|
THE HALL OF SHAME "Mirror, mirror on the wall, who is Just as a person may look in a mirror to find any
imperfections in his appearance, the Human Race must look in the mirror of its
own Conscience in order to identify and redress any moral and Spiritual
defects. We are not demanding this from a vain wish to moralise, criticise, patronise or pontificate, but because the Human Race is
facing the greatest dangers in its history which can only be averted by
immediate and far-reaching changes in the attitudes, assumptions and behaviours which have brought us all to the verge of
Disaster. The following represents a list of examples of individuals, organisations and governments who are known to have
engaged in teachings or practices that: (a) are contrary to the Spiritual
Laws of the Universe; (b) are actually or potentially harmful to Mankind's
Spiritual and material well-being; or (c) constitute an act of aggression
against India, her people, culture and religion. THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH deliberately and systematically
destroyed the culture and religion of Ancient Europe and other parts of the
World. THE ISLAMIC EMPIRE. Based in Fortunately, Resistance to such an Empire is equally
old as evidenced by the heroic anti-Islamic Uprisings: of the North African
Berbers in the 8th century; the East Arabian Qarmathians
in the 10th century; the West European Crusaders (1095-1291); the Spanish Christians
in the 15th century; the East Europeans in the 20th century; and last but not
least, the ongoing struggle of Indian Hindus against Islamic colonialism and
domination. MAHMUD OF GHAZNI belonged to the Turkish branch of the
Mongolian race and was one of the first Muslim invaders of mainland GENGHIS KHAN, LEADER OF THE MONGOLS, followed into the
footsteps of Mahmud of Ghazni.
Driven by greed and a pathological desire to dominate other people and
destroy their culture, Genghis’s military exploits
resulted in the death of millions of people and the depopulation of large
areas of Although the inhabitants of present-day Historical evidence shows that Mongols and related tribes such
as the Huns and the Turks attacked countless nations from
The word “Hun” which is the same as “Khan” has retained its
negative connotations even in the West. The Oxford Dictionary of the English
Language defines it as signifying “uncivilised
devastator”, while in parts of Eastern Europe expressions such as “Go to the
Hun (or Khan)!”, “May the Hun (Khan) take you!” are still in use today. Far from showing any sign of shame and remorse for their
ancestor’s crimes, present-day Mongols take pride in his exploits and many
Mongolians and Turks call their sons “Genghis”. In keeping with this
tradition, the former Pakistani playboy and cricket-player-turned-politician Imran Khan in his book “Indus Journey” describes his
country - which has many “Khans” - as a “land of warriors”. More alarmingly, the name "Khan" has turned up in
terrorist attacks (Tel Aviv 2003, London 2005, etc.) while another
"Khan" is the head of the Pakistani nuclear arms programme which aims to threaten, intimidate and bully
Hindu India into surrendering to Islam. Given that according to scientific
evidence 16 million men alive today are descended from Genghis Khan, the
probability is that his murderous legacy will continue to terrorise
the World for some time to come. THE PORTUGUESE AND FRENCH BRANCHES OF THE CHRISTIAN
CHURCH
desecrated and destroyed Hindu temples in THE CHINESE COMMUNIST (MAOIST) GOVERNMENT has promoted
anti-Indian activities in Of particular concern is the fact that the Holy POPES JOHN PAUL II and BENEDICT XVI, leaders of the
Christian (Catholic) World, have become notorious
for their propagation of irrational and scandalous beliefs such as that
"Eastern faiths are an obstacle to Salvation". How do they know? Which Eastern Faiths have they practised? Do they even know what the true teachings of
Eastern Faiths are? We advise the followers of Western Faiths to practise what they preach and look at their own faults -
the Inquisition, slavery, forced conversions, religious wars and genocide -
before they criticise others. Otherwise, what they
believe to be the Path to Salvation may turn out to be the Road to Hell. GRAND MUFTI ALI GOMAA, Spiritual leader of Egyptian
Muslims, declared that "Yoga is an aberration the practice of which is
forbidden under Islamic Law". To this we can only say that Muslims
should think for themselves: could God forbid Yoga which is the Path of Unity
with Himself? By no means! Therefore, beware of leaders who denigrate other faiths and remember
that God knows best. He never said that Yoga is an aberration. Those who
prevent believers from attaining Unity with God are doing the work of Evil.
