Tuesday 22 January 2008

Shiite Islam and the Racial Jihad Against Whites

Image - Moqtada Al Sadr of Iraq wearing the Black Turban of Shiite Islam which indicates his being a direct blood descendant of the Prophet Mohammed. Shiite Islam is race based religion.

Islam and the Race Issue.

This is Mr.Spencers latest attack on me on his Jihad Watch site - my response is in the numbered points below ;

" The late, now-banned Barnes wrote, inter alia:

The Global Jihad is also a race war against whites.

This is a prime example of the kind of red herring, or white herring, that diverts energy and attention from what it should be on, and empowers the jihadists and their allies.

There is no shortage of white Islamic jihadists and white Muslims in general. They are not "self-hating" whites. They are adherents of an ideology that is interested in killing, converting, or subjugating not all whites, but all non-Muslims.

If Barnes were correct, there would have been no jihad against the Hindus. The Thais. No jihads in sub-Saharan Africa. (1)

If Barnes were correct, Hajj Amin Al-Husseini would never have been able to recruit white Bosnian Muslims to fight in the SS. And there would be no, or very few, jihadists among native Muslims in the Balkans. Or Chechnya. (2)

The Global Jihad is not a race war. (3)

It is a religious war. (4)

Israel is on the front lines of it. (5)

And this BNP op is calling them Zionazis. (6)

Robert Spencer "

My Response To Robert Spencer
(1) For an expert on Jihadism Mr.Spencer has a very outdated view on how Jihadism has evolved in time and spread in relation to location. Jihadism has two fundamental aspects, the first is racial and is based on the fact that Shiite Islam is at heart a racial religion. "Islam is an invention for the purpose of providing
a religious justification for Arab Imperialism. The Conquest is the reason and explanation for Islam, not the other way around" as stated by Islamic Historian Mohammad ibn al-Rawandi. This statement means that Islam was a religion created in order to expand the power of the Arab peoples, and even today the direct descendants of the Prophet, those who wear the black turban such as in Shiite Islam, are the leaders of the religion itself. This shows us that Islam and Race are entwined. The second aspect of Jihad is in order to expand the religion of Islam so as to increase the power of the Arabic leadership itself. The more lands that the Shiite Islamists conquer the more power the leaders of Islam, the more power the descendants of the Prophet have.

In order to expand the previous Jihads were all specific to that nation and time and place. In the past as Islamism expanded into new areas across the globe it formented new wars and new ethnic conflicts in those areas in which it appeared and grew. The latest expansion of Islamism is into the West. As a result the new Jihadism is against whites. This has been explictly confirmed by the British-educated bomb-maker Azahari Husin who died in the 2002 Bali bomb attack that targeted white tourists and killed 202 people who wrote in his plan for the attacks ""We will consider all white people the enemy." (Daily Telegraph Friday 13 July 2007 "Target any white person: the chilling guidelines for Bali suicide bombers".)

The 34-page document on his computer set out the meticulous planning and execution for the second Bali attack, including a minute-by-minute timetable culminating with the triple suicide bombing on Oct 1. The blasts were set for 7.34pm when the restaurants would be full, and the entry read: "Allahu Akbar" (God is great).

It advocated attacking "foreign tourists from America and its allies" - including all Nato countries, as well as Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, Japan, Thailand and the Philippines. But given the difficulty in distinguishing different nationalities, the author concluded: "We will consider all white people the enemy."

We also have to take a look at other Islamist organisations such as The Nation of Islam and the Death Angels in that group who were responsible for the Zebra Killings which targeted whites in the US and which were in fact the first racist Jihad within the United States ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zebra_murders ). Other examples of this racist Jihad against whites in the US are the Beltway Snipers and their attacks against whites in the name of Islam.


Those that wear the Black Turbans in Shiite Islam, such as Moqtada Al Sadr, are the descendants of Mohammed and asu such they are regarded as the leaders. Under often complex rules of Shiite Islam, only clerics who can prove that they are direct descendants of prophet Mohammed may wear black turbans.

The division in Islam between Shiite and Sunni dates back to the time after Muhammad's death in 632, in the area which is now known as Saudi Arabia, when the next leader of the Muslim nation had yet to be decided. One group of people (who would later become known as the "Shiites") believed that the ruler should be a member of the prophet's family, while another group (who would later be called the "Sunnis") believed that Muhammad’s successor should be chosen from amongst those who were most qualified. While Shiites desired the succession of Muhammad’s cousin “Ali” as the next leader, Sunnis opted for “Abu Bakr,” a close friend to the prophet. The Sunnis quickly prevailed and Abu Bakr was installed as Muhammad's successor. Rather than ending with Abu Bakr's succession, however, the conflict between the two groups only escalated further over the following decades. In 656, a full-scale civil war engulfed the Muslim nation over the question of leadership. The war, which lasted for five years, hardened divisions between the two groups and ultimately led to a formal split of the religion into two distinct sects.

Since the split, several religious and ethnic differences have emerged between the two groups. Shiites, for example, have more of a formal religious hierarchy than Sunnis do. For Shiites, those who are descendants of the prophet are particularly important and are often looked to for spiritual and social guidance. To become a member of this elite caste is only through blood, and those outside the caste are seen only as followers of the religion and do not have the divine right to call themselves the descendants of the prophet or become religious leaders within the religion. In so called ‘progressive circles’ of western society we have moved on past the idea of royalty and inherited divinity, to see liberals ignoring such a racist practice in Islam is sickening. Can you imagine who the Catholic Church would be regarded if instead of having its hierarchy open to anyone on the basis of their worth, it was open only to those who were descendants of family members of Jesus. Therefore the schism in Islam is based on racism, and the war within Islam was based on the principle of racism - that only those of the same bloodline and racial group as descended from the prophet should be allowed to become the leaders of the religion, and everyone else merely a follower. This means that only Arab descendants of Mohammed are considered within Shiite Islam as the true elite of Islam, and therefore that all non-descendants of the Arab descendants of Mohammed are somehow less qualified to be leaders in Islam due to them not being genetically Arab and genetic descendants of Mohammed.

