Pamphlet Secular Humanism


Pamphlet
Secular Humanism:
Bane of Civilizations
From Secular Humanism To Islam - The Only Solution
Click to download PDF of Pamphlet Secular Humanism: Bane of Civilizations By Zahir Ebrahim | Project Humanbeingsfirst.org





Ch.

Table of Contents

Pg.

Preface
3

About the author
4
1
Atheism and Social Justice a Non Sequitur
5
2
Uniting Mankind Against Secular Humanism
9
3
Is Islam the Problem for which Secular Humanism is pitched as the Solution or Is Primacy the Problem for which Islam is the only Solution?
4
Open Letter to Muslims: Is Islam really the Last Obstruction to World Government?
5
Axioms of Secular Humanism and Why It Must Lead to Primacy By Definition
6
Case Study of Secular Humanists Misdirecting the Problem by Half Truths – Ignoring Primacy

Part-I Introduction to Documentary Thrive

Part-II The Road to No Where: The Journey of Voluntary Servitude

NOTES





Preface

Secular Humanism is intended to become the “religion” of the World Order in the making. Its purpose is to disarm the populations of all resistance by removing theism from their midst; the higher moral authority that confers absolute standards and invites mankind toward hope and breaking the bonds of servitude to fellow man. It is easier to make slaves of the public mind with no higher authority other than the world government, big brother if you will, which shall rule the public mind in such a way that mankind shall come to love its own servitude. That's the agenda. It will come to naught without a doubt – for the religion of Islam stands in its way; the only impediment to achieving full spectrum control of the human species by the financial oligarchy. Its visible champions among commoners span the gamut of useful idiots from likkha-parrha jahils pretending to be the avant-garde in intellectual thought to ordinary a-religious people fed up with moral policing.
The purpose of this pamphlet is to warn of the perfidiousness of this new “religion” behind its lure of compassion, equality, human rights, supremacy of reason over Higher Authority, etceteras. The pamphlet dives right in the midst of the Secular Humanists and challenges their crippled epistemology in the hope of getting them to realize they are being made useful idiots --- for I can't really believe that all of them are petty mercenaries or Übermensch. I like to think that they are just mistaken --- for the idea does sound rather nice to the irreligious at the most facile level. But like the syphilis ridden new bride, all one has to do is look under the virginal gown and one shall know. This pamphlet does exactly that. I have never met a secular humanist who can stand scrutiny. They tend to run and congregate among their own kind in the safety and comfort of incestuous self-reinforcement. Don't be a fool and become useful idiot agents of social engineers. Examine the premise, the axioms, and see for oneself how cunning and guile are being used to usher in one of the most subversive values among mankind. I believe most secular humanists are inclined to be kind-hearted folks in search of solutions for the issues facing mankind. Under that premise, this pamphlet is addressed to the well-intentioned ones to get them to see that the first order fundamental problem facing mankind is Primacy! This discovery is not really a classified state secret that was leaked to me. It is rather obvious and self-evident. But for some, it evidently requires heavy dosage of intellectual vitamins to glean. Here is one such vitamin regimen.
Zahir Ebrahim
Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
October 22, 2019





About the author

He is just an ordinary fellow, a common man. But one who suffers no fools, takes no prisoners, bows before no authority figures as bearers of divine truths, and remains just as unimpressed by the metaphysics of the turban as by the scholarship of the gown. There is not much else to say about him. He was quite imperfectly educated in the elite secular universities of both the United States of America and Pakistan, which might explain how he managed to escape from these factories of jahiliya with his mind still intact and his brain still firing on all cylinders. It is only because of the imperfection of his education, and because of the failure of the system to obedience train him to United We Stand with absurdities, that his deconstruction of modernity is able to capture reality the way it actually is, minus all of truth's protective layers. At least me thinks so. My name is Zahir Ebrahim, and I am the archetype plebeian antidote to hectoring hegemons. My contribution to making America great again can be gleaned at the United States Patent Office ( https://tinyurl.com/Zahir-Patents ), and from this May 2009 article on IEEE Spectrum's Special Report: 25 Microchips That Shook the World. My contribution to making her almost human can be read at my hobby website: Project Humanbeingsfirst.org.