On this there can be no doubt. WINSTON CHURCHILL is celebrated by many as a war-time
hero of almost divine status. Indeed, he distinguished himself through his
single-mindedness and tenacity of purpose as British Prime Minister during
the Second World War. However, his present-day admirers would perhaps be less
pleased with their hero if they knew that, after the war, Churchill declared
that, "We have slaughtered the wrong pig", meaning that the war
effort should have been directed against Communist Russia rather than Nazi
Germany. His preference for Fascism over Communism was no secret to his
contemporaries. The fact is that, unbeknown to many today, Churchill had a
distinctly dark side to his carefully staged official persona. Apart from
being an alcoholic, he was also an incurable anti-Indian. Not only is he credited with racist utterances such as,
"I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly
religion", but he was also a fierce opponent of the Indian struggle of
independence from British occupation till the very end, subscribing to the
view that " When the Viceroy of India, Lord Irwin, suggested that
Churchill might change his views if he only talked to some Indians, he
retorted: "I am quite satisfied with my views on RICHARD NIXON and HENRY KISSINGER. According to
declassified documents and Oval Office tapes recording meetings between the
two in the 1970s, former Unbelievably, the newspapers reporting this (see "The
Times", Firstly, it is difficult to see how Indians can be described
as "slippery" and "treacherous" in comparison with the Taleban of Afghanistan and the military dictatorship of
Pakistan (who are harbouring Osama bin Laden and
other international terrorist leaders); the Islamic dictatorship of Iran; or
the Communist regimes of Russia and China; all of which came to power on
promises of freedom and prosperity only to deliver brutal oppression and
unspeakable misery. Secondly, By contrast, Nor must we forget that America herself has often proved quite
capable of aggressive, treacherous and hypocritical behaviour.
We only need to think of Vietnam or of Iran in the 1980’s when the Reagan
Administration supplied thousands of TOW and HAWK missiles to the terrorist
regime of Ayatollah Khomeini, free of charge, too! In the light of these facts, Nixon's and Kissinger's remarks
are indicative of unbelievable hypocrisy, cruelty and lack of humanity. As a
German-born Jew, Kissinger, in particular, ought to have demonstrated greater
sensitivity and, above all, better knowledge of history. Clearly, some people
never learn. Nor should they be entrusted with a position of leadership by a
great nation like THE U. S. ADMINISTRATION, especially under President G.
W. Bush, is collaborating with What is important to understand is that while Americans in
general are decent and hard-working people, their leaders have often indulged
in actions which have caused immense suffering to other nations. For example,
as President Bush admitted in a speech made in Now if the fifty-year long occupation of Eastern Europe by
Communist Russia is one of the greatest wrongs in history, then the
centuries-long occupation of India must be even greater a wrong, especially
when large areas of India remain under the occupation of Islamic and other
foreign forces to this day - with American approval and support. Indeed, as far as As if being oppressed, exploited and robbed for centuries by
foreign powers were not bad enough, This being so, it is right for Indian people to expect
Americans to apologise, repent and atone for all
the injustice American leaders have done to them and their country.
Otherwise, Indian patience with Western arrogance and hypocrisy will one day
run out and the people will rise against their Western oppressors. If
Westerners are shocked at Arab hatred and violence, they should consider what
will happen when one billion Indians, having lost all hope of justice, come
to demand Western blood instead. We urge the Western World to pause for a moment and think. If
the only way to stop Christian fundamentalists from converting innocent
Hindus while their capitalist collaborators exploit, corrupt, pollute and
utterly ruin the country and the livelihood of millions, is to assassinate,
kidnap, or publicly decapitate Westerners, then this is exactly what is going
to happen. It is entirely predictable and only fools and hypocrites can be
surprised. Westerners must stop listening to their corrupt and devious
leaders and understand that the crimes they commit in other countries cannot
go unpunished for ever. The day of reckoning is bound to come sooner than
they expect. OSAMA BIN LADEN, an Arab of Yemeni origin,
started his career as an Following the 9/11 attack on It is essential to understand in this context that, the notion
of a World-dominating Islamic Empire (Khilafat) is
not the creation of modern-day Islamic terrorists like bin Laden, but it is
as old as Islam itself and part and parcel of that religion. Without this
concept, Islam would never have reached beyond the borders of THE AMERICAN BRANCH OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH, working in
parallel with the Islamist movement is attempting to destabilise
and destroy Indian culture and civilisation.
