Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Christian-Terrorists, Secular-Fanatics

Expand Messages
  • World View
    Christian-Terrorists and Secular-Fanatics: Licensed to Kill by Yamin Zakaria London, UK
    Message 1 of 1 , Aug 10, 1943
      Christian-Terrorists and Secular-Fanatics: Licensed to Kill

      by Yamin Zakaria
      London, UK


      Which is worse, those who incite violence, those who practice violence
      or those who practice violence while lecturing their victims? Why do
      nations, that profit most from the sale of weapons for war, death and
      destruction, shout loudest in claiming to be proponents of "peace"?
      How can the Christian-West bully others with charges of anti-Semitism,
      when they are the ones who built the gas chambers, implemented the
      inquisition, and carried out routine pogroms against the Jews for

      In any legal system, the testimony of a proven liar has little merit
      if any at all, but why then do we have to accept and abide by the
      words of those who openly lied about Iraq's WMD's, or is this a virtue
      of a capitalist-democracy! Now we have mass murderers that have
      slaughtered over 100,000 civilians in Iraq, preaching about
      non-violence and the sanctity of innocent civilians, or is that UK
      civilians only? Words of hypocrites and liars are always exposed by
      their inconsistent deeds, and the following examples from recent
      events will further illustrate.

      An American Judge recently ruled that it was the notion of free speech
      dictated by the first amendment, which gave the right to the newspaper
      [1] in Arizona to publish letters calling for the killing of any
      Muslim civilians, in retaliation for the deaths of any US soldiers in
      Iraq. So, here 'free' speech takes precedence over the incitement to
      murder innocent Muslims.

      For sure, if any Muslim did anything remotely close to that, they
      would be automatically locked up in Camp-X-Ray for inciting violence.
      In fact, just on mere suspicion the Muslims get locked up in
      accordance to the doctrine of pre-emptive strike. This behaviour in
      the language of the cowboys from the Wild West or a KKK (Ku Klux Klan)
      member is: kill the Sand-Niggers and if they say anything we lynch
      them and even if we think they are gone say something we lynch them,
      like a per-emptive strike.

      This week, the abusive xenophobic preacher, Pat Robertson, called for
      US Special Forces to "take out," (assassinate) President Hugo Chavez,
      the democratically elected head of Venezuela. Chavez has not waged a
      military campaign against the US, on the contrary the US have funded
      coup attempts against him, underlining their status as democracy
      hypocrites. Despite calling for the assassination of the head of a
      democracy, on national TV, he has not been accused of inciting
      terrorism or murder or hate! Imagine the hysteria it would have
      caused, if a similar incitement was made by any Muslim on national TV,
      calling for the assassination of President Bush or Blair. NB: these
      two cases mentioned are not equivalent, as Bush and Blair are
      mass-murdering war criminals, for whom the Hague or Nuremburg
      equivalence are required, with an appropriate sentence for their
      crimes, whereas President Chavez is a new born baby compared to them!

      This incident is even more ironic when you consider that Pat Robertson
      is a Bible-bashing fanatic, those people are constantly lecturing the
      non-Christian world and especially the Muslims, that they should turn
      the other cheek like Jesus. Of course we know why they preach such a
      message from history, both recent and distant, Africans, Native
      Americans and others will testify that they got the Bible shoved down
      their throats, were told to turn the other cheek to invasion, murder,
      ethnic cleansing and genocide in return for the loss of their lands,
      languages and "way of life".

      Chavez's real crime is like Saddam, possessing lots of oil while
      showing disobedience to the US corporate interests. Pat Robertson
      himself stated the oil factor: "a dangerous enemy to our south,
      controlling a huge pool of oil that could hurt us very badly". How can
      a relatively poor and militarily weak country like Venezuela hurt a
      superpower? Again Pat Robertson stated they "could" hurt us, meaning
      it is time for another pre-emptive strike. Far from turning the other
      cheek, Pat Robertson believes in pre-emptive slaps! These preachers
      are not followers of Jesus but of Judas.

      Then the other crusader, Pope Benedict of the Catholic Church,
      lectured Muslims to tackle the "cruel fanaticism of terrorism", as if
      'terrorism' is the sole reserve of the Muslims. He obviously thinks
      that, the Western-Christian forces invading Muslim countries, killing
      innocent women, children and men by the tens of thousands, delivering
      State Terrorism are in line with Biblical teachings and Catholic
      doctrine. Or is this again the "noble savage" being told to turn the
      other cheek and not resist, lie back and enjoy it! Does anyone
      remember the Vatican calling the Serbs and Croats fanatics, murderers,
      terrorists or any such like? 200,000 Muslims bludgeoned, battered,
      raped, mutilated, shot, knifed, crucified (oh yes) in the centre of
      Christian Europe by the Christian Serbs and Croats and not a whisper.
      Had it been the Muslims slaughtering 200,000 Christians, no doubt it
      would then have been the "cruel fanaticism of terrorism".

