Course was in Sapphire, North Queensland, 830kms north of home. Did the return in under 9 hours, stopping only for fuel and a quick piss in the bushes. Long, straight roads, some with tarmac but 120k's was on dirt.
Thursday, 26 April 2012
Big Trucks
Just completed the haul truck course, so, with my induction and medical over, I can look for a job in the mines.
Course was in Sapphire, North Queensland, 830kms north of home. Did the return in under 9 hours, stopping only for fuel and a quick piss in the bushes. Long, straight roads, some with tarmac but 120k's was on dirt.
Course was fun, different machines to play with, different sizes, not all that difficult to drive once you got the measure of the width. Auto-boxes make things easy but then, oil-coiled brake systems are new with a retarder for long downhill runs that apply partial brake effort to hold speed. Anyway, here's my favourite truck. Can you guess why?
Course was in Sapphire, North Queensland, 830kms north of home. Did the return in under 9 hours, stopping only for fuel and a quick piss in the bushes. Long, straight roads, some with tarmac but 120k's was on dirt.
Saturday, 21 April 2012
More Truth To Fuck Up Their Lies
Here’s another dose of verified and verifiable truth destined to get our little sheet-head followers frothing. Tip to the Islamists, if you don’t like the truth, change it for the better, don’t suppress it. Because like your shitty religion, it will keep popping up.
WHY ISLAM IS THE MOST RACIST IDEOLOGY EVER CONCEIVED BY MAN? As you will read, Arabs believe they are a superior race and have the right to rape, torture, kill because the Quran being in Arabic non-Arabic people are inferior and are to be treated like slaves. This is sanctified by God in the Quran.
RACISM AND SLAVERY ARE DIVINE ETERNAL INSTITUTIONS OF GOD
All human beings, irrespective of race or color, are created equal in terms of rights and dignity. Assuming that one human being is lesser than another and worth being a slave or property of another person is abhorrent to civilized conscience. Slavery is one of the vilest institutions ever created by man. Slavery is a form of vile racism.
In Islam, God is a slaver, who sanctions enslaving other people by Muslims in the Quran. Prophet Muhammad was a slaver, who took 20% from the profits derived from the sale of slaves. He also owned 40 slaves. He beat and raped his slaves. He hated the Blacks and compared them to Satan. Some 120 million Blacks were murdered by Muslims, the greatest holocaust in history. Of hunted Black slaves, some 75% of them died on the way to Islamic markets. All Black male slaves were castrated. While most black slaves sent to the Americas could marry and have families, most of the male black slaves destined for the Muslim world were castrated. Millions more died in the unhygienic operation for castrating them, and most of the black children born to the women were killed at birth.
It was noted that black slaves were castrated “based on the assumption that the blacks had an ungovernable sexual appetite.
Below are some of the commands of Islamic God, sanctioning slavery:
Sura 2 (The Cow), Verse 178:
“O you who believe! retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the slain, the free for the free, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female, but if any remission is made to any one by his (aggrieved) brother, then prosecution (for the bloodwit) should be made according to usage, and payment should be made to him in a good manner; this is an alleviation from your Lord and a mercy; so whoever exceeds the limit after this he shall have a painful chastisement.”
Slavery is mentioned in this verse as part of Islam’s criminal law clearly indicating that slavery is an eternal divine institution in Islam, a part and parcel of Islamic societies.
Sura 24 (The Light), Verse 31:
“And say to the believing women that they cast down their looks and guard their private parts and do not display their ornaments except what appears thereof, and let them wear their head-coverings over their bosoms, and not display their ornaments except to their husbands or their fathers, or the fathers of their husbands, or their sons, or the sons of their husbands, or their brothers, or their brothers’ sons, or their sisters’ sons, or their women, or those whom their right hands possess, or the male servants not having need (of women), or the children who have not attained knowledge of what is hidden of women; and let them not strike their feet so that what they hide of their ornaments may be known; and turn to Allah all of you, O believers! so that you may be successful.”
This is the famous Sura enjoining the veiling of women. Those before whom the Muslim women need not veil themselves are “those whom their right hands possess”, which means “slaves”. Again God mentions slavery in this verse as a part and parcel of Muslim households. Therefore, slaves are an inseparable part of Muslim societies.
Sura 23 (The Believers), Verses 1-6:
“Successful indeed are the believers, Who are humble in their prayers, And who keep aloof from what is vain, And who are givers of poor-rate, And who guard their private parts, Except before their mates or those whom their right hands possess, for they surely are not blameable.”
This verses not only sanctions the practice of slavery, but also gives the slave owner unfettered right to use female slaves sexual pleasures.
Sura 24 (The Light), Verse 32:
“And marry those among you who are single and those who are fit among your male slaves and your female slaves; if they are needy, Allah will make them free from want out of His grace; and Allah is Ample-giving, Knowing.”
This is said to sanction marriages of slaves with slaves and slaves with free persons (including the owner). Owners did not usually marry slaves as they could use them for sexual purposes at will. This dispensation has been used to make slaves marry other slaves. In Islam a child born to a slave couple also is a slave from birth, so this verse gives a great incentive to slave owners to breed slaves. This is another obnoxious aspect of Islamic slavery. Whatever be the other circumstances in which people are made into slaves to make a new-born infant a slave is one of the most cruel and callous. Ye this did not evoke a protest from the Prophet and has been extensively resorted to by Muslims.
Sura 16 (The Bee), verse 75:
“Allah sets forth a parable: (consider) a slave, the property of another, (who) has no power over anything, and one whom We have granted from Ourselves a goodly sustenance so he spends from it secretly and openly; are the two alike? (All) praise is due to Allah!”
This is one of the clearest instances where the institution of slavery is justified in the Quran as a divine dispensation. It deserves close scrutiny. This “parable” contrasts two people a slave who is owned by another and is completely powerless and a freeman on whom Allah has granted “a goodly sustenance” which he can spend openly or secretly as he pleases (perhaps acquiring slaves for himself). Since Allah claims for himself the position of the granter of all benefits (or lack of them) both the freeman’s fortune and the slave’s misfortune are ultimately determined by Allah. By his rhetorical question — “Are the two alike?” — Allah was actually justifying the inequality between the slave and the freeman as a natural thing. Thus a Muslim will have no compunctions or qualms in employing and exploiting slaves (subject only to any conditions that Muhammad may have imposed) because it is what Allah has ordained and “all praise is due to Allah”.
Sura 33 (The Clans), Verse 50:
“O Prophet! surely We have made lawful to you your wives whom you have given their dowries, and those [slaves] whom your right hand possesses out of those whom Allah has given to you as prisoners of war, and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts, and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who fled with you; and a believing woman if she gave herself to the Prophet, if the Prophet desired to marry her – specially for you, not for the (rest of) believers; We know what We have ordained for them concerning their wives and those whom their right hands possess in order that no blame may attach to you; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful”.
As stated before – here, as elsewhere, the term “possessions of the right hand” mean slaves. It is expressly stated that Muhammad’s slaves are given to him by Allah himself to be taken out of his share of the captives in war. It also records the special dispensation given to Muhammad, not available to other Muslims, in the number of wives.
Sura 39 (The Companions), Verses 29:
“Allah sets forth an example: There is a slave in whom are (several) partners differing with one another, and there is another slave wholly owned by one man. Are the two alike in condition? (All) praise is due to Allah. Nay! most of them do not know.”
The example set out here compares joint ownership of a slave by many owners and the single ownership by one person. Allah asks rhetorically whether the two cases are the same. Of course, they are not and it is clear that Muhammad prefers single ownership. In fact, this is why he established the rule that after a military campaign the captives were allocated to each of his soldiers individually not collectively, with himself keeping a fifth of the captives as his personal slaves.