1

Atheism and Social Justice a Non Sequitur

Response to Michael Rectenwald's A Critique of 'Social Justice' Ideology: Thinking through Marx and Nietzsche

July 29, 2017
Dear Professor Michael Rectenwald,
Hello, interesting reading, enjoyed it. Some quick thoughts that spring to mind which I would like to share with you as an invitation to probe further and with a tad more pertinence to empirical reality.
While I am not a philosopher Michael, I do use philosophy as a reasoning tool, particularly as a means of parsing both logic and arguments. One thing the study of philosophy and the philosophers' thoughts taught me early on is to seek (or look for) self-consistency between their arguments and the presuppositions that these are based on.
When arguments are self-consistent with their presuppositions, then the reasoning is usually weighty, whether or not it matches with reality. Seeking that match is what empiricism tries to do when the domain is within the purview of falsifiability, and it becomes “religion” when the domain is either un-empirical or the axioms are unfalsifiable. In either case, when there is self-consistency, the logic of the argument passes the first test of acceptability. Meaning, the argument, theory, ideology, logic, cannot be rejected just because it may not be empirical or non-falsifiable, primarily because it is self-consistent with its own axioms. In other words, this arguably [is] the sole exception [to] reductio ad absurdum --- even if the [conclusion] is shown to be absurd, if the argument, logic, theory, is consistent with its fundamental premise, it cannot be (easily) rejected. For instance, the Euclidean geometry is built with great self-consistency and with considerable completeness upon its principal axiom that parallel lines don't meet at infinity. One can however also create a fully self-consistent and equally complete non-Euclidean geometry by assuming that parallel lines meet at infinity. Its theorems and corollaries also being entirely self-consistent with that unfalsifiable axiom. Of course we may find little use for such a geometry in non-relativistic space, since its theorems might simply lead to absurd results in our non-relativistic daily experience. But we also can't reject its theorems outright just because they don't apply in our daily experiences, principally because of the self-consistency of the theorems with its own fundamental axioms.
However, when theorems (arguments, philosophies, ideologies, logic) and their axioms are inconsistent, it usually, nay almost always, means sophistry! In the worst case it is bullshit disguised in erudite demagoguery and the foundation of propaganda warfare, often the purview of the Übermensch. In the best case it is merely incompetence of reasoning when employed by those of limited intellectual acumen. In either event, it is a false argument, false logic, false theory, false ideology, when the argument does not follow from its axiomatic presuppositions. The truth of this statement is self-evident, rather obvious, and does not need any further proof or discussion.
What is fundamentally common between the two philosophers, Marx and Nietzsche, is that, by virtue of their both being atheists, they both believe in the natural law as a presupposition. That axiom cannot lead to any theory of social justice (fairness, egalitarianism) except in sophistry, even if it is enacted by the fiat of law. This fact is irrespective of the particular argument, theory, or ideology, whether broad-spectrum (Marxism), or narrow-spectrum as enacted within a subgroup or clique or tribe by mutual considerations of survival (Nietzsche) or domestic or international law by mutual agreement (policy-making). Since Natural law is presumed to also apply to humans, it fundamentally governs their very existence, development, evolution, and thus subsequently arguing social justice and egalitarianism among them as the supposed mutually agreed upon civilizational construct is inconsistent by definition. It is inconsistent with the supposition of natural law governing mankind, whether in individual, or in aggregate.
That is such a basic and most obvious truth that I am sure it is no news to you. So I am surprised that I missed its deeper exploration in your Critique.
This inconsistency of natural law applied to humans and the vague altruistic notions of egalitarianism will naturally give rise to primacy, hegemony, despite all the platitudinous window dressings they might be couched in for the benefit of the sheep by those who will themselves be self-consistent with their axiomatic premise of natural law. This is both philosophically true, and also empirical.
Just for completeness, that is the premise that laws of nature apply to all existence, to human beings, to animals, to animate and inanimate objects, and in that ambit of natural law, there is no equality. Might and power by definition reign only by the superiority of force, and this is seen empirically not only within the natural forces of nature, but also within the natural forces of jungle. The lion can never be equal to the sheep, nor wolves equal to sheep, but certainly the wolves might vociferously argue egalitarianism between themselves and the lions (had they any ability to reason logically for survival).