Particularly shameful is its systematic effort to convert disadvantaged
Indians to Christianity and turn them against their Hindu brothers and
sisters. However, it is not only the political and religious organisations of PROFESSOR PAUL COURTRIGHT of Indeed, had the Professor done his job of academic research
into the subject-matter he would have discovered that an elephant's trunk is
quite dissimilar to a phallus in respect of both appearance and function.
Unlike a "limp phallus", the trunk is a muscular part of an
elephant's anatomy which is in constant motion, being employed for grasping,
feeding and drinking. If anything, its capacity of lifting and hurling heavy
objects bears comparison with a human arm which is a symbol of strength and
not limpness. In the interest of academic discussion, Hindu scholars could
theorize on the similarity of the body of Christ hanging on the cross to a
lifeless phallus. Indeed, his limp
head, in particular, lends itself very well to such comparison. In
consequence, we could legitimately speculate that, since Jesus was unmarried,
his myth suggests an incestuous relation between him and his mother, and that
the Christian God caused his own son to die in order to eliminate any
competition in his affair with Jesus's mother whom,
as the Bible says, he had earlier impregnated with his “spirit”. At the very
least, it could be argued that worshipping a dead man displayed on a cross
indicates an abnormal obsession with death and destruction – which is well
supported by Christianity’s history of violence. To complete the picture, it
may be asserted that this, indeed, is how Christians themselves understand or
ought to understand their mythology. Given that Hindu scholars kindly refrain from descending to
this level of discussion, Western scholars ought to demonstrate the decency
of returning the favour and abstain from drawing
parallels of this nature in respect of Hindu Deities. Apart from ignorance or
insanity, the only logical explanation for this offensive choice of
comparison is that it is intended to denigrate Hindu religious symbolism. In
our opinion, this in itself suffices to disqualify the Professor as a serious
scholar. For more on this subject click HERE. PROFESSOR WENDY DONIGER, PROFESSOR SUSAN WADLEY, PROFESSOR JAMES W. LAINE of PROFESSOR FRANCIS X. CLOONEY, of PROFESSOR
MICHAEL WITZEL, of Harvard University and PROFESSOR STEVE FARMER, of Stanford University. In their
writings, the said Professors criticize Indian scholars for aiming to
“rewrite Indian history from a nationalistic and religious point of view”.
The question that must be asked is, from exactly
what other point of view are Indians supposed to write the history of their
own country? From a Western-dictated, anti-national, atheistic one that
glorifies the crimes against India committed by British and Islamic
imperialists? Surely not! PROFESSOR MARTHA C.
NUSSBAUM, of the University of Chicago, has shamelessly joined the
bandwagon of anti-Hindu academia by blaming Hindu organisations
for the century-old Muslim-Hindu conflict in India. And the list goes on. Were such views restricted to just a few
academics, they wouldn't constitute too big of a problem. However, when they
threaten to become the main channel of information on Indian culture, in
particular in university circles, this goes against the very principles of
democracy and freedom so vehemently claimed by all Americans when their own
culture is perceived as coming under attack. In the final analysis, millions
of Westerners learn about Indian religion and culture not from Indians
themselves but from Indo-phobic Western academics. As if the anti-Indian
Hollywood propaganda was not bad enough as it is. Westerners need to understand that, while Indian people
welcome everybody who has a sincere interest in their country and culture,
they wish to enjoy their national heritage without misrepresentations and
malicious interferences from outside. While it is debatable whether and to what
extent the above mentioned Professors qualify as evil, the fact remains that,
had they taken the time to study Indian culture as experienced by Indians
themselves, they would have been less inclined to offer their own
pseudo-scientific interpretation of it. In any case, as such interpretation
may be taken as "scientific fact" by the ignorant and the credulous
and thereby contribute to the ongoing distortion of Indian culture by the
Western media, it does deserve the qualification of
evil in purpose if not in intent. This anti-Indian stance is, of course, nothing new among
Western academics. As long ago as 1811, JOSEPH BODEN, a retired army
officer who had served in the British occupation forces in Not, as one might think, in order to advance Indian culture.