Sura 70 (The Ways of Ascent), verses 29-35:
“And those who guard their private parts, Except in the case of their wives or those whom their right hands possess — for these surely are not to be blamed, But he who seeks to go beyond this, these it is that go beyond the limits — And those who are faithful to their trusts and their covenant And those who are upright in their testimonies, And those who keep a guard on their prayer, Those shall be in gardens, honored.”
These verses are similar to Sura 23.93-96 and gives the right to slave owners to have sexual relation with female slaves. The only difference is that the earlier reference may leave some doubt as to whether both males and female slaves are meant. These verses clearly show that it is only female slaves that are meant.
Quran 4:3:
“Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.”
This verse is saying a Muslim man can have sex with his female slaves (obtained in war) just like with married wives (up to four). The divine institution of Islamic slavery, including the sex-slavery, is the vilest of institutions ever created in history.
Allah, the Islamic God, thus, sanctions slavery as well as use of female slaves for pleasures of men – the vilest practice, albeit an divinely-sanctioned one, ever exercised by man. (For article titled, Islam, Slavery and Rape, go to: http://www.islamreform.net/new-page-62.htm)
Slavery in Prophetic traditions
Following is just a small sample of more teachings of God’s divine institution of slavery.
Muhammad’s position on freeing slaves
1) In one instance, a man freed a slave that he kept as a sexual partner. When Muhammad heard what happened, he auctioned the boy and sold him for 800 dirhams to Na-eem Ebn Abdullah Al- Nahham. (Sahih Muslim, vol. 7, p. 83)
2) According to Muhammad, the punishment for committing adultery is different with a free-woman and a slave-woman. The man must be flogged one-hundred stripes and be exiled for one year. The free woman must be stoned to death. But the slave-woman (since she has a monetary value) will not be exiled or killed, she is to be flogged one-hundred stripes. If the violation is repeated, the slave-woman is to be sold. (Sahih Al Bukhari vol. 8:821 & 822)
Islam Looked Down on Blacks
Islam’s sacred texts contain explicit denigrating remarks about black people.
Muhammad referred to Blacks as “raisin heads”. (Sahih al-Bukhari 1.662, 9.256).
In another Hadith, Muhammad is quoted as saying that Blacks are “pug-nosed slaves”. (Sahih Muslim vol. 9, p. 46-47).
A Slave is not Entitled to Property or Money
Ibn Hazm says in Vol. 6, Part 9,
“The slave is not permitted to write a will when he dies, nor can he bequeath (anything) because his entire possessions belong to his master.”
Testimony of Slaves inadmissible
In Vol. 35, p. 409 Ibn Timiyya remarks:
“The Shafi’i, Malik, and Abu Hanifa, who are the legists of Islam, assert that the testimony of the slave is not acceptable.”
The “Ordinances of the Qur’an” by the Shafi’i (part II, p. 142), stipulates that,
“The witnesses must be from among our freeman, not from our slaves, but from freeman who belong to our religion!”
Black Slaves on Matters of Sex and Marriage
1. The Slave cannot choose for himself.
This was confirmed by all the Muslim scholars on the authority of Muhammad. In Vol. 6, Part 9, p. 467, Ibn Hazm said,
“If a slave gets married without the permission of his master, his marriage will be invalid and he must be whipped because he has committed adultery. He must be separated from his wife. She is also regarded as an adulteress because Muhammad said, ‘Any slave who gets married without the approval of his master is a prostitute.’”
The same text is quoted by Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (Part 5, p. 117 of “Zad al-Maad”), as well as Ibn Timiyya (Vol. 32, p. 201). Malik Ibn Anas relates (Vol. 2, Part 4) more than that. He says (pp. 199, 201, 206),
“The slave does not get married without the approval of his master. If he is a slave to two masters, he has to obtain the approval of both men.”
2. The male slave and the female slave are forced to get married.
Malik Ibn Anas says explicitly,
“The master has the right to force his male or female slave to marry without obtaining their approval” (Vol. 2, p. 155).
“The master does not have the right to force the female slave to wed to an ugly black slave if she is beautiful and agile unless in case of utmost necessity” (refer to Ibn Hazm, Vol. 6, Part 9, p. 469).
In matters of sex and marriage, Ibn Timiyya states:
“The one who owns the mother also owns her children. Being the master of the mother makes him the owner of her children whether they were born to a husband or they were illegitimate children. Therefore, the master has the right to have sexual intercourse with the daughters of his maid-slave because they are his property, provided he does not sleep with the mother at the same time” (Vol. 35, p. 54).
Price of Slaves
“If an owned slave assaults somebody and damages his property, his crime will be tied to his neck. It will be said to his master, ‘If you wish, you can pay the fine for the damages done by your slave or deliver him to be sentenced to death.’ His master has to choose one of the two options – either the value of the slave and his price or the damage the slave has caused” (Vol. 32, p. 202, Ibn Timiyya).
Racism from Prophetic tradition
Ishaq, p. 243:
“I heard the Apostle say: ‘Whoever wants to see Satan should look at Nabtal!’ He was a black man with long flowing hair, inflamed eyes, and dark ruddy cheeks…. Allah sent down concerning him: ‘To those who annoy the Prophet there is a painful doom.” [9:61] “Gabriel came to Muhammad and said, ‘If a black man comes to you his heart is more gross than a donkey’s.’”
Ishaq, p. 144:
“A rock was put on a slave’s chest. When Abu Bakr complained, they said, ‘You are the one who corrupted him, so save him from his plight.’ I will do so,’ said Bakr. ‘I have a black slave, tougher and stronger than Bilal, who is a heathen. I will exchange him. The transaction was carried out.”
Tabari, II:11:
“Shem, the son of Noah was the father of the Arabs, the Persians, and the Greeks; Ham was the father of the Black Africans; and Japheth was the father of the Turks and of Gog and Magog who were cousins of the Turks. Noah prayed that the prophets and apostles would be descended from Shem and kings would be from Japheth. He prayed that the African’s color would change so that their descendants would be slaves to the Arabs and Turks.”
Tabari, II:21:
“Ham [Africans] begat all those who are black and curly-haired, while Japheth [Turks] begat all those who are full-faced with small eyes, and Shem [Arabs] begat everyone who is handsome of face with beautiful hair. Noah prayed that the hair of Ham’s descendants would not grow beyond their ears, and that whenever his descendants met Shem’s, the latter would enslave them.”
Ishaq, p. 450:
“It is your folly to fight the Apostle, for Allah’s army is bound to disgrace you. We brought them to the pit. Hell was their meeting place. We collected them there, black slaves, men of no descent.”
Bukhari 4.52.137:
“The Prophet said, ‘Let the negro slave of Dinar perish. And if he is pierced with a thorn, let him not find anyone to take it out for him…. If he [the black slave] asks for anything it shall not be granted, and if he needs intercession [to get into paradise], his intercession will be denied.’”
Slavery, raping slave girls, owning slaves, selling boys and women as trophies of war, sharing the booty (including slaves) obtained in raids and wars with Allah are all central teachings of Islam. Slavery was one of the major driving forces behind the expansion of Islam. After assuming his prophetic career, Prophet Muhammad enslaved large number of men and women, owned dozens of slaves, he sold many slaves as well as used the female captives as sex-slaves on top his dozen wives. Islam is such as vile, evil cult, which has been embraced by today’s civilized world’s 1.2 billion people as the perfect guide to life and its Prophet as perfect human being, the greatest apostle of God, a man of peace.
Today, tens of millions of Blacks—whose forefathers were the worst victim of Muhammad’s cult—also eulogize this man, and call themselves proud Muslims. There cannot be anything more shameful than this.
—-
Jake Neuman is the author of “Islam and Sharia Law Are Treason: Jihad Is Treason” and Prophet Muhammad (AKA ALLAH): Monster of History. The Teachings of The Quran are The Teachings of A Psychotic and That Psychotic Was Prophet Muhammad: Murderer, Terrorist, Torturer, Rapist, Child Molester free download at http://www.islamreform.net. His book ISLAM — EVIL IN THE NAME OF GOD ™ was banned in Malaysia.
