do not believe in the supernatural, but I respect others' right to believe in it.

The Jews have come from the tragedy (of the Holocaust), and forced the world to
respect them, with their knowledge, not with their terror, with their work, not their crying and yelling.
Humanity owes most of the discoveries and science of the 19th and 20th centuries to Jewish
scientists. 15 million people, scattered throughout the world, united and won their rights through work
and knowledge. We have not seen a single Jew blow himself up in a German restaurant. We have
not seen a single Jew destroy a church. We have not seen a single Jew protest by killing people.

The Muslims have turned three Buddha statues into rubble. We have not seen a single Buddhist burn down a Mosque, kill a Muslim, or burn down an embassy.

Only the Muslims defend their beliefs by burning down churches, killing people, and destroying embassies. This path will not yield any results.

The Muslims must ask themselves what they can do for humankind, before they demand that
humankind respect them.

Wafa Sultan

http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD110706
TO VIEW THIS CLIP, VISIT: http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1050.htm . [Registration and Log-in required]

Le choc entre la civilisation et l’arriération, entre le civilisé et le primitif, entre la barbarie et la rationalité.

2009-07-09T15:12:00.000-07:00

From Kabylia Info

Le choc entre la civilisation et l’arriération, entre le civilisé et le primitif, entre la barbarie et la rationalité.
Wafa SULTAN

Posted Mon, 07/06/2009 - 13:16 by Fernas

"Le choc que nous voyons dans le monde n’est pas un choc des religions ou un choc des civilisations ; c’est un choc entre deux opposés, entre deux ères. C’est un choc entre une mentalité qui appartient aux temps médiévaux et une autre mentalité qui appartient au XXIem siècle. C’est un choc entre la civilisation et l’arriération, entre le civilisé et le primitif, entre la barbarie et la rationalité. C’est un choc entre les droits de l’Homme d’une part, et la violation de ces droits d’autre part. C’est un choc entre ceux qui traitent les femmes comme des bêtes, et ceux qui les traient comme des êtres humains. Ce que nous voyons aujourd’hui n’est pas un choc des civilisations. Les civilisations ne se heurtent pas, elles rivalisent.

Les musulmans sont ceux qui ont entamé le choc des civilisations. Le prophète de l’islam à dit : "J’ai reçu l’ordre de combattre les gens jusqu’à ce qu’ils croient en Allah et en son messager" Quand les musulmans divisèrent les peuples en musulmans et non-musulmans et appelèrent à combattre les autres jusqu’à ce qu’ils partagent leurs croyances, ils déclenchèrent ce choc et débuta cette guerre. Pour mettre fin à cette guerre, ils doivent réexaminer leurs Textes et leurs plans islamiques, qui sont remplis d’appels au takfir (accusation de mécréance) et à combattre les infidèles.

Quelle civilisation de cette terre lui permet d’appeler d’autres gens par des noms qu’ils n’ont pas choisis par eux-mêmes ? Tantôt il les appelle "le peuple des dhimmis", tantôt il les appelle "les gens du livre" et tantôt il les compare à des singes ou à des porcs, ou bien nomme les chrétiens "ceux qui encourent la colère d’Allah" Qui vous a raconté qu’ils sont les "gens du Livre" ? Ils ne sont pas les gens d’un livre, ils sont les gens de beaucoup de livres.

Tous les livres scientifiques salutaires que vous avez aujourd’hui sont les leurs, le fruit de leur pensée, libre et créatrice. Qui vous donne le droit de les appeler "ceux qui encourent la colère d’Allah" ou "ceux qui se sont égarés" et puis venir ici dire que votre religion vous commande de vous abstenir d’offenser les croyance des autres ?

Je ne suis pas une chrétienne, une musulmane ou une juive. Je suis un être humain laïc. Je ne crois pas au surnaturel mais je respecte le droit des autres à y croire. Frères vous pouvez croire aux pierres (réf. aux rituels mecquois) tant que vous ne me les jetez pas. Vous êtes libres d’adorer ce que vous voulez, mais les croyances des autres, ce ne sont pas vos affaires, qu’ils croient que le Messie est Dieu fils de Marie, ou que Satan est Dieu fils de Marie. Laissez les gens avoir leurs croyances. Les juifs sont sortis de la tragédie (l’Holocauste) et ont forcé le monde à les respecter avec leur connaissance pas avec la terreur, avec leur travail pas avec leurs lamentations et leurs cris. l’Humanité doit une majeure partie des découvertes scientifiques des XIX° et XX° siècles à des scientifiques juifs. Quinze millions de personnes dispersées de par le monde se sont unies et ont gagné leurs droits par le travail et la connaissance. Nous n’avons pas vu un seul juif se faire exploser dans un restaurant allemand ! Nous n’avons pas vu un seul juif détruire une église, nous n’avons pas vu un seul juif protester en tuant des gens. Les musulmans ont transformé trois statues de Bouddha en gravats ; nous n’avons pas vu un seul bouddhiste brûler une mosquée, tuer un musulman ou incendier une ambassade.

Seuls les musulmans défendent leurs croyances en brûlant des églises, en tuant des gens et en détruisant des ambassades. Cette façon de faire ne donnera aucun résultat.

Les musulmans doivent se demander ce qu’ils peuvent faire pour l’humanité avant d’exiger que l’humanité les respecte."

Wafa SULTAN
http://www.kabylia.info/islam/le-choc-entre-la-civilisation-et-l%E2%80%99arri%C3%A9ration-entre-le-civilis%C3%A9-et-le-primitif-entre-la-barba

Iranian Civilization and Islam - (Can Iran recover from Islam?)

2009-06-21T11:44:00.000-07:00

Civilizations Destroyed By Islam:

Civilizations in Arabian Peninsula: 1. Nabatian Kingdom 2. Hejaz Civilization 3. Heira Kingdom (Protectorate of Persian Empire) 4. Yemenese Civilization (Protectorate of Persian Empire) 5. Lakhmid Kingdom 6. Mazun State Society (Protectorate of Persian Empire) 7. Humyarite Kingdom 8. Hadramaut Civilization

Civilizations in Africa: 1. Egyptian Empire 2. Carthaginian Empire (Tunis) 3. Siranaeek Kingdom (Libya) 4. Nubian Kingdom (Sudan)

Civilizations in Asia: 1. Phoenician Civilization (Lebanon) 2. Sham Civilization (Syria, Colony of Rome) 3. Anatolia (Turkey, Colony of Rome)

Civilizations Struggling Not To Die: 1. Persian Empire (Present Iran)

We have been struggling with Islam for 1400 years now. We are still alive! Lets keep our holy Persian Culture alive so we will not join the long list of old civilizations extinct by the Islam & presently called "Just another Arab Muslim State"!

the reason we are still alive is that we still have our:

Persian Language Persian Traditions Persian Celebrations (Norouz, Mehregan, Sadeh, Yalda Night, Chahar Shanbe Souri, Sizda Be Dar, etc.) Persian Values Persian Philosophy (Zoroastrianism, etc.) Persian Literature Persian Traditional Music Persian Poetry (Ferdousi, etc.) Persian History

Yazdgird III, Rostam Farokhzad, Apranik, Babak-e Khoramdin, Maziar, Banoo, Negan, Abu Moslem, Yaqoob Leise Saffari, Ferdousi Toosi, Dr. Ahmad Kasravi, Dr. Kourosh Aryamanesh, Dr. Cyrus Elahi, General Ayat Mohaqeqi & thousands of others did not die in vein. Prove it that they did not die in vein.

They died so Iran could live, so Iran would not become another Arab Muslim Nation, another Iranistan (Pahlavi II), another Cesspool.

10. Lets take a good look at the fundamentals of Islam, what has Islam brought to us Persians? A Religion of Terror which openly preaches martyrdom & destruction of all Non Muslim's (exact verses of Quran listed on other articles of IPC) lives & property, a prophet who was a thief, bandit, assassin, murderer, rapist, child molester, & most of all a charlatan! The most fanatical, ignorant, superstitious religion which ever existed in the whole world! What is the true legacy of Islam?

Aba: Islamic Cape Amameh: Turban Ghaba: another Islamic cover Hejab: women's covering Chaghchoor: women's head cover Charghad: Islamic Scarf Lachak: Traditional Islamic Scarf Roobandeh: Women's face cover Maghana'eh: Women's specific head cover Chador: Veil Giveh: Islamic shoes Nalein: Islamic Flip Flop Aftabeh: Islamic toilet Pitcher Tonban: Islamic Pajama Quran: A 1500 years old pile of garbage torn paper, creation of a sick evil charlatan's mind called Muhammad the Bandit. Muhammad: the prophet of terror himself, a delusional, epileptic, schizophrenic, pedophile, child molester, murderer, assassin, rapist, assaulter of women, female slave holder, criminal charlatan! and of course, 1400 years full of history of blood, murder & terror, Islamic Style, which we are still involved with it specially during the last 22 & 1/2 years as we know it as the Islamic Republic of Iran! And we are still denying that the true Islam is not what IRI practices or Taliban practices, but the true Islam is beautiful as Roses & holier than the holy! Give yourselves a break & open your eyes & mind & smell the true stench of Islam all around you & not just inside the mosque!

11. Do you possibly believe that it is only us, the historians that know of the true nature of Islam? do not kid yourselves! Do you really believe that the President of United States, the Vice, & as a matter of fact the whole government of United States & rest of the Western & civilized world does not know of the true nature of Islam?! Of course they do! All logical knowledgeable politicians do know about the true nature of Islam. Then you might ask that why are they saying & pretending that the true Islam is innocent & all these terrorist movements are sacrilege to Allah & Islam?! I tell you why!

US & The West cannot possibly declare war on Islam & all Muslim. It will be a loosing battle, the same battle that the communism lost, the same battle that USSR lost! Religion is so deep in the blood of the masses & Islam is proposing itself as a religion; therefore, it will be disastrous to fight against people's religion. Remember that religion is the opiate of the masses!

Another reason that the West specifically US, will not declare a war on Islam, is that the best way to fight this so called religion & a dangerous political ideology, is to attack the very roots of it & not the pretty branches of it! By roots, I mean the Fundamentalist Islam which is the original Islam & by the pretty branches, I mean the Neo Islam which is trying to sell the civilized face of Islam to the world. If the West manages to destroy the world wide terrorism of the Islamic kind, it will manage to destroy the fundamentalist Islam & that is where Islam gets it's power from. Once the roots of an ideology is destroyed, the branches shall fall! Neo Islam of the modern Muslims like Shariati, Soroush, Bazargan & Yazdi is nothing but a beautiful facade without a content. Once you take the fundamentals of this ideology out of it, then you have to revise it, & revisionism is worst than the "Death of an Ideology"! the destruction of Soviet Union started when they started to revise Communism. First they revised a bit here & a bit there, until there was nothing left of Leninism & Stalinism. And next thing you know, Communism, Russian style, died out! The power of Islam comes from it's fundamentals, it's fanatical beliefs to control the cattle-like masses of illiterate people & to keep the masses ignorant. Once you take that out of Islam, there will be nothing left but the liquidy Soda Pop Islam of Shariati which is a revision of Islam & an insult to the true Islam. By then, most of the battle will be already fought for!

So have in mind that to declare war on the whole Islam, is nothing but a bad tactic to achieve the ultimate strategy of winning the war against Islam. So why not separate the two Islam to the:

Good Islam, Revised Islam, Neo Islam, True Islam, Holy Islam & Bad Islam, Fundamentalist Islam, Fanatical Islam, Fake Islam, Terrorist Islam

And by the end, when the world's battle against Fundamentalist Islamic Terrorism is done & it will be won, then there will be nothing left of the Islam, but only a facade wallpaper made of revised meaningless confused politically correct Islam of the Modern Neo Islamists which does not even look, sound, or tastes like Islam! And of course this is the best way to get rid of the power of this ideology, divide it in two fractions of fundamentalist & moderate or reformist & then just sit & watch them eat each other alive & chew each other out! Politics at it's best with a spice of logic! So West, specifically US, is doing the best tactic that they can play for the ultimate strategy of weakening Islam & making it loose it's credibility. It is all well calculated my friends.

12. Why is Islam & Islamic nations way behind the world? As I, mentioned in the past, we can notice many reasons:

a. Lack of individual freedom in Islam. b. Lack of independence of free thought in Islam. c. Renaissance happened in Europe, but it never happened in Islamic Nations! There was a Martin Luther in the West, but there was never one in Islamic world! d. Islam did not give anything to history of human civilization, but it only took & took from the cultures which it destroyed, until there was nothing left to take!

Lets expand on this, When Islam invaded the civilized world, it took over one of the two major super powers (Persia) & it took over all Asian colonies of the other one (Rome). Now, if at the time, Islam had a great navy & capability to invade Europe through Constantinaple, & during it's golden days, then Italy would have been also a Shiite Hole like Iran! Thanks & many fortunes that they could not invade main land Europe back then, or the whole Europe would also end up as backwarded as the Muslim states are! Europe would have ended up being as the middle east or North Africa now!

When Islam took over the so many of the world's civilizations, it had nothing to give, yet it had everything to take & gain. If we study the whole history of Islamic Empire in it's glory days, we will notice that the whole Empire ran by the ingenuity of the occupied country's specialists. All the people who ran the Islamic Empire from scientists, politicians, poets, artists, philosophers, writers, etc. were mostly Persian & leastly from other destroyed occupied civilizations under Islam like Egypt, Cartage or Phoenicia! The Arab Savage Barbarians of the peninsula truly had nothing to offer! Due to the reactionary & oppressive nature of Islam, the Islamic Regime did not let any new creative ingenuity to grow in the Empire, yet purposely, it helped killing every ounce of ingenuity & intellectualism which bloomed in the region! Finally all these bloomed flowers from the occupied nations died out & there were nobody else to replace them! suddenly there were left only, Arabs & their oppressed occupied mongrelized nations under occupation with no present or future sign of ingenuity or creation, & thats when Islamic world died out & fell behind the progressive world.

Many, mistakenly name the major Persian minds as Arabic or Islamic! Minds like:

Omar Khayam father of Algebra, Modern Astronomy, & a famous poet Zakaria Razi father of Chemistry Ebne Sina father of Medicine Kharazmi, Birooni, & so many more were all Persian.

Please do not give the credit to Arabs or Muslims! Look at the Moorish example, for about 800 years Moors owned Spain & Iberian Peninsula. The first 400 years, were the glory days of Islam due to the fact that Persians & other defeated civilization's bright minds were carrying the burden of running the Islamic Empire. Even, Booran (Pretty) The Persian Prime Minister of Islamic Empire during Khalifat of Mamoon the Abassids dynasty, during the occupation of Iran by Arab oppressors, daughter of Hassan Sahl was Persian. Yes even the prime minister of Islamic Empire was a Persian Woman! How odd can it get?! the oppressed women of Iran by the evil of Islam, have sent their candidate to the main court house of the Khalifat to rule! and that is what Persian women are made of! during the first 400 years, all the different local khalifats were sending the share of the central Khalifat of Baghdad to the capital, they were all together pillaging & stealing the world, blind! They were united & strong, but during the second 400 years, every little local Khalifat started singing their own songs, & did not send Baghdad's share to them! they all got separated without the support of Baghdad, they all got weak, even the Baghdad Khalifat! And eventually the last strong hold in Europe, the Khalifat of Granada in Spain surrendered & people like El Sid & Queen Isabelle kicked out the last of Muslims out of Iberia. Moorish Empire of Berbers & Arabs destroyed itself in a way & this finished the 800 years of Muslim supremacy in Iberia including Portugal, Spain, & once even as far as the middle of France! Now Muslim Arab Barbarians just occupied Iran for 171 years & finally got kicked out by The Great Yaghoob-e Leis-e Saffari of Saffarids Dynasty, the greatest freedom fighter of them all & the freedom fighting masses of Iran, yet the roots of oppression & the rotting mentality & corps of Islam remained in Iran & in Iranian's brains until it destroyed Iran once more @ 1979 by Khomeini & his Islamic Reaction!

http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:_ahsQvveY2IJ:www.iranian.ws/iran_news/publish/article_719.shtml+site:iranian.ws+iranian.ws&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
http://www.persian-journal.com/

POLL:

As an Iranian, If (or when) time comes to choose between 'Islam or Iran', which one will you support?

Islam 8.2%

Iran 91.8%

Total votes: 13213

want to add your comment?
http://www.iranian.ws/poll/poll-13.php?action=results&poll_ident=13

ISLAM IN THE PUNJAB (of India)

2009-06-19T00:10:00.000-07:00

ISLAM IN THE PUNJAB

(of India)

THE MOSLEM MUGHALS (TURKIC/MONGOLS)

IN THE PUNJAB (India)

MUGHALS is also written as MOGULS

Baba Banda Singh Bahadur (pronounce like this: Banda- "Bun-tha", Bahadur- "Bah-Ha-'th'ur" {'th' pronounced as 'th' in 'the'}

THE SHORT OF IT

In 1713, Banda Bahadur wanted to establish a Sikh State in the Punjab. For this he fought relentlessly with the Mughals. His state lasted just under a year before its collapse. However, after a number of years he was caught in a seize and executed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punjab_region

LYING IS PART OF MOSLEM TRADITION

Towards the end of November 1715, the remaining defenders were running out of ammunition and food. They were trying to exist on boiled leaves and the bark of trees, and were gradually reduced to mere skeletons. Then on December 17, 1715, Abdus Samad Khan, one of the Mughal commanders, shouted across the separating moat, that he would not allow any killing by his men, if Banda opened the gate to the fortress. When Banda ordered the gate be opened, the Mughals rushed in to spear or stab as many as three hundred of the half-dead and helpless defenders. About two hundred were captured alive and handcuffed in twos. Banda had chains round his ankles and his wrists, and was then locked in an iron cage. The Mughals were still afraid that he might escape and so they placed a guard on each side of the cage with swords drawn and the cage was placed aloft an elephant, which led the procession, which paraded through Lahore, before proceeding towards Delhi. Zakarya Khan, the son of the Lahore Governor, then ordered his men to lop off more Sikh heads on the way. The prisoners were first taken to Lahore, and thence to Delhi.

