MUSLIM RACISM TODAY
Australian court brands Muslim leader a racist
Asia-Pacific News
Jul 31, 2009
Sydney - Australia's best-known Muslim leader 'holds views which can properly be described as racist,' a Supreme Court judge said Friday when deciding against him in a defamation action he brought against a Sydney radio station.
Keysar Trad, head of the Islamic Friendship Association of Australia, is the spokesman for Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali, the mufti of Sydney's biggest mosque.
He sought damages from 2GB radio station for its description of him as a dangerous individual who incited violence, hatred, and racism.
Justice Peter McClelland echoed that view, saying the Lebanese-born father of 11 was a dangerous person and had had encouraged hostility between Muslims and non-Muslims.
'Many of his remarks are distasteful and appear to condone violence,' McClelland said. 'I'm also satisfied that he encourages others to hold those views. In particular, he holds views derogatory of Jewish people.'
Al-Qaida Leader Says Obama's Afghan Plan is Doomed
By VOA News
19 November 2008
Al-Qaida's first reaction to Barack Obama's election as U.S. president
refers to him by a derogatory racial term and attacks his policies as
anti-Islamic.
In an posting on a militant Web site Wednesday, a voice identified as
the terror network's second-in-command, Ayman al-Zawahri, says
President-elect Obama's plan to increase the U.S. military presence in
Afghanistan is doomed.
There was no immediate reaction from the U.S. government or Mr. Obama's transition team.
The al-Qaida recording says Mr. Obama's support of Israel confirms his
hostility toward Islam. The posting shows a picture of Mr. Obama
wearing a skull cap at a Jewish holy site in Jerusalem.
Zawahri also denigrates Mr. Obama's achievements and those of other
prominent African Americans: Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and
General Colin Powell - implying they are servile to whites.
Zawahri uses a phrase popularized by slain U.S. activist and Muslim
convert Malcolm X to refer to Mr. Obama as a "house slave." The
English caption translates it to "house Negro" - a reference to
enslaved African Americans who Malcolm X said were manipulated by white
power.
The personal attack also includes a rebuke to Mr. Obama for turning his back on his father's Muslim roots.
Mr. Obama has said he would return America's military focus to
Afghanistan and the fight against al-Qaida after what the
president-elect has called the distraction of Iraq.
The U.S. military is already working to draw down troops in Iraq, while
boosting forces in Afghanistan, where insurgent attacks have been on
the rise.
Zawahri says in the posting that "the dogs of Afghanistan have found
the flesh" of American soldiers "to be delicious, so send thousands
after thousands to them."
Zawahri refers to a specific U.S. airstrike in Afghanistan on November
5, showing that the message was taped after Mr. Obama's election.
Racism in the Islamic World
For years, the U.N., led by Islamic and Arab nations and their sympathizers, has
accused Israel of racism, but the world consistently turns a blind eye to open,
seething anti-Semitism in Islamic society.
What are the facts?
In one of the most astonishing propaganda coups ever, a United Nations
conference on racism, which took place in Durban South Africa in 2001, declared
that Zionism is racism. No wonder the U.S. and Israel walked out of the meeting,
which was dominated by representatives of Islamic and Arab states and other
anti-Israel forces, and whose conclusions were predictable from the outset.
The supreme irony of this conference was that it accused no other nation of
racism—only Israel. In truth, Israel is perhaps the most racially and ethnically
diverse and tolerant country in the world. More than half of Israel’s Jewish
population consists of people of color—blacks from Ethiopia and Yemen, as well
as brown-skinned people from Morocco, Iran, Syria, Egypt and Israel itself. In
addition, Israel’s population includes more than one million Arabs, who enjoy
the same civil rights as Jewish Israelis. In Israel hate speech is banned, and
it is against the law to discriminate based on race or religion.
In contrast, anti-Semitism—a poisonous form of racism directed specifically
against the Jewish people—is rampant in most all Islamic societies. Not only is
anti-Semitism commonplace in Muslim nations, but it is propagated shamelessly by
their leaders, in state-sponsored media, and by Muslim clergy.
For example, Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamed declared in a 2003 speech
to the Organization of Islamic Conference that, “today Jews rule the world by
proxy. They get others to fight and die for them.” Imagine if an American
president had made a similarly sweeping and bigoted statement about blacks,
Latinos or any other race—what a justifiable uproar, perhaps even an
impeachment, would ensue. Yet there was no condemnation by the Muslim world of
Mohamed’s comments. Rather, virtually all of the conference’s Muslim leaders
actually voiced their approval.
In response to a terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia in May 2004, Crown Prince
Abdullah declared that “Zionism is behind [these] terrorist actions in the
kingdom.” (Zionism is the code word often used by Islamic anti-Semites for
Jews.) U.S. Congressman Tom Lantos called the Prince’s assertion “an outrage . .
. blatant hypocrisy,” but Islamic leaders were silent. In fact, millions of
Muslims still insist that Zionists were behind the September 11 attacks on the
World Trade Center.
Anti-Semitism is expressed so freely and ubiquitously in most Islamic societies
that no citizen can escape it. During Ramadan in 2002, Egypt’s state-controlled
TV aired “Horseman Without a Horse,” a program based on the notorious forgery,
The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, in which Jews allegedly use the blood of
non-Jews to make Passover matzot. In Iran, a TV series, “Zahra’s Blue Eyes,”
portrays “Zionists” kidnapping Palestinian children and harvesting their organs.