      Enough with the Christian-Fanatics let us now look at what the secular
      fanatics have been up to. The shadow education secretary, David
      Cameron of the Conservative party compared Islamic extremist, meaning
      those who adhere to Islamic teachings, to the Nazis. I did not realise
      Muslims adhered to such European traditions as Nazism, was it not
      invented and practiced in Europe. Why the constant cry about the
      Muslims not integrating then?

      Nazis killed millions and for the last 50 years it is Muslims who have
      also been killed in their millions, yet to Mr Cameron, we are the
      aggressors like the Nazis, what a twisted little mind he and his ilk
      have. The Nazi's created unjust laws to victimise and alienate
      minorities, similar to what the British government has started to do.
      Like the Nazi's, Mr Cameron, it is your government that have bombed,
      imprisoned, killed and tortured hundreds of thousands of Muslims. Nazi
      ideology is exclusively based on the supremacy of one race, while
      Islam is the exact opposite, all races being equal, yet Mr Cameron
      claims Islam/Muslims are similar to the Nazis. He called Muslims
      violent for resisting aggression in their own lands, but he thinks
      that invading a country which did not attack his and murdering over
      100,000 civilians is not violent. I thought we no longer live in the
      age of racist white-Imperialism, Mr Cameron have you heard the one
      about "people who live in glass houses, shouldn't throw stones."

      I would not call Mr Cameron or Blair or Bush Nazis, as the Nazis were
      more civilised in some respects. The Nazis did not for instance
      imprison, rape and torture children [2] as the 'liberators' has been
      doing in Iraq. It was not the Nazis who started to bomb civilians en
      masse. German and Japanese cities were deliberately targeted to cause
      maximum deaths amongst the civilians, a favoured tactic of 'bomber'
      Harris. Their cities were carpet-bombed and civilians were incinerated
      and boiled alive, while their armies were on the retreat. Those
      bombings served no real military purpose other than gratuitous acts of
      violence and terrorism.

      Why were the Atomic bombs used against Japan's cities when it was
      already close to surrender? It was close to surrendering because the
      firebombing of Tokyo had already killed more than the numbers in
      Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined; also Hirohito already sent a message
      through Stalin to Truman that he wanted to negotiate surrender. If,
      the bomb was used to bring the war to an early end, surely the first
      one was more than adequate, why the second bomb after three days, in a
      war that had already lasted 6 years? Because these are the actions of
      inhuman beasts and savages; and these are the people lecturing the
      world about terrorism. However, I do agree with many of the Americans
      who claimed the bombs ended the war early and saved lives, because the
      back-up plan was the mass-production of chemical weapons to be used
      against Japanese cities that envisaged killing as many as 5 million
      people. So, you see, the most violent people on earth are lecturing
      the Muslims, and it would take the action of millions of Islamic
      'terrorists' to attempt to equal their horrific record.

      Now Blair wants to crack down on anyone glorifying or justifying
      'terrorism'. But who will crack down on those who justify, glorify and
      actually practice terrorism, State Terrorism? If 'terrorism' is the
      problem then why not define it, and more importantly apply the
      definition consistently. Obviously neither the US nor the British
      government can define it, as they will themselves be incriminated by
      those definitions. They are too embarrassed to say what those terms
      really mean: "Terrorism" is retaliatory strikes against the US and UK
      aggression; "incitement to hate" is expressing political opposition to
      the Anglo-US war crimes; "incitement to violence" is calling for armed
      resistance to US-UK aggression.

      Not surprising, Blair is off to join the Carlyle group after he leaves
      the post of Prime Minister and he has been rewarded handsomely for
      generating the business of war. Naturally, he joins the war industry
      as the Carlyle group has very strong links to the White House and
      defence industry. Blair, you will be drinking the blood of the Iraqi
      children and consuming the flesh of their parents, I wonder even Hell
      can accept or accommodate people like you.

      Another glaring hypocrisy missed by many is the issue of women's
      rights. Post 9/11 and 7/11, majority or significant proportion of the
      attacks were directed against Muslim women in the US and the UK. They
      are easily identified by their Islamic clothing of Khimar (Head Scarf)
      and Jilbab (long loose dress). After, lecturing about how sacred
      women's rights are in the West and especially how oppressed Muslim
      women are, the society did not even think twice to attack the
      so-called 'oppressed.' One would have expected these flag bearers of
      women's rights, to show at least some level of remorse for attacking
      Muslim women, after the event. All those infamous and anti-Islamic
      newspaper columnists, journalists and politicians found their tongues
      and brain cells paralysed, suffering from a disease called hypocritus!

      You see, the acid test works, hypocrites and liars cannot hide, as
      sooner or later they will be exposed by their own deeds. Whilst Bush
      and Blair try to legislate against people thinking, disagreeing and
      resisting; they are dependent on the masses not seeing past their
      'spin.' Sooner or later people will ask about their inconsistencies,
      their hypocrisy and their lies, and they will have a great fall, when
      that happens, all of the presidents men wont be able to put Grumpy and
      Lumpy back together again!

      Copyright © Yamin Zakaria 2005



      [2] http://www.sundayherald.com/43796



      To subscribe to this group, send an email to:

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.