Torture and execution

The cavalcade to the imperial capital was a grisly sight. Besides 740 prisoners in heavy chains, it comprised seven hundred cartloads of Sikh heads with another 200 stuck upon pikes. On February 26, 1716, the procession neared Delhi, and Farukh Siyar ordered his Minister, Mohammed Amin Khan to go out to receive them and to prepare them for a suitable display in the city. On February 29, the citizens of Delhi lined the streets, to get a good sight of the procession.

First came two-thousand soldiers, each holding a Sikh head impaled on his upright spear. Next followed Banda's elephant. A gold-laced red turban was placed on his head, and to add further mockery to his plight, a bright printed scarlet shirt was slipped on his body. Then came 740 prisoners (500 had been collected on the way). These men were chained in pairs and thrown across the backs of camels. Their faces were blackened, and pointed sheepskin or paper caps were clapped on their heads. Behind this line came the Mughal Commanders, Abdus Samad Khan, his son Qamar-ud-Din Khan, and his son-in-law Zakaria Khan. Their men lined both sides of the streets.

For seven days, executions were carried out, until all the ordinary captives had been disposed off. Their bodies were loaded on wagons and taken out of town to be thrown to the vultures. The heads were hung up on trees or on poles near the market-place to be a lesson to all rebels. The jailors next turned their attention to the 20 major leaders, including Baj Singh, Fateh Singh, Ali Singh and Gulab Singh. These men were tortured to the extreme and were asked to divulge the place where they had buried all the treasures that had been looted from Sirhind, Batala and other towns during their better days.

Failing to get any clues after three months, they prepared to put an end to their lives on Sunday, June 9, 1716. Banda's cage was again hoisted on top of an elephant, and he was dressed in the mock attire of an emperor, with a colourful red pointed turban on his head. His four-year old son, Ajai Singh was placed in his lap. The twenty chiefs marched behind the elephant and this procession then passed through the streets of Delhi, and headed for the mausoleum of Bahadur Shah, near the Qutub Minar. On reaching the graveyard, the captives were again offered a choice of two alternatives: conversion to Islam or death. All chose death. They were tortured again before being executed. Their heads were then impaled on spears and arranged in a circle around Banda who was now squatting on the ground. There were hundreds of spectators standing around watching this scene.

Banda was then given a short sword and ordered to kill his own son, Ajai Singh. As he sat unperturbed, the executioner moved forward and hacked the little child into pieces. Banda sat through all this without any display of emotion.

Mohammed Amin Khan, who was standing nearby remarked: "It is surprising that one, who shows so much acuteness in his features and so much of nobility in his conduct, should have been guilty of such horrors."

Banda replied, "Whenever men become so corrupt and wicked as to relinquish the path of equity and abandon themselves to all kinds of excesses, then Providence never fails to raise up a scourge like me to chastise a race so depraved; but when the measure of punishment is full then he raises up men like you to bring him to punishment."

On June 9: The executioner then stepped forward and thrust the point of his dagger into Banda's right eye, pulling out the eyeball. He then pulled out the other eyeball. Banda sat through all this as still as a rock. His face gave no twitch of pain.

The cruel devil then took his sword and slashed off Banda's left foot, then both his arms. But Banda's features were still calm as if he was at peace with his Creator. Finally they tore off his flesh with red-hot pincers, and there being nothing else left in their book of tortures, they cut his body up into a hundred pieces, and were satisfied. (These details of the torture are given in full, by the following writers: Mohammed Harisi, Khafi Khan, Thornton, Elphinstone, Daneshwar and others).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banda_Bahadur#Torture_and_execution

http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php?title=Banda_Singh_Bahadur

THE MUGHALS

Mughal is the Persian word for Mongol, and was generally used to refer to Central Asian nomads who claimed descent from the Mongol warriors of Genghis Khan. The Mughal rulers were adherents of Islam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mughal_Empire

The Mughal Empire (Persian: سلطنت مغولی هند‎ , Urdu: مغلیہ سلطنت), self-designation Gurkānī, گوركانى (which was also the self-designation of the Timurids in Central Asia and Khorasan) was an empire that at its greatest territorial extent ruled most of the Indian subcontinent, then known as Hindustan, and parts of what is now Afghanistan and Pakistan.

It was established in 1526 by the Timurid prince Babur, enjoyed expansion and consolidation until about 1707 and survived, even if in drastically attenuated form, until 1857. The empire was founded by the Timurid leader Babur in 1526, when he defeated Ibrahim Lodi, the last of the Delhi Sultans, at the First Battle of Panipat. Mughal is the Persian word for Mongol, and was generally used to refer to Central Asian nomads who claimed descent from the Mongol warriors of Genghis Khan. The Mughal rulers were adherents of Islam.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mughal_Empire

WHO WAS THE MOGHUL EMPEROR WHEN BANDA BAHADUR WAS TORTURED AND EXECUTED? (see "Torture and Execution" above)

[The Mughal emperor] Jahandar Shah [not him, he wasn't the Moghul emperor then] was defeated at Samugarh near Agra on 10 January 1713. Following this, the Saiyad brothers, who were the king-makers of that era, placed Farukhsiyar on the throne as nominal emperor. He took the throne On June 11, 1713, at the age of 30. His reign marked the ascendancy of the Saiyid brothers who monopolized state power and reduced the Emperor to an effective figurehead. Saiyid Huseyn Ali became Wazir or chief minister while his brother, Abdullah, became commander-in-chief of the army.

Farrukhsiyar [he was the one when Banda Bahadur was executed] was irked by their supremacy, but could did little to change the situation. Various plots to overthrow the influence of the Saiyad brothers failed. The ensuing internecine strife affected the administration of the empire. Taking advantage of the situation, the Maratha and Sikh factions created anarchy in the provinces. Farrukhsiyar enjoyed some success in his campaigns against the Sikhs; recovered Lohagar from them and executed Banda Bahadur in 1716 AD.

The constant plotting eventually led the Saiyid brothers to depose the Emperor. Farrukhsiyar was imprisoned and starved; later, on February 28, 1719, he was blinded with needles at the orders of the Saiyad brothers. Farukhsiyar was strangled to death on the night of April 27/28, 1719. After accomplishing his assassination, the Saiyid brothers placed his first-cousin, Rafi Ul-Darjat on the throne. Rafi-ud-durjat's father and Farukhsiyar's father had been brothers.

[edit] Trade concessions

It was during Farrukhsiyar's reign, in 1717, that the British East India Company purchased duty-free trading rights in all of Bengal for a mere three thousand rupees. It is said that the Company's surgeon, William Hamilton, cured Farrukhsiyar from some ailment and the emperor was moved to grant trading rights to the Company.[1] This favour aided the British in later years to establish a firm foothold in India.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furrukhsiyar

Bābur

the Mughal empire was founded by
Zāhir ud-Dīn Mohammad, commonly known as Bābur (February 14, 1483 – December 26, 1530) (Chaghatay/Persian: ظﮩیرالدین محمد بابر‎ , Hindi: ज़हिर उद-दिन मुहम्मद; also spelled Zahiruddin, Zahiriddin, Muhammad, Bobur, Baber, Babar, etc.), was a Muslim Emperor from Central Asia who founded the Mughal dynasty of India. He was a direct descendant of Timur, and believed himself to be a descendant also of Genghis Khan through his mother.[1] Following a series of set-backs he succeeded in laying the basis for one of the most important empires in Indian history, the Mughal Empire.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babur

He subdued the population of India with enthusiastic savagery and took joy in unbridled slaughter.

Zahiru'd-Din Muhammed Babur (1526 C.E. - 1520 C.E.)

Babur's Own Words on Killing Hindus:
For the sake of Islam I became a wanderer,
I battled infidels and Hindus,
I determined to become a martyr
Thank God I became a Killer of Non-Muslims!

From Baburnama, the Memoires of Babur Himself:
In AH 934 (2538 C.E.) I attacked Chanderi and by the grace of Allah captured it in a few hours. We got the infidels slaughtered and the place which had be Daru'l-Harb (nation of non-muslim) for years was made into a Daru'l-Islam (muslim nation).

Guru Nanak on Babur's atrocities:
Source:Rag Asa Guru Nanak Dev witnessed first hand the atrocities Babur committed on Hindus and recorded them in his poems. He says: Having attacked Khuraasaan, Babar terrified Hindustan. The Creator Himself does not take the blame, but has sent the Mugal as the messenger of death. There was so much slaughter that the people screamed. Didn't You feel compassion, Lord? pg (360)

On the condition of Hindu women in Babur's monster rule:
Those heads adorned with braided hair, with their parts painted with vermillion - those heads were shaved with scissors, and their throats were choked with dust.They lived in palatial mansions, but now, they cannot even sit near the palaces.... ropes were put around their necks, and their strings of pearls were broken. Their wealth and youthful beauty, which gave them so much pleasure, have now become their enemies. The order was given to the soldiers, who dishonored them, and carried them away. If it is pleasing to [Allah's] God's Will, He bestows greatness; if is pleases His Will, He bestows punishment pg(417-18)

On the nature of Mughal rule under Babur:
First, the tree puts down its roots, and then it spreads out its shade above. The kings are tigers, and their officials are dogs; they go out and awaken the sleeping people to harass them. The public servants inflict wounds with their nails. The dogs lick up the blood that is spilled. Source:Rag Malar, (pg.1288)

http://www.hinduholocaust.com/HinduHolocaustMuseum.htm

The Sikhs

The Sikhs are one of the most prosperous and politically important religious minorities in India. The religion itself is of comparatively recent origin—it dates from the time of Babur—but the history of its community, called Panth , or "Path," by the faithful, is a deeply rooted aspect of Sikh life. Since its inception, the Sikh community has been one of the major factors in Indian history. The Mughals understood that Sikhism was a separatist movement, and by the eighteenth century, the Sikhs had established a separate kingdom with its capital in Lahore. The Sikhs were a major force in the British Allied army as the British gradually annexed the whole of India in the 1850's, and after Indian Independence, the Sikh community, half of which had to flee Muslim Pakistan after partition, became economically and politically the most significant and successful minority community in India. The Sikhs are unique as a religious movement. Founded in the deepest spirituality and mysticism, they are a radically egalitarian group rooted deeply in their sense of community, called "brotherhood" (khalsa ) , and history. The khalsa is unified by one aspect: all Sikhs are disciples of the founding Gurus of the religion—the word, "Sikh," means disciple. They are also, however, a highly militant religion and society; the community has to be protected with the highest martial vigilance and ability. Since the seventeenth century, Sikh fighters have been feared throughout India for their ability and sheer courage. The British, who employed them in their army in the nineteenth century, referred to them as the greatest of the "martial races." It's an odd mixture. On the one hand, Sikhism is one of the most deeply spiritual and profoundly mystical religions of the world, advocating a social harmony and egalitarianism unrivalled by any other major religion, with the possible exception of Buddhism. On the other hand, the Sikh community is a militant, warrior community, willing to fight, sacrifice, or assassinate to protect or further the community.

* * *
To this day, the Sikh community is economically and politically very powerful and is one of the most restive of India's minorities. It has demanded greater autonomy and has militantly defied the government(1). India's Prime Minister was assassinated by her Sikh guards, and Sikh militancy has led to military intervention, including the the invasion of the Sikh Golden Temple in Amritsar. . . . . . As a separate and militant community, the Sikhs still find themselves partly foreigners in their own country, suspicious of and suspected by the dominant government.

http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/MUGHAL/MUGHAL.HTM

THE FOLLOWING IS FROM
Muslim League Attack on Sikhs
and Hindus in the Punjab 1947
Compiled for the SGPC
by S. GURBACHAN SINGH TALIB

That the Sikh (and Hindu) attack on the Muslims in East Punjab was retaliation under terrible and unbearable provocation is now admitted to be a fact by all impartial people; though it is not known everywhere of what horrible nature, of what prolonged duration and diabolical character was the provocation offered to Sikhs by Muslims over a period of several agonizing months-beginning from December, 1946. There was a war unleashed by the Muslim population of the Punjab to cow down Sikhs, and as a means to that, to carry on among them a total campaign of murder, arson, loot and abduction of women. Sikhs passed through the experience of this war as a people for months; and not thousands, but millions of them were forced to quit their homes for safety in the process. Without a clear knowledge of this part of the story a just and balanced view of the situation cannot be formed.

The details of atrocities committed on Sikhs and Hindus given in these paces are not full or even a fairly large proportion of what actually befell. They are only representative episodes of what happened in a few villages and towns all over West Punjab and other West Pakistan areas. Imagine such things happening in thousands upon thousands of villages and hundreds of towns, and you will then be able to take in the proportions somewhat close to what the reality was-which, in the last analysis must, however, remain inexpressible in its full horror. The facts drawn upon are statements of sufferers of these horrors, recorded from complaints made to the authorities, from reliable press reports and from statements recorded with scrupulous fidelity and signed by those who made them, in the refugee camps in East Punjab.

Sikhs left behind their homes, the richest land in the Punjab, their factories and prosperous businesses, their holy shrines, schools and colleges-all under the pressure of the Pakistan terror, so that according to unbiassed estimates 40% (and these perhaps the most enterprising section of the community) were rendered refugees. They came out of their homes-hammed, despoiled and in unending trudging caravans. This vast human tragedy is too large even for the imagination to take in without the help of facts presented in a telling way.

This record is intended in the first place to rehabilitate the Sikh name, maligned by false propaganda of the leaders and press of Pakistan, and secondly to serve as part of the material for anyone who should set out to write a full history of the Punjab of these terrible 1947 months.

* * *

[HOW FAR CAN A NON-MOSLEM TRUST MOSLEM MEMBERS OF THE POLICE? lw]

A Sikh constable was beaten to death by a wild mob in the civil lines, the Additional District Magistrate was brutally assaulted and a murderous attack was made on a Sub-inspector by a demonstrator who was killed by police fire. . . . C. & M. Gazette-25.2.1947)

Firing had to be resorted to by the Police on this day in Rawalpindi. The Lahore Courts were raided and files tempered with. At Kasur there was violence too.

Regarding the murder of the Sikh police constable at Amritsar, certain details of it are very revealing. The Muslim mob asked the police to withdraw, which the police did. This helpless Sikh constable was beseiged by the Muslim mob, and stoned to death in a most brutal manner. The Muslim members of the police party, among whom there were only a few solitary non-Muslims, did nothing to rescue their comrade from the clutches of the murderous mob. The lesson of it was clear - that a Sikh had been murdered, solely because out of a party of policemen he was the only Sikh. In Congress agitations the police used to be attacked, seldom physically though, as the Police, as the instrument of foreign rule, and no discrimination was made between its Hindu, Muslim, Sikh or Christian personnel as such. But here was a case of such discrimination.

FROM
Muslim League Attack on Sikhs
and Hindus in the Punjab 1947
Compiled for the SGPC
by S. GURBACHAN SINGH TALIB
Muslim League Attack on Sikhs and Hindus in the Punjab 1947 by S. Gurbachan Singh Talib

Muslim League

MOSLEMS LOOKING FOR CONVERTS--OR SIKHS TO KILL (rape the women first THEN kill them)

from
http://www.sikhlionz.com/1947-Rawalpindi-Shaheedis.htm

The Muslims thugs got angry hearing such answer from Sardarni Lajavanti Kaur. They moved forward towards her. Sardarni jee was holding her 5 year old granddaughter and a grandson. She loudly said the jaikaara, “Bole So Nihaal!! Sat Srree Akaal!!”. Saying this she jumped in the well, in order to avoid getting her granddaughter and herself raped by the Muslims. Within seconds all Sikh women jumped in the well. All 90 jumped in. A person came running to me and told me the whole incident. After hearing this incident, all Sikhs present there said, “Dhan Gursikhee!! Dhan Guru Kalgidhar! I dashed towards the well”.

“At that time what to talk about the pathaans but all aggressors were shaken from within. They were saying that who can kill such people who can sacrifice their lives to save their honour.”

“When I reached the well, my granddaughter, Harbhajan Kaur, my daughter-in-law Kartar Kaur and one sister-in-law Sardarni Ram Rakhee were crying as the well was full and they did not drown. By then 87 lives had been taken. They were taken out of the well. I was baffled. I uttered, “Dhan Gurdev, these daughters of yours have passed your test. Please show me the way too. At that time I had clear darshan of Dhan Guru Nanak Dev jee and Hazoor said, “You still have to see more of this bloodshed. You have to do some more sewa of sangataan”.

“After this bloody massacre, the Muslims got scared and started running away but some scoundrels were left. All Sadh Sangat came to my house and stayed there for the night. Muslims tried to find a lone Sikh to convert but could not convert anyone”.

http://www.sikhlionz.com/1947-Rawalpindi-Shaheedis.htm

Also,

This is an excellent resource for what the Moslems did to the non-Moslems (Hindus and Sikhs)

http://www.geocities.com/hindoo_humanist/partition.html

Turnabout or do onto others as they have done onto you

Finally, the Sikhs of the Punjab rid themselves of the Moslems that had long tortured Sikhs while trying for forceful conversions with the alternative being death.