Perhaps nowhere is the hatred of Jews more virulent than among the Palestinians.
Most perniciously, Palestinian children are taught in school that Jews are
descended from apes and pigs and that the most noble thing they can do is to
kill Jews. Muslim clerics like Imam Ibrahim Madiras, an employee of the
Palestinian Authority, declared in a 2005 television sermon, “Jews are a cancer”
and later that, “Muslims will kill the Jews . . . [and] rejoice in Allah’s
victory.” No surprise, then, that the 1982 doctoral dissertation of Palestinian
president Mahmoud Abbas makes the astounding claim that “Zionists” collaborated
with the Nazis to annihilate the Jewish people in order to drive the survivors
to Palestine.
Anti-Semitism and the prospects for peace: Islamic anti-Semitism permeates the
Arab Middle East and creates an atmosphere in which Jews are reviled and
represented as subhuman. How can the Palestinian people embrace peace with a
people represented by their religious and political leaders as dehumanized, evil
beings? Even more importantly, how can Israel be expected to trust a so-called
peace partner who expresses abject hatred and murderous intent toward Jews on a
daily basis? Yet the U.S. and many European nations continue to demand that
Israel make one-sided sacrifices for peace with a people steeped in racism and
committed to its destruction.
Until Islamic leaders muster the integrity to relentlessly condemn anti-Semitism
(and its evil twin, anti-Zionism), we can’t expect Israel to accept a forced
peace with the Palestinians. Likewise, until moderate Muslims reject racism in
all forms, they can’t expect Islam to enjoy full respect as a political and
spiritual force among the world’s people.
“Until Muslims reject racism in all forms, they can’t expect Islam to enjoy full
respect as a political and spiritual force.”
The Darfur Tragedy : The Islamic World Needs to Speak Out Loudly
Abubakr G. Shaikh, May 15, 2006
The blood-thirsty and the much feared Sudanese militia, known
as Janjawed, has been trained by the Sudanese army with the explicit purpose of
ridding Darfur villages of black Muslims. They race their camels and machinegun-
mounted trucks through the villages, shooting indiscriminately at the helpless
and unarmed villagers. These barbarous butchers are aided helicopter gunships to
maximize the terror and mayhem so that none could dare to return. Men, women and
children are virtually mowed down without mercy. When the mayhem is complete,
the victims’ bodies are dismembered, sprayed with oil and burnt alongside their
huts. The livestock and young women are spared to be taken away as the war
booty. The women are routinely kidnapped, raped and enslaved as serfs and
domestic servants. They tend the farms and cattle of the brown skinned Arabs and
satisfy their lust and give birth to the Arab progeny to replace the black
population.
Slavery is an ugly blot on the Islamic faith. Despite the immense compassion
shown by the holy Prophet, peace be upon him, for the oppressed, poor and
children, it is an irony that slavery is still part of the Sharia. The glorious
Qur’an says: "O mankind We have created you from a single male and a female and
made you into nations and tribes that you may know one another. Verily the most
honorable in you in the sight of Allah is that who has At-Taqwa (pious and
righteous person) who fear Allah much and love Allah much."(49.13). Color, creed
or caste, does not distinguish a person from the other in Islam and given that
all people are born equal how could slavery be justified?
The Darfurians have a valid claim on their sacred lands from where they are
being consistently and systematically uprooted. They are the original natives,
not the Arabs whose forefathers came to the region with a noble cause:
delivering the message of peace and not to rule or drive the Darfurians away
from their homelands .They were received well by their hosts and they in turn
served them well. However, their descendents have followed a path of savagery,
prejudice and hate, breaking every rule of civility, all principles of humanity,
and the basic tenets of Islam.
The merciless genocide has gone on unchecked for the past two years and while
the actual death toll is difficult to estimate, close to 200,000 innocent people
have been butchered in this worst scenario of ethnic cleansing according to some
sources - the biggest carnage after Rwanda and Bosnia. More than two millions
have been rendered homeless. Milovesic must have been wondering in his grave
what did he do to deserve the Hague trial! The United Nations’ duplicity and
double standards are also evident from the fact that it actively got involved in
East Timur and Sudan's other conflict based on religion with its southern region
whereas in this conflict based on color prejudice there are no signs of urgency
on the part of the world body. The world remains cool and impassive because of
global oil interests tainted with the blood of the innocent Darfurians.
In their quest to complete the annihilation of black Muslins, Sudan's army
supported by its notorious militia, continues to chase and attack refugee camps
inside the neighboring country Chad. Sudan is also accused by the president of
Chad to be actively involved in its nefarious activities to destabilize his
regime by providing aid to rebels to instigate a revolt in Chad. The aim is to
install a proxy government, which in collaboration with Sudan, will wipe out the
entire black Muslim population of Darfur. The only crime of these unfortunate
and helpless people is the color of their skin and their Islamic faith, Islam,
whose basic tenets call for eradication of all kind of prejudices.
How much longer can they endure and keep their faith in Islam? Perhaps they must
already be thinking of other options for their survival while the Islamic world
remains unmoved. Its silence and indifference is staggering. The catastrophe is
of a colossal nature, but it has not moved the hearts of 1.2 billion Muslims of
the world who only recently reacted violently to the much less critical issue of
the cartoon controversy. The entire Muslim community from one end of the globe
to the other, erupted in furor, over-reacting to the controversy in a manner
that seemed to suggest that Islam was in eminent danger. The irrational behavior
led to many deaths of innocent citizens, loss of property and revenue, and
contra-productive results in the form of severe criticism on the conduct of
Muslims by the international press. However, not a single protest march took
place on the massacre and carnage of 200,000 Muslims at the hand of fellow
Muslims in Darfur.