WHY ISLAM IS THE MOST RACIST IDEOLOGY EVER CONCEIVED BY MAN? As you will read, Arabs believe they are a superior race and have the right to rape, torture, kill because the Quran being in Arabic non-Arabic people are inferior and are to be treated like slaves. This is sanctified by God in the Quran.
RACISM AND SLAVERY ARE DIVINE ETERNAL INSTITUTIONS OF GOD
All human beings, irrespective of race or color, are created equal in terms of rights and dignity. Assuming that one human being is lesser than another and worth being a slave or property of another person is abhorrent to civilized conscience. Slavery is one of the vilest institutions ever created by man. Slavery is a form of vile racism.
In Islam, God is a slaver, who sanctions enslaving other people by Muslims in the Quran. Prophet Muhammad was a slaver, who took 20% from the profits derived from the sale of slaves. He also owned 40 slaves. He beat and raped his slaves. He hated the Blacks and compared them to Satan. Some 120 million Blacks were murdered by Muslims, the greatest holocaust in history. Of hunted Black slaves, some 75% of them died on the way to Islamic markets. All Black male slaves were castrated. While most black slaves sent to the Americas could marry and have families, most of the male black slaves destined for the Muslim world were castrated. Millions more died in the unhygienic operation for castrating them, and most of the black children born to the women were killed at birth.
It was noted that black slaves were castrated “based on the assumption that the blacks had an ungovernable sexual appetite.
Below are some of the commands of Islamic God, sanctioning slavery:
Sura 2 (The Cow), Verse 178:
“O you who believe! retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the slain, the free for the free, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female, but if any remission is made to any one by his (aggrieved) brother, then prosecution (for the bloodwit) should be made according to usage, and payment should be made to him in a good manner; this is an alleviation from your Lord and a mercy; so whoever exceeds the limit after this he shall have a painful chastisement.”
Slavery is mentioned in this verse as part of Islam’s criminal law clearly indicating that slavery is an eternal divine institution in Islam, a part and parcel of Islamic societies.
Sura 24 (The Light), Verse 31:
“And say to the believing women that they cast down their looks and guard their private parts and do not display their ornaments except what appears thereof, and let them wear their head-coverings over their bosoms, and not display their ornaments except to their husbands or their fathers, or the fathers of their husbands, or their sons, or the sons of their husbands, or their brothers, or their brothers’ sons, or their sisters’ sons, or their women, or those whom their right hands possess, or the male servants not having need (of women), or the children who have not attained knowledge of what is hidden of women; and let them not strike their feet so that what they hide of their ornaments may be known; and turn to Allah all of you, O believers! so that you may be successful.”
This is the famous Sura enjoining the veiling of women. Those before whom the Muslim women need not veil themselves are “those whom their right hands possess”, which means “slaves”. Again God mentions slavery in this verse as a part and parcel of Muslim households. Therefore, slaves are an inseparable part of Muslim societies.
Sura 23 (The Believers), Verses 1-6:
“Successful indeed are the believers, Who are humble in their prayers, And who keep aloof from what is vain, And who are givers of poor-rate, And who guard their private parts, Except before their mates or those whom their right hands possess, for they surely are not blameable.”
This verses not only sanctions the practice of slavery, but also gives the slave owner unfettered right to use female slaves sexual pleasures.
Sura 24 (The Light), Verse 32:
“And marry those among you who are single and those who are fit among your male slaves and your female slaves; if they are needy, Allah will make them free from want out of His grace; and Allah is Ample-giving, Knowing.”
This is said to sanction marriages of slaves with slaves and slaves with free persons (including the owner). Owners did not usually marry slaves as they could use them for sexual purposes at will. This dispensation has been used to make slaves marry other slaves. In Islam a child born to a slave couple also is a slave from birth, so this verse gives a great incentive to slave owners to breed slaves. This is another obnoxious aspect of Islamic slavery. Whatever be the other circumstances in which people are made into slaves to make a new-born infant a slave is one of the most cruel and callous. Ye this did not evoke a protest from the Prophet and has been extensively resorted to by Muslims.
Sura 16 (The Bee), verse 75:
“Allah sets forth a parable: (consider) a slave, the property of another, (who) has no power over anything, and one whom We have granted from Ourselves a goodly sustenance so he spends from it secretly and openly; are the two alike? (All) praise is due to Allah!”
This is one of the clearest instances where the institution of slavery is justified in the Quran as a divine dispensation. It deserves close scrutiny. This “parable” contrasts two people a slave who is owned by another and is completely powerless and a freeman on whom Allah has granted “a goodly sustenance” which he can spend openly or secretly as he pleases (perhaps acquiring slaves for himself). Since Allah claims for himself the position of the granter of all benefits (or lack of them) both the freeman’s fortune and the slave’s misfortune are ultimately determined by Allah. By his rhetorical question — “Are the two alike?” — Allah was actually justifying the inequality between the slave and the freeman as a natural thing. Thus a Muslim will have no compunctions or qualms in employing and exploiting slaves (subject only to any conditions that Muhammad may have imposed) because it is what Allah has ordained and “all praise is due to Allah”.
Sura 33 (The Clans), Verse 50:
“O Prophet! surely We have made lawful to you your wives whom you have given their dowries, and those [slaves] whom your right hand possesses out of those whom Allah has given to you as prisoners of war, and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts, and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who fled with you; and a believing woman if she gave herself to the Prophet, if the Prophet desired to marry her – specially for you, not for the (rest of) believers; We know what We have ordained for them concerning their wives and those whom their right hands possess in order that no blame may attach to you; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful”.
As stated before – here, as elsewhere, the term “possessions of the right hand” mean slaves. It is expressly stated that Muhammad’s slaves are given to him by Allah himself to be taken out of his share of the captives in war. It also records the special dispensation given to Muhammad, not available to other Muslims, in the number of wives.
Sura 39 (The Companions), Verses 29:
“Allah sets forth an example: There is a slave in whom are (several) partners differing with one another, and there is another slave wholly owned by one man. Are the two alike in condition? (All) praise is due to Allah. Nay! most of them do not know.”
The example set out here compares joint ownership of a slave by many owners and the single ownership by one person. Allah asks rhetorically whether the two cases are the same. Of course, they are not and it is clear that Muhammad prefers single ownership. In fact, this is why he established the rule that after a military campaign the captives were allocated to each of his soldiers individually not collectively, with himself keeping a fifth of the captives as his personal slaves.
Sura 70 (The Ways of Ascent), verses 29-35:
“And those who guard their private parts, Except in the case of their wives or those whom their right hands possess — for these surely are not to be blamed, But he who seeks to go beyond this, these it is that go beyond the limits — And those who are faithful to their trusts and their covenant And those who are upright in their testimonies, And those who keep a guard on their prayer, Those shall be in gardens, honored.”
These verses are similar to Sura 23.93-96 and gives the right to slave owners to have sexual relation with female slaves. The only difference is that the earlier reference may leave some doubt as to whether both males and female slaves are meant. These verses clearly show that it is only female slaves that are meant.
Quran 4:3:
“Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.”
This verse is saying a Muslim man can have sex with his female slaves (obtained in war) just like with married wives (up to four). The divine institution of Islamic slavery, including the sex-slavery, is the vilest of institutions ever created in history.
Allah, the Islamic God, thus, sanctions slavery as well as use of female slaves for pleasures of men – the vilest practice, albeit an divinely-sanctioned one, ever exercised by man. (For article titled, Islam, Slavery and Rape, go to: http://www.islamreform.net/new-page-62.htm)
Slavery in Prophetic traditions
Following is just a small sample of more teachings of God’s divine institution of slavery.