So, in response to your interesting article, I would observe that Nietzsche was perhaps more self-consistent in his reasoning of the Übermensch being the natural shepherd because they are more able than the sheep, just as Plato was in his logic of Philosopher-king being the natural shepherd otherwise the Übermensch controllers would naturally enslave mankind, than anyone else in Western humanist philosophy. Marx was entirely inconsistent. And so were the deist philosophers who crafted the American constitution. Anyone can easily see the fruits of that inconsistency in the wonderful Bill of Rights, wherein, only if you are the right racial and genetic (European) makeup are you deemed a “human being” enjoying all the natural rights of pursuit of happiness --- the imported Negroes and their descendants bonded into slavery, and the native inhabitants of the land ten million of whom were mercilessly exterminated from their own soil, were evidently not deemed fully human when those Rights were crafted by the founders of United States of America.
The more interesting question of philosophy in this domain of social justice is really this Michael: under what set of axioms or presuppositions can egalitarianism and social justice be a self-consistent ideology among mankind?
Nietzsche confronted that question head on and as you too correctly observed in your article quoting someone: “… all ethical systems, that is all those ways of thinking which are generally accepted as such, have a basis for judgment which lies outside that which is to be judged.” But since Nietzsche was also an avowed atheist and had killed God, to be self-consistent with his own presupposition and belief in natural law, he had to reject any outside source, and thus forthrightly rejected egalitarianism, except of course by mutual consent among the Übermensch themselves!
Nietzsche only re-laid the modern foundation of the same old white man's burden, and as you well know, that foundation of primacy is quite ancient, and which the late Dr. Brzezinski summed up with the greatest laconic wit in perhaps the shortest sentence in human history to convincingly legitimize international primacy: “Hegemony is as old as mankind.” It was his justification for continued primacy of the sole superpower despite all the conventions of international law thrust down the individual national throats. Just look at the egregious title of his realpolitik book, which is of course only the American Mein Kampf: “The Grand Chessboard -- American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives”. Merely the white man's burden revisited --- wouldn't you agree --- so what's all this specious discussion of egalitarianism in the postmodern contemporary setting?
I look forward to you examining that aforementioned pertinent question if you are keenly interested in any notion of the viability of social justice among mankind. Nietzscheanism today governs not just ideology, but also all law, policy, and dispensation. Its pinnacle is to be reached, I imagine, when the religion of secular humanism is enacted in the world by the fiat of power and international law in a one-world government.
Thanks for your frequent emails from legitgov. I often have to mark it “not spam”. Keep up the good work. I am sure that you will agree that we must all continue to seek self-consistency with axioms as the first rejection criterion of absurdities that are couched in erudite philosophies and specious logic, the main gift of reason and philosophy, and continue to teach those tools of philosophical reasoning to others as a means of parsing reality for self-preservation from the Übermensch. In human society, some are wolves and the rest are sheep --- there can be no egalitarianism between their imperatives unless both are forcibly subjected to a higher force. That force, both mathematical logic [Gödel's incompleteness theorems] and the quest for survival of the sheep dictates, should be self-consistent with the axioms which give birth to it, and above that which it is meant to govern.
Let me hasten to clarify that this humble entreaty of teaching those who are ill-equipped with a sophisticated intellect to survive the Übermensch's Machiavellian jungle only applies to those who do genuinely proclaim (or seek) social justice and do not believe in the presupposition of atheism. I guess I am hoping that all who are inclined towards social justice would logically reach the self-consistent realization that there must be a higher force or authority that one must accept as the source of egalitarian morality in order to have social justice among mankind. Without that presupposition of higher authority, there can be none!
Thus, it follows that atheist by the demands of self-consistency with their own axiom must either give-up social justice, or give up atheism. They cannot have both.
With Regards,
Zahir Ebrahim