This contribution is from an East Indian correspondent:

[quote]

"As a rule of thumb, muslims are peaceful as long as they are below a
certain
critical threshold
As soon as they cross that threshold, they are a menace

The key then is to dilute muslims below the critical mass

This critical mass is a function of the local kafir community

For example, among a sikh host, the critical % for muslims is about 65%
Among PC infected white Europeans, this critical % is 5%
* * *
The first and foremost is to recognise that the lands of islam are lost
forever
and the only thing to do is to evacuate the residual kafirs
A cordon sanitaire needs to be imposed on darul islam
mid-east xtians, bangladeshi hindus, etc this extra 20 - 30 million
kafirs
will dilute the muslims below critical mass
In addition, east asians, south americans can be imported to dilute
muslims
below critical mass

Indian Punjab was 33% muslim in 1947, the sikhs reduced it to 0% in 2
months
The sikhs used islamic method on muslims
When the sikhs ruled Pakistan, they shut down all the mosques and
mullahs
were thrown to
their deaths from minarets
When the mullahs declared jihad agains the sikhs, the sikhs invaded
Balakot
( near Afghanistan )
and cut up the chief mullah and burnt his body
The sikh general Nalwa used mass reprisal terror against muslim
civilians
and it was very effective
For any act of islamic terror, he burnt down the nearest muslim town
and no
one allowed to escape
The sikhs have an interesting method to prevent PC
The golden temple has a muslim atrocity museum
You can see sikh gurus tortured to death for refusing to convert to
islam
etc
This is kind of a holocaust museum
In addition, sikhs have a daily evening prayer called Ardas wherein
they
remember all the sikh victims of muslim atrocities

Next is a policy of active containment
For example strict law enforcement
In Gujurat, Modi has tamed the muslims by periodically cutting off
electricity to muslim areas
and getting them to sweat in the hot Indian sun
and giving the police a free hand to thrash muslims
Strict law enforcement has a side effect, each time the more jihadist
elements come out to protest, thrash them
and the rest get tame
Interestingly the only 2 areas in India free of islamic terrorism is
Indian
punjab, where sikhs solved the problem in 1947 and Gujurat where Modi
used
islamic methods on muslims
* * *
Also another tactic used by hindus in India is economic boycott
For example even in Mumbai, no hindu rents a house to a muslim

My favorite is guided tours of kafir women inside muslim ghettos, where
they
can see lecherous islamists
in action first hand and get cured of PC

I would also advice on switching to bio-diesel
Jatropha grows in semi-desert and many trains and cars in India are
switching to biodiesel from Jatropha
Jatropha is far more effective than ethanol

I also suggest setting up pig abbotoirs near muslim neighborhoods
Remove halal food from schools based on animal cruelty
Any other tactic for making their daily life miserable
* * *
The spanish inquisition took 120 years to get spain rid of muslims
The sikhs managed it in east punjab in 2 months

[close quote]

That this de-islamization worked can be gathered from the following:

The following though is written by a Moslem, hence its reliability as to truth and fact must always be in question. their founderr condones lying and deceit in the service of making the entire world Moslem.

Muslims in disguise

Contrary to popular perception, there are still thousands of
Muslims living in Punjab with a disguised identity

By Omar Khalidi
On a sunny afternoon in Kapurthalla town of east Punjab, in the famous ‘Moroccan’ mosque, a man looking every inch a Sikh - with turban, beard, and kada - looks over his shoulder, then with a quick movement of hands does what appeared to be wuzu, and joins me for Zuhr prayers. Being a stranger, I was immediately recognised by the rest of the four namaazis. Then followed an animated conversation about the state of the Muslims in the area. Of the namaazis, two were Bihari labourers, the other two were Kashmiri merchants. As I conversed with them, the absence of Punjabi Muslims struck me. Where are they? Instead of an answer, a meaningful silence stopped the conversation.

Meanwhile, the ‘Sikh’ joined us. Making sure that no non-Muslim was around, he told me, “Janab I am a Muslim, my real name is Allah Ditta, son of Piran Ditta, Arun Singh is my fake name. I belong to a village in Amritsar district. When the partition disturbances took place, we were too poor to travel to Pakistan. Our family of potters was so well integrated in the village that we did not think of migrating hoping that the dark nights of killings would end. Soon, surrounding villages were emptied as a large number of Muslims did cross the border. When the massacres stopped in late 1947, the social pressure of our Hindu and Sikh neighbours and the arrival of the refugees compelled us to hide our faith. Men and women adopted Sikh and Hindu appearances: turbans, beards, bindis, names, and the like.” The story of Allah Ditta/Arun Singh and thousands of others like him forms a tragic chapter in the history of modern India.
http://www.sabrang.com/cc/archive/2001/march01/history.htm

COMMENT by lw:

This could possibly be the miniscule persentage remaining in the area that Moslems would have taken over had they not been discouraged by Sikhs.

The idea of "multiculturallism" in the UK--which could work to replace Moslem immigrants with non-Moslems--good idea, but you can forget-about-it. Why? Read on:

BRITISH "MULTICULTURALISM" ONLY FOR MOSLEMS

A WAY OF PLACATING MOSLEMS IN THE UK

UK Government Ignoring Sikhs ?

Jan 20, 2007 - 3:19:44 PM

uk_flag.gif
The Sikh Commission on Race & Cohesion points to a long running pattern of government statements and initiatives which display “alarming evidence of non-inclusion of Sikhs and Sikh aspirations”. The Sikh Commission says the PM’s landmark speech on ‘multi-culturalism’ and ‘integration’ on 8th December 2006 and similar Queen’s Christmas Day speech (25th December 2006), have brought the issue to a head for Britain ’s 700,000 Sikhs. The Commission says “Sikhs are much concerned at the conspicuous exclusion of Sikhs in the media, in government policy and by the Commission for Race Equality”.

“Over the course of the last five years, Sikhs have been left out of many Home Office, CRE and public discussions, declarations and initiatives on ‘community engagement’. Despite active attempts by Sikh organisations to engage British Ministers and the CRE on community issues, Sikhs have found themselves repulsed by a dismissive and apathetic attitude. There has been zero government or CRE initiative on Sikh racist attacks, Sikh ethnic monitoring and Sikh inclusion in community cohesion discussions.” Says the Sikh Commission. Official comments, statements, reports and declarations by Ministers, Parliamentary Committees and senior public figures on matters such as community relations after 9/11, racist attacks and community cohesion; have omitted Sikh topics and Sikh representation.

The Sikh Commission says Sikhs have made a substantial contribution to life in Britain over the last 100 years. “Over 80,000 Sikh soldiers’ lives were sacrificed defending Britain from attack in the two world wars. Sikh soldiers’ qualified for14 Victoria Crosses for distinguished courage. Since migrating in the 1960s, we have proved to be an exceedingly self-sufficient, hard-working, enterprising community. We have excelled in education, employment, business and home ownership. This is despite decades of social and political racism. Our hard-work, independence and social perseverance; has ensured that we have been a minimum burden on state funds and resources and that our tax contribution to the British state has far exceeded anything our community has taken in terms of resources and monetary benefits.” Sikhs stress they have contributed positively to social life and cohesion, through historic Sikh values of family, community, social interaction, diversity, tolerance and kind-heartedness to their English and British neighbours. “Instead of celebrating this contribution, the Prime Minister and his government, together with the CRE, national media and public bodies choose to exclude Sikhs at all levels.”

The Sikh Commission says the government’s agenda on community cohesion and integration is “incoherent, selective in application, and lacking in equal and wholesome inclusion”. The government’s approach includes some and excludes others. “Integration is about equal and authentic inclusion of all communities that make up British society – both indigenous and migrant. Cohesion, integration and race equality is about everyone being included and everyone participating”.

By: Jagdeesh Singh

© Copyright 2007 by SikhSangat.org

______________________________________
NOTES

1. [indira] Gandhi's later years were bedevilled with problems in Punjab. In September 1981, Bhindranwale was arrested in Amritsar, but was released twenty five days later due to lack of evidence. After his release, he relocated himself from his headquarters at Mehta Chowk to Guru Nanak Niwas within the Golden Temple precincts.[1]

Disturbed by the spread of militancy by Bhindranwale's group, Gandhi ordered the Army to storm the Golden Temple to remove Bhindranwale and his followers on June 3, 1984. Thousands of innocent Sikh pilgrims were killed in the process, leading to widespread anger over the desecration of Sikhism's holiest shrine. The blatant disregard for the thousands of civilians within the temple and excessive use of military force has remained a source of great controversy to this day.

In response to this desecration of the Golden Temple, on October 31, 1984, two of Indira Gandhi's Sikh bodyguards Satwant Singh and Beant Singh assassinated her in the garden of the Prime Minister's Residence at No. 1, Safdarjung Road in New Delhi. As she was walking to be interviewed by the British actor Peter Ustinov filming a documentary for Irish television, she passed a wicket gate, guarded by Satwant Singh and Beant Singh, where they proceeded to open fire with their semiautomatic machine pistols before being shot themselves by other bodyguards. One bodyguard was killed and the other wounded. She died on her way to the hospital, in her official car, but was not declared dead until many hours later.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indira_Gandhi

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Blue_Star

1984 Anti-Sikh Riots took place in India after the assassination of Indira Gandhi on October 31, 1984. India's Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated by two of her Sikh guards acting in the aftermath of Operation Bluestar.

Over the next four days nearly 3000 Sikhs were massacred in systematic riots planned and led by Congress activists and sympathizers. The then Congress government was widely criticized for doing very little at the time, if not acting as a conspirator, especially since voting lists were used to identify Sikh families. The then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, son of Indira Gandhi allegedly made a statement "When a big tree falls, the earth is bound to shake" on the Sikh carnage [1][2]. His widow, Sonia Gandhi and current President of the Congress Party, officially apologized in 1998 for the events of November, 1984. The most affected regions were neighborhoods in Delhi.

It is alleged that the anti-Sikh violence were conducted at the behest of the Congress party who actually instigated masses. Many ordinary Indians of different religious dispositions made significant efforts to hide and help Sikh families as outlined in affidavits of Sikh victims and have been active in seeking appropriate justice[citation needed].

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_Anti-Sikh_Riots

For Sikh Books - history, etc., click here

History of Jihad against the Mongols (1050-1258) - AND - History of Jihad

Also see

RACE AND ETHNICITY IN AFGHANISTAN AND PAKISTAN

You can take Arabization out of the Amazigh . . .

2009-05-01T03:50:00.000-07:00

. . . but, can you take the Amazigh out of Islam?

Under the Arabs, the Berbers became Islamized and soon formed the backbone of the Arab armies that conquered Spain. However, the Berbers repeatedly rose against the Arabs, and in the 9th cent. they supported the Fatimid dynasty in its conquest of N Africa.
from Islamization of the Imazighen

Islam, however, that came with the Arabs, appears to have been embedded deeply into the
Amazigh psyche.

A Moroccan with whom I corresponded, told me of the Moroccan troops that not only broke through German SS troops but terrified them with their ferocity.

I suppose that he was referring to the following incident cited by the American General Mark Clark, The Allied commander, [who] paid tribute to the Goumiers and the Moroccan regulars of the Tirailleur units:

In spite of the stiffening enemy resistance, the 2nd Moroccan Division penetrated the Gustave [sic] Line in less than two day’s fighting. The next 48 hours on the French front were decisive. The knife-wielding Goumiers swarmed over the hills, particularly at night, and General Juin’s entire force showed an aggressiveness hour after hour that the Germans could not withstand. Cerasola, San Giorgio, Mt. D’Oro, Ausonia and Esperia were seized in one of the most brilliant and daring advances of the war in Italy... For this performance, which was to be a key to the success of the entire drive on Rome, I shall always be a grateful admirer of General Juin and his magnificent FEC.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goumier

My Moroccan correspondent believed that the Jews owed an expression of gratitude to these Moroccans, although I doubt that the French Moroccans fought to save Jewish lives.

In the next sentence, my correspondent wrote that what he wished most for was to go to Israel and kill Jews.

When I mentioned to him that his people had been defeated by Arabs who had foisted their Islam on them, he replied that Allah had willed it.

AND . . .

from http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/comments/151288 a COMMENT:

Submitted by Charles Martel, Feb 27, 2009 10:34
This is a quote from one of the Berber writers blasting the Islamists:

The (Islamists) author's second error is that he has limited solidarity with Palestine to participation in marches organized by the political current to which he himself belongs [i.e. the Islamists], in cooperation with the pan-Arab current - whether in its left-wing, nationalist salafi, or right-wing liberal forms.

Daniel: Can you explain these three apparently anti-Islamist strains of pan-Arab nationalism?

Daniel Pipes reply:
You mean anti-Islamist strains of anti-Arab nationialism. The Berbers, like the Kurds, see themselves as a separate ethnic group and resist Arabization.

Most Berbers reject radical Islam. Some go further and see Islam as part of the Arabizing package and are cool or even hostile to Islam.
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/comments/151288

Reader comment on: Berbers as Anti-Islamists and Anti-Arab Nationalists
The So-Called Arabs Who Built The Pyramids ??
Submitted by Rebecca, Mar 4, 2009 11:21
[excerpt]
The Muslims are always talking about the 'colonizers' - but here is the ultimate example of colonization - and Arabia barely had to lift a finger - now these people are so devoted to Arabia - they have called themselves Arab - even the Egyptians - who's ancestors built the pyramids - are now ditching their history and calling themselves Arab. - Talking to the North Africans there - is even more interesting - they seem devoid of knowledge about their own history - except to say they were conquered by the Arabs (something which they seem extremely happy about!) - it is a great crime !! To do anything at all - they must be in synch with Arabia - which of course is a lot richer then they are - to show how subservient the mindset is - many North Africans will tell you - their country is not rich because they don't have oil ~ perfectly logical in the Arab alternate reality ! - I would venture to say that until the North Africans are free of this Arab slave-like mindset and until they establish their own unique identity - that part of the world will see little or no progress for some time to come - I'm with the Berbers on the identity issue !! I predict that Ethiopia might well emerge as a powerhouse in this region - here are a people who respect their history and so their identity -- this coupled with a respect for human rights - could place them in a good position to bring their country into the modern world -- the other surrounding countries you could say are a part of the wider Arab harem !
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/comments/151620
　
[from] "'Berbers, Where Do You Stand on Palestine?'" As the MEMRI introduction explains:

Throughout the recent fighting in Gaza, the mainstream North African press was nearly unanimous in its support for the Palestinians and its condemnation of Israel. Some Amazigh (Berber) activist groups, though, made a point of distancing themselves from this mainstream view - for which they were attacked by the Islamist press. While a number of conservative and left-wing Amazigh groups expressed support for the Palestinians, others expressed contrary views, to underline their non-Arab identity and their belief that North Africa should detach itself politically and culturally from the Middle East.

Then follow six excerpts from the Moroccan and Algerian media concerning Berber attitudes towards the war in Gaza. Some of it is bitter indeed, as, for example, a commentary by Moha Moukhlis, a Berber activist:

And the so-called 'Arab street[?]' A brainless herd that has been indoctrinated and riled up and that has lost all sense of gravity and direction. They express their hatred for the Jews, whom they hope to exterminate from the face of the Earth… Yet this 'Arab street', which sees itself as the voice of the [world's] peoples, never dared to lift a finger against the crimes committed by the Hamas fundamentalists, or by the Arabo-Islamist regimes against non-Arab populations in Darfur, Kurdistan, Egypt, Syria, Libya, Algeria, or Niger. No! [And] the rights of the Amazigh people are supposed to be sacrificed on the altar of [this] Arab fundamentalism.
Translations of this item (entire Pipes article) into French
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2009/02/berbers-as-anti-islamists-and-anti-arab-nationalists.html

[Selected] COMMENTS
　
Submitted by Atlas Kahena, Mar 27, 2009 03:26
[excerpts]
Before we attempt to answer the question Where do the Amazigh Stand in regard to this or to that issue, we first need to define who the berbers are.
***
If we ask an arab-islamist, for instance, the answer would be that the Amazigh are Muslims and he/she may even add that they are more Arabs than the Arabs themselves. Another extreme view would only find the truth in one place and one only - The middle Ages: "the Almoravids who established a brutal and bigoted regime on southern Spain in the Middle Ages were Amazigh." What this view failed to mention is that this was done – if it was done at all, in the same exact terms – under the arab-islamist ideology.
The berbers didn't just conquer Spain. It happened with the Arab-Muslim push and conquest that has swept the berbers of North Africa on its way to Spain. Otherwise, why hadn't they done it before? Approaching the Amazigh question is quite a controversy unless we check with the Amazigh themselves. The whistles of the current identity crisis of the berbers were not blown by the copy-cuts of the arab-islamists because those are the ones who lost their Amazighity and if they don't have it, they won't give it.
***
If Israel is an enemy of the Palestine and of the Arabs and I don't see myself as a Palestinian or as an Arab, I don't see why the berbers should be dictated what position to take in this matter. The berbers hardly have the weight to change their own economic conditions, how in the world would they have the power to alter a deeply rooted historically intertwined political problem – More than that, if the Arab countries have not only watched the problem go on for so long but they have contributed to it, what would the berbers do? – knowing that the berbers hardly exist in the eyes of the Arabs.
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/comments/152835
　
Submitted by Farid H., Mar 25, 2009 05:01
[excerpts]
As a Moroccan (of Arab ethnicity), I'd like to add a few points:
***
3. With respect to Berber Anti-Islamism, I'm rather skeptical and I don't think that it holds much water, and you can't count on it. There is a small minority within the Amazigh movement that is anti-Islamic and a very, very small fraction that is even openly pro-Israel. But this is statistically totally insignificant. Considering that most hardened Islamists are actually MREs (marocains résidents à l'étranger), and that this group consists of many, many more Amazighs than Arabs (proportionally, when compared to the ethnic make-up in Morocco itself), it is quite evident that Islamism is more prevalent amongst Amazighs (at least outside Morocco).