Muhammad’s position on freeing slaves
1) In one instance, a man freed a slave that he kept as a sexual partner. When Muhammad heard what happened, he auctioned the boy and sold him for 800 dirhams to Na-eem Ebn Abdullah Al- Nahham. (Sahih Muslim, vol. 7, p. 83)
2) According to Muhammad, the punishment for committing adultery is different with a free-woman and a slave-woman. The man must be flogged one-hundred stripes and be exiled for one year. The free woman must be stoned to death. But the slave-woman (since she has a monetary value) will not be exiled or killed, she is to be flogged one-hundred stripes. If the violation is repeated, the slave-woman is to be sold. (Sahih Al Bukhari vol. 8:821 & 822)
Islam Looked Down on Blacks
Islam’s sacred texts contain explicit denigrating remarks about black people.
Muhammad referred to Blacks as “raisin heads”. (Sahih al-Bukhari 1.662, 9.256).
In another Hadith, Muhammad is quoted as saying that Blacks are “pug-nosed slaves”. (Sahih Muslim vol. 9, p. 46-47).
A Slave is not Entitled to Property or Money
Ibn Hazm says in Vol. 6, Part 9,
“The slave is not permitted to write a will when he dies, nor can he bequeath (anything) because his entire possessions belong to his master.”
Testimony of Slaves inadmissible
In Vol. 35, p. 409 Ibn Timiyya remarks:
“The Shafi’i, Malik, and Abu Hanifa, who are the legists of Islam, assert that the testimony of the slave is not acceptable.”
The “Ordinances of the Qur’an” by the Shafi’i (part II, p. 142), stipulates that,
“The witnesses must be from among our freeman, not from our slaves, but from freeman who belong to our religion!”
Black Slaves on Matters of Sex and Marriage
1. The Slave cannot choose for himself.
This was confirmed by all the Muslim scholars on the authority of Muhammad. In Vol. 6, Part 9, p. 467, Ibn Hazm said,
“If a slave gets married without the permission of his master, his marriage will be invalid and he must be whipped because he has committed adultery. He must be separated from his wife. She is also regarded as an adulteress because Muhammad said, ‘Any slave who gets married without the approval of his master is a prostitute.’”
The same text is quoted by Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (Part 5, p. 117 of “Zad al-Maad”), as well as Ibn Timiyya (Vol. 32, p. 201). Malik Ibn Anas relates (Vol. 2, Part 4) more than that. He says (pp. 199, 201, 206),
“The slave does not get married without the approval of his master. If he is a slave to two masters, he has to obtain the approval of both men.”
2. The male slave and the female slave are forced to get married.
Malik Ibn Anas says explicitly,
“The master has the right to force his male or female slave to marry without obtaining their approval” (Vol. 2, p. 155).
“The master does not have the right to force the female slave to wed to an ugly black slave if she is beautiful and agile unless in case of utmost necessity” (refer to Ibn Hazm, Vol. 6, Part 9, p. 469).
In matters of sex and marriage, Ibn Timiyya states:
“The one who owns the mother also owns her children. Being the master of the mother makes him the owner of her children whether they were born to a husband or they were illegitimate children. Therefore, the master has the right to have sexual intercourse with the daughters of his maid-slave because they are his property, provided he does not sleep with the mother at the same time” (Vol. 35, p. 54).
Price of Slaves
“If an owned slave assaults somebody and damages his property, his crime will be tied to his neck. It will be said to his master, ‘If you wish, you can pay the fine for the damages done by your slave or deliver him to be sentenced to death.’ His master has to choose one of the two options – either the value of the slave and his price or the damage the slave has caused” (Vol. 32, p. 202, Ibn Timiyya).
Racism from Prophetic tradition
Ishaq, p. 243:
“I heard the Apostle say: ‘Whoever wants to see Satan should look at Nabtal!’ He was a black man with long flowing hair, inflamed eyes, and dark ruddy cheeks…. Allah sent down concerning him: ‘To those who annoy the Prophet there is a painful doom.” [9:61] “Gabriel came to Muhammad and said, ‘If a black man comes to you his heart is more gross than a donkey’s.’”
Ishaq, p. 144:
“A rock was put on a slave’s chest. When Abu Bakr complained, they said, ‘You are the one who corrupted him, so save him from his plight.’ I will do so,’ said Bakr. ‘I have a black slave, tougher and stronger than Bilal, who is a heathen. I will exchange him. The transaction was carried out.”
Tabari, II:11:
“Shem, the son of Noah was the father of the Arabs, the Persians, and the Greeks; Ham was the father of the Black Africans; and Japheth was the father of the Turks and of Gog and Magog who were cousins of the Turks. Noah prayed that the prophets and apostles would be descended from Shem and kings would be from Japheth. He prayed that the African’s color would change so that their descendants would be slaves to the Arabs and Turks.”
Tabari, II:21:
“Ham [Africans] begat all those who are black and curly-haired, while Japheth [Turks] begat all those who are full-faced with small eyes, and Shem [Arabs] begat everyone who is handsome of face with beautiful hair. Noah prayed that the hair of Ham’s descendants would not grow beyond their ears, and that whenever his descendants met Shem’s, the latter would enslave them.”
Ishaq, p. 450:
“It is your folly to fight the Apostle, for Allah’s army is bound to disgrace you. We brought them to the pit. Hell was their meeting place. We collected them there, black slaves, men of no descent.”
Bukhari 4.52.137:
“The Prophet said, ‘Let the negro slave of Dinar perish. And if he is pierced with a thorn, let him not find anyone to take it out for him…. If he [the black slave] asks for anything it shall not be granted, and if he needs intercession [to get into paradise], his intercession will be denied.’”
Slavery, raping slave girls, owning slaves, selling boys and women as trophies of war, sharing the booty (including slaves) obtained in raids and wars with Allah are all central teachings of Islam. Slavery was one of the major driving forces behind the expansion of Islam. After assuming his prophetic career, Prophet Muhammad enslaved large number of men and women, owned dozens of slaves, he sold many slaves as well as used the female captives as sex-slaves on top his dozen wives. Islam is such as vile, evil cult, which has been embraced by today’s civilized world’s 1.2 billion people as the perfect guide to life and its Prophet as perfect human being, the greatest apostle of God, a man of peace.
Today, tens of millions of Blacks—whose forefathers were the worst victim of Muhammad’s cult—also eulogize this man, and call themselves proud Muslims. There cannot be anything more shameful than this.
—-
Jake Neuman is the author of “Islam and Sharia Law Are Treason: Jihad Is Treason” and Prophet Muhammad (AKA ALLAH): Monster of History. The Teachings of The Quran are The Teachings of A Psychotic and That Psychotic Was Prophet Muhammad: Murderer, Terrorist, Torturer, Rapist, Child Molester free download at http://www.islamreform.net. His book ISLAM — EVIL IN THE NAME OF GOD ™ was banned in Malaysia.
Thursday, 19 April 2012
Towel Heads
Please will you stop referring to Muslims as Towel Heads.
It is not a towel, more like a small sheet. Thus the correct term is Little-Sheet Heads.
Or, to be pedantic, Shi-ite Little Sheet Heads.
It is not a towel, more like a small sheet. Thus the correct term is Little-Sheet Heads.
Or, to be pedantic, Shi-ite Little Sheet Heads.
Wednesday, 18 April 2012
Is This What Livingstone Means When He Claims He wants To Make London a Beacon For Islam?
The genocide suffered by the Hindus of India at the hands of Arab, Turkish, Mughal and Afghan occupying forces for a period of 800 years is as yet formally unrecognised by the World.
The only similar genocide in the recent past was that of the Jewish people at the hands of the Nazis; arguably of the Africans during the slave trade and also the almost total extermination of native populations like the Aboriginal people in Australia and the native Indians, Aztecs, Incas, etc. in North and South America.
The holocaust of the Hindus in India was of even greater proportions, the only difference was that it continued for 800 years, till the brutal regimes were effectively overpowered in a life and death struggle by the Sikhs in the Panjab and the Hindu Maratha armies in other parts of India in the late 1700′s.