On the contrary, the idea was that a "more general and critical knowledge of that language will be a means of
enabling my countrymen to proceed to the conversion of the natives of The first to masquerade as Boden
"Professor of Sanskrit" was Horace Wilson, followed by a string of
"Professors" busily engaging themselves in the fraudulent task
entrusted upon them by their generous benefactor. We may observe that no Chair of Hebrew was ever created at
Western Universities for the purpose of converting the Jews, nor a Chair of
Arabic for the conversion of the Arabs. Indians are clearly being singled out
as a target by the esteemed "Professors" who shamelessly use the
cover of academic work to go about their nefarious business. What becomes evident is that this blatantly
anti-Indian, British-American Axis of Evil, was formed from the very
beginning with the express intention to infiltrate, subvert, take over and
destroy Indian religion and culture. Apart from the Academic World, the political and media
Establishments of the Western World are only too eager to participate in this
Globalist Conspiracy. THE IMMIGRATION
AUTHORITIES OF EUROPE AND AMERICA systematically restrict the number of
Hindu immigrants and visitors in order to secure a Christian-Muslim majority
in these countries as part of a concerted effort to marginalise,
suppress and eventually exterminate Hinduism. CHARLES KENNEDY and GEORGE GALLOWAY, British Members
of Parliament, have expressed the view that the war in We know that politicians will use anything to promote their
agenda, but this is simply going too far. Not only does such a stance promote
lies and twisted thinking but it encourages the planners and
perpetrators of such atrocities in their belief that their message is being
taken as intended. Moreover, once innocent people start believing that they
are guilty of something, they will be open to endless blackmail and
intimidation. Could Kennedy and Galloway possibly be right? To answer this,
let us first look at the historical facts: they show that Islamic forces have
carried out unprovoked attacks on non-Islamic nations ever since Islam took
over in 7th-century What becomes evident is that this is an age-old conflict which
was started neither by Tony Blair and George Bush nor by the British National
Party, but by Islamists themselves who insist on establishing a
World-dominating Islamic Empire (Khilafat) against the
wishes of other nations - and over the dead bodies of everyone else, if
necessary. Secondly, how do the above politicians know that Thirdly, if the Western war on If Messrs Kennedy and Galloway know for a fact that the Iraqi
people have appointed Pakistanis to speak and act on their behalf, then let
them produce the evidence. If they cannot do so, then let them do their job
which is to represent the British people and not masquerade as mouthpieces
for lunatic fringe elements. Finally, as the website of the Islamist organization Hizb ut-Tahrir tells its followers: “We begin fighting the enemy even if
he did not start fighting us. Jihad is
not a defensive war, it is in fact a war to spread
Islam even if the disbelievers did not attack us.” (See also The Daily
Telegraph’s article on this, KEN LIVINGSTONE, Mayor of London from 2000 to 2008, is
reported to have declared that "Islamic extremism is being fuelled by
the West". Comrade Livingstone, who likes to compare Jewish journalists
to Nazi concentration-camp guards, certainly knows a lot about fuelling
conflicts. Let us spell out something else that he does know but chooses to
keep quiet about. The fact is that the act of "fuelling"
presupposes the existence of the thing which is to be fuelled, for example, a
fire or engine. While the West may be blamed for fuelling Islamic extremism,
it cannot be blamed for creating it. The fire of Islamic extremism has been alive for many centuries,
indeed, from the very beginning of Islam. Extremists are, by definition,
people who hold extreme views and act in extreme ways to enforce those views.
If the intention of Islamic extremists is to create a World-dominating
Islamic Empire (Khilafat), they will still hold
those views and continue to act in accordance with them, regardless of what
the rest of us do. As for the fuelling of Islamic extremism by the West, it has
taken place in various ways: 1. Through the encouragement, by the Leftist-liberalist Front,
of the Islamist view that the more pressure Islam puts on the non-Islamic
World, the more power it will acquire. This encouragement has been carried
out through the leftist-liberalist-controlled political, education,
religious, legal and media systems of left-leaning
countries like 2. Islamic extremism has been encouraged by Christian Church
leaders who, having lost most of their former power and influence,
collaborate with the Islamist camp in its fight against Eastern Faiths, in the
vain hope of getting a share in the Worldwide Islamic Empire once it has been
established. Among these we may mention the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan
Williams, and the Bishop of Rochester, Michael Nazir-Ali.