And while this is objectively verifiable with statistics, my own subjective non-verifiable impression is that when talking about the M.E. conflict, the most radical anti-Israeli comments are more often made by Amazighs than by Arabs. On this point, I may have the wrong (or biased?) impression, but it strikes me as being very visible.
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/comments/152736
　
Submitted by Peter Herz, Mar 19, 2009 15:21
[excerpt]
I wonder how many Amazigh stood up for the Jewish communities of the Maghreb when they were being expelled after Algerian independence; or for the right of Muslims to convert to Christianity.
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/comments/152503

Recovering Lands Previously Conquered by the Moslems - Italy

2009-04-12T01:24:00.001-07:00

[The following has been gathered from Wikipedia]

The Islamic conquest and rule of Sicily, Malta, and parts of southern Italy was a process whose origin can be traced back through the general expansion of Islam from the 7th century onwards.[1] Though the Muslim presence was ephemeral on the peninsula and limited mostly to semi-permanent soldier camps—the Emirate of Bari existed for only twenty years or so[2]—their rule over the island was effective from 902, but their complete rule of Sicily lasted only from 965 until 1061, though they were not completely evicted until 1091.[3]

The Muslim conquest of Sicily and the subsequent Christian reconquest by the Normans was the major event in the history of Islam in Italy.[4] The conquests of the Normans established Roman Catholicism firmly in the region, where Eastern Christianity had been prominent during the time of Byzantine rule and continued with the natives during the time of the Muslim overlords.[5][6] Widespread conversion ensued, which coupled with the re-latinisation of the inhabitants led to the disappearance of Islam in Sicily by the 1280s.

Norman conquest of Muslim Sicily (1061–1091)
Main article: Norman conquest of southern Italy

Southern Italy in 1084, showing the remains of the Kalbid emirate, then fought over by multiple claimants, on the eve of the final Norman conquest.

In 1038 a Byzantine army under George Maniaces crossed the strait of Messina. This included a corps of Normans which saved the situation in the first clash against the Muslim from Messina. After another decisive victory in the summer of 1040, Maniaces halted his march to lay siege to Syracuse. Despite his conquest of the latter, Maniaces was removed from his position: the subsequent Muslim counter-offensive reconquered all the cities captured by the Byzantines.

The Norman Robert Guiscard, son of Tancred, invaded Sicily in 1060. The island was split between three Arab emirs, and the sizeable Christian population rose up against the ruling Muslims. One year later Messina fell, and in 1072, Palermo was taken by the Normans.[15] The loss of the cities, each with a splendid harbor, dealt a severe blow to Muslim power on the island. Eventually all of Sicily was taken. In 1091, Noto in the southern tip of Sicily and the island of Malta, the last Arab stongholds, fell to the Christians. By the 11th century Muslim power in the Mediterranean had begun to wane.[16]

The Norman Kingdom of Sicily under Roger II was characterised by its multi-ethnic nature and religious tolerance.[17] Normans, Jews, Muslim Arabs, Byzantine Greeks, Longobards and "native" Sicilians lived in harmony.[18][19] Rather than exterminate the Muslims of Sicily, the Roger II's grandson Emperor Frederick II of Hohenstaufen (1215—1250) allowed them to settle on the mainland and build mosques.[citation needed][dubious – discuss] Not least, he enlisted them in his — Christian — army and even into his personal bodyguards.[20][21]

A large scale Muslim rebellion broke out in 1190, triggering organized resistance and systematic reprisals[22] and marked the final chapter of Islam in Sicily. The Muslim problem characterized Hohenstaufen rule in Sicily under Henry VI (1194-97) and his son Frederick II (1197-1250). In the 1220s, in order to stamp out the Muslim rebellion, Frederick adopted a programmatic system to remove Islam from Sicily entirely, as it had been prior to their invasion. This was achieved with the expulsion and forced deportation to the Apulian town of Lucera where they were isolated. The annihilation of Islam in Sicily was completed by the late 1240s, when the final deportations to Lucera took place.[23]

Islamic and Arabic influence and legacy

See also: Arab-Norman culture

Ibn Hawqal, the eminent Arab traveler, visited Sicily in year 972 and described the city of Palermo in his book Al-Masalik wal Mamlik as "the city of the 300 mosques". This Islamic and Arabic identity of the island was still preserved even 100 years after the arrival of the Normans[24] as described by the Spanish-Arab geographer Ibn Jubair who landed in the island after returning from a pilgrimage to Mecca in 1184.

To his surprise, Ibn Jubair enjoyed a very warm reception[citation needed] by the Norman Christians. He was further surprised to find that even the Christians spoke Arabic, that the government officials were still largely Muslim, and that the heritage of some 200 previous years of Muslim rule of Sicily was still intact.[25][24][dubious – discuss]

Arabic art and science continued to be heavily influential[24] in Sicily during the two centuries[citation needed] following the Christian conquest. Frederick II, Holy Roman Emperor and King of Sicily in the early 13th century, is said to have been able to speak Arabic (as well as Latin, Sicilian, German, French, and Greek) and had several Muslim ministers. The heritage of the Arabic language can be still found in numerous terms adapted from it and still used in Sicilian language.

A community of Muslims, especially fishermen from Tunisia, has deep roots in the history of the town of Mazara del Vallo, on the south-western coast of Sicily.[citation needed] During the 1970s, a prosperous Italian economy spurred the immigration of Muslims from Jordan, Syria and Palestine to the area.[26]

Another legacy of Muslim rule is the survival of some Sicilian place-names of Arabic origin, for example "Calata-" or "Calta-" from Arabic Qal`at… (قلعة) = “castle of”.

Also, a genetic study in 2009 revealed a significant genetic contribution of Northwest African genes among today's inhabitants near the region of Lucera[27].

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Islam_in_southern_Italy

How the Moslems were driven out of Italy

Islamic period in Lucera, Italy
In 1224 AD, Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II, responding to religious uprisings in Sicily, expelled all Muslims from the island, transferring many to Lucera over the next two decades. In this controlled environment, they couldn't challenge royal authority and they benefited the crown in taxes and military service. Their numbers eventually reached between 15,000 and 20,000, leading Lucera to be called Lucaera Saracenorum because it represented the last stronghold of Islamic presence in Italy. Muslims in Lucera were predominately farmers. They grew durum wheat, barley, legumes, grapes and other fruits. Muslims also kept bees for honey.[1]

The colony thrived for 75 years until it was sacked in 1300 by Christian forces under the command of Charles II of Naples. The city's Muslim inhabitants were exiled or sold into slavery,[2] with many finding asylum in Albania across the Adriatic Sea.[3] Their abandoned mosques were demolished, and churches were usually built in their place, including the cathedral S. Maria della Vittoria.[4]

After the Muslims were removed from Lucera, Charles tried to settle Christians in the city. Those Muslims that converted to Christianity got part of their property back, but none was restored his former position of political or economic influence. As time progressed, grain production fell in the city, and in 1339 the city was hit by a famine. While Christians were allowed to farm as the Muslims, the loss of Muslim farmers may have been a cause of the famine.[5]

A significant genetic Northwest African contribution among today's inhabitants near the region of Lucera was revealed by a very recent genetic study in 2009[6].

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucera

Morocco, conquered by the Arab-Mohammedans, still under the rule of Arabs and Islam

2009-04-01T03:15:00.000-07:00

The Arabs conquered Morocco coming from Egypt into North Africa. The inhabitants of what the Arabs called the "Maghreb" were either forcefully, by circumstance, or voluntarily converted to Islam.

[quoting Robert Spencer of
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/025440.php]

Many people frown on proselytizing. I have no problem with it from any group. If someone wants to convert me to another religion or point of view, I'll be glad to discuss it. If, however, someone who rejects an invitation to convert must be killed [as is the case with Islam] -- well, that does seem to cross a line. So in Morocco, why not let Christians preach, and anyone else who wants to preach also? If Islam is true, its truth will shine forth in comparison to error, will it not? Actions like this one from the Moroccan government manifest a deep insecurity that can also be found all over the Islamic world.

COMMENT

Sorrow01 • 94p
It is actually an inadvertent admission on the part of the Morrocan authorities that Islam, even when in a dominant position, cannot tolerate any competition.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/025440.php

Les Cosaques zaporogues écrivant une lettre a Mahmoud IV sultan de Turquie

2009-03-28T19:01:00.000-07:00

Conflits - Islamisation 13 mars 2009 -->

Contexte Les Cosaques zaporogues écrivant une lettre au sultan de Turquie est un tableau historique. La scène représentée se déroule en l’année 1676. Les Cosaques zaporogues (zaporogue vient du russe za porohamy et signifie « derrière les rapides »), vivant sur les bords du Dniepr inférieur, ont vaincu l’armée turque au cours d’une bataille. Le sultan de Turquie exige cependant d’eux qu’ils se soumettent. À cette requête, les Cosaques (...) suite

La chute du mythe du "Zéro arabe"

2009-03-28T02:34:00.000-07:00

15 mars 2009

Si les impérialisme romain, perse, grec, égyptien apportaient des choses totalement inconnues des peuples occupés, l’impérialisme arabo-islamique prend aux peuples conquis des choses totalement inconnues du monde musulman. D’un simple coup de pinceau, il s’approprie ces choses et les peuples qui les ont créées.

Cet article va enfin mettre fin à un autre mensonge monumental de l’usurpateur.

Préambule

Nous savons tous que les chiffres que nous utilisons actuellement (1, 2, 3...) sont appelés à tort "chiffres arabes" alors que ce sont des chiffres venus d’Inde et d’ailleurs les arabes utilisent d’autres chiffres, d’autres formes pour noter les nombres. Définition de "chiffre" : caractère servant à représenter un nombre ; système conventionnel pour correspondre secrètement (un code) ou en langage moderne "message crypté". Et bien sûr Larousse et toutes les références donnent la même étymologie qui fait remonter l’origine de ce mot à l’arabe "sifr" qui signifie zéro. Eh bien il est temps de vérifier cette hypothèse.

Hypothèse

Nous avons dans les billets précédents que le "h" kabyle serait une mutation d’autres sons selon les cas de figure, le "h" aurait notamment remplacé un son "ph"(f). Nous avons vu aussi le sens du "ph" kabyle comme symbole de l’unité la plus petite, la particule élémentaire. Aujourd’hui on va s’attaquer au son "sh" considéré à juste raison comme trop répandu dans notre langue à cause des sémitiques, le phénicien notamment, oû le "sh" est omniprésent. D’abord il faut signaler que 1. ce son "sh" peut-être confondu avec le son "j" (zh), 2. il serait simplement une altération du "s". Ensuite nous prenons ce son "SH" comme un son complexe ou digramme que l’on va scinder pour comprendre son sens réel : sh = s+h Nous avons vu que le "h" en kabyle aurait remplacé un autre son notamment le "ph"(f) : sh = s+h = s+ph ou s+f C’est précisément cette hypothèse sh = s+ph qui va nous servir de tremplin pour déchiffrer notre lexique kabyle (mazigh en général) et vérifier les interférences avec les autres langues notamment les sémitiques, l’arabe en particulier. Mais déjà il est bien de vérifier au sein de la langue kabyle même, pour ce un exemple assez frappant : shirew (frissonner) avec sh=s+ph il deviendra sphirew...avec la même racine que l’autre verbe kabyle phriwes (frissonner). Un autre exemple : shrew = égrapper (enlever les feuilles sans toucher à la tige), shrew devient sphrew oû l’on devine phrew/i-pherawen = feuille(s) d’arbre. On reviendra sur ces mots shrew/phrew par rapport à leur sens "feuille, écrire" avec une révélation fracassante. Cette hypothèse est vérifiée pour une multitude d’exemples de mots et verbes kabyles (mazigh en général) donc elle est on ne peut plus convaincante.

La potence

Nous allons commencer par un exemple cruel. Comment appelle-t-on en kabyle comme en argot algérois la guillotine (au temps de la guerre d’Algérie) ? Finga, lfinga. Ce terme en fait signifie la potence. Suivez le lexique. a-shangal = piège à nœud coulant, lacs (la), potence Avec le son "sh" = s+ph (s+f) on aura : a-sphangal (sfangal) oû l’on devine facilement finga (potence) du parler moderne. sphang° ou lesfendj = beignet rond et flexible (une relation avec spongia = éponge n’est pas à exclure) Cette racine "rétractable" [s.ph.n] en kabyle s’entrevoit en langue grecque oû span = contracter (ce mot a donné spasmos en grec et spasme en latin/français). Et pour finir il faut rappeler qu’en kabyle shengu (sphengu) signifie "ennemi".

La sphère

Si vous avez lu sur ce blog le post Cicéron vous aurez compris le sens de shyr, shawar, etc...Un petit rappel : shyr = ballon, pelote, boule, rond Avec le "sh" muté en s+ph on aura : shyr = sphyr (mot au masculin). Ce mot est sans doute équivalent au grec sphaira = boule, globe, sphère, le mot sphère en français/latin est issu de là. Notre shyr au sens de globe est phonétiquement proche...du russe shar (globe, boule, ballon), c’est amusant comme coïncidence, n’est ce pas ! En réalité notre shyr=sphyr atteste la forme de sphère, globe, boule (à zéro !). Il est quasi certain que le mot arabe sifr (zéro) est issu de ce mot commun au moins à deux autres langues plus anciennes que l’arabe : le libyque (mazigh, kabyle) et le grec. Et le sens de cette racine sphérique [sph.r] n’est pas exactement le même sens qu’en arabe siphr = zéro, nul mais plutôt il désignerait une globalité, un cycle complet, un ensemble, un paquet de N unités de base comme une boite d’emballage ou pour être plus clair une cartouche contient par exemple une dizaine (10) de paquets et chaque paquet contient une douzaine (12) d’unités de base (ex.cigarette). D’ailleurs l’autre forme de cette racine avec "sh" à la place de "sph" soit la racine [sh.r] est présente en arabe dans les dizaines âshra = 10, âshrin = 20, etc..., et ces nombres sont présents aussi en kabyle et les autres nous disent que ce sont des emprunts à l’arabe, eh bien voyons de plus près. En kabyle il y a les verbes shaR ou chaR = remplir qui serait sphaR avec une indication très nette de remplir, compléter un volume (comme une sphère), il n’y pas de tels verbes ou de telles notions avec cette même racine allant dans le même sens en arabe ! Le sens de "remplir, compléter" mais pour une surface (superficie) existe en arabe et il est commun au kabyle avec le verbe aamaR proche de âmeR en arabe. Toujours par rapport au sens sphr = zéro, nul voici une autre piste : nous avons un verbe en kabyle fregh interfèrent avec l’arabe faregh avec le sens de "vide" ; il y a le verbe kabyle phReDH = "vider de sa consistance" qui aurait pu être amputé d’un "s" donc il aurait été sphredh et ici la racine à la base sfr indique bien le sens de "vide, sans consistance" donc "nul, zéro"...ce verbe phReDH existe bel et bien en arabe mais avec un sens totalement différent : "exiger". Donc...

Le milieu

Pour signifier 12 heures ou midi en arabe ils disent ithnat-âshar (2-10, soit 12), en kabyle nous disons tsenash qui avec la formule sh=s+ph serait tsenasph...terme quasi similaire à tsenasfa = milieu, centre soit le midi (pour la journée) ou minuit pour les notions de temps, le terme équivalent en arabe est "waset" (milieu) qui est très loin du notre comme vous le voyez. D’autre part pour dire moitié en kabyle nous disons nephs avec un "fs" alors qu’en arabe c’est l’inverse nesf avec un "sf" peut-être parce que chez eux nefs = équivalent, égal, similaire. Donc il faudra vérifier si notre mot nephs (moitié) n’est pas une déformation de nesph (comme en arabe) car cette forme nesph est plus concordante avec tsenaspha (milieu, centre). Je me risque à avancer les suppositions suivantes : tsenaspha avec le N attesterait sans doute la demi-sphère ou hémi-cycle ; le "sh" ou sa forme "sph" attesterait sans doute le cyle complet, la sphère. On vérifiera plus tard.

La boule à zéro

On peut bien sûr passer au crible tous les mots kabyles avec un "sh" et les remplacer par "sph" tout comme les mots étrangers notamment grecs avec un "sph, sp" à remplacer par un "sh" pour avoir leur forme en kabyle moderne. Mais il y a autre chose à signaler à savoir que dans certains mots kabyles commençant par un "ph" (f) il y aurait eu une chute du "s", exemple finga devrait être sfinga et shinga. On va prendre 2 exemples assez pertinents (un autre très très intéressant viendra prochainement) : a-phermash, a-fermash = édenté, sans dents Avec un "s" re-gréffé au F on aura a-sphermash, a-sfermash (shermash) a-ferDHas = chauve (en italien calvo, pelato...pelote) comme Kojak, Fantomas ou Pierluigi Collina ! Avec un "s" rétabli aux côtés du "f" on aura : a-spherDHas, a-sferdhas (sherdhas) Ici nous avons le vrai sens de "spher/sfer" qui certainement serait "vide, sans, néant" en clair avec le sens de zéro. C’est sans doute pour marquer un "cycle, ensemble, un chiffre rond" comme "dizaine" ou "douzaine" qui reste à déterminer.