We have elaborate literary evidence of the World’s biggest holocaust from existing historical contemporary eyewitness accounts. The historians and biographers of the invading armies and subsequent rulers of India have left quite detailed records of the atrocities they committed in their day-to-day encounters with India’s Hindus.
These contemporary records boasted about and glorified the crimes that were committed – and the genocide of tens of millions of Hindus, mass rapes of Hindu women and the destruction of thousands of ancient Hindu / Buddhist temples and libraries have been well documented and provide solid proof of the World’s biggest holocaust.
Quotes from modern historians
Dr. Koenraad Elst in his article “Was There an Islamic Genocide of Hindus?” states:
“There is no official estimate of the total death toll of Hindus at the hands of Islam. A first glance at important testimonies by Muslim chroniclers suggests that, over 13 centuries and a territory as vast as the Subcontinent, Muslim Holy Warriors easily killed more Hindus than the 6 million of the Holocaust. Ferishtha lists several occasions when the Bahmani sultans in central India (1347-1528) killed a hundred thousand Hindus, which they set as a minimum goal whenever they felt like punishing the Hindus; and they were only a third-rank provincial dynasty.
The biggest slaughters took place during the raids of Mahmud Ghaznavi (ca. 1000 CE); during the actual conquest of North India by Mohammed Ghori and his lieutenants (1192 ff.); and under the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526).”
He also writes in his book “Negation in India”:
“The Muslim conquests, down to the 16th century, were for the Hindus a pure struggle of life and death. Entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. Every new invader made (often literally) his hills of Hindus skulls. Thus, the conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindu slaughter.”
Will Durant argued in his 1935 book “The Story of Civilisation: Our Oriental Heritage” (page 459):
“The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. The Islamic historians and scholars have recorded with great glee and pride the slaughters of Hindus, forced conversions, abduction of Hindu women and children to slave markets and the destruction of temples carried out by the warriors of Islam during 800 AD to 1700 AD. Millions of Hindus were converted to Islam by sword during this period.”
Francois Gautier in his book ‘Rewriting Indian History’ (1996) wrote:
“The massacres perpetuated by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history, bigger than the Holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis; or the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks; more extensive even than the slaughter of the South American native populations by the invading Spanish and Portuguese.”
Writer Fernand Braudel wrote in A History of Civilisations (1995), that Islamic rule in India as a
“colonial experiment” was “extremely violent”, and “the Muslims could not rule the country except by systematic terror. Cruelty was the norm – burnings, summary executions, crucifixions or impalements, inventive tortures. Hindu temples were destroyed to make way for mosques. On occasion there were forced conversions. If ever there were an uprising, it was instantly and savagely repressed: houses were burned, the countryside was laid waste, men were slaughtered and women were taken as slaves.”
Alain Danielou in his book, Histoire de l’ Inde writes:
“From the time Muslims started arriving, around 632 AD, the history of India becomes a long, monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliations, and destructions. It is, as usual, in the name of ‘a holy war’ of their faith, of their sole God, that the barbarians have destroyed civilizations, wiped out entire races.”
Irfan Husain in his article “Demons from the Past” observes:
“While historical events should be judged in the context of their times, it cannot be denied that even in that bloody period of history, no mercy was shown to the Hindus unfortunate enough to be in the path of either the Arab conquerors of Sindh and south Punjab, or the Central Asians who swept in from Afghanistan…The Muslim heroes who figure larger than life in our history books committed some dreadful crimes. Mahmud of Ghazni, Qutb-ud-Din Aibak, Balban, Mohammed bin Qasim, and Sultan Mohammad Tughlak, all have blood-stained hands that the passage of years has not cleansed..Seen through Hindu eyes, the Muslim invasion of their homeland was an unmitigated disaster.
“Their temples were razed, their idols smashed, their women raped, their men killed or taken slaves. When Mahmud of Ghazni entered Somnath on one of his annual raids, he slaughtered all 50,000 inhabitants. Aibak killed and enslaved hundreds of thousands. The list of horrors is long and painful. These conquerors justified their deeds by claiming it was their religious duty to smite non-believers. Cloaking themselves in the banner of Islam, they claimed they were fighting for their faith when, in reality, they were indulging in straightforward slaughter and pillage…”
A sample of contemporary eyewitness accounts of the invaders and rulers, during the Indian conquests
The Afghan ruler Mahmud al-Ghazni invaded India no less than seventeen times between 1001 – 1026 AD. The book ‘Tarikh-i-Yamini’ – written by his secretary documents several episodes of his bloody military campaigns : “The blood of the infidels flowed so copiously [at the Indian city of Thanesar] that the stream was discoloured, notwithstanding its purity, and people were unable to drink it…the infidels deserted the fort and tried to cross the foaming river…but many of them were slain, taken or drowned… Nearly fifty thousand men were killed.”
In the contemporary record – ‘ Taj-ul-Ma’asir’ by Hassn Nizam-i-Naishapuri, it is stated that when Qutb-ul- Din Aibak (of Turko – Afghan origin and the First Sultan of Delhi 1194-1210 AD) conquered Meerat, he demolished all the Hindu temples of the city and erected mosques on their sites. In the city of Aligarh, he converted Hindu inhabitants to Islam by the sword and beheaded all those who adhered to their own religion.
The Persian historian Wassaf writes in his book ‘Tazjiyat-ul-Amsar wa Tajriyat ul Asar’ that when the Alaul-Din Khilji (An Afghan of Turkish origin and second ruler of the Khilji Dynasty in India 1295-1316 AD) captured the city of Kambayat at the head of the gulf of Cambay, he killed the adult male Hindu inhabitants for the glory of Islam, set flowing rivers of blood, sent the women of the country with all their gold, silver, and jewels, to his own home, and made about twentv thousand Hindu maidens his private slaves.
This ruler once asked his spiritual advisor (or ‘Qazi’) as to what was the Islamic law prescribed for the Hindus. The Qazi replied:
“Hindus are like the mud; if silver is demanded from them, they must with the greatest humility offer gold. If a Mohammadan desires to spit into a Hindu’s mouth, the Hindu should open it wide for the purpose. God created the Hindus to be slaves of the Mohammadans. The Prophet hath ordained that, if the Hindus do not accept Islam, they should be imprisoned, tortured, finally put to death, and their property confiscated.”
Timur was a Turkic conqueror and founder of the Timurid Dynasty. Timur’s Indian campaign (1398 – 1399 AD) was recorded in his memoirs, collectively known as ‘Tuzk-i-Timuri.’ In them, he vividly described probably the greatest gruesome act in the entire history of the world – where 100,000 Hindu prisoners of war in his camp were executed in a very short space of time. Timur after taking advice from his entourage says in his memoirs :
“they said that on the great day of battle these 100,000 prisoners could not be left with the baggage, and that it would be entirely opposed to the rules of war to set these idolaters and foes of Islam at liberty.
“In fact, no other course remained but that of making them all food for the sword’
Timur thereupon resolved to put them to death. He proclaimed :
“throughout the camp that every man who has infidel prisoners was to put them to death, and whoever neglected to do so should himself be executed and his property given to the informer. When this order became known to the ghazis of Islam, they drew their swords and put their prisoners to death. 100,000 infidels, impious idolaters, were on that day slain. Maulana Nasir-ud-din Umar, a counselor and a man of learning, who, in all his life had never killed a sparrow, now, in execution of my order, slew with his sword fifteen idolatrous Hindus, who were his captives”.
During his campaign in India – Timur describes the scene when his army conquered the Indian city of Delhi :
“In a short space of time all the people in the [Delhi] fort were put to the sword, and in the course of one hour the heads of 10,000 infidels were cut off. The sword of Islam was washed in the blood of the infidels, and all the goods and effects, the treasure and the grain which for many a long year had been stored in the fort became the spoil of my soldiers.