2

Uniting Mankind Against Secular Humanism

Morality derived from the Intellect leads to Enslavement!

This is Project Humanbeingsfirst's response to the moral reflections of an anonymous ordinary mortal in “The importance and benefits of self honesty”. The writer mused:
'When you stand before God to be judged, do you really think at that time you will be able to enter a debate with God about your behavior? Playing with or bending some words to cover-up or justify your bad deeds? Perhaps a little “white lie” here and there? Do you really think you can deceive God?' [1]
This problem was solved by Nietzsche a long time ago!
There used to be a prominent T-Shirt worn around campus when I was an undergrad, it said in bold:
God is Dead --- Nietzsche
(of course I am not going to provide the punch-line that was printed in very fine letters just underneath that, at least not just yet!)
The German philosopher found God dead for the more keen of intellect among mankind, the superman, Übermensch, über alles; Plato's philosopher-king no longer bound by God but his own “will to power” to become his own god. [2]
Caption Morality Derived From Intellect Leads To Enslavement
As god, the superman is beyond the confines of good and evil, beyond the calculus of conventional morality, and thus is freed to redefine what the word “morality” means with his own superior intellect for the rest of mankind, the untermensch, who have not yet evolved, or refuse to evolve, to that higher state of intelligence that only evolution can bestow. Hoi polloi being in the majority, hamper the evolution of man and his societies with their superstitions and must therefore be led and guided by the intellect of the superman. This line of reasoning is the foundation of modern secularism and its new religion, Secular Humanism, the worship of reason instead of some unseen God.
In this missive, I advance the commonsense observation that morality and intellect are two separate things. It is mixing them where people become misled!
Intellect cannot confer upon morality any view other than subjective, and hence relative and arbitrary. The following statement from an 'uber intellect' is a good evidence of this:
Nothing is more certain in modern society than the principle that there are no absolutes, that a name, a phrases, a standard has meaning only when associated with the considerations which give birth to nomenclature. To those who would paralyze our Government in the face of impending threat by encasing it in a semantic strait-jacket, we must reply that all concepts are relative.” --- Justice Vinson, U.S. Supreme Court, 1951 AD
However, the following algorithm is not just evidence of what I say, but its outright proof. This proof is furnished by the 'uber uber' atheist of the 20th century, i.e., the most fanatical God is Dead exponent, Mr. Bertrand Russell. I can't recall the exact chapter and verse, but it goes something like this.
Bertrand Russell's morality synthesis exclusively from the intellect:
~ 'Maximize individual happiness (pleasures) while minimizing social conflict (not hitting on another's spouse) to optimize the overall happiness of the people composing the social unit who agree to live by the set of laws which implement this operations-research calculus.' --- Bertrand Russell also noted some caveats for protection of minors and those unable to make choices so that one could not maximize one's pleasures upon them without some institutional safeguards.
Using that highly intellectual morality equation – and I will confess that I have not encountered a more profound synthesis of morality and law anywhere, and which, on the surface at least, appears rather full of brilliance and minimalism – it would be perfectly acceptable, for instance, to spread Black-death every other generation for population control among other 'untermensch' societies. Or, to create a draconian police-state by re-defining what individual happiness might mean, and conditioning the people to get used to it. As Goethe had observed, “none are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free”. In such a society, the people could be kept quite content in their voluntary servitude thus leaving no social conflict whatsoever – and thus culminating in a perfectly stable and rational society.
In this highly intellectual system, also euphemistically called Secular Humanism, enslaving the populace by a bunch of wily 'ubermensch' who have craftily chosen not to be constrained in the “semantic strait-jacket” alluded to by Judge Vinson quoted above and who accept “that all concepts are relative”, that state of affairs would be a perfectly moral outcome. It certainly satisfies Bertrand Russell's intellect-derived morality calculus. And if someone thinks I am making all this up, Bertrand Russell himself concluded in his epiphany to 'uber' intellectual morality, in his 1952 book “Impact of Science on Society”, that a Scientific Society, meaning one built on intellect – as obviously imbeciles can't do high-tech science – will automatically culminate in “World government [which] could only be kept in being by force”.
Bertrand Russell's superior intellect finds the stability of the global police state desirable as it would also have the other wholesome characteristic that any superior intellect running the world with unlimited force at its disposal would always demand from hoi polloi: absolute obedience! The tools to finally achieve that long held dream to control all human beings on earth by its supermen, only made available in the scientific age.
Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski, America's National Security Advisor and the author of the Carter Doctrine that gave to the USSR its Vietnam War in Afghanistan in Muslim blood, wrote in his own seminal 1970 book “Between Two Ages” of the advent of the scientific society and what that new age portends:
Life seems to lack cohesion as environment rapidly alters and human beings become increasingly manipulable and malleable. Everything seems more transitory and temporary: external reality more fluid than solid, the human being more synthetic than authentic. Even our senses perceive an entirely novel "reality"—one of our own making but nevertheless, in terms of our sensations, quite "real." More important, there is already widespread concern about the possibility of biological and chemical tampering with what has until now been considered the immutable essence of man. Human conduct, some argue, can be predetermined and subjected to deliberate control. Man is increasingly acquiring the capacity to determine the sex of his children, to affect through drugs the extent of their intelligence, and to modify and control their personalities. Speaking of a future at most only decades away, an experimenter in intelligence control asserted, "I foresee the time when we shall have the means and therefore, inevitably, the temptation to manipulate the behaviour and intellectual functioning of all the people through environmental and biochemical manipulation of the brain."” (pg. 12)