(The latter appears of late to have somewhat reconsidered his position on
Islam. In an article published in the magazine Standpoint of June 2008, the
Bishop complained that the vacuum created by Christianity’s decline is being
filled by radical Islamism. This, of course, can hardly be blamed on Islam.
Christianity is on the decline because it is a bogus and failed religion just
like Islam. The main difference between the two is that while many Christians
have lost faith, Muslims have retained a high degree of fanaticism which puts
them at considerable advantage over its fellow-Abrahamic
cult.) 3. Islamism has also been encouraged by the Capitalist camp
through arms sales to, and oil purchases from, Islamic countries, among other
things. This has created immense wealth for a few Islamic potentates who then
donate some of their income to extremist causes. More directly, Capitalism
has actually trained, armed and financed extremist
groups in its attempt to defeat Communist hegemony in What is important to understand is that the Globalist Entity is not a solid bloc but a loose alliance
of conspirators who conspire not only against outsiders but sometimes against
fellow conspirators. After all, a conspirator's work is to scheme and
conspire. We must not forget that the Western Globalist
Conspiracy is a Force of Disunity and Discord which opposes the
Eastern Tradition of Unity and Harmony. As such, it is comparable to a pack of wolves, sometimes
collaborating in coordinated attacks on a common victim, sometimes making
each their own separate kill and sometimes attacking each other. Their killing
instinct, at any rate, may be fuelled as much by opposition as by weakness,
appeasement and surrender. TONY BLAIR, British Prime Minister (1997-2007). In
the wake of the 7/7 attack on Indeed, he came to power on the promise to be "tough on
crime and the causes of crime". Unfortunately, under his Left-wing (Labour) Government, crime has risen instead of falling.
Islamic extremism, in particular, has sharply risen. The Labour policy of
"integrating" the Muslim community by helping it build more and
more mosques, Islamic centres and schools as well
as allowing unrestricted immigration from Islamic countries, in particular,
Pakistan, failed completely. Moreover, the authorities have done little to
prevent either the recruitment by terrorist organisations
of volunteers from British universities and colleges or the collection of
millions of pounds annually from British mosques for terrorist purposes. The
fact that Peter Clarke, the head of Scotland Yard’s anti-terrorism branch,
compared the Finsbury Park Mosque in London to “a
honey pot for extremists”, demonstrates how explosive the situation has
become. All this made the 7 July atrocity possible, indeed,
inevitable. Under Tony Blair's Leftist Government, British-based Islamic
extremism has been allowed to become a threat not only to The boost to the extremist cause is, of course, not only
material but also moral: if the leaders of the “war on terror”, that is,
Britain and America, allow these things to go on in their own country, the
only possible conclusion terrorists can draw is that the "war on terror"
is just a scam like "the war on crime", "the war on
drugs", "the war on poverty" and many other wars the Western
World has waged from the 20th century and before. In other words, empty
promises designed to fool voters. We have demonstrated above that the strategy of the
Leftist-liberalist camp is to try and defeat Capitalism with the help of
radical Islam. As leader of the Leftist Labour
Party, Tony Blair clearly belongs to this category. We must not forget that
the Prime Minister's wife, Cherie Blair, once openly declared her sympathy
for Palestinian suicide-bombers who, she believes, murder innocent Jewish
women and children not because they choose to but because they are driven to
such acts by their desperate situation. It is not unreasonable to assume that her husband shares some
of these ideas. This would explain: (a) his inaction with regard to the
obvious rise of Islamic extremism in Britain and elsewhere; (b) his bizarre
insistence that the European Community grant membership to Turkey - a
backward Islamic country which in most people's view does not meet the
economic, social, cultural and political requirements for membership; and (c)
his introduction of laws which make it illegal to criticise
Islam. Tony Blair's case seems clear. The conclusion which must be drawn is that Islamic extremism
can only be defeated by first defeating its powerful ally, Leftist-liberalist
Extremism. Leftism-liberalism is the evil ideology which must be defeated and
a man like Tony Blair is not the man to do it because he is one of the
leaders of the Leftist-liberalist Camp (alongside Kennedy, Galloway and
Livingstone). He is part of the problem, not the solution, though he may not
be aware of this. We shall now briefly examine the conflict itself. Speaking of The fact is that, between the fall of the All this changed, however, with the introduction of Islam into