“They set fire to the houses and reduced them to ashes, and they razed the buildings and the fort to the ground….All these infidel Hindus were slain, their women and children, and their property and goods became the spoil of the victors. I proclaimed throughout the camp that every man who had infidel prisoners should put them to death, and whoever neglected to do so should himself be executed and his property given to the informer. When this order became known to the ghazis of Islam, they drew their swords and put their prisoners to death.”
The Mughal emperor Babur (who ruled India from 1526 -1530 AD) writing in his memoirs called the ‘Baburnama’ – wrote : ” In AH 934 (2538 C.E.) I attacked Chanderi and by the grace of Allah captured it in a few hours. We got the infidels slaughtered and the place which had been Daru’l-Harb (nation of non-muslims) for years was made into a Daru’l-Islam (a muslim nation).”
In Babur’s own words in a poem about killing Hindus (From the ‘Baburnama’ ) he wrote :
“For the sake of Islam I became a wanderer,
I battled infidels and Hindus,
I determined to become a martyr
Thank God I became a Killer of Non-Muslims!”
The atrocities of the Mughal ruler Shah Jahan (who ruled India between 1628 – 1658 AD) are mentioned in the contemporary record called : ‘Badshah Nama, Qazinivi & Badshah Nama , Lahori’ and goes on to state : “When Shuja was appointed as governor of Kabul he carried on a ruthless war in the Hindu territory beyond Indus…The sword of Islam yielded a rich crop of converts….Most of the women (to save their honour) burnt themselves to death. Those captured were distributed among Muslim Mansabdars (Noblemen)”
The Afghan ruler Ahmad Shah Abdali attacked India in 1757 AD and made his way to the holy Hindu city of Mathura, the Bethlehem of the Hindus and birthplace of Krishna.
The atrocities that followed are recorded in the contemporary chronicle called : ‘Tarikh-I-Alamgiri’ :
“Abdali’s soldiers would be paid 5 Rupees (a sizeable amount at the time) for every enemy head brought in. Every horseman had loaded up all his horses with the plundered property, and atop of it rode the girl-captives and the slaves. The severed heads were tied up in rugs like bundles of grain and placed on the heads of the captives…Then the heads were stuck upon lances and taken to the gate of the chief minister for payment.
“It was an extraordinary display! Daily did this manner of slaughter and plundering proceed. And at night the shrieks of the women captives who were being raped, deafened the ears of the people…All those heads that had been cut off were built into pillars, and the captive men upon whose heads those bloody bundles had been brought in, were made to grind corn, and then their heads too were cut off. These things went on all the way to the city of Agra, nor was any part of the country spared.”
Why we should remember.
“Holocaust Memorial Day (HMD) is the international day of remembrance for the victims of the Holocaust and of other genocides” (Holocaust Memorial Day Trust) yet the biggest holocaust in World History has been whitewashed from history.
When we hear the word HOLOCAUST most of us think immediately of the Jewish holocaust. Today, with increased awareness and countless cinema films and television documentaries – many of us are also aware of the deaths of the Native American peoples, the genocide of the Armenian peoples in the Ottoman Empire, and the millions of African lives lost during the Atlantic slave trade.
The World seems to either ignore or just does not seem to care about the many millions of lives lost during the 800 – year long holocaust of Hindus in India.
The Indian historian Professor K.S. Lal estimates that the Hindu population in India decreased by 80 million between 1000 AD and 1525 AD, an extermination unparalleled in World history. This slaughter of millions of people occurred over regular periods during many centuries of Arab, Afghan, Turkish and Mughal rule in India.
Many Indian heroes emerged during these dark times – including the 10th Sikh Guru – Guru Gobind Singh and also the Hindu Maratha king – Shivaji Maratha – who led the resistance against this tyranny and eventually led to its defeat by the late 1700s – after centuries of death and destruction.
The modern World today is facing a global threat from organizations and groups of terrorists such as the Taliban and Al-Qaeeda – whose ideology is chillingly similar to that of the perpetrators of the World’s biggest holocaust in India. Also ironically – these terrorist groups are growing and launching attacks in exactly those areas that suffered extensively during India’s holocaust. Let us hope that the bloody lessons of the past are learnt so that history does not even have the remotest chance of repeating itself.
The descendants of these scum are the people our politicians are courting.
The descendants of these scum deny the Holocaust and seek to prevent the truth about the Jewish Holocaust being taught in our schools.
The descendants of these scum are building their brainwashing hovels on every street.
The descendants of these scum are demanding that their laws are ‘respected’ so that they might repeat their vileness across Europe and beyond.
Islam is not a religion; its adherents are not peaceful acolytes; its intentions are neither harmless nor beneficial to any but Muslims.
————————————————————————
Bibliography, Articles and Links:
Negationism in India, by Dr Koenrad Elst. (Voice of India, New Delhi.)
“Was There an Islamic Genocide of Hindus?” (article) by Dr. Koenraad Elst (http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/articles/irin/genocide.html)
Rewriting Indian History by Francois Gautier (Vikas Publishing House, New Delhi 1996)
‘‘Aurangzeb, as he was according to Mughal Records’’(An exhibition) by Francois Gautier’s Trust : ‘FACT – India’ URL(http://www.aurangzeb.info/)
The Story of Civilization. Vol. 1: Our Oriental Heritage by Will Durant (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1935.)
A History of Civilisations by Fernand Braudel (Penguin Books, New York 1995)
Histoire de l’Inde, by Jean Danielou. (Editions Fayard, Paris.)
Growth of Muslim population in India (A.D. 1000-1800) by K.S. Lal. (Voice of India, New Delhi.)
“Demons from the Past” (article in the ‘Daily Times’, Pakistan August 30, 2004) by Irfan Husain (http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_30-8-2004_pg3_4)
The ‘Hindu Wisdom’ website : http://thedevil.com/The_Hindu_Holocaust_by_Muslims/Islamic_Onslaught.htm
stephen-knapp.com website : http://www.stephen-knapp.com/islamic_destruction_of_hindu_temples.htm
The Hindu Holocaust Museum website : http://hinduholocaust.com/HinduHolocaustMuseum.htm
The only similar genocide in the recent past was that of the Jewish people at the hands of the Nazis; arguably of the Africans during the slave trade and also the almost total extermination of native populations like the Aboriginal people in Australia and the native Indians, Aztecs, Incas, etc. in North and South America.
The holocaust of the Hindus in India was of even greater proportions, the only difference was that it continued for 800 years, till the brutal regimes were effectively overpowered in a life and death struggle by the Sikhs in the Panjab and the Hindu Maratha armies in other parts of India in the late 1700′s.
We have elaborate literary evidence of the World’s biggest holocaust from existing historical contemporary eyewitness accounts. The historians and biographers of the invading armies and subsequent rulers of India have left quite detailed records of the atrocities they committed in their day-to-day encounters with India’s Hindus.
These contemporary records boasted about and glorified the crimes that were committed – and the genocide of tens of millions of Hindus, mass rapes of Hindu women and the destruction of thousands of ancient Hindu / Buddhist temples and libraries have been well documented and provide solid proof of the World’s biggest holocaust.
Quotes from modern historians
Dr. Koenraad Elst in his article “Was There an Islamic Genocide of Hindus?” states:
“There is no official estimate of the total death toll of Hindus at the hands of Islam. A first glance at important testimonies by Muslim chroniclers suggests that, over 13 centuries and a territory as vast as the Subcontinent, Muslim Holy Warriors easily killed more Hindus than the 6 million of the Holocaust. Ferishtha lists several occasions when the Bahmani sultans in central India (1347-1528) killed a hundred thousand Hindus, which they set as a minimum goal whenever they felt like punishing the Hindus; and they were only a third-rank provincial dynasty.
The biggest slaughters took place during the raids of Mahmud Ghaznavi (ca. 1000 CE); during the actual conquest of North India by Mohammed Ghori and his lieutenants (1192 ff.); and under the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526).”
He also writes in his book “Negation in India”:
“The Muslim conquests, down to the 16th century, were for the Hindus a pure struggle of life and death. Entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. Every new invader made (often literally) his hills of Hindus skulls. Thus, the conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindu slaughter.”