Novelist George Orwell depicted that re-semantification of words and language for the full spectrum control of the human mind as “Newspeak” in his famous 1948 dystopian fable “Nineteen Eighty-four”. Aldous Huxley introduced the “Soma” and being happy in voluntary servitude by the very design of the human beings without the need for overt jackboots on the face of humanity, in his 1931 dystopian fable “Brave New World”. All dystopias fundamentally brought on by the superior intellect of the Übermensch.
Books of atheist philosophers and social scientists aside, we can brazenly observe this exercise of the 'uber' intellect not just in the world government under construction which of course no one believes is happening, but in the Talmud among its own very moral followers which too no one can ever deny unless their lips are moving in chutzpatic confabulations. The Ten Commandments of Moses are intellectually particularized from their universal moral form, by adding an implied “Jew” at the end. Thus, as has been amply exposed by many recovering Jews themselves, “Thou Shall Not Kill” is read by many an adherent Talmudic Rabbi as: “Thou Shall Not Kill [a Jew; killing goy is OK]”.
And as evidence that this “hegelian mind fck” isn't just some historical baggage which happened in the Dark Ages with no bearing to modernity, here is the latest version of the Law Book of Israel: 'The King's Torah'! [3]
For additional examples of this ongoing “hegelian mind fck”, please see From Genesis to Genocide in Palestine. [4]
Fundamentally, the questions probed by the anonymous writer have been long solved philosophically, i.e., by using the intellect. Here is a short passage from Leo Strauss which shows just how remarkably easily it has been solved:
'Political Zionism has repeatedly characterized itself as the will to normalize the existence of the Jewish people, to normalize the Jewish people. By this self-definition it has exposed itself to a grave misunderstanding, namely, the misunderstanding that the will to normality was the first word of political Zionism; the most effective criticism of political Zionism rests on this misunderstanding. In truth, the presupposition of the Zionist will to normalization, that is, of the Zionist negation of galut [exile], is the conviction that "the power of religion has been broken". Because the break with religion has been resolutely effected by many individual Jews, and only because of this reason, it is possible for these individuals to raise the question on behalf of their people, how the people is to live from now on. Not that they prostrate themselves before the idol of normality; on the contrary: they no longer see any reason for the lack of normality. And this is decisive: in the age of atheism, the Jewish people can no longer base its existence on God but only on itself alone, on its labor, on its land, and on its state. ...' --- page 202, Leo Strauss, The Early Writings 1921-1932
See its fuller exposition at the link below, but here is the core essence of that morality:
'In simple language which peels off the philosophical-gibberish of “will to normality” and such, straightforwardly speaking: god gave the Jews the land grants, anointed them as the 'chosen peoples', and then Nietzsche killed god, and now it's up to the Jewish people who “can no longer base its existence on God but only on itself alone, on its labor, on its land, and on its state”, in order to construct their own future “because the break with religion has been resolutely effected by many individual Jews” who must now lead their flock!!!' [5]
See how wonderful a solution it is mes amis? I hope no one is too sarcasm impaired here.
Not to be outdone by atheists in defining their own super-morality with their uber-intellect, god's chosen theists can even outdo that with learned confabulations – become god themselves:
'... The point is that a Jew has strength, ability and power to create the desire within G-d to accept and become King over the entire creation.
It's understood, that the existence of the entire creation, in truth, is brought about by the Jew's coronation of G-d, and through which He becomes a King over the entire creation, which ultimately results in the fact that all of creation comes from the Primary being, G-d.
It's obvious that since every Jew, men and even women and children, brings about the existence of the entire creation, they become masters over the world, and thus every single creation owes them recognition for this good.
Being that through the Jew, all beings were created, he therefore becomes the master over all of them.
This is especially so in regards to what needs to be accomplished on erev [every?] Rosh Hashana.
Since the judgment of Rosh Hashana is primarily regarding physical matters, as explained in Likutei Torah, therefore the Jew is in complete control, particularly over physical matters.
The physicality of the world itself has to recognize the good that the Jew has accomplished.
Through the Jews they came into being, and their true existence is through their unity with the True Being.
Since G-d and the Jews are one, each Jew becomes a True Being, and is thus able to bring about all of creation.
He therefore has control over all of creation and not only that, but they owe him thanks and are indeed thankful, for being provided with abundance in physical and especially spiritual matters.' --- Translation of Talmudic reading by a Rabbi, The Coronation of Hashem [6]
Such is the natural culmination of morality when the superior intellect is put in charge of its direction! The sociopaths will always justify the Übermensch. Nietzsche of course called it “will to power” of the superman; the only way for man to evolve into a higher rational being. As we have unfortunately witnessed time and again however, it has become the favorite expression of both social Darwinian philosophers and war-mongers of all stripes who remorselessly employ “end justify the means” paradigm for exercising their primacy upon fellow man. The primacy entitlement felt to be innate to the “survival of the fittest” philosophy, is cunningly disguised in Newspeak which the ill-informed public is unable to parse until it is already fait accompli.
Here is President George W. Bush Jr. employing it in his Speech before a Joint Session of Congress on September 20, 2001. The speech writer used Nietzschean allusions to announce the unfettered rise of the new superman mandarins of earth in the aftermath of 9/11. Only those well read of classical literature, mostly the elites themselves, likely understood its implications even before the first bombs were dropped on Afghanistan. One wonders whether even the chief executive mouth-piece