This is a classic racist position. The fact that after a thousand years the descendants of the prophet are still genetically Arabs who have never married outside Arabic family circles under the principle of Harim (related to the word Harem )means the Arab elite within Shiite Islam retain a sense of the importance of keeping their Arabic blood pure shows how this internal racism has been to Islam.

2) The Bosnian Muslim SS units were motivated more by Anti-Semitism than anti-White hatred, and as Eastern European converts of Islam they were whites themselves. Like most Islamists they did not understand the internal racial dimension of Shiite Islam.

3) The global Shiite Jihad is a race war as it its aim is to create a global caliphate with the descendants of the Prophet as the leadership - that would be the same as if the Nazis had took over the planet and made the children of Hitler the inherited leadership of the global nazi movement.

4) It is both a religious and racial war.

5) Britain is on the front line ( 7/7, the July 21 st bombers and the Glasgow and London bomb attacks) and British troops are on the frontline in Iraq and Afghanistan Mr.Spencer you Zionist idiot.

6) The Jihadis and the Zionists are both nazis - as both are motivated by haematological and theological considerations as were the Nazis with their obsessions with Aryan blood and Positive Christianity.


Anonymous said...

This fellow doesn't get it.

Words like Nazi and racist are simply racial slurs given to white Gentiles.

We are a predatory species. Appearance is a marker for race. All healthy races fight to endure, to maintain their power within a society, both in terms of their percentage and their power within the power structure.

When white Gentiles engage in the above, they are given the racial slur of racist. (No different than calling us a honky or cracker.)

When Jews and nonwhites engage in the above, they are simply called normal.

Anonymous said...

To be fair, the Islamic jihad is more ideological than racial as the goal is the single world ummeh. It doesn't discriminate by race but by disbelief.

I also don't agree with your view of the jews. Israel is being sold out by both the US and the EU. You could reasonably argue that the marxist EU hates jews, just look at how much money the EU gives to Hamas and Hizbollah.

I think the real problem is marxism allied with global capitalism. Immigration - including Islamic immigration - is their weapon to control and suppress indiginous populations and along with Islam constitutes the three-headed serpent crushing the life out of judeo-christian civilsation.

Words such as "nazi", "racist" and "fascist" are the marxist's orwellian tactic to stiffle debate and opposition.

Except some of us refuse to shut up and these parasites will get their due one day.


Defender of Liberty said...

Hi chaps,

Zionism these days is no longer a Jewish obsession it is primarily a Christian Fundamentalist obsession. Many many Jews are anti-Zionist but most fundamentalist christians are zionists.

As for the EU and US selling out Israel, the EU is of course EURABIA and the US needs Saudi oil - but that doesnt mean they have sold Israel out as the Israeli lobby in the US, UK and EU is the most powerful lobby group, closely followed by the Arab oil lobby group.

The fact is that Zionism, Pro-Israel lobby groups, Islamism, Global Capitalism, Marxism, Political Correctness, dependence on Arab oil and Christian fundamentalists are all the enemies of all nationalists, as nationalism is predicated on Britain First whilst each of those put their own personal issues before the British national interest.

All the best,


Anonymous said...

Laurence Auster Comments on this topic:

... At the culminating point of his article Spencer has reverted to liberal rather conservative principles. Instead of speaking of defending Western civilization, or the historic cultures and nations of Europe, from the Islamic threat, he speaks of defending a "positive vision of defense for the human rights of all people." For Spencer, as always, the bottom line is universal liberal rights, not the concrete civilization and nations of which those rights are but one aspect--and, indeed, not the most fundamental aspect. Our civilization existed for a thousand years before it embraced the modern notion of liberal rights. Furthermore, without those particular, concrete Western societies to uphold those rights, the rights would instantly disappear, since it is only the West that truly believes in individual rights. Furthermore, as the British National Party understands and Spencer does not, to maintain those societies, their respective historic peoples must be preserved as the cultural majority, since without a sufficient degree of ethnic and cultural homogeneity, no society can even exist. This is why BNP's ethnicity-conscious defense of Britain and Europe is morally legitimate, even from a liberal point of view.
[ emphasis added]

Anonymous said...

To be true to the facts, the global Jihad is mainly religious, but often when done by Arabs (who are Muslims) there's a raciam involeved as well, just as the blind anti Israel (anti Jewish, rather) war by Arab Muslims which is just a combination of the infamous DOUBLE FASCISM (Arab Racism + Islamic Jihadi-bigotry).

No matter how many radical whites who think they help themselves by useless "defense" of the self made (fake) victims, the Arab (grandchildren of) immigrants in Israel/palestine who are called "palestinians" since the 1960s... they (Arab Muslims) will never differenciate between Jews & Christians (when push comes to shove.

After all their plan of WORLD DOMINATION (CALIPHATE) SHARED BY MAINSTEREAM ISLAM IS THE CORE OF THE GLOBAL JIHAD WAR ON ALL NON MUSLIMS, it's just easier for propaganda purposes to go after the joos first...