Will Durant argued in his 1935 book “The Story of Civilisation: Our Oriental Heritage” (page 459):
“The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. The Islamic historians and scholars have recorded with great glee and pride the slaughters of Hindus, forced conversions, abduction of Hindu women and children to slave markets and the destruction of temples carried out by the warriors of Islam during 800 AD to 1700 AD. Millions of Hindus were converted to Islam by sword during this period.”
Francois Gautier in his book ‘Rewriting Indian History’ (1996) wrote:
“The massacres perpetuated by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history, bigger than the Holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis; or the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks; more extensive even than the slaughter of the South American native populations by the invading Spanish and Portuguese.”
Writer Fernand Braudel wrote in A History of Civilisations (1995), that Islamic rule in India as a
“colonial experiment” was “extremely violent”, and “the Muslims could not rule the country except by systematic terror. Cruelty was the norm – burnings, summary executions, crucifixions or impalements, inventive tortures. Hindu temples were destroyed to make way for mosques. On occasion there were forced conversions. If ever there were an uprising, it was instantly and savagely repressed: houses were burned, the countryside was laid waste, men were slaughtered and women were taken as slaves.”
Alain Danielou in his book, Histoire de l’ Inde writes:
“From the time Muslims started arriving, around 632 AD, the history of India becomes a long, monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliations, and destructions. It is, as usual, in the name of ‘a holy war’ of their faith, of their sole God, that the barbarians have destroyed civilizations, wiped out entire races.”
Irfan Husain in his article “Demons from the Past” observes:
“While historical events should be judged in the context of their times, it cannot be denied that even in that bloody period of history, no mercy was shown to the Hindus unfortunate enough to be in the path of either the Arab conquerors of Sindh and south Punjab, or the Central Asians who swept in from Afghanistan…The Muslim heroes who figure larger than life in our history books committed some dreadful crimes. Mahmud of Ghazni, Qutb-ud-Din Aibak, Balban, Mohammed bin Qasim, and Sultan Mohammad Tughlak, all have blood-stained hands that the passage of years has not cleansed..Seen through Hindu eyes, the Muslim invasion of their homeland was an unmitigated disaster.
“Their temples were razed, their idols smashed, their women raped, their men killed or taken slaves. When Mahmud of Ghazni entered Somnath on one of his annual raids, he slaughtered all 50,000 inhabitants. Aibak killed and enslaved hundreds of thousands. The list of horrors is long and painful. These conquerors justified their deeds by claiming it was their religious duty to smite non-believers. Cloaking themselves in the banner of Islam, they claimed they were fighting for their faith when, in reality, they were indulging in straightforward slaughter and pillage…”
A sample of contemporary eyewitness accounts of the invaders and rulers, during the Indian conquests
The Afghan ruler Mahmud al-Ghazni invaded India no less than seventeen times between 1001 – 1026 AD. The book ‘Tarikh-i-Yamini’ – written by his secretary documents several episodes of his bloody military campaigns : “The blood of the infidels flowed so copiously [at the Indian city of Thanesar] that the stream was discoloured, notwithstanding its purity, and people were unable to drink it…the infidels deserted the fort and tried to cross the foaming river…but many of them were slain, taken or drowned… Nearly fifty thousand men were killed.”
In the contemporary record – ‘ Taj-ul-Ma’asir’ by Hassn Nizam-i-Naishapuri, it is stated that when Qutb-ul- Din Aibak (of Turko – Afghan origin and the First Sultan of Delhi 1194-1210 AD) conquered Meerat, he demolished all the Hindu temples of the city and erected mosques on their sites. In the city of Aligarh, he converted Hindu inhabitants to Islam by the sword and beheaded all those who adhered to their own religion.
The Persian historian Wassaf writes in his book ‘Tazjiyat-ul-Amsar wa Tajriyat ul Asar’ that when the Alaul-Din Khilji (An Afghan of Turkish origin and second ruler of the Khilji Dynasty in India 1295-1316 AD) captured the city of Kambayat at the head of the gulf of Cambay, he killed the adult male Hindu inhabitants for the glory of Islam, set flowing rivers of blood, sent the women of the country with all their gold, silver, and jewels, to his own home, and made about twentv thousand Hindu maidens his private slaves.
This ruler once asked his spiritual advisor (or ‘Qazi’) as to what was the Islamic law prescribed for the Hindus. The Qazi replied:
“Hindus are like the mud; if silver is demanded from them, they must with the greatest humility offer gold. If a Mohammadan desires to spit into a Hindu’s mouth, the Hindu should open it wide for the purpose. God created the Hindus to be slaves of the Mohammadans. The Prophet hath ordained that, if the Hindus do not accept Islam, they should be imprisoned, tortured, finally put to death, and their property confiscated.”
Timur was a Turkic conqueror and founder of the Timurid Dynasty. Timur’s Indian campaign (1398 – 1399 AD) was recorded in his memoirs, collectively known as ‘Tuzk-i-Timuri.’ In them, he vividly described probably the greatest gruesome act in the entire history of the world – where 100,000 Hindu prisoners of war in his camp were executed in a very short space of time. Timur after taking advice from his entourage says in his memoirs :
“they said that on the great day of battle these 100,000 prisoners could not be left with the baggage, and that it would be entirely opposed to the rules of war to set these idolaters and foes of Islam at liberty.
“In fact, no other course remained but that of making them all food for the sword’
Timur thereupon resolved to put them to death. He proclaimed :
“throughout the camp that every man who has infidel prisoners was to put them to death, and whoever neglected to do so should himself be executed and his property given to the informer. When this order became known to the ghazis of Islam, they drew their swords and put their prisoners to death. 100,000 infidels, impious idolaters, were on that day slain. Maulana Nasir-ud-din Umar, a counselor and a man of learning, who, in all his life had never killed a sparrow, now, in execution of my order, slew with his sword fifteen idolatrous Hindus, who were his captives”.
During his campaign in India – Timur describes the scene when his army conquered the Indian city of Delhi :
“In a short space of time all the people in the [Delhi] fort were put to the sword, and in the course of one hour the heads of 10,000 infidels were cut off. The sword of Islam was washed in the blood of the infidels, and all the goods and effects, the treasure and the grain which for many a long year had been stored in the fort became the spoil of my soldiers.
“They set fire to the houses and reduced them to ashes, and they razed the buildings and the fort to the ground….All these infidel Hindus were slain, their women and children, and their property and goods became the spoil of the victors. I proclaimed throughout the camp that every man who had infidel prisoners should put them to death, and whoever neglected to do so should himself be executed and his property given to the informer. When this order became known to the ghazis of Islam, they drew their swords and put their prisoners to death.”
The Mughal emperor Babur (who ruled India from 1526 -1530 AD) writing in his memoirs called the ‘Baburnama’ – wrote : ” In AH 934 (2538 C.E.) I attacked Chanderi and by the grace of Allah captured it in a few hours. We got the infidels slaughtered and the place which had been Daru’l-Harb (nation of non-muslims) for years was made into a Daru’l-Islam (a muslim nation).”
In Babur’s own words in a poem about killing Hindus (From the ‘Baburnama’ ) he wrote :
“For the sake of Islam I became a wanderer,
I battled infidels and Hindus,
I determined to become a martyr
Thank God I became a Killer of Non-Muslims!”
The atrocities of the Mughal ruler Shah Jahan (who ruled India between 1628 – 1658 AD) are mentioned in the contemporary record called : ‘Badshah Nama, Qazinivi & Badshah Nama , Lahori’ and goes on to state : “When Shuja was appointed as governor of Kabul he carried on a ruthless war in the Hindu territory beyond Indus…The sword of Islam yielded a rich crop of converts….Most of the women (to save their honour) burnt themselves to death. Those captured were distributed among Muslim Mansabdars (Noblemen)”
The Afghan ruler Ahmad Shah Abdali attacked India in 1757 AD and made his way to the holy Hindu city of Mathura, the Bethlehem of the Hindus and birthplace of Krishna.