the region from Following his death in 632, one of Mohammad's wives organised a powerful army and secured the If we really want justice, then an international court should
examine all the historical and archaeological evidence and decide who is
right and who is wrong. Curiously, this has never been seriously considered
by anybody. Instead, the whole World, led by the likes of Cherie Blair,
automatically sides up with the Islamist version of events! Incidentally, the Crusades, which took place between 1095-1291, are defined by the Oxford Dictionary of
Current English as military expeditions intended to defend the Western World
against earlier Muslim attacks on the West: the occupation of In the light of the historical evidence, it becomes apparent
that the suffering of present-day Palestinians is largely the result of their
own violent past for which, as Muslims, they must assume responsibility
instead of blaming it on others. If we go further back in time, the earliest evidence available
indicates that the original Palestinians (or Philistines as the Bible calls
them) were a Greek-speaking tribe from the Aegean who invaded Canaan (Ancient
Israel) in the 12th century BC – about the same time as the
Hebrews (the ancestors of the Jews). If that is the case, then present-day Palestinians must be
either (a) descendants of the original Palestinians who displaced the people
of The truth, of course, is that Palestinians are an ethnically
mixed nation consisting primarily of Arabs, Europeans and Turks all of whom
came to the area from elsewhere and cannot, therefore, qualify as original
Israelis or Palestinians, properly speaking. In particular, it is important for Muslims to understand that
they cannot claim ownership of the disputed land while denying the same to
their Jewish neighbours. The acknowledgement of
this fact must be the first step towards a just and peaceful solution to the
conflict. In addition to this, the following measures must be taken: 1. The
disputed land must be divided in a way that is fair to both parties. The above measures must be enforced by the International
Community in the interest of World justice, peace and stability and similar
measures must be taken to resolve the India-Pakistan and other conflicts. The
fact that
THE PRINCE OF To begin with, what exactly does he mean by “understand
Islam”? Are we meant to tolerate Islam, accept Islam, submit to Islam, take
pity on Islam, or what? What if we did take the time to study Islam and then, on the
basis of our understanding of it, decided to reject Islam as contrary to
accepted norms of what is right and what is wrong? Would this be an
acceptable form of understanding or are we to understand Islam strictly and
solely along the lines dictated by the Prince’s own lofty thoughts? Furthermore, why does Prince Charles never suggest to his
Islamic friends that they too, must understand other religions? Where is the
understanding offered by the Muslims of Pakistan, To understand the absurdity of the Prince’s position, we only
need to look at some basic facts. Western systems like Christianity and Islam
together with Communism and Capitalism, already rule the World. None of them
are in any danger or need of understanding, protecting or promoting. Islam,
in particular, already rules in some 52 countries worldwide. In many of
these, non-Islamic faiths are officially illegal and their practice is
punishable by imprisonment or death. In others, the persecution of
non-Islamic minorities is a daily, state-sponsored occurrence. In stark contrast
to this, Eastern faiths like Hinduism have no say in world politics and are
clearly on the decline. As opposed to dozens of Islamic countries, the State-funded Islamic schools have been in operation in Moreover, given that Islam has a well-documented anti-Hindu
ideology and agenda - which ought to be well-known to a holder of a Cambridge
degree in history like Prince Charles - promoting Islam while neglecting
Hinduism amounts to denying Hindus the right to exist. The rational analysis of facts compels us to conclude that if
any of the World faiths is in need of understanding, protecting and
promoting, it is Hinduism rather than Islam. Indeed, Hinduism is much more
misunderstood than Islam has ever been. In consequence, Prince Charles’
opinion on matters of religious harmony represents a classical example of
unbalanced thinking that can only add to the many imbalances already threatening
the World. Due to the fact
that ordinary people are often ignorant of the truth behind political events,
the words and actions of public figures can have a devastating effect on a
nation's destiny. THE WESTERN MEDIA.
The media's role in the promotion of twisted thinking is often more subtle
but can have an equally devastating effect: THE TIMES. An otherwise respectable British paper,
THE TIMES regularly publishes articles referring to non-Muslims as
"infidels", that is, "unbelievers". Firstly, from a historical point of view, this is incorrect.