One wonders about the priorities of the Ummah. The Qur’an is very specific on
resolving disputes and making reconciliation between two Islamic factions. Allah
has ordained: "And if two parties or groups among the believers fall into
fighting ,then make peace between them both and if one of them rebels against
the other then fight you against the one that which rebels till it complies with
the command of Allah then if it complies then make reconciliation between them
justly and be equitable"(49: 9,10)
Every big fire starts with a small spark, each movement is the brainchild of an
individual and eventually transforms into a revolution, every hurricane develops
from the buildup of winds and waves.
Nicholas Kristof, a New York Times columnist and champion of the oppressed
people around the world, has tirelessly raised awareness on the Darfur genocide
in the past two years. The spark now seems to have developed into a sizeable
flame. Here in the United States, with the steady involvement of the common
people, religious leaders, organizations, human rights activists, college and
universities students - the flame is getting larger every day. In contrast tothe
Muslim world's apathy, the Jewish, Evangelical, Armenian and human rights
organizations are in the forefront of building alliances, pressure and lobbying
groups to get the administration involved in ending the genocide in Darfur. I
had counted more than 60 nationwide Jewish organizations’ names which sponsored
a full-page protest in the Columbus Dispatch, the leading newspaper of Ohio on
the insensitivity of the Bush administration to the Darfur genocide. I am sure
similar protest ads must have appeared in all major newspapers nationwide. The
Jews’ sensitivity reflects their having suffered the worst genocide in human
history. This movement is gathering momentum and now has reached colleges and
universities, churches and synagogues. These groups also arranged a million
march to Capital Hill. No name of any Muslim organization appeared in the
protest march nor any public statements appeared on the subject in any
newspaper.
Some hopes have started to build as there are indications that president Bush
might take an initiative to involve UN troops in Darfur yet nothing concrete has
emerged so far. Meanwhile, Sudan has successfully persuaded South Africa to stay
for six more months in Darfur and delay in handing over charge to the UN. What
sinister motive is behind this move is not clear yet.
One regrets the snail-pace response of the UN and the confounding apathy of the
Muslim world to the unfolding tragedy.
Why black Africa should resist Arab domination of AU
By Chinweizu
Part I: The Arab Quest for Lebensraum in Africa“
The third of the Arab community living outside Africa should move in with the two-thirds on the continent and join the African Union “which is the only space we have’ — Col. Mouammar Gadhafi of Libya, at the Arab League, 2001
Many AfriKans take great exception to the sentiments and
views expressed by Col. Gadhafi at the March 2001, Amman, Jordan meeting of the
Arab League. --Prof. Kwesi Kwa Prah, 2004, in a paper to the AU [both quotes in
Bankie and Mchombu eds, 2006:217, 235]
Besides joining Prof. Prah and the other Afrikans who take exception to
Gadhafi’s statement, I should like to point out that Gadhafi’s invitation to his
fellow Arabs is nothing but a declaration of race war on Africa. It is an
invitation to more Arabs to invade and colonize Africa. Indeed, it is a call for
the final phase of the 15 centuries old Arab lebensraum war on Afrikans - a war
to Islamise and conquer all of Africa, from Cairo to the Cape and from Senegal
to Somalia, and to then enslave or Arabise all the conquered Afrikans. In order
to make that clear, it is necessary to first put his invitation in the context
of the traditions of Arab melanophobia and negrophobia, and of Arab expansionist
ambitions and conquests that go back to the time of their Arab prophet,
Mohammed.
Melanophobia and Negrophobia in Arab culture:
The following excerpt from The Crisis of Identity in Northern
Sudan: A Dilemma
of a Black people with a White Culture, by Al-Baqir al-Afif Mukhtar, gives an
insight into the melanophobia and negrophobia that Arab culture has reeked of
since before the time of Mohammed: “The contempt towards . . . the dark skinned
is expressed in a thousand ways in the documents, literature and art that have
come down to us from the Islamic Middle Ages.
. . . This literature, and especially popular literature, depicts (the black man) in the form of hostile stereotypes - as a demon in fairy tales, as a savage in the stories of travel and adventure, or commonly as a lazy, stupid, evil-smelling and lecherous slave. . . . Ibn Khaldun sees the blacks as “characterized by levity and excitability and great emotionalism” and [says] that “they are everywhere described as stupid” . . . al-Dimashqi had the following to say: “The Equator is inhabited by communities of blacks who may be numbered among the savage beasts. Their complexion and hair are burnt and they are physically and morally abnormal. Their brains almost boil from the sun’s heat.”
Ibn al-Faqih al-Hamadhani follows the same line of reasoning. To him . . . the zanj . . .are “overdone until they are burned so that the child comes out between black, murky, malodorous, stinking, and crinkly- haired, with uneven limbs, deficient minds, and depraved passions. . .”
Arab-Muslim doctrines on Black enslavement:
The following excerpt [from Blasphemy Before God: The Darkness of Racism In Muslim Culture by Adam Misbah aI-Haqq, shows how and why Arabs incurably believe in enslaving blacks: “Classic Muslim thought maintained that blacks became legitimate slaves by virtue of the colour of their skin.