The atrocities that followed are recorded in the contemporary chronicle called : ‘Tarikh-I-Alamgiri’ :
“Abdali’s soldiers would be paid 5 Rupees (a sizeable amount at the time) for every enemy head brought in. Every horseman had loaded up all his horses with the plundered property, and atop of it rode the girl-captives and the slaves. The severed heads were tied up in rugs like bundles of grain and placed on the heads of the captives…Then the heads were stuck upon lances and taken to the gate of the chief minister for payment.
“It was an extraordinary display! Daily did this manner of slaughter and plundering proceed. And at night the shrieks of the women captives who were being raped, deafened the ears of the people…All those heads that had been cut off were built into pillars, and the captive men upon whose heads those bloody bundles had been brought in, were made to grind corn, and then their heads too were cut off. These things went on all the way to the city of Agra, nor was any part of the country spared.”
Why we should remember.
“Holocaust Memorial Day (HMD) is the international day of remembrance for the victims of the Holocaust and of other genocides” (Holocaust Memorial Day Trust) yet the biggest holocaust in World History has been whitewashed from history.
When we hear the word HOLOCAUST most of us think immediately of the Jewish holocaust. Today, with increased awareness and countless cinema films and television documentaries – many of us are also aware of the deaths of the Native American peoples, the genocide of the Armenian peoples in the Ottoman Empire, and the millions of African lives lost during the Atlantic slave trade.
The World seems to either ignore or just does not seem to care about the many millions of lives lost during the 800 – year long holocaust of Hindus in India.
The Indian historian Professor K.S. Lal estimates that the Hindu population in India decreased by 80 million between 1000 AD and 1525 AD, an extermination unparalleled in World history. This slaughter of millions of people occurred over regular periods during many centuries of Arab, Afghan, Turkish and Mughal rule in India.
Many Indian heroes emerged during these dark times – including the 10th Sikh Guru – Guru Gobind Singh and also the Hindu Maratha king – Shivaji Maratha – who led the resistance against this tyranny and eventually led to its defeat by the late 1700s – after centuries of death and destruction.
The modern World today is facing a global threat from organizations and groups of terrorists such as the Taliban and Al-Qaeeda – whose ideology is chillingly similar to that of the perpetrators of the World’s biggest holocaust in India. Also ironically – these terrorist groups are growing and launching attacks in exactly those areas that suffered extensively during India’s holocaust. Let us hope that the bloody lessons of the past are learnt so that history does not even have the remotest chance of repeating itself.
The descendants of these scum are the people our politicians are courting.
The descendants of these scum deny the Holocaust and seek to prevent the truth about the Jewish Holocaust being taught in our schools.
The descendants of these scum are building their brainwashing hovels on every street.
The descendants of these scum are demanding that their laws are ‘respected’ so that they might repeat their vileness across Europe and beyond.
Islam is not a religion; its adherents are not peaceful acolytes; its intentions are neither harmless nor beneficial to any but Muslims.
————————————————————————
Bibliography, Articles and Links:
Negationism in India, by Dr Koenrad Elst. (Voice of India, New Delhi.)
“Was There an Islamic Genocide of Hindus?” (article) by Dr. Koenraad Elst (http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/articles/irin/genocide.html)
Rewriting Indian History by Francois Gautier (Vikas Publishing House, New Delhi 1996)
‘‘Aurangzeb, as he was according to Mughal Records’’(An exhibition) by Francois Gautier’s Trust : ‘FACT – India’ URL(http://www.aurangzeb.info/)
The Story of Civilization. Vol. 1: Our Oriental Heritage by Will Durant (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1935.)
A History of Civilisations by Fernand Braudel (Penguin Books, New York 1995)
Histoire de l’Inde, by Jean Danielou. (Editions Fayard, Paris.)
Growth of Muslim population in India (A.D. 1000-1800) by K.S. Lal. (Voice of India, New Delhi.)
“Demons from the Past” (article in the ‘Daily Times’, Pakistan August 30, 2004) by Irfan Husain (http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_30-8-2004_pg3_4)
The ‘Hindu Wisdom’ website : http://thedevil.com/The_Hindu_Holocaust_by_Muslims/Islamic_Onslaught.htm
stephen-knapp.com website : http://www.stephen-knapp.com/islamic_destruction_of_hindu_temples.htm
The Hindu Holocaust Museum website : http://hinduholocaust.com/HinduHolocaustMuseum.htm
Tuesday, 14 February 2012
Bloody Daily Mail
They wouldn't post this. Can't understand why. (response to a story of an African woman with 3 London houses + property in Nigeria claiming £200K in benefits, thieving cow)
Don't ya just lurv the multi-culti society? Alien after alien queuing up to steal our birthright, which, of course, was based on the slave trade and imperialism so we can't complain, can we?
Let's be clear. If they have a black face and big lips, they're either going to rob you or stab you. Statistics prove it. Sorry to stereotype the decent ones but, hey, you're a minority all of your own, the smallest one on the fucking planet!
Don't ya just lurv the multi-culti society? Alien after alien queuing up to steal our birthright, which, of course, was based on the slave trade and imperialism so we can't complain, can we?
Let's be clear. If they have a black face and big lips, they're either going to rob you or stab you. Statistics prove it. Sorry to stereotype the decent ones but, hey, you're a minority all of your own, the smallest one on the fucking planet!
Monday, 13 February 2012
NHS
Lots of ongoing crap and waffle about the NHS/nasty Tories again but the simple fact is the NHS is no longer fit for purpose and is unaffordable. And ever will be until it aims are more clearly defined for this modern era.
I am sure its founders never intended it to change boys into girls (or vica versa), increase/decrease the size of ladies wobbly bits, treat anybody from anywhere in the world or do anything more than make comfortable those who choose to abuse and destroy their bodies.
How about we start with 3 simple changes:
1 If you are not British and have paid nothing in, you get nothing out
2 Set up special hospitals funded by the industry to treat those who smoke.
3 ditto for those whose illnesses are as a result of alcohol.
Finally, no treatment, for those testing positive for illegal substances. I feel sure Mr Branson and his wealthy (substance abusing) friends would be happy to fund Clinics for these poor souls through a Charity.
I like the concept of the NHS but anywhere universal health care is available to all with no restrictions, it doesn't work! Another good move would be to remove the onerous tax penalties that are applied to those receiving private health care cover as part of their employment. This might encourage a greater take up and thus unburden the NHS In any event, this is an unfair tax as the payee has already paid their health care (NI - Employee and Employer contributions), their employer is just ensuring they're back at work as quick as possible BECAUSE the NHS is crap.
I am sure its founders never intended it to change boys into girls (or vica versa), increase/decrease the size of ladies wobbly bits, treat anybody from anywhere in the world or do anything more than make comfortable those who choose to abuse and destroy their bodies.
How about we start with 3 simple changes:
1 If you are not British and have paid nothing in, you get nothing out
2 Set up special hospitals funded by the industry to treat those who smoke.
3 ditto for those whose illnesses are as a result of alcohol.
Finally, no treatment, for those testing positive for illegal substances. I feel sure Mr Branson and his wealthy (substance abusing) friends would be happy to fund Clinics for these poor souls through a Charity.
I like the concept of the NHS but anywhere universal health care is available to all with no restrictions, it doesn't work! Another good move would be to remove the onerous tax penalties that are applied to those receiving private health care cover as part of their employment. This might encourage a greater take up and thus unburden the NHS In any event, this is an unfair tax as the payee has already paid their health care (NI - Employee and Employer contributions), their employer is just ensuring they're back at work as quick as possible BECAUSE the NHS is crap.
Sunday, 12 February 2012
Dan Hannan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6U6v0pZ9f6k
Perhaps one of the greatest orators of our time.
Perhaps one of the greatest orators of our time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)