Non-Islamic religions such as Hinduism, Judaism and Christianity existed long
before the introduction of Islam. Their followers, therefore, cannot be
described as non-believers with reference to a religion that didn't exist. If
anybody is an "unbeliever", it is the followers of Islam who chose
to reject, and disbelieve in, the religions that were already established at
that time. Secondly, from a religious point of view, this is also
incorrect. It may be that some non-Muslims are Atheists, but the majority
believe in the God of their own denomination and, in consequence, qualify as
believers for all practical purposes. It is, therefore, wrong for the media
to describe us non-Muslims as "unbelievers". Thirdly, from a moral and psychological point of view,
describing non-Muslims as "unbelievers" without ever applying this
term to Muslims themselves, gives the impression that non-Islamic faiths
constitute unwarranted religious deviations which entitles Islamist extremists
to punish the followers of such faiths according to Islamic law - which
prescribes the death penalty for apostasy and other offences of this nature. Another important issue is the media's treatment of
Indian-related matters. For example, apart from the customary negative image
of The fact that thousands of Hindu temples were destroyed by the
Muslim and Christian invaders of India, which morally and legally entitles
Indians to reclaim at least some of their religious sites, is simply brushed
aside as "nationalism", "communalism" or "fundamentalism".
We wonder whether Western publications like The Times would be prepared to
apply the same standard to Jewish property confiscated or destroyed by German
Nazis during the Second World War. In its article, "The act of small-time losers" ( Not only does associating Islamists with neo-Nazis not solve
the problem but, on the contrary, it merely muddles the issue and dangerously
distorts the truth which is that it isn't the neo-Nazis who sympathise with the Islamist cause but the
Left-wing-liberalist front who dreams of defeating Capitalism with the help
of Islam. Left-wing-liberalist principles do not appear to thrive in
Islamist societies (see The answer is that Left-wing rule may thrive for a while in
some parts of the World (see Therefore, the Left-wing dinosaur, who
has one foot in the grave and the other in the Communist era, is well aware
of its imminent extinction. Its main objective is not to win - as this is
impossible - but to ensure that: (a) the Capitalists don't win either; (b) it
remains itself in power, for the time being, with the help of the Islamic
electorate; and (c) it does as much damage as possible to the Capitalist
cause, again with Islamist help. Thus Left-wing-Islamist collaboration is a
tactical alliance which makes sense from the desperate point of view of a
failed and moribund movement. It is clear that Islamist strategies are more akin to those of
the Left-wing-liberalist camp than to neo-Nazi ones. This explains the mutual
Left-wing-Islamist sympathy and collaboration. See, for example, the
left-wing Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone's shameless invitation to Dr Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a known
Islamic fundamentalist. As if Nor must we forget that the prophets of Communism, Karl Marx
and Friedrich Engels, were advocating
"Revolutionary Terrorism" long before the rise of Nazism. Indeed,
Nazism (National Socialism) was to a large extent a reaction to Communist terrorism. By the time
Nazism came to power, Communism had already claimed millions of innocent
lives in Russia and elsewhere and continued to do so for almost a century.
Even today, so-called Nationalism is nothing but a natural reaction against
the crimes of Leftist-liberalism and its Globalist
allies, Capitalism and Islam. It wasn’t much different in the 20th
century. Therefore, let us not twist and pervert history lest we return to
Neanderthal times or worse. What renders the equation or comparison of Islamism with
neo-Nazism so dangerous, is that it creates the
false impression that Islamism is just an insignificant lightweight force in
the political arena of Western society. It is no such thing. The Islamist
cause enjoys the support of hundreds of millions of Muslims worldwide - from
ordinary believers to governments, armed forces, secret services and oil-rich
financiers. Militant Islamism is sufficiently vicious and dangerous to
merit a category of its own. It needs no comparison with anything else apart
from itself as an integral element of Islam and as the engine that has driven
the latter to invade, occupy and subjugate countless nations from its very beginning
in the Middle Ages to the present day. In its discussion on a new law (proposed by the Labour Government on the demand of Muslim leaders) which
would make it a criminal offence to criticise
Islam, The Times ("This law will protect believers not beliefs", Hindus, a substantial minority in In its editorial "Indian Summer, Another important aspect of the problem is the media's
systematic failure to explain the historical background of the Hindu-Muslim
conflict, without which no proper understanding of the current situation is
possible. This anomaly leaves the readers with the false impression that
Indians (or Hindus) are unreasonable, aggressive and violent people who
attack Muslims for no apparent reason and who insist on building temples on
Muslim holy places. This has the effect of humiliating, denigrating and stigmatising Hindus in the eyes of the Western public and
reinforces the Islamist extremists' resolve to wreak vengeance on the Hindu
people, leading to further escalations of the conflict - which according to
established media practice is then automatically blamed on the Hindus. If, as The Times ( This is what Mr Shapal
Khan, a Pakistani villager interviewed by The Times ( THE BBC was found guilty by the BSC (Broadcasting
Standards Commission) of giving preferential treatment to Muslims and
Muslim-related issues. As this indictment is official, we need not go into details.