The justification of the early Muslim equation of blackness with servitude was found in the Genesis story so popularly called “the curse of Ham,” in reference to one of Noah’s sons . . . .In the Arab- Muslim version, blacks are cursed to be slaves and menials, Arabs are blessed to be prophets and nobles, while Turks and Slavs are destined to be kings and tyrants. . . . The famous Al-Tabari, for example, cites no less than six Prophetic traditions which seek to support this story. One tradition reads: Ham begat all those who are black and curly- haired, while Japheth begat those who are full faced with small eyes, and Shem begat everyone who is handsome of face (Arabs of course) with beautiful hair. Noah prayed that the hair of Ham’s descendants would not grow past their ears, and wherever his descendants met the children of Shem, the latter would enslave them.
Ahmad Ibn Hanbal reported a saying attributed to the Prophet which in effect states that God created the white race (dhurriyyah bayd) from the right shoulder of Adam and created the black race (dhurriyyah sawd) from Adam’s left shoulder. Those of Adam’s right shoulder would enter Paradise and those of the left, Perdition. Other equally racist sayings have been attributed to the Prophet in the traditions.
Contradicting this spirit, there are the sayings of the Prophet which equate the value of a person to his God-consciousness (taqwa), and to their piety without any regard to the tribal or ethnocentric concerns of a racist purport. Such [egalitarian] reports [were overshadowed by] the more deeply rooted tradition of racial bigotry . . . [emphasized by] Muslim geographers and travellers who ventured into Africa. . . . Al-Maqdisi wrote, “ . . . As for the Zanji, they are people of black colour, flat noses, kinky hair, and little understanding or intelligence.” . . . Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406CE) added that blacks are “only humans who are closer to dumb animals than to rational beings.” . . . Even such luminaries as Ibn Sina considered blacks to be “people who are by their very nature slaves.” .
. . The creation or resurgence of the mythology of Ham also made darkskinned people synonymous with servitude in light-skinned Muslim thinking.
This went so far that eventually, the term abd (slave), went through a semantic development and came to specifically refer to “black slave” while lightskinned slaves were referred to as mamluks. And further on in later usage, the Arabic word came to mean “black man” of whatever status. . . .”
We can now see why, when an Arab sees anyone with black skin, all he notices is a dumb animal that he is licensed and even obliged by his religion to capture and enslave. With that background on the Arab tradition of enslaving and holding blacks in profound contempt, let us now examine the meaning of Gadhafi’s call for lebensraum.
In 2001, the Libyan leader, Gadhafi, under the cover of advancing the Nkrumahist Pan- African project of African Unity, was concluding his sub-imperial assignment to round up the African states into his Arab-dominated AU for easier muzzling and control by global imperialism. At an Arab League meeting in Amman, Jordan, Gadhafi exposed another hidden agenda of his AU project when he observed that 2/3 of the world’s [approximately 250million] Arabs now live in Africa, and he invited the rest to move into Africa and join them.
Though the Pan-African News Agency (PANA) reported it and posted it on its website, I wonder how many African leaders took note of Gadhafi’s invitation and saw the danger it poses for Africa. What Afrikans (i.e. the indigenous peoples of Africa) should particularly note is his reason for the invitation, namely, that Africa is the only space Arabs have. This is so reminiscent of the Nazi project of seizing living space, lebensraum, for the Germans from their neighbours in Eastern Europe that any sensible Afrikan must understand it as a threat to all Afrikans.
More importantly, it spells out, for all but the willfully and suicidally deaf to hear, the grand geopolitical purpose behind Arab policy and action in Africa in the last 50 years. But first, we need to put Gadhafi’s invitation in the context that allows us to appreciate the full danger to Afrikans from this enduring Arab ambition for lebensraum. Since the death of their prophet, Mohammed, Arabs have been relentlessly seizing lebensraum – living space—in Africa. Since their conquest of Egypt in 642, they have taken over all of North Africa, and most of the Nile valley and some of their tribes have even infiltrated as far west from the Nile as Lake Chad. Arabs have, by now, occupied supra-Sahara Africa and the Nile Valley, i.e. more than one-third of the African landmass, and they are still grabbing more and moving tenaciously to conquer the rest.
Arab expansionism in Africa, 640-1900
I wonder how many Afrikans today wonder how it came about that Arabs, whose homeland is the Arabian Peninsula, came to occupy all of supra-Sahara Africa, from the Sinai peninsula across to Morocco’s Atlantic coast. And what they did to the Black Egyptians, Black Berbers and other blacks who were the aborigines of all that expanse of land? Similarly, Afrikans need to inquire into why and how an Arab minority has ruled Sudan since 1956? And how did it come about that we hear of Arab tribes in Darfur, Chad and even in Nigeria’s Bornu State? Until 640 AD, there were no Arab settlers of any kind in all those places. But in that year, hungry Arab hordes desperate for plunder and greener pastures charged out of Arabia, flying the flag of their new religion, Islam, and conquered Egypt by 642. Egypt thereafter became their base for invading and seizing lebensraum all the way west to Morocco and Mauritania, and southward up the Nile.
In the first phase of conquest, an Arab raiding army reached Tangier on the Atlantic in 682. Then in the 11th Century, the Fatimids who were then ruling in Egypt, unleashed Bedouin Arab tribes, such as the Beni Hilal and Beni Sulaim, into the Maghreb. These Bedouin tribes overran as far west as Morocco in the 12th and 13th centuries, and brought about the Arabisation of the indigenous Berber population of the Maghreb whom they swamped.