Épilogue

Donc vous avez compris que le sh = s+ph et que derrière un F au début d’un mot en kabyle il est probable qu’un S lui aurait été amputé. Prenons maintenant le deuxième sens du mot "chiffre" mot "arabe" sifr selon Larousse et les autres "autorités" occidentales et orientales, en l’occurrence le sens de chiffre = code. Donc ce qui est secret et caché aux autres. Comment on dit en arabe cacher ? - ils disent khebi. Et comment on dit chacher en kabyle (mazigh) ?...’pher/’fer ! Ce mot ’pher s’il a vraiment perdu son "s" aurait été spher. On y reviendra là-dessus pour a-sirem (esprérer en kabyle), sperare/espérer en latin/français, on reviendra par rapport à la beauté et oiseau comparé aux langues sémitiques et bien sûr on rendra visite à l’ancienne Egypte à Nefertiti et aux Pharaons.

Pour finir. Je pense que le mythe des "chiffres arabes" alors qu’ils sont hindous est déjà tombé depuis un bon moment. Aujourd’hui je considère que le mythe du "zéro -chiffre arabe" est tombé à l’eau et tous les usurpateurs qui continueront à propager le mensonge du "zéro arabe" méritent un vrai zéro, un beau double zéro et eux-mêmes resteront de grands zéros en chiffres.

http://www.afrique-du-nord.com/article.php3?id_article=1617
original at http://mazaris.blogspot.com/2009/03/zero.html

Zéro et l'usurpateur

2009-03-28T00:43:00.000-07:00

Zéro

Ce post va mettre fin à un autre mensonge monumental de l'usurpateur.

Préambule

Nous savons tous que les chiffres que nous utilisons actuellement (1, 2, 3...) sont appellés à tort "chiffres arabes" alors que ce sont des chiffres venus d'Inde et d'ailleurs les arabes utilisent d'autres chiffres, d'autres formes pour noter les nombres.

Définition de "chiffre": caractère servant à représenter un nombre; système conventionnel pour correspondre secrètement (un code) ou en langage moderne "message crypté".
Et bien sûr Larousse et toutes les références donnent la même étymologie qui fait remonter l'origine de ce mot à l'arabe "sifr" qui signifie zéro. Eh bien il est temps de vérifier cette hypothèse.

Hypothèse
Nous avons dans les billets précédents que le "h" kabyle serait une mutation d'autres sons selon les cas de figure, le "h" aurait notamment remplacé un son "ph"(f). Nous avons vu aussi le sens du "ph" kabyle comme symbole de l'unité la plus petite, la particule élémentaire.
Aujourd'hui on va s'attaquer au son "sh" considéré à juste raison comme trop répandu dans notre langue à cause des sémitiques, le phénicien notamment, oû le "sh" est omniprésent. D'abord il faut signaler que 1. ce son "sh" peut-être confondu avec le son "j" (zh), 2. il serait simplement une altération du "s". Ensuite nous prenons ce son "SH" comme un son complexe ou digramme que l'on va scinder pour comprendre son sens réel:
sh = s+h
Nous avons vu que le "h" en kabyle aurait remplacé un autre son notamment le "ph"(f):
sh = s+h = s+ph ou s+f
C'est précisemment cette hypothèse sh = s+ph qui va nous servir de tremplin pour déchiffrer notre lexique kabyle (mazigh en général) et verrifier les interférences avec les autres langues notamment les sémitiques, l'arabe en particulier. Mais déjà il est bien de vérifier au sein de la langue kabyle même, pour ce un exemple assez frappant: shirew (frissoner) avec sh=s+ph il deviendra sphirew...avec la même racine que l'autre verbe kabyle phriwes (frissoner). Un autre exemple: shrew = égrapper (enlever les feuilles sans toucher à la tige), shrew devient sphrew oû l'on devine phrew/i-pherawen = feuille(s) d'arbre. On reviendra sur ces mots shrew/phrew par rapport à leur sens "feuille, écrire" avec une révélation fracassante. Cette hypothèse est vérifiée pour une multitude d'exemples de mots et verbes kabyles (mazigh en général) donc elle est on ne peut plus convaincante.

La potence
Nous allons commencer par un exemple cruel. Comment appelle-t-on en kabyle comme en argot algérois la guillotine (au temps de la guerre d'Algérie)? Finga, lfinga. Ce terme en fait signifie la potence. Suivez le lexique.
a-shangal = piège à noeud coulant, lacs (la), potence
Avec le son "sh" = s+ph (s+f) on aura:
a-sphangal (sfangal) oû l'on devine facilement finga (potence) du parler moderne.
sphang° ou lesfendj = beignet rond et flexible (une relation avec spongia = éponge n'est pas à exclure)
Cette racine "rétractable" [s.ph.n] en kabyle s'entrevoit en langue grecque oû span = contracter (ce mot a donné spasmos en grec et spasme en latin/français). Et pour finir il faut rappeller qu'en kabyle shengu (sphengu) signifie "ennemi". La sphère
Si vous avez lu sur ce blog le post Cicéron vous aurez compris le sens de shyr, shawrar, etc...Un petit rappel:
shyr = ballon, pelote, boule, rond
Avec le "sh" muté en s+ph on aura:
shyr = sphyr (mot au masculin). Ce mot est sans doute équivalent au grec sphaira = boule, globe, sphère, le mot sphère en français/latin est issu de là.
Notre shyr au sens de globe est phonétiquement proche...du russe shar (globe, boule, ballon), c'est amusant comme coincidence, n'est ce pas!
En réalité notre shyr=sphyr atteste la forme de sphère, globe, boule (à zéro!). Il est quasi certain que le mot arabe sifr (zéro) est issu de ce mot commun au moins à deux autres langues plus anciennes que l'arabe: le libyque (mazigh, kabyle) et le grec. Et le sens de cette racine sphérique [sph.r] n'est pas exactement le même sens qu'en arabe siphr = zéro, nul mais plutôt il désignerait une globalité, un cycle complet, un ensemble, un paquet de N unités de base comme une boîte d'emballage ou pour être plus clair une cartouche contient par exemple une dizaine (10) de paquets et chaque paquet contient une douzaine (12) d'unités de base (ex.cigarette). D'ailleurs l'autre forme de cette racine avec "sh" à la place de "sph" soit la racine [sh.r] est présente en arabe dans les dizaines âshra = 10, âshrin = 20, etc..., et ces nombres sont présents aussi en kabyle et les autres nous disent que ce sont des emprunts à l'arabe, eh bien voyons de plus près. En kabyle il y a les verbes shaR ou chaR = remplir qui serait sphaR avec une indication très nette de remplir, compléter un volume (comme une sphère), il n'y pas de tels verbes ou de telles notions avec cette même racine allant dans le même sens en arabe! Le sens de "remplir, compléter" mais pour une surface (superficie) existe en arabe et il est commun au kabyle avec le verbe aamaR proche de âmeR en arabe. Toujours par rapport au sens sphr = zéro, nul voici une autre piste: nous avons un verbe en kabyle fregh interférent avec l'arabe faregh avec le sens de "vide"; en kabyle il y a le verbe phres (fer'es) = nettoyer, élaguer, enlever tout ce qui est nocif, rendre net/clair/sain; il y a le verbe kabyle phReDH = "vider de sa consistance" qui aurait pu être amputé d'un "s" donc il aurait été sphredh et ici la racine à la base sfr indique bien le sens de "vide, sans consistance" donc "nul, zéro"...ce verbe phReDH existe bel et bien en arabe mas avec un sens totalement différent: "exiger". Donc...

Le milieu
Pour signifier 12 heures ou midi en arabe ils disent ithnat-âshar (2-10, soit 12), en kabyle nous disons tsenash qui avec la formule sh=s+ph serait tsenasph...terme quasi similaire à tsenasfa = milieu, centre soit le midi (pour la journée) ou minuit pour les notions de temps, le terme équivalent en arabe est "waset" (milieu) qui est très loin du notre comme vous le voyez. D'autre part pour dire moitié en kabyle nous disons nephs avec un "fs" alors qu'en arabe c'est l'inverse nesf avec un "sf" peut-être parce que chez eux nefs = équivalent, égal, similaire. Donc il faudra vérifier si notre mot nephs (moitié) n'est pas une déformation de nesph (comme en arabe) car cette forme nesph est plus concordante avec tsenaspha (milieu, centre). Je me risque à avancer les suppositions suivantes: tsenaspha avec le N attesterait sans doute la demi-sphère ou hémi-cycle; le "sh" ou sa forme "sph" attesterait sans doute le cyle complet, la sphère. On vérifiera plus tard.

La boule à zéro
On peut bien sûr passer au crible tous les mots kabyles avec un "sh" et les remplacer par "sph" tout come les mots étrangers notamment grecs avec un "sph, sp" à remplacer par un "sh" pour avoir leur forme en kabyle moderne. Mais il y a autre chose à signaler à savoir que dans certains mots kabyles commençant par un "ph" (f) il y aurait eu une chute du "s", exemple finga devrait être sfinga et shinga. On va prendre 2 exemples assez pertinents (un autre très très intéressant viendra prochainement):
a-phermash, a-fermash = édenté, sans dents
Avec un "s" re-gréffé au F on aura a-sphermash, a-sfermash (shermash)
a-ferDHas = chauve (en italien calvo, pelato...pelote) comme Kojak, Fantomas ou Pierluigi Collina!
Avec un "s" rétabli aux côtés du "f" on aura:
a-spherDHas, a-sferdhas (sherdhas)
Ici nous avons le vrai sens de "spher/sfer" qui certainement serait "vide, sans, néant" en clair avec le sens de zéro. C'est sans doute pour marquer un "cycle, ensemble, un chiffre rond" comme "dizaine" ou "douzaine" qui reste à déterminer.
Epilogue
Donc vous avez compris que le sh = s+ph et que derrière un F au début d'un mot en kabyle il est probable qu'un S lui aurait été amputé.
Prenons maintenant le deuxième sens du mot "chiffre" mot "arabe" sifr selon Larousse et les autres "autorités" occidentales et orientales, en l'occurence le sens de chiffre = code. Donc ce qui est secret et caché aux autres. Comment on dit en arabe cacher? - ils disent khebi. Et comment on dit chacher en kabyle (mazigh)?...'pher/'fer! Ce mot 'pher s'il a vraiment perdu son "s" aurait été spher. On y reviendra là-dessus pour a-sirem (esprérer en kabyle), sperare/espérer en latin/français, on reviendra par rapport à la beaute et oiseau comparé aux langues sémitiques et bien sûr on rendra visite à l'ancienne Egypte à Nefertiti et aux Pharaons. Pour finir. Je pense que le mythe des "chiffres arabes" alors qu'ils sont hindous est déjà tombé depuis un bon moment. Aujourd'hui je considère que le mythe du "zéro -chiffre arabe" est tombé à l'eau et tous les usurpateurs qui continueront à propager le mensonge du "zéro arabe" méritent un vrai zéro, un beau double zéro et eux-mêmes resteront de grands zéros en chiffres.

Publié par Dda Stayevski à l'adresse 13:41
Libellés : ph, Sh, sph, Zéro

http://mazaris.blogspot.com/2009/03/zero.html

The Makhzen will ban Morocco too!

2009-03-27T15:20:00.000-07:00

The Makhzen will ban Morocco too!
25 March 2009

The Moroccan regime has decided that the banning of Amazigh first names inside the country is not sufficient enough. Two or three weeks before, it has sent to all his corrupt consulates all over the world a racist notice forbidding them definitely from then on. I know that is beyond comprehension, which is why we can not comprehend. But it’s not the case of the young Amazigh immigrants, especially in France, Netherland, and Belgium. They were overwhelmingly surprised because they don’t know very well the Makhzen and his fascistic methods.

But why this move at that time? Sincerely, I don’t have the foggiest idea. As all the totalitarian regimes, even if you bend over backwards for a long time, I am sure you will not find any logical explanation. But we are quite sure of one point: the Moroccan regime is still very amazigh phobic and full of hatred and hate against the indigenous population of North Africa, the Amazigh people. This is as plain as your nose on your face even if his talkative spokespersons and his propagandist media say collectively and constantly the contrary.

It stands to reason that the Makhzen system has never liked things which have the slighest connection with amazighity, the authentic identity not only of Morocco but also of North Africa on the whole. Even if it appreciates certainly a lot its benfits: the amazigh cuisine, the richness of the country, and most of all to be everlastingly in power. Not to put too fine a point on it, the Makhzen has in effect a lot to do with any colonial and imperial regime, because it is proudly one of them. In any manner, we do need no proofs to show that, his dumb actions speak loudly by themselves.

That being said, if the Amazigh culture is despised and hated at this point, why on earth doesn’t Rabat go forward- and demonstrate his logic- and prohibit any Amazigh thing in the country? For example all Amazigh food, all Amazigh toponyms (Agadir, Tiznit, Meknes, Fes, Tanger, Anfa...), all Amazigh apparel, etc. As it did before with the name of the country.

As you may know, his authentic name is Marrakech, which gave quite rightly Morocco in English or Maroc in French. In Arabic language, the former official name of Morocco was arabized decades before: it became El Maghreb. Sorry, thought, if I lead you up the garden path because of the title of this story which is little bit misleading. In point of fact, as we saw it, the real name of Morocco was banned already. It was a huge advance, wasn’t it?

Publié par Lahsen.Oulhadj
Leave a comment
Discuss live in the forums
http://www.north-of-africa.com/article.php3?id_article=572
http://oulhadjlahsen.blogspot.com/2009/03/makhzen-will-ban-morocco-too.html

Imazighen* in Iberia (Al-Andalus**)

2009-03-22T23:29:00.000-07:00

**Al-Andalus was the Arabic name given to those parts of the Iberian Peninsula governed by Muslims from 711 to 1492

*In the power hierarchy, Imazighen ["Berbers"] were situated between the Arabic aristocracy and the Muladi*** populace.

The Muladi*** (Spanish: muladí, pl. muladíes or muwallad (pl. muwalladun or muwalladeen) arabic مولدون, were Muslims of ethnic Iberian origin who lived in Al-Andalus during the Middle Ages. They were descended from the native people who converted to Islam after the Islamic conquest of Hispania.

Muslims who entered Iberia in 711 were mainly Imazighen (Berbers), and were led by an Amazigh, Tariq ibn Ziyad, though under the suzerainty of the Arab Caliph of Damascus Abd al-Malik and his North African Viceroy, Musa ibn Nusayr. A second mixed army of Arabs and Imazighen came in 712 under Ibn Nusayr himself. It is claimed they formed approximately 66% of the Islamic population in Iberia; supposedly they helped the Umayyad caliph Abd ar-Rahman I, because his mother was a Berber. During the Taifa era, the petty kings came from a variety of ethnic groups; some-- for instance the Zirid kings of Granada --were of Amazigh origin. The Taifa period ended when an Amazigh dynasty--the Almoravids from modern-day Western Sahara and Mauritania --took over Al-Andalus; they were succeeded by the Almohad dynasty from Morocco, during which time al-Andalus flourished.

In the power hierarchy, Imazighen were situated between the Arabic aristocracy and the Muladi** populace. Ethnic rivalries were one of the factors of Andalusi politics.
After the fall of the Caliphate, the taifa kingdoms of Toledo and Granada had Amazigh rulers.
___________________________________________________
***Muladi
Mulades were an ethnic group that lived in the Iberian Peninsula in the Middle Ages.
The spanish language word mulad is derived from arabic language muwallad....
___________________________________________________

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berbers_and_Islam

Islamization of the Imazighen

2009-03-21T15:13:00.000-07:00

from questia.com

Until their conquest in the 7th cent. by Muslim Arabs, most of the Berbers were Christian (also, a sizable minority had accepted Judaism), and many heresies of the early African church, particularly Donatism, were essentially Berber protests against the rule of Rome. Under the Arabs, the Berbers became Islamized and soon formed the backbone of the Arab armies that conquered Spain. However, the Berbers repeatedly rose against the Arabs, and in the 9th cent. they supported the Fatimid dynasty in its conquest of N Africa.

After the Fatimids withdrew to Egypt, N Africa was plunged into an anarchy of warring Berber tribes that ended only when the Berber dynasties, the Almoravids and the Almohads, were born. Each of these dynasties succeeded in pushing back Christian kingdoms which had pushed south against the fragmented Moors. With the disintegration of these dynasties, the Berbers of the plains were gradually absorbed by the Arabs, while those who lived in inaccessible mountain regions, such as the Aurès, the Kabylia, the Rif, and the Atlas, retained their culture and warlike traditions. When the French and the Spanish occupied much of N Africa, it was the Berbers of these mountainous regions who offered the fiercest resistance. In more recent times the Berbers, especially those of the Kabylia, assisted in driving the French from Algeria. Contemporary relations between Berbers and Arabs are sometimes tense, particularly in Algeria, where Berbers rebelled (1963–65) against Arab ruled and have demonstrated and rioted against Arab discrimination.