Suffice it here to say that, as an influential news network, the BBC ought to
simply report facts and not manipulate them in favour
of any political or religious denomination. In breach of this important
principle, the BBC is not only clearly left-leaning but also favours Islam over other religions. This, once again,
demonstrates the collaboration between the Leftist-liberalist camp and Islam. The media must give up their parasitic and subversive
existence and honour their duty to society, which
is to report facts without putting a spin on them. If the media told the
plain historical truth which is that, Islamic forces have invaded,
occupied and subjugated Hindus for centuries, then the general public would
understand that Hindus have as much the right to redress historical wrongs as
they have to defend their cultural and Spiritual heritage against present-day
attacks. In the same way as the media have spent decades explaining
to the German people that they did certain things in the past which were
wrong, they must now also put all their combined efforts into making it
absolutely clear to the Muslim people that Islam has in the past made itself
guilty of some terrible crimes and that any attempt to glorify or repeat such
crimes will not be tolerated by the World Community in any form or shape. So
long as the media and their inhuman political allies refuse to do so, we are
entitled to accuse them of a criminal Conspiracy against the Human Race, in
general, and against the Indian People, in particular. On their part, Muslims must understand two things: (1) there
is no proof that Islamic culture and religion are better than others, and (2)
there is no proof that Muslims, in particular leading figures, always tell
the truth. Muslims, therefore, must ask themselves which is wiser: to blindly
follow their leaders or to find out for themselves what the historical facts
are? They must ask themselves, Why did Islamic Arab armies invade Moreover, what happened to the Hindu and Buddhist people of If the Quran is the Word of God, why
does it misinterpret other faiths? Why does it tell women to dress modestly
in order to avoid being molested when the evidence from Islamic countries
shows that Islamic dress does not protect women against being
molested, raped or even killed? These are extremely important questions to which Muslims have
a duty to urgently find answers. Otherwise, they will continue to inhabit a
dream-world in which Muslims are always right and non-Muslims wrong - a
dream-world which is slowly turning into a nightmare for all. THE
LEFTIST-ISLAMIST INSPIRED REACTION TO THE DANISH MOHAMMAD CARTOONS. As part of a debate
on freedom of speech the Danish daily newspaper JYLLANDS-POSTEN, in September
2005, published several cartoons involving Mohammad, the prophet of Islam.
The Muslim world reacted in an intemperate and disproportionate manner which
resulted in the murder of innocent Christians, the burning of churches and
embassies in various countries and other atrocities. The Muslim reaction to the cartoons must be condemned by all
right-thinking people not only because it is utterly disproportionate but, in
particular, because it is based on arguments which are logically and morally
untenable as well as factually false. The following examples will demonstrate
our point: 1. It is claimed that
the cartoons were designed to “offend Muslims” or even to provoke a “clash of
civilisations”.
This claim is entirely baseless. The fact is that the so-called “clash
of civilisations” or, rather, the conflict between
Islam and the rest of the World, was started by Muslims themselves when they
took over 7th-century Arabia and invaded other countries in a
campaign to impose Islam on the World.
It is evidently a long-standing, ongoing historical process that could
not have been started or provoked by 21st-century cartoonists. Moreover, criticism of Mohammad and his “divinely-inspired
prophecies” is hardly new. As may be gathered from the Quran
itself, accusations of insanity, forgery and deception against Mohammad were
already common in his living years. Criticism of Mohammad and his teachings,
therefore, is nothing but a legitimate continuation of an age-old tradition. Nor is |