They reached northern Mauritania by the 14th Century. Also in the 14th Century, Guhayna Arab tribes, edged out of Egypt, infiltrated up the Nile into Sudan. In 1820, Mohammed Ali Pasha sent an expedition from Egypt that conquered Northern Sudan by 1841. In 1869, Ismail Pasha attempted to annex the region from Juba/Gondokoro to Lake Victoria, a region that would become Uganda and Sudan’s Equatoria Province. He failed, but the British who ruled from 1899 to 1956 later incorporated Equatoria into the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan. In 1874, the Jellaba-Arab slave raider, Zubair Pasha conquered Dar Fur for the Egyptians. Also in the 19th Century, Awlad Sulaiman Arabs migrated, in the 1840s, from the Fezzan in Libya into the Lake Chad area, and Shuwa Arabs in search of pasturelands moved, in the 1810s, from Chad into the Bornu area of what became Nigeria.
From the late 19th Century until the 1950s, Arab expansionism in Africa was stopped in its tracks by the European powers who conquered and partitioned Africa among themselves. Only with the retreat of European political rule did opportunity arise for Arab expansionism to resume its march. And it promptly did.
Arab expansionism in Africa since 1956, i.e. in the era of
continentalist Pan-Africanism.
Continentalist Pan-Africanism was launched in 1958 at the Accra Conference of
Independent African States (CIAS). It has been the dominant tendency within Pan-Africanism
ever since, and it has given birth to the Arab-dominated OAU/AU. As some
observers have pointed out, the Arab League, established in 1945, is the
institutional organ for realizing the Arab aspirations for unity and imperial
resurgence through “an Arab-Islamic empire across Africa into the Middle East.”
Under its aegis, Arab nationalism resumed its expansion in Africa when, on
attaining independence in 1956, the Jellaba-Arab minority government of Sudan
defined Sudan as an Arab country and set out to enforce that definition on
Sudan’s African majority.
Islamisation and Arabisation of Black Africa: the pilot project in Sudan:
It has been noted by Opoku Agyeman that Pan-Arabism, in its
so-called ‘civilizing mission’ perceives Africa as a ‘cultural vacuum’ waiting
to be filled by Arab culture “by all conceivable means” [Agyeman, 1994:30]
including Islamisation, and the settlement of Arab populations on lands forcibly
seized from Africans. The assumptions, objectives and methods of this project
may be illustrated from the statements of its principal implementers in Sudan:
“You are aware that the end of all our efforts and this expense is to procure
Negroes. Please show zeal in carrying out our wishes in this capital matter.”
--Muhammad Ali Pasha, Ruler of Egypt, 1825, in a letter to one of his generals
in Sudan, quoted in [Nyaba, 2002:36]
In his 1955 book on the orbital scheme [the three circles at whose center he envisioned Egypt to be], President Nasser characterized Africa as “the remotest depths of the jungle,” and as merely a candidate for Egypt’s “spread of enlightenment and civilization” via Islamisation-Arabisation.
-Gamal Abdel Nasser, President of Egypt, 1955, quoted in [Agyeman,1994:34].
“Sudan is geographically in Africa but is Arab in its
aspirations and destiny. We consider ourselves the Arab spearhead in Africa,
linking the Arab world to the African continent.” -Sudanese Prime Minister,
Mahgoub, 1968, quoted in [Agyeman, 1994:38]. Sudan “is the basis of the Arab
thrust into the heart of Black Africa, the Arab civilizing mission.”
- President Nimeiry of Sudan, 1969, quoted in [Agyeman, 1994:39] “We want to
Islamise America and Arabise Africa” – Dr. Hassan El-Turabi, chief ideologue of
Jellaba-Arab minority rule in Sudan, 1999, quoted in [Nyaba, 2002:27]. “The
south [Sudan] will remain an inseparable part of the land of Islam, God willing,
even if the war continued for decades.”
-Osama bin Laden, April 2006, [from an edited translation of an audiotape
attributed to al-Qaeda leader, Osama bin Laden, parts of which were aired by
Aljazeera on April 23, 2006]
This thrusting of Arab spears into the body and soul of Black
Africa through deAfrikanisation campaigns of Islamisation-Arabisation was, of
course, not confined to Sudan, but has been done wherever Arabs spotted an
opportunity to exploit Afrikan weakness, such as Mauritania, Chad, Somalia,
Eritrea, Uganda. In the past 40 years, Libya’s Gadhafi has been particularly
active in sponsoring chaos, anarchy and civil wars in Chad, Liberia, Cote
d’Ivoire etc., and in trying to Islamise Uganda, Rwanda, the CAR etc. For
example, in a live broadcast on Rwanda Radio on 17 May, 1985, Gadhafi said:
"First, you must stick to your Islamic religion and insist that your children
are taught the Islamic religion and you teach the Arabic language because
without the Arabic language, we could not understand Islam. . . You must teach
that Islam is the religion of Africa. . . You must raise your voice high and
declare that Allah is great because Africa must be the refugee camps in
neighbouring Chad. . . .
Muslim. . . We must wage a holy war so that Islam may spread in Africa. --quoted
in [Bankie and Mchombu, 2006:239-240].
Why do Gadhafi and other Arabisers sponsor Islamisation? Steve Biko pointed out
the fundamental reason why imperialists make a point of converting their victims
to their Christian religion when he said: It has always been the pattern
throughout history that whosoever brings the new order knows it best and is
therefore the perpetual teacher of those to whom the new order is being brought.