See E. Gellner, Saints of the Atlas (1969); E. Gellner and C. Micaud, ed., Arabs and Berbers (1972); J. Waterbury, North for the Trade (1972).

http://www.questia.com/library/encyclopedia/berbers.jsp

See also

Berber Revolt
The Great Berber Revolt of 12225/74043 took place during the reign of the Umayyad Caliph Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik and marked the first successful secession from the caliphate....

Muslim conquest of North Africa

Uqba ibn Nafi
Uqba ibn NafiUqba ibn Nafi was an Arab general under the Umayyad dynasty, who began the Islamic conquest of the Maghreb, including present-day western Algeria and Morocco in North Africa....

Musa bin Nusair
Musa bin NusairMusa bin Nusair was a Yemeni Muslim governor and general under the Umayyads. In 698 he was made the governor of Ifriqiya and was responsible for putting down a large Berber rebellion....

Kusaila
KusailaKusaila was a 7th century chief of the Awraba tribe of the Berber people and head of the Sanhadja confederation....

Almoravids
Almoravides , was a Berber dynasty from the Sahara that flourished over a wide area of Africa and Europe during the 11th century....

The source of this article is Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. The text of this article is licensed under the GFDL.

AbsoluteAstronomy.com 2009. All Rights Reserved

The Great Berber Revolt of 740-43 A.D.

2009-03-21T01:04:00.001-07:00

The Great Berber Revolt of 740-43 A.D. (122-25 A.H. in the Muslim calendar) took place during the reign of the Umayyad Caliph Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik and marked the first successful secession from the Arab caliphate (ruled from Damascus). The revolt began in Tangier in 740, and was led initially by Maysara al-Madghari, a member of the caliphal army.By 740 Hisham's armies had been defeated by the Byzantines

Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik

Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik was an Umayyad caliph who ruled from 723 until his death in 743.Inheriting the caliphate from his brother Yazid II, Hisham was ruling an empire with many different problems....

Byzantine Empire

Byzantine Empire is the term conventionally used since the 19th century to describe the Greek-speaking Roman Empire of the Middle Ages, centered at its capital in Constantinople....at the
Battle of Akroinon

Battle of Akroinon

The Battle of Akroinon was fought at Akroinon in Phrygia, on the western edge of the Anatolian plateau, in 739 between an Umayyad Arab army of Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik, led by his brother Sulayman, and Byzantine Empire forces led by Leo III the ...; expeditions into Gaul

Gaul

Gaul was the name given, in ancient times, to the region of Western Europe comprising present-day northern Italy, France, Belgium, western Switzerland and the parts of the Netherlands and Germany on the west bank of the Rhine river....during the period 732-737 had been repulsed by the Franks

Franks

The Franks or the Frankish people were one of several west Confederations of Germanic Tribes....under Charles Martel

Charles Martel

Charles Martel was the Mayor of the Palace and dux Francorum. He expanded his rule over all three of the Franks: Austrasia, Neustria and Burgundy...., and the strategic city of Narbonne

Battle of Narbonne (737)

The Battle of Narbonne was fought in 737 between the forces of Yusuf ibn 'Abd al-Rahman al-Fihri, Umayyad governor of Narbonne, and a Franks army led by Charles Martel....was threatened; the Caucasian front was at a standstill and Gujarat had been lost. Against this series of reversals, the revolt of the Berbers in Ifriqiya

Ifriqiya

In Middle Ages, Ifriqiya or Ifriqiyah was the area comprising the coastal regions of what are today western Libya, Tunisia, and eastern Algeria....marked the crowning blow and largest military catastrophe of Hisham's reign.The main causes of the revolt were the harsh policies of the governor of North Africa, 'Ubayd Allah bin al-Habhab (which required that Berber slaves be delivered as part of the tribute paid by Berber tribes) and discrimination against Berber units of the caliphal army as compared to Arab units, the former frequently being exposed to dangers that commanders spared the latter.The army of the Berber rebels, most of whom belonged to the radical Kharijite

Kharijites

Kharijites is a general term embracing a variety of Islamic sects which, while initially accepting the caliphate of Ali, later rejected him....sect, swept through the Maghreb

Maghreb

The Maghreb...slaughtering most the Arab aristocracy at the Battle of the Nobles in 741. In 743 a force sent from Damascus

DamascusDamascus is the largest city and capital of Syria. Founded approximately 2500 BC, it is thought to be one of List of oldest continuously inhabited cities, before Al Fayyum, and Gaziantep....under the command of Kulthum finally brought the revolt to an end at the Battle of Kairouan
KairouanKairouan is a city in Tunisia, about 160 kilometres south of Tunis. In 2003 the city had about 150,000 inhabitants.....
See also
Berbers and Islam
Berbers and IslamThe Berber people are an ethnic group that had, until recently, few links to the Arabs. They have existed in ancient Mauretania, Numidia, Ifriqiya and Tripolitania, for thousands of years....
The Berbers
Berber peopleThe Berbers are an ethnic group indigenous to Northwest Africa, speaking the Berber languages of the Afroasiatic languages....(Imazighen) are an ethnic group that had, until recently, few links to the Arab
ArabThe Arabs are predominantly speakers of the Arabic language, rather than a pure ethnic group, mainly found throughout the Middle East and North Africa....s. They have existed in ancient Mauretania
MauretaniaIn Antiquity, Mauretania was originally an independent Berber monarchy on the Mediterranean coast of north Africa, corresponding to western Algeria, Spain's Plaza de soberana and northern Morocco...., Numidia
NumidiaNumidia was an ancient Berber kingdom in North Africa that later became a Roman province, and is no longer in existence today...., Ifriqiya
IfriqiyaIn Middle Ages, Ifriqiya or Ifriqiyah was the area comprising the coastal regions of what are today western Libya, Tunisia, and eastern Algeria....and Tripolitania
TripolitaniaTripolitania or Tripolitana is a historic region of western Libya, centered on the coastal city of Tripoli...., (present-day Morocco
MoroccoThe Kingdom of Morocco is a country in North Africa. It has a long coastline on the Atlantic Ocean that reaches past the Strait of Gibraltar into the Mediterranean Sea...., Algeria
AlgeriaAlgeria , officially the People's Democratic Republic of Algeria is a country in north Africa, and the second largest country on the African continent, Sudan being the largest...., Tunisia
TunisiaTunisia , officially the Tunisian Republic , is a country situated on the Mediterranean coast of North Africa....and Libya
LibyaLibya , officially the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya , is a country in North Africa....respectively) for thousands of years. Most Berbers have converted to Islam
IslamIslam is a monotheism religion based upon the Qur'an, which adherents believe was sent by God through Muhammad....over the course several centuries.
Background
The region of North Africa
North AfricaNorth Africa or Northern Africa is the north region of the African continent. Geopolitically, the United Nations subregion of Northern Africa includes the following seven territories:...practiced many religions including various forms of pagan ritual
PaganismPaganism is a blanket term which has come to connote a broad set of western spiritualism or religion beliefs and practices of natural or polytheistic religions, as opposed to the Abrahamic monotheistic religions....s, Judaism
JudaismJudaism is the religion of the Jewish people. It is the first recorded Monotheism faith and one of the oldest religious traditions still practiced today...., and Christianity
ChristianityChristianity is a Monotheism#Christian view religion centered on Jesus, and on his life and teachings as presented in the New Testament..... The first Islamic forces encountered fierce opposition by the various city-states resulting from the departure of the Byzantines
Byzantine EmpireByzantine Empire is the term conventionally used since the 19th century to describe the Greek-speaking Roman Empire of the Middle Ages, centered at its capital in Constantinople..... The weakest of them in the southern and southwestern parts of the Amazigh territory were the first to fall to the Islamic troops under the Egyptian Qalif in a locally initiated attempt of expansion westward. This first attempt in late 7th century (660 A.D.) resulted in a decisive defeat of the Islamic troops. In 750 the qalifs centralized their command in Damascus
DamascusDamascus is the largest city and capital of Syria. Founded approximately 2500 BC, it is thought to be one of List of oldest continuously inhabited cities, before Al Fayyum, and Gaziantep....and a coalition of Islamic forces from Medina
MedinaMedina is a city in the Hejaz region of western Saudi Arabia...., Damascus, Baghdad
BaghdadBaghdad is the capital of Iraq and of Baghdad Governorate. It is the second-largest city in Southwest Asia after Tehran and the second-largest city in the Arab world after Cairo, and the largest city in Iraq, with the 2003 population estimated...and Egypt
EgyptEgypt , officially the Arab Republic of Egypt, is a Middle Eastern country in North Africa....returned in a second attempt following successive defeats in Greece
GreeceGreeceGreece lies at the juncture of Europe, Asia, and Africa. It is heir to the heritages of Ancient Greece, the Byzantine Empire, and nearly four centuries of Ottoman Empire ruleistory .... The Islamic forces in a coalition resumed their conquest of the Mediterranean Sea
Mediterranean SeaThe Mediterranean Sea is a part of the Atlantic Ocean almost completely enclosed by land: on the north by Europe, on the south by Africa, and on the east by Asia....from the south, through North Africa
North AfricaNorth Africa or Northern Africa is the north region of the African continent. Geopolitically, the United Nations subregion of Northern Africa includes the following seven territories:.... A more diplomatic second attempt resulted in a successful alliance with the mainly desert-based Mauritanian tribes (south and west of modern Algeria) then Numidia
NumidiaNumidia was an ancient Berber kingdom in North Africa that later became a Roman province, and is no longer in existence today..... The new Muslim northwest African tribes in turn became ambassadors of the Muslim Qalifs, and brokers on their behalf in an attempt to assemble a coalition of forces to engage their common enemy Rome. The new approach was better received by the Numidian tribes of the highlands and were successfully recruited for a joint military venture into Europe and ultimately to Rome and around the Mediterranean Sea. A Numidian chief Tariq ibn Ziyad headed these stronger forces under the green flag of Islam and embarked for Europe, taking over most of the Iberian Peninsula
Iberian PeninsulaThe Iberian Peninsula, or Iberia, is located in the extreme southwest of Europe. It is the western and southernmost of the three southern European peninsulas ..... It is then that North Africa
North AfricaNorth Africa or Northern Africa is the north region of the African continent. Geopolitically, the United Nations subregion of Northern Africa includes the following seven territories:...west of Egypt was referred to as "al-Maghreb
MaghrebThe Maghreb..." or the "West" by the peoples of the Middle East
Middle EastThe Middle East is a subcontinent for the Historical geography and cultural geography subregion of Africa-Eurasia traditionally held to be countries or regions in Southwest Asia together with Ancient Egypt#Background.....In 670, the Islamic coalition under the command of Uqba ibn Nafi
Uqba ibn NafiUqba ibn Nafi was an Arab general under the Umayyad dynasty, who began the Islamic conquest of the Maghreb, including present-day western Algeria and Morocco in North Africa....established its camp on the Tunis peninsula and founded the city of Kairouan
KairouanKairouan is a city in Tunisia, about 160 kilometres south of Tunis. In 2003 the city had about 150,000 inhabitants...., about 160 kilometers south of present-day Tunis
TunisTunis is the capital of Tunisia and also the Tunis Governorate, with a population of 699,700 in 2003..... The Muslims used the city as a base for further operations against Numedians in the West and along the highlands of modern Algeria. Successive and repeated attacks on the villages of the lower Numedian agricultural valleys by Abu al-Muhajir Dinar
Abu al-Muhajir DinarAbu al-Muhajir Dinar , amir of Ifriqiya under the Umayyads.His biography is complicated by the existence of two versions of the history of the Umayyad conquest of North Africa...., Uqba's successor, forced the uncoordinated Numidian tribes to eventually work out a modus vivendi through Kusaila
KusailaKusaila was a 7th century chief of the Awraba tribe of the Berber people and head of the Sanhadja confederation...., a converted Numidian chief on behalf of an extensive confederation of Christian Imazighen. Kusaila, who had been based in Tilimsan
TlemcenTlemcen, sometimes spelled Tlemsen, is a town in Northwestern Algeria, and the seat of government for the Tlemcen Province of the same name....(Tlemcen), converted to Islam and relocated his headquarters to Takirwan, near Kairouan.The harmony between the Imazighen and the Muslims was short-lived, however. The tolerance of Islamic preachers among the Imazighen did not guarantee their support for the Ummayad Dynasty - which held control over most of the Islamic Caliphate
Islamic caliphateThe Islamic Caliphate could refer to:*The Umayyad Caliphate*The Abbasid Caliphate.... Their ruling proxies alienated the Imazighen by taxing them heavily; treating convert as second-class citizens; and enslaving the southern and weaker nomadic tribes. As a result, widespread opposition took the form of open revolt in 739-40 under the banner of Kharijite Islam. The Kharijites objected to Ali
AliAli ibn Abi ?alib? was an early Islamic leader. He is seen by Sunni Muslims as the last of the four Rashidun...., the fourth caliph - and made peace with the Umayyads in 657 and left Ali's camp (khariji means "those who leave"). The Kharijites had been fighting Umayyad rule in the East, and many Imazighen were attracted by the sect's egalitarian precepts. The issue at hand is the same Numidians had fought against with the Romans (State Religion) whereby the control of the faith is an inherited right of the those in control of the state. Accordingly, a new sect known as Kharijism was born on the premise that any suitable Muslim could be elected caliph without regard to race, station, or descent from the Prophet Muhammad
MuhammadMuhammad 570-632 CE, was an Arab religious and political leader and the historical founder of Islam.....After the revolt, Kharijites established a number of tribal kingdoms in the North African highlands - most of which simply abandoned and rejected Islam altogether and remained separate thereafter. Their safety was purchased with taxation without representation. A set of Islamic representatives and tax collectors were established as attache's, and known as the Marabouts from the Arabic
Arabic languageThe Arabic language , or simply Arabic , is the largest member of the Semitic branch of the Afro-Asiatic languages language family and is closely related to Hebrew language and Aramaic language....word "mourabitoun" or attaches whose role was restricted to that of a relay between local tribal council of elders of the tribes Aarch
AarchAarch is a supporting protagonist in the animated series, Galactik Football. He is the coach of the Snow Kids, and being a former player himself has a wide range of knowledge he intends to use to help his players master control over the Flux to win t...and the central authority in Tunis. They had neither mosquss nor authority. Their houses served as their quarters and were commonly constructed with a dome above whose Abavic term is qoba and Amazigh one ta qobe-tt(little dome). Other regions and tribes, however, like Sijilmasa
SijilmasaSijilmasa was a mediaeval trade centre in the western Maghreb.Sijilmasa was an oasis town south west of Fez, Morocco on the northern edge of the Sahara, overlooking the Ziz River....and Tilimsan
TlemcenTlemcen, sometimes spelled Tlemsen, is a town in Northwestern Algeria, and the seat of government for the Tlemcen Province of the same name....- which straddled the principal trade routes - proved more viable and prospered. In 750, the Abbasids - who succeeded the Umayyads as the rulers of the Caliphate, moved the caliphate capital to Baghdad and reestablished Islamic authority in Ifriqiya
IfriqiyaIn Middle Ages, Ifriqiya or Ifriqiyah was the area comprising the coastal regions of what are today western Libya, Tunisia, and eastern Algeria...., appointing Ibrahim ibn al-Aghlab as governor of Kairouan
KairouanKairouan is a city in Tunisia, about 160 kilometres south of Tunis. In 2003 the city had about 150,000 inhabitants..... Although nominally serving at the caliph's pleasure, al-Aghlab and his successors, the Aghlabid
AghlabidThe Aghlabid dynasty of emirs, members of the Arab tribe of Bani Tamim, ruled Ifriqiya, nominally on behalf of the Abbasid Caliph, for about a century, until overthrown by the new power of the Fatimids....s, ruled independently until 909, presiding over a court that became a center for learning and culture.To the west of Aghlabid
AghlabidThe Aghlabid dynasty of emirs, members of the Arab tribe of Bani Tamim, ruled Ifriqiya, nominally on behalf of the Abbasid Caliph, for about a century, until overthrown by the new power of the Fatimids....lands, Abd ar-Rahman ibn-Rustam
RustamidThe Rustamid dynasty of Ibadi Kharijite imams ruled the central Maghreb as a Muslim theocracy for a century and a half from their capital Tahert in present Algeria until the Ismailite Fatimid Caliphs destroyed it....ruled most of the central-west Maghreb from Tahert
TahertTahert is the name of a large Algerian town, one that gives its name to the wider farming region of 'Provinces of Algeria de Tiaret' province in central Algeria...., southwest of Algiers
AlgiersAlgiers is the capital and largest city of Algeria in North Africa. According to the 1998 census the population of the city proper was 1,519,570, whilst the total for the agglomeration was 2,135,630..... The rulers of the Rustamid
RustamidThe Rustamid dynasty of Ibadi Kharijite imams ruled the central Maghreb as a Muslim theocracy for a century and a half from their capital Tahert in present Algeria until the Ismailite Fatimid Caliphs destroyed it....imamate, which lasted from 761 to 909, each an Ibadi
IbadiAl-Iba?iyyah is a form of Islam distinct from the Shi'ite and Sunni denominations. It is the dominant form of Islam in only one Muslim country, Oman....Kharijite imam
ImamImam is an Arabic word meaning "Leader". The ruler of a country might be called the Imam, for example...., were elected by leading citizens. The imams gained a reputation for honesty, piety, and justice. The court at Tahert
TahertTahert is the name of a large Algerian town, one that gives its name to the wider farming region of 'Provinces of Algeria de Tiaret' province in central Algeria....was noted for its support of scholarship in mathematics, astronomy, and astrology, as well as theology and law. The Rustamid
RustamidThe Rustamid dynasty of Ibadi Kharijite imams ruled the central Maghreb as a Muslim theocracy for a century and a half from their capital Tahert in present Algeria until the Ismailite Fatimid Caliphs destroyed it....imams, however, failed, by choice or by neglect, to organize a reliable standing army. This major factor, accompanied by the dynasty's eventual collapse into decadence, opened the way for Tahert's demise under the assault of the Fatimids.
Imazighen in Al-Andalus
The Muslim
MuslimA Muslim is an adherent of Islam. The feminine form of Muslim is Muslimah. Literally, the word means "one who submits to God"....s who entered Iberia
Iberian PeninsulaThe Iberian Peninsula, or Iberia, is located in the extreme southwest of Europe. It is the western and southernmost of the three southern European peninsulas ....in 711 were mainly Imazighen (Berbers), and were led by an Amazigh, Tariq ibn Ziyad, though under the suzerainty of the Arab Caliph
CaliphCaliph is the title for the Islamic leader of the Ummah, or community of Islam. It is a transliterated version of the Arabic word ????? Khalifah which means "successor" or "representative"....of Damascus
DamascusDamascus is the largest city and capital of Syria. Founded approximately 2500 BC, it is thought to be one of List of oldest continuously inhabited cities, before Al Fayyum, and Gaziantep....Abd al-Malik
Abd al-MalikAbd al-Malik ibn MarwanAbd al-Malik became caliph after the death of his father in 685. Within a few years, he dispatched armies under Al-Hajjaj bin Yousef on a campaign to reassert Umayyad control over the Islamic empire....and his North African Viceroy, Musa ibn Nusayr. A second mixed army of Arab
ArabThe Arabs are predominantly speakers of the Arabic language, rather than a pure ethnic group, mainly found throughout the Middle East and North Africa....s and Imazighen came in 712 under Ibn Nusayr himself. It is claimed they formed approximately 66% of the Islamic population in Iberia; supposedly they helped the Umayyad caliph Abd ar-Rahman I
Abd ar-Rahman IAbd ar-Rahman I was the founder of a Muslim dynasty that ruled the Al-Andalus for nearly three centuries....in Al-Andalus
Al-AndalusAl-Andalus was the Arabic name given to those parts of the Iberian Peninsula governed by Muslims from 711 to 1492...., because his mother was a Berber. During the Taifa
TaifaThe term taifa in the history of Iberian Peninsula refers to an independent Muslim-ruled principality, an emirate or petty kingdom, of which a number formed in Spain after the final collapse of the Umayyad Caliph of Cordoba in 1031....era, the petty kings came from a variety of ethnic groups; some-- for instance the Zirid
ZiridThe Zirids were a Berber dynasty, originating in Petite Kabylie among the Kutama tribe, that ruled Ifriqiya, initially on behalf of the Fatimids, for about two centuries, until weakened by the Banu Hilal and finally destroyed by the Almohads....kings of Granada
GranadaGranada – Greek language: - Elibyrge; Latin: Illiberis or Illiberi Liberini ; Arabic language: ?????? – is a city and the capital of the province of Granada , in the autonomous communities of Spain of Andalusia,...--were of Amazigh origin. The Taifa period ended when an Amazigh dynasty--the Almoravids from modern-day Western Sahara
Western SaharaWestern Sahara is one of the List of countries by population density, mainly consisting of desert flatlands....and Mauritania
MauritaniaMauritania , officially the Islamic Republic of Mauritania, is a country in northwest Africa....--took over Al-Andalus
Al-AndalusAl-Andalus was the Arabic name given to those parts of the Iberian Peninsula governed by Muslims from 711 to 1492....; they were succeeded by the Almohad
AlmohadThe Almohad Dynasty were a Berber Muslim religion power which founded the fifth Moorish dynasty in the 12th century, and conquered all northern Africa as far as Egypt, together with Al-Andalus ....dynasty from Morocco
MoroccoThe Kingdom of Morocco is a country in North Africa. It has a long coastline on the Atlantic Ocean that reaches past the Strait of Gibraltar into the Mediterranean Sea...., during which time al-Andalus flourished.In the power hierarchy, Imazighen were situated between the Arabic aristocracy and the Muladi
MuladiMulades were an ethnic group that lived in the Iberian Peninsula in the Middle Ages.The spanish language word mulad is derived from arabic language muwallad....populace. Ethnic rivalries were one of the factors of Andalusi politics.After the fall of the Caliphate, the taifa kingdoms of Toledo
Toledo, SpainToledo is a city and municipality located in central Spain, about 70 kilometers south of Madrid...., Badajoz
BadajozBadajoz , the capital of the Spain provinces of Spain of Badajoz in the autonomous communities of Spain of Extremadura, is situated close to the Portugal frontier, on the left bank of the river Guadiana, and the Madrid-Lisbon railway...., Mlaga
MlagaMlaga is a port city in Andalusia, southern Spain, on the Costa del Sol coast of the Mediterranean. According the 2006 census the population is 558,287....and Granada had Amazigh rulers.
See also
Berber Revolt
Berber RevoltThe Great Berber Revolt of 12225/74043 took place during the reign of the Umayyad Caliph Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik and marked the first successful secession from the caliphate....
Muslim conquest of North Africa
Uqba ibn Nafi
Uqba ibn NafiUqba ibn Nafi was an Arab general under the Umayyad dynasty, who began the Islamic conquest of the Maghreb, including present-day western Algeria and Morocco in North Africa....
Musa bin Nusair
Musa bin NusairMusa bin Nusair was a Yemeni Muslim governor and general under the Umayyads. In 698 he was made the governor of Ifriqiya and was responsible for putting down a large Berber rebellion....
Kahena
Kusaila
KusailaKusaila was a 7th century chief of the Awraba tribe of the Berber people and head of the Sanhadja confederation....
Umayyads
Almohads
Almoravids
AlmoravidsAlmoravides , was a Berber dynasty from the Sahara that flourished over a wide area of Africa and Europe during the 11th century....
The source of this article is Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. The text of this article is licensed under the GFDL.
AbsoluteAstronomy.com 2009. All Rights Reserved