If the white missionaries were “right” about their God in the eyes of the
people, then the African people could only accept whatever these new know-all
tutors had to say about life.
The acceptance of the colonialist-tainted version of Christianity marked the turning point in the resistance of African people. [Biko, 1987:56]. Steve Biko’s observation helps explain why Arab hegemonists like Gadhafi insist on Islamising their intended victims. Since the death of their prophet, Mohammed, Islam has been the religious cloak and entry-dagger of Arab imperialism. Islamisation is used as a prelude to the project of Arabisation.
Among the targeted victims, Islam privileges the Arabic language and culture. Arab names and customs are made obligatory, and the anathema on Jahiliya discourages remembrance of the pre-Islamic, non-Arab culture of an Islamised people. It should be noted that the core Islamic countries that stretch contiguously from the Maghreb to Pakistan are fragments of the empire that Arabs conquered and ruled from 632-1517 when the Turks, under Selim the Grim, conquered Egypt and Syria and extinguished the Arab Abbasid Caliphate. Thus, the core lands of Dar-al-Islam today are a continuation of the Arab Empire. Just as the Commonwealth is the euphemistic PR name for the enduring British Empire, so too Dar-al-Islam is the euphemistic PR name for the enduring Arab Empire. In fact, Dar-al-Islam is simply the Arab empire in religious camouflage, and the Umma are the Arab citizens/masters and the non-Arab subjects of the enduring Arab Empire.
Gadhafi and the Arab lebensraum project in the 21st Century in furtherance of his lebensraum project, in May 2003, proposed a tripartite union of Libya, Sudan and Egypt, a move reminiscent of Hitler’s Anschluss project that annexed, in 1938, Austria as well as Czechoslovakia’s Sudetenland. To appreciate the menace in Gadhafi’s invitation, Afrikans would do well to consider Hitler’s drive for lebensraum and how it was stopped.
Just as Gadhafi wants to enlarge Arabia inside Africa, Hitler wanted to enlarge Germany within Europe by the acquisition of a territory for settlement, which will enhance the area of the mother country, and hence not only keep the new settlers in the most intimate community with the land of their origin, but secure for the total area those advantages which lie in its unified magnitude. [Hitler, 1971: 653] Hitler looked east for Germany’s expansion in Europe. In Nazi ideology, Lebensraum meant the expansion of Germany eastward to conquer lands for Germans to settle and peoples for Germans to enslave. According to Hitler, the ideal war was one of conquest, extermination, and subjugation; the ideal area in which to conduct such a war was in the east, where the German people would win for itself the lebensraum.
The Nazi theory of Lebensraum became Germany’s foreign policy during the Third Reich. A key element in Hitler’s plan for lebensraum was the idea of military expansion and the forced expulsion of the nations of Poland, Ukraine, Russia etc. and their replacement with German settlers. The Lebensraum ideology was a major factor in Hitler’s launching of Operation Barbarossa in June 1941. As the German armies moved eastward, the Nazis began to turn large areas of Soviet territory into German settlement areas. The biggest obstacle to implementing the Lebensraum further was the fact that by the end of 1942, the Sixth Army was defeated in Stalingrad. After the second big defeat in the tank battle at Kursk during July 1943 and the Allied landings in Sicily, all further Lebensraum plans came to a halt.
USA, Australia, Russia — case studies of lebensraum.
Faced, from the 16th Century, with European invaders seeking lebensraum, the Native Americans in what became the USA, failed to muster the necessary will and forces to defeat and drive the invaders away; as a result, these indigenous peoples were exterminated and lost their continent by the late 19th Century. Bands of their remnants were herded into reservations and left to slowly die out. Similarly in the 19th Century, the Australian aborigines failed to muster the necessary will and forces to defeat and drive away the invaders from Europe. They too were exterminated. In contrast, the Russians in the 20th Century, under Stalin, mustered the necessary will and forces, defeated Hitler’s armies and chased them back all the way to Berlin and obliged Hitler to commit suicide.
As these contrasting examples make clear, seekers of lebensraum can only be stopped by decisively defeating and driving them away. How did the Russians manage to do that? First of all, their leaders took quite seriously the Nazi talk of seeking lebensraum in Eastern Europe, and prepared for war. In February 1931, Stalin predicted and warned his people: ‘We are 50 or 100 years behind the advanced countries. We must make good this lag in 10 years. Either we do it or they crush us.’ And he drove his people with the proverbial whip and scorpion, and forced them to industrialize at a desperate pace. And Russia industrialized in 10 years flat! Which was just in time to be ready when Hitler unleashed his armies on Russia in June 1941. And by 1943, Hitler’s lebensraum project lay in ruins as his mighty armies had been defeated by Stalin’s armies. It took another two years of hard fighting for the Russians to drive Hitler’s armies all the way back to Berlin. Had they not done so, there would be no Russia or Poland or Ukraine etc today. All the land from Berlin to the Urals would have been taken over and settled by Germans. And any Russians not exterminated would have been enslaved as Hitler intended.
If Afrikans want to escape at Arab hands the type of fate that Hitler planned for the Russians, we need to learn from Stalin’s example. We need to build a megastate and industrialize it at breakneck speed into a modern power. And we need to defeat the Arabs and drive them back across the Sahara.
The first step is to expel all Arab League countries from the AU, or better yet, to destroy this enemy-controlled AU and organize a Black World League of States to serve as the collective security outfit exclusively for the Blacks of the World. The second step is to militarily discourage any further Arab expansion into sub-Sahara Africa. We must firmly bear in mind that lebensraum ambitions are effected by military action, as in Sudan’s war on the SPLM, and its use of Janjawid militias in Darfur and Chad. And we must also firmly bear in mind that such ambitions are destroyed only by military action. To think of any other way is suicidal foolishness. So Gadhafi’s ambition must be finally defeated militarily by Afrikan power, and the sooner the better for Afrikans.
Part II: The Challenge to Pan-Afrikanism
First, they came for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up
because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up
because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a
trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time, no one was left to speak up for me. -Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892-1984)
In the last 15 centuries, Arab invaders have grabbed 1/3 of the African continent, and systematically enslaved, exterminated or Arabised the blacks they met there. How? I have already quoted examples from the mission statements of the anti-Afrikan leaders of the Arab expansionists since 1820 in Sudan. Let us now see examples of how they’ve gone about implementing their policy on the ground since 1956 while the OAU/AU Pan-Africanists determinedly looked the other way or buried their ostrich heads in the sand. The following are instructive excerpts, about the events in al-Di’ein and Dar Fur, from Islamisation and Arabisation of Africans as a means to Political Power in the Sudan by Sudanese scholar, M. Jalaal Haashim: al-Di’ein 1987
As its civil war with the SPLM/SPLA intensified, the Jellaba-Arabist Sudan government of al-Sadiq al-Mahdi (1986-1989) used the Baggara Arabs to punish those Dinka who lived on the border of Kordufan and Dar Fur, such as the Ngog, on the assumption that all the Dinka were SPLM/SPLA.
“The Baggara tribes in Kordufan and Dar Fur are nomadic Arabs who have been greatly influenced by the Nilotic tribes, especially the Dinka, from whom they have taken the cows for livestock and the colour of blackness . . . . Until then, the hostility between the two sides was relatively kept at bay due to their historical inter-relationship. Thousands of Dinka who fled the war zone came and lived with the Baggara. This is how in a certain village called al-Di’ein in Southern Dar Fur, more than 6,000 Dinka people peacefully took refuge and lived with the Baggara.
In 1987, the government of Sadiq al-Mahdi established the infamous Popular Defence Forces (PDF) as a pretext for officially arming the Baggara Arabs to fight the Southerners. Armed in this way, the marauding Baggara squads of PDF began making incursions into the South, raiding the Dinka villages. [These] naturally sought help from the SPLM/SPLA [who] came to the rescue . . . . In all aspects, the Baggara Arabs were unequal to the SPLA. Suffering defeat after defeat, . . . the Baggara began nursing deep hatred towards the Dinka in general, [and finally directed their revenge on] the peaceful Dinka who were living with them at al- Di’ein . . .In one day in mid 1987, at least 1,000 Dinka were massacred, 4,000 were burned alive, and the survivors - around 1,000 - were enslaved. The massacre began early in the day. At first, the bewildered Dinka did not believe what was going on. When reality dawned on them, they fled into the houses of their hosts who were also their attackers. They were dragged by their feet like animals to be butchered outside the houses of their hosts. The Dinka took refuge in the Church; there they were killed along with the priest. Then they ran and took refuge inside the Police station, which was part of the railway station, but, alas, the Police turned out to be accomplices.
They were killed there also. Whether in good or bad faith . . . they were ill-advised to take refuge in the empty carriages of a standing freight train so they could be taken away from al-Di’ein. With the trustfulness usually shown by totally vulnerable and helpless people in their eagerness to cling to a straw, they hurriedly obeyed. Once crammed inside, they were locked in from outside. Caged in like animals, they saw with their own eyes barrels full of diesel being rolled toward them. They were burnt alive, all of them. Only then, with the barbecue smell of that holocaust, did the Baggara come to their senses. The survivors were fortunate that they were only enslaved. Slavery was the common sense of that doomed day . . . . In the period 1989-1999, only God knows how many massacres like that of al-Di’ein took place.”
The Janjawid campaign of genocide:
“A decade after the Dinka massacre in al-Di’ein, the scenario of ethnic manipulation by the state expanded to cover the whole of Dar Fur and most of Kordufan, . . . [and] the era of terror of the infamous Janjawid had been launched. . . .
Dar Fur has been the victim of the involvement of the neighbouring Arab states in the civil war in Chad that flared up in the 1970s. Libya, an extreme advocate of Pan-Arabism with highly volatile policies, intervened in Chad with the sole aim of helping the Arab nomad tribes with money, logistics and arms. . . . The government of Khartoum has not only backed the nomadic Arab tribes, but has also armed them and fought by land and air along with them.
All through the decade of 1982-1992, skirmishes and limited killings were commonplace in Dar Fur. The Khartoum government dubbed them ‘armed robbery’. In 1995, the massacres were launched first against the Masalit tribe of the state of West Dar Fur. The governor himself was a Masalit Muslim brother who was given orders from Khartoum to let his sedentary people host a heavily armed clan of pastoralist Baggara who were driven out of Chad to be welcomed by the Khartoum government simply out of bias for the Arabs. . . . The Masalit welcomed the Baggara. Under the official eyes of the State government which was headed by their own son, thousands of the Masalit were butchered in mid 1995. . . . ”
Through these “gruesome atrocities . . ., which are being overtly committed by State- backed Arab tribes”, the nomadic Arab tribes of Dar Fur have been committing genocide and ethnic cleansing against the African sedentary tribes. As both the culprit and the victim are Muslims, the Afro-Arab race war nature of the genocide becomes very clear. As Jalaal Haashim points out, the conflicts in Sudan are “a racist war camouflaged with religion.”