Anti-Berber Arabism

2009-03-03T20:38:00.000-08:00

Racist Arabism against the Berber people

The UN documented the racism against Indigenous peoples Multi-ethnic States, The Imazighen Berbers are the indigenous peoples of northern Africa and the Sahel [44]. Despite Arabization's oppression in north-Africa, they are a proud people[45], Morocco's Berbers Battle to Keep Their Culture [46], in 2004 they spoke out and attacked Moroccan state racism [47]. Berber Leader Belkacem Lounes: "There Is No Worse Colonialism Than That of the Pan-Arabist Clan that Wants to Dominate Our People" [48].

Kabylia info writes about oppression and tyranny of its people by Arabic-Islamic colonialism [49], the IHT's description: This is Kabylia, one of Algeria's most restive regions - home to a stubborn and proud ethnic minority of Berbers who since the end of the colonial era four decades ago have fought to preserve their cultural identity and independence [50].

On 28/09/2009 'amazighworld' celebrates the 'national day of the language', in order to denounce the Panarabist racism against political prisoners of the Amazigh issue [51].

http://www.freerepublic.com/~masti/index#Anti-Berber

Berbers as Anti-Islamists and Anti-Arab Nationalists

2009-03-02T18:16:00.000-08:00

by Daniel Pipes
Thu, 26 Feb 2009

http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2009/02/berbers-as-anti-islamists-and-anti-arab-nationalists.html#continued

Islam As A Vehicle For Arab Imperialism: The Case Of The Berbers

2009-02-28T23:42:00.000-08:00

by Hugh Fitzgerald

If the American government wished to fight a war of self-defense against those who wage Jihad, not only against America, but against all non-Muslim states and peoples, sometimes across national borders, sometimes within Infidel states, it would surely take the time to identify the possible points of purchase that would help to divide and demoralize the Camp of Islam.

Since 80% of the world's Muslims are non-Arabs, and since in Islam the Arabs are the best of peoples, and the Sunnah merely reflects the customs of seventh (or eighth or even ninth) century Arabs, and since, furthermore, Muslims are supposed to read the Qur'an in Arabic (the only version that truly counts), and take Arabic names, and face Mecca, in Arabia, five times a day, and in many other ways become sedulous apes of the Arabs, it would surely be useful to make those non-Arabs Muslims aware, by speaking and writing openly about, the linguistic and cultural, and other forms of imperialism by the Arabs, for which Islam is, and always has been, the vehicle.

Take the Berbers, for example, and their campaign, especially in the Kabyle region of Algeria, to be able to speak and be taught in their own language, Tamazight. The riots in Tizi-Ouzou and elsewhere for such linguistic rights (now finally, and reluctantly, granted by the Algerian Arabs), the Berber websites that rightly denounce the Arabs and their "invasion" of North Africa, the way in which Christianity is spreading among some Berbers, because resentment of the Arabs nautrally weakens the hold of Islam, all of this causes the Arabs to worry. And in France itself, it is among the Berbers that the French intelligence services, have found the recruits necessary to monitor the larger Muslim, chiefly Arab, population.

Here, from http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD226209a piece that reflects the worry of the Arabs over

Berber loyalty lies. Does it lie, blindly, in reflexive hatred of the Jews? Is the Arab war on Israel really the war of the Berbers? Even as early as the 1960s a Berber writer was expressing sympathy for Israel. Should not this kind of thing be noted, and in every way encouraged? Do the Infidels not have a stake in spreading the word, everywhere, that Islam is a handmaiden of Arab imperialism, and then in spelling out -- it's not hard to do -- exactly how it performs that function? For no Berber, no Kurd, no black African Muslim in Darfur can deny that the Arabs have treated them badly, even at times engaged in murder or mass murder. Let the reasons for this Arab supremacist attitude, rooted in the texts and history of Islam, be more widely understood.

Go to it, Pentagon, go to it, State Department. You have nothing to lose, and a world to win.

Posted on 12:32 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald

http://www.newenglishreview.org/The_Iconoclast/

Moslems are NOT "The New Jews!" They are . . .

2009-02-21T15:48:00.000-08:00

. . . the enemies of their "host countries," instead of enriching them, they suck the life-blood out of their hosts, and like true parasites end up by taking them over and using the body of the host to sustain them . . .

Gates of Vienna: The Islamophobia Machine:

" . . . a familiar meme: Muslims in the West face the same threat today from their host societies that Jews did in the 1930s. The Muslims are the new Jews, and the Islamophobes who object to them are the same as the Nazis.

As has often been pointed out, there are holes in this argument big enough to ride a camel through.
- - - - - - - - -
First of all, the Jews in the 1930s were almost suicidally non-violent. They did not publicly abuse their gentile neighbors. They made no threats against the community or the state. They did not start riots or blow things up because of their religious beliefs. The anti-Semitism that was so prevalent at time owed nothing to any rational fear of Jewish violence.

Secondly, in contrast to the Nazis, there is no official state-sanctioned anti-Islamic policy in the non-Muslim world. Quite the opposite, in fact: the governments of the West generally bow and scrape before Islam in an attempt to fend off more violent attacks."

***

"Western publishers have all gotten the message by now. Publishing books that “insult Islam” can be unprofitable, expensive, and even life-threatening. If they are not already established best-sellers, authors who wish to publish Counterjihad books can either self-publish or forget the idea.

Visit a Barnes and Noble or Borders and look at the books about Islam. If you care to take the time, add up the numbers of pro-Islamic and anti-Islamic titles.

The last time I did so —in the airport in Toronto last fall — the gushing pro-Islam books outnumbered the anti-Islam books by at least ten to one. The press is engaged in an organized whitewash on behalf of the Religion of Peace."

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2009/02/islamophobia-machine.html

And now . . . Meine Damen und Herren . . . Trommelwirbel . . .

Letter to the Germans

[First published at the original Islamic Danger on Tuesday, September 26, 2006. Includes the link to the famous The Downfall of the Netherlands ('De ondergang van Nederland') Land of the Naive Fools by Mohammed Rasoel]

[Reprinted at Islamic Danger 2U]

A Letter to the Germans from one who cares for the well-being of the German nation and of all of Europe:

Germans!

Listen!

Moslems are not the Jews!

Some of you might not be too comfortable with what happened to the Jews of Europe some sixty years ago. You are perhaps concerned about offending the sensibilities of another group in your midst--let me warn you: Don't be! Do not bend over backwards to accomodate Islamics. They will eat you alive!

You see my dear German friends: The MOSLEMS ARE NOT LIKE THE JEWS. Islam is NOT A RELIGION like the one the Jews practice, quietly without infringing on anybody's rights.

Islam is an ideology that demands all othes knuckle under to it. They--the Islamics (I like that term it's sort of a contraction of Islam and clerics--get it? Islamics)--the Islamics are not like Jews. Islamics make demands: they want this, they want that, they want head scarves obligatory for all females, not only Islamic ones. They want mosques everywhere, blaring out the muezzin's call to prayer to the faithful, so foreign to European ears.

Islamics would prefer pork were not sold or eaten, it offends them. They do not want women wearing revealing clothes (it might excite the oh-so-pure-in-thought Moslem males and cause them to lose control and --well--you know what they do then).

But they demand. They are insulted. Their prophet is insulted. Their pride is insulted.

German, do not feel bad about not giving in to any--to all--of their demands for apologies for not observing Islamic customs yourselves.

Stand up to them. These are not Jews that you may want to handle with kid gloves because of memories that are not quite comfortable yet.

Do not coddle the Islamics to make up for what was done by prior generations to the Jews.

No. Islamics are not Jews and you can--you should stand up to them. Refuse their demands. Who are they, these foreign "Asylum seekers" and what have you, to make demands on the citizens of the country that took them in?

They should be grateful for what you have done for them, but they are not. They threaten, they whine, they rage, they want you to cringe,

You see, my dear Germans, they are not Jews. What Jews would have tried to intimidate the citizen of their host country?

Islamics want you to be afraid of them, to fear their rage, their threats of throat slittings and head off-choppings (abzuhacken). They want you to fold up and let Eurabia become the reality not the goal. Eurabia now! They want. "We will get it, never you fear. We will outbreed you. we will have you living under our 'protection.'" (or not at all.)

Germans, don't you see: These are not the Jews about you might have an uneasy conscience. Don't worry, you can resist them. Do not let them play on your perhaps subconscious feelings

By being so sensitive to the sensibilities of the Islamics, you are not being kind to the memory of the Jews that not only made no demands, certainly did not try to strike fear in your hearts , spoke your language fluently, contributed to your literature even, your music, your art, and did not insist that their laws and customs be followed by Germans.

Whence comes your reluctance, Germans, to stand up to those who refuse to be part of you but want you to become part of them or be their "Untermenschen?"

Well, from a Moslem himself you might be surprised to learn. A Moslem who dare not use his name nor reveal himself in the country that accepted him and treated him as a human being: one of your fellow European countries, Holland.

Here is what he writes:

"There they stand, the Dutch with their completely justified and without doubt noble striving to dissociate themselves as far away as possible from Hitler's ideology. Completely blind to the fact that their path circles back to the other end at the Jews (with all due respect). The poor devils continue to misunderstand that a choice isn't necessarily between the Nazis or the Jews, predator or prey, oppressor or victim, but that there is an alternative, a third road, which is save yourself and guarantee the continuance of your own culture and your own country. It's simply this one, tiny misunderstanding, that will make the Dutch go down in history as the people who thought so deeply about a nightmare from the past that they ended up becoming that nightmare."

- Mohammed Rasoel

vom dem Buch

The Downfall of the Netherlands
['De ondergang van Nederland']

Land of the Naive Fools

by Mohammed Rasoel [or Rasool]
Translation courtesy of Faust

http://www.childrenofmillennium.org/heroes/faust/faust2.php

So, you see, my dear Germans, do not make the mistake that he accuses the Netherlanders (die Hollaender) of having made. Do not make amends for what happened to the Jews of Europe of yesteryear by knuckling under to the Islamics of today.

[Please, my Dear Germans, remember the valiant Mohammed Rasoel's admonition:

["save yourself and guarantee the continuance of your own culture and your own country" ]

Remember what the Danes said to the Islamics that threated and demanded after the cartoons appeared in Denmark.

If you cannot recall, let me refresh your memory:

After the Mohammed Cartoons, the Danes begged the Islamics's pardon for having offended them. Their apology is non pareil--without parallel-- in the annals of European-Islamic relations. And here it is in all its simple beauty:

The Excuse of the Danes for the Cartoons that offended the sensibilities of the Islamics in Denmark first and of course of all Islamics in the world, who apparently are always waiting for an incident that they can pounce upon and give vent to their inborn rage.

(If you have seen this before, bear with me please. Reread the the abject apology of the Danes to the Islamics.)

Here it is:

We're Sorry

(Auch gut fuer die muslime der ganzen Welt die in unsern Laendern uns das Blut aussaugen)

We´re sorry we gave you shelter when war drove you from your home country....

We´re sorry we took you in when others rejected you....

We´re sorry we gave you the opportunity to get a good education....

We´re sorry we gave you food and a home when you had none....

We´re sorry we let you re-unite with your family when your homeland was no longer safe...

We´re sorry we never forced you to work while WE paid all your bills....

We´re sorry we gave you almost FREE rent,phone,internet,car and school for your 10 kids...

We´re sorry we build you Mosques so you could worship your religion in our Christian land...

We´re sorry we never forced you to learn our language after staying 30 years!...

And so....from all Danes to the entire Muslim world, we just wanna say:

F**K YOU!!

(This apology also applies to all the Islamics of the world that have been sucking the life-blood from the nations that gave them asylum, or shelter, and welcomed them as "new citizens.")

--from the Book "Hurra, wir kapitulieren" by Henryk M. Broder

To be certain that all Germans, whether they are proficient in English or not understand this abject apology from the deeply sorry Danes, it is reprinted in their native language, in German, here:

Es tut uns leid, dass wir euch aufgenommen haben, als andere euch ablehnten...

Es tut uns leid, dass wir euch die Gelegenheit gaben, einen gute Ausbildung zu erhalten...

Es tut uns leid, dass wir euch Essen und ein Zuhause gaben, als Ihr keines von beiden hattet...

Es tut uns leid, dass wir eure Familie nachkommen ließen, als eure Heimatländer nicht mehr sicher waren...

Es tut uns leid, dass wir euch nie zur Arbeit gezwungen haben, während wir alle eure Rechnungen bezahlt haben...

Es tut uns leid, dass wir euch in unseren Sozialwohnungen wohnen ließen, euch Telefone, Internet, Autos und Schulbildung für eure zehn Kinder gaben...

Es tut uns leid, dass wir Euch erlaubt haben Eure Moscheen in unserem christlichen Land zu bauen, damit Ihr Eurem Glauben nachgehen könnt...

Es tut uns leid, dass wir Euch in den 30 Jahren die Ihr bei uns lebt, nie gezwungen haben, unsere Sprache zu lernen...

Deshalb, ...von allen Dänen an die gesamte moslemische Welt, nur ein einziges:

F**K YOU!!

[es ist schwer die letzten zwei Worte auf Deutsch zu uebersetzen. Villeicht kann mir jemand damit helfen. Danke sehr.]

Destruction and Desecration in Ayodhya

2009-02-17T02:03:00.000-08:00

by Baron Bodissey

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2009/02/destruction-and-desecration-in-ayodhya.html

Back in 2005 I touched briefly on the destruction of a Hindu temple in Ayodhya by the Moghul emperor Aurangzeb. The desecration of Ayodhya was part of a vast project of devastation and massacre perpetrated by the Muslim invaders upon the Hindus, Buddhists, and Sikhs of India over a span over several hundred years.The legions of the Prophet cut swaths of destruction across the Hindu heartland in the 14th, 15th, 16th, and 17th centuries, destroying temples, carrying off booty, and massacring millions of infidels. The mujahideen heaped up literal mountains of skulls in their pious zeal. They enslaved those whom they did not kill, and destroyed the magnificent sacred architecture and art of Hindu civilization that lay in their path.

Considering the Indian treasures that managed to survive the Muslim onslaught, it is heartrending to contemplate what was lost, since what remains is only a fraction of what once was. This deliberate wanton destruction of a civilization was not a byproduct of greed: it was the very purpose of Islam itself. Mass murder of infidels and the destruction of all “idols” remain the primary function of pious Muslims when they are unencumbered by any external restraints.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The enormity of India’s struggle against the Great Jihad is daunting for a Westerner to come to grips with. The consequences that befell India in the wake of the Islamic juggernaut exceeded those of any European country by at least an order of magnitude. And the struggle continues to this day: the Muslim population of India is currently eight to ten times larger than in the whole of Europe, and is growing relative to India’s other ethnic groups.

So I’m grateful that Dharmaveer at Thoughts of a nationalist Indian has agreed to post a series of articles about the Muslim invasions of India. In a recent post he outlined the history of Ayodhya, Babar’s demolition of the Ram Janmabhoomi temple complex: The gloating Muslim accountsTo the western world, an iconic image of Islamic aggression is the conversion of the Hagia Sophia — Eastern Christendom’s greatest church — into a mosque by the Ottoman Sultan Mehmet. It was his first act upon entering the conquered city of Constantinople (now Istanbul) in 1493AD.It is relatively unknown in the western world that a mere 35 years later, in 1528AD, his fellow Turk — Zahir ud-din Babar, the founder of the Moghul empire in India, and a descendant of Tamerlane — demolished one of Hinduism’s greatest temple complexes, and erected a mosque in its place, which is known in India as the Babri Masjid (Babar’s mosque).It is the purpose of this article to give my western readers a glimpse into this act of destruction, and to provide further evidence of the compulsive aggression and profanity of Islam.Through the centuries of brutal Islamic rule over India, tens of thousands of Hindu temples were destroyed and mosques built at their sites. In northern India, which was under Islamic rule for a longer period of time, hardly any temple has survived the Islamic period. Among the temples destroyed were the 3 greatest temples of Hindu Dharma — those dedicated to Shri Ram, Shri Krishna, and Shankar, at Ayodhya, Mathura, and Benaras (Varanasi), respectively.Muslims kept fairly accurate accounts of their temple demolitions, since they considered them acts of great piety. By destroying the temples of the “kufr”, they were doing Allah’s bidding, and imitating Muhammad, who himself had destroyed all the idols in the Kaaba and made it into a mosque. Muslim rulers throughout history have repeated this act. The West knows of the conversion of the St. Sophia in Constantinople into a mosque. Hindudom knows of thousands of such tragic instances.Given below are some of the accounts left by Muslim historians of the destruction of the Ram Janmabhoomi temple in Ayodhya — one of the greatest temples of Hindu Dharma. We will never know its splendour, but judging by the temples of South India that did survive Islamic rule, it must have been a stupendous feat of architecture.The Muslim writers unanimously describe the following:- - - - - - - - -
1. The temple complex comprised of the Janmasthan of Shri Ram at Kot Ram Chander, the private apartments (mahal sarai) of King Dashrath and Shri Ram, and a temple and a kitchen popularly known as Sita Ki Rasoi, where tradition held that Sita lived and cooked for her husband.
2.

All three were demolished and a mosque constructed thereupon in 1528 A.D. under the guidance of Babur’s commander Mir Baqi and the Patronage of a Muslim cleric named Sayed Musa Ashikan.The earliest of such authors is none other than the granddaughter of the Moghul emperor Aurangzeb. Many of these Muslim writers were residents of Ayodhya (Awadh) and some were eye-witness to or participants in the Hindu-Muslim clashes that resulted from the numerous (77 recorded) attempts by Hindus to regain control of their holy site. Muslim records state that over 100,000 Hindus, over the centuries, perished in attempts to regain the temple.Let us now see what the Muslim writers have said…Dharmaveer goes on to quote in some detail the accounts of various Muslim historians concerning the destruction of temple in Ayodhya and the building of the mosque that replaced it.He says, in conclusion:
It is this Babri mosque, built as a symbol of the subjugation and humiliation of Hindus at a spot they venerated so highly, that was damaged by a crowd of Hindus in 1992 at the height of the nationalist movement to rebuild a temple for Shri Ram at the site which had been venerated as his birthplace by Hindus for millennia.Islam deliberately destroyed and desecrated what was most sacred to Hindus, and replaced it with a symbol of Islamic victory. The same reason Sultan Mehmet converted the Hagia Sophia into a mosque.Go over to Thoughts of a nationalist Indian to read the rest.The importance of the Indian front in the current conflict cannot be overemphasized. Dharmaveer’s desire to build bridges between his country and the rest of the West is commendable.India is the natural ally of all those countries and cultures that lie in Islam’s crosshairs.

Baron Bodissey 2/14/2009 02:10:00 PM

Links to this post:
Stones Cry Out - If they keep silent… » Things Heard: e55v1
Archives. Select Month, February 2009, January 2009, December 2008, November 2008, October 2008, September 2008, August 2008, July 2008, June 2008, May 2008, April 2008, March 2008, February 2008, January 2008, December 2007 ... posted by Mark O. @ 2/16/2009 9:22 AM
Destruction and Desecration in Ayodhya
Gates of Vienna. Back in 2005 I touched briefly on the destruction of a Hindu temple in Ayodhya by the Moghul emperor Aurangzeb. The desecration of Ayodhya was part of a vast project of devastation and massacre perpetrated by the Muslim ... posted by FreedomBloggers @ 2/14/2009 6:13 PM
Islamic Danger to Americans: B. Hussein Obama Shows His True Color ...
The only change is the US rewarding Iran for not changing their ways (supporting Hamas, Hezbollah, developing nukes, threatening to wipe Israel off the map)..... Over at Weasel Zippers, via GWP .....The United States has abandoned its ... posted by urbanadder22 @ 2/14/2009 4:44 PM
Road Sassy » Blog Archive » Muslim Student Association and Their ...
Muslim Student Association and Their “Hadith of Hate”. Muslims and their apologists will tell you that they are victims of islamophobia. That the few who spew hatred are the rarity. Yet the proof to the contrary is pervasive wherever ... posted by zee @ 9/03/2008 3:00 AM
if (typeof BL_addOnLoadEvent == 'function') { BL_addOnLoadEvent(function() { BL_writeBacklinks(); }); }
function BlogThis() {
Q=''; x=document; y=window;
if(x.selection) {
Q=x.selection.createRange().text;
} else if (y.getSelection) {
Q=y.getSelection();
} else if (x.getSelection) {
Q=x.getSelection();
}
popw = y.open('http://www.blogger.com/blog-this.g?t=' +
escape(Q) + '&u=' + escape(location.href) + '&n=' +
escape(document.title),'bloggerForm',
'scrollbars=no,width=475,height=300,top=175,left=75,status=yes,resizable=yes');
void(0);
}
Create a Link
6 Comments: To add a link in a comment, use this format:My Title
DP111 said...
The most heinous crimes which the followers of Mohammad called as jihadis or to use a more euphemistic term, Muslims, perpetrated was on peace loving Hindus in India. The entire civilization of Hindus called as Saraswati Civilization was decapitated and reduced to dust. The depth and the scope of holocaust which befell Hindus is so staggering that common human mind fails to understand this and goes blank. Vedic India, originally called as Bharatvarsha, stretched from Afghanistan all the way to Japan. Murderous Muslims layed siege to glorious Bharatvarsha almost 1400 years ago and by treacherous and totally subhuman techniques succeeded in destruction and plunder of the greatest civilization that humanity has known so far. - from Rape of a Civilization, by Kuldeep Razdan, Sword of Truth, September 4th, 1999What has been the Indian/Hindu experience with Islam?"The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying from within." - W. Durant, "Story of Civilization" Islamic slaughter of Hindus, the destruction of their civilisation, and their continuous humiliation through the centuries of Islamic rule, has had consequences that are present even to this day. Long term dhimmitude has induced a servility in Hindu minds to Islam. The humiliation of Hindu India was so great, that it is not surprising that Hindu India refuses to accept it. It is far too humiliating, and shameful, thus the mind, not unreasonably, just pushes it out of mind. Only in the last two decades has Hindu India started re-gain the confidence which should be its by right, but even now, it cannot face up to the reality of what happened in the centuries of Muslim rule.Long term dhimmification of a population is akin to long term slavery. It continues to inflict a feeling of impotence, fatalism, lack of self-confidence, and shame, in the subject group, even after the subjugation is removed. I have real sympathy for India. But there is hope. It is one of just two countries, Spain being the other, that has removed Islam from power. There are no other examples - which is sad portend for us, as we head, on our own steam unfortunately, towards dhimmitude.
2/14/2009 4:43 PM
DP111 said...
From summer patriot, winter soldierwhy, indeed, does the man in the bowler hat not feel the sting of his leg being sawn off? why does the west remain indifferent to the image of daniel pearl, or the polish engineer, or the bearded american, having their heads sawn off by thugs who insult their victims by slaughtering them as though domestic animals, sheep for the ancestral bedouin table. why does not the slaughter at mumbai arouse the universal wrath of the western world, as it would have 100 years ago: wars were fought, and empires toppled, for far less insult than this, when the west was vigorous and robust.why is there no outrage, no wrath, no blood boiling for revenge of our compatriots?my intellect struggles with this, because more than killings, these outrages are humiliations and insults aimed at the values which underpin our very national existence, and the very existence of western civilization, as it was once comprised. these outrages are insults and humiliations which defame our manhood, our masculinity, or very will to exist.summer patriot, winter soldierAs I've posted before, there is something wrong with us "men in the West" at a fundamental level ie the level of the soul, no, at the basic primeval level.
2/14/2009 4:58 PM
Fjordman said...
DP111: We're a completely empty shell of a culture which believes in absolutely nothing. At least we will be providing employment for centuries of future historians, who will scratch their heads and wonder exactly how a once-great civilization could just fall apart like this. I could add that I don't by this mean to say that the West will necessarily die from this, but the current incarnation of it will.
2/14/2009 9:17 PM
Zenster said...
This deliberate wanton destruction of a civilization was not a byproduct of greed: it was the very purpose of Islam itself.It would be best if all non-Muslims bore this in mind when considering how to deal with Islam. A worldwide caliphate would be nothing more or less than Global Cultural Genocide™.Mass murder of infidels and the destruction of all “idols” remain the primary function of pious Muslims when they are unencumbered by any external restraints.That being the case, which it most definitely is, it's long overdue for a whole messa encumberin' to happen. One would think that the 9-11 atrocity was sufficient to motivate Western leaders in this respect.What, then, shall be required? Toppling of the Eiffel Tower? Dynamiting of the Statue of Liberty? Bombing of the Cistine Chapel? Exactly what article of priceless Western heritage must be obliterated before Islam is finally brought to heel?... the compulsive aggression and profanity of Islam.For Muslims, the term "compulsive aggression" is redundant and the profanity intrinsic.Muslims kept fairly accurate accounts of their temple demolitions, since they considered them acts of great piety.Yet one more striking similarity to the Nazis who kept meticulous records of their mass murder.DP111: why does not the slaughter at mumbai arouse the universal wrath of the western world, as it would have 100 years ago: wars were fought, and empires toppled, for far less insult than this, when the west was vigorous and robust.Why, indeed. I still maintain that when history closes its book upon this new jihadist era, the 9-11 atrocity will stand as the beginning of Islam's end. Flying fully loaded passenger airliners into occupied skyscrapers stands as one of the most heinous crimes that can be committed without resorting to massive military force or weaponry. This one event will eventually be recognized as the unignorable call to arms that hearlded Islam's final demise. How dreadful it is to think that even one more such atrocity, if not many more, will be needed to spur on Western powers in ridding this world of Islam.
2/14/2009 9:26 PM
DP111 said...
Zenster: Succinct and precise remedies. Excellent. 9/11 was far worse then Pearl Harbour. A previous generation of Americans, some of who are still alive, would have devastated the ME. And not just physical devastation, though that is essential for what follows, the entire constitution of Islam would have been forcibly changed, just as that of Japan was changed for good. These days however, there is the assumption that the root culture of a people cannot be changed by force, though Islamic conquest is an example that it can.Fjordman wrote: We're a completely empty shell of a culture, which believes in absolutely nothing. At least we will be providing employment for centuries of future historians, who will scratch their heads and wonder exactly how a once-great civilization could just fall apart like this.We cannot abandon hope. Without hope, all is lost. Do we believe in nothing? Fundamentally, yes. The trouble is that we have too much to believe in, and we end up believing nothing. Society has been atomised. The civilisation born from the Christian faith has cut itself off from its roots, so we have nothing to coalesce around. This is the same problem that Martin Luther diagnosed as the Turks (Muslim) armies laid waste to Eastern and Central Europe, and threatened Germany itself. The nightmare of India under Muslim rule is so horrendous that modern India cannot face up to its reality, and hence they gloss over it and pretend that it never happened. This is the situation in all countries that were conquered by Islam. Iran and Pakistan are both heirs to an ancient and cultured civilisation, and yet Iranians and Pakistanis ignore the bestial treatment of their ancestors by Muslim invaders, and pretend that Islam just changed their minds in a peaceful manner. To acknowledge the reality is too shameful. This is where we are headed, and that is why this thread on India is important.The problem is, why are men of the West so docile? This is particularly so in the case of Britain. This is a martial and militaristic island par excellence that made even the Japanese appear pacifist. What ever happened? It cannot be because women are in the majority. Women have been the majority for a long while, but that didn’t make men any the less assertive and robust. The normal response of men when their community or nation is attacked is to counter attack. What did we do after London 7/7? Nothing. Instead we sat back and congratulated ourselves that no Muslim in Britain was attacked, and we are “oh so civilised”. The same happened in Bombay after the train bombs. Indians did nothing, and the liberal Times of India and other papers were sanctimoniously congratulating themselves as to how civilised Indians are. There should have been some response, which of course could have been dealt by the police in the usual way. However, the message would have gone out to the authorities, as well as to Muslims - “Watch it, don’t push us”. Instead, the message that has gone out to the authorities is – “Ignore British men but be careful not to antagonise Muslims”. That is one of the fallouts, and is clearly evident in the Geert Wilders affair. Lord Ahmed claims he did not threaten parliament with 10,000 Muslim (violent) demonstrators – he does not need to, as the message has already been understood and digested by the authorities and Muslims, and Ahmed simply displays that. Men, particularly Western men, are not behaving as men should.
2/15/2009 1:17 PM
The Poster Formerly Known as Gordon said...
The earliest of such authors is none other than the granddaughter of the Moghul emperor Aurangzeb.Aurangzeb was Mogul emperor from 1658 to 1707. His granddaughter would have written even later.This means that the first "eyewitness" account of the destruction of the temple was written almost 200 years after it actually occurred.
2/16/2009 12:11 PM
Post a Comment