But how exactly do these Arab marauders carry out ethnic cleansing? The next excerpt, from Singing while their men rape, THE GUARDIAN, NAIROBI Wednesday, July 21, 2004, Page 6, tells of an ongoing example of organized raping and killing and enslavement carried out by the Janjawid in Dar Fur: According to an Amnesty International report published in 2004, “While African women in Darfur were being raped by the Janjaweed militiamen, Arab women stood nearby and sang for joy . . .The songs of the Hakama, or the “Janjaweed women” as the refugees call them, encouraged the atrocities which the militiamen committed. . . . During an attack on the village of Disa in June last year, Arab women accompanied the attackers and sang in praise of the government and scorning black villagers.
According to an African chief quoted in the report, the singers said: “The blood of the blacks runs like water, we take their goods and we chase them from our area and our cattle will be in their land.” “The power of (Sudanese president Omer Hassan) al-Bashir belongs to the Arabs and we will kill you until the end, you blacks, we have killed your God.” The chief said that the Arab women also racially insulted women from the village, saying: “You are gorillas, you are black and you are badly dressed.”
The Janjaweed have abducted women for use as sex slaves, in some cases breaking their limbs to prevent them escaping, as well as carrying out rapes in their home villages, the report said. The militiamen “are happy when they rape. They sing when they rape and they tell that we are just slaves and that they can do with us how they wish,” a 37-year-old victim, identified as A, was quoted as saying in the report.
*Paper presented at the Global Pan-African Reparations and Repatriation Conference (GPARRC) on 25 July, 2006, at the University of Ghana, Legon, Accra.
German Turk takes on 'anti-Semitic Islamic propaganda'
By Ofri Ilani
BERLIN -
When Aycan Demirel looks out his office window onto the main street of the
Kreuzberg neighborhood, center of the Turkish community in Germany's capital, he
is unimpressed by the diverse human mosaic for which "Little Istanbul" is
famous. Businesses along Oranienstrasse are populated by young Germans eating
shwarma to the sounds of Turkish music, but Demirel pointedly recalled the
darker side of the neighborhood experience. "The residents here love to treat
this neighborhood as a model of multiculturalism and tolerance, but that image
is fraudulent," he said.
"The Jews have no place in this multiculturalism," Demirel
said. "If you wear a kippa or a Magen David, there's a big chance you'll be
cursed at and even assaulted. Anti-Semitism is rearing its head in Germany, only
now the anti-Semites are young Muslims."
Demirel,
38, is not Jewish; he emigrated from Turkey 16 years ago. In today's Germany,
his decision to confront radical Islam places him on the frontlines of one of
the stormiest social debates the country has known.
Last month, a storm erupted over statements about Islam made
by the pope, himself a German. Conservative politicians hastened to his defense
in what was presented as a struggle over freedom of expression. Shortly
afterward came the controversial cancelation of a Mozart opera because of a
scene in which the severed head of the Prophet Mohammed is displayed. This
self-censorship due to "fear of Islam" aroused protests across nearly the entire
political spectrum.
According to Demirel, the recent expressions of anger by
radical Muslims in Germany are just the tip of the iceberg of what he terms the
"culture of hate" in Muslim communities. Daily exposure to a "barrage of
anti-Semitic Islamist propaganda" led him two years ago to found KIGA (Kreuzberger
Initiative gegen Antisemitismus), whose local activists - of German, Turkish and
Arab origin - work with schools and youth centers to fight anti-Semitism,
primarily in Muslim communities.
Some say criticism of immigrant communities is too harsh, and
connected to essential hostility toward the Muslim faith. "I actually think this
phenomenon should be examined within a more defined context, of the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and not seen as ingrained anti-Semitism," said
Tzafrir Cohen, an Israeli journalist and founder of the Berlin Jewish Film
Festival, who has lived in Kreuzberg for 20 years. "To say that there is a
racist atmosphere in Kreuzberg is an outright lie. It's true you see graffiti
here along the lines of 'Fight Zionist Fascism' and similar slogans, mostly
among Palestinians who live here. But I never heard of a Jew being attacked for
being a Jew, and if such incidents occur, they come from the radical right."
Oguz Ucuncu, Secretary General of Milli Gorus - a major
Islamic organization that runs 300 mosques in Germany - denied allegations of
anti-Semitism in Muslim communities. "We do not have hostility toward the West,
nor hostility toward Jews," he said. "But there is of course frustration with
the international community's double standard when it comes to Muslim
countries.."
Demirel rejected the claim that fear of anti-Semitism prevents
any criticism of Israel. "There is room for criticism of certain matters in
Israel," he said, "for instance, the attitude toward Arab Israelis and certain
actions by the Israeli army. But what interests us is how the criticism is
worded, and whether hatred of Jews isn't hiding behind 'Israel.'"
Dr. Juliane Wetzel, chair of the Center for the Study of
Anti-Semitism at the Technical University of Berlin, agreed that anti-Semitism
among young Muslims in Germany has been rising in the past five years. "Since
the Muslim community in Germany is largely of Turkish origin, there is a lot
less hatred toward Israelis and Jews than in comparable communities in Europe,"
she said. "But in recent years, the youth here have apparently been influenced
by Islamic Internet sites and satellite channels, and absorbed certain
anti-Semitic stereotypes that they did not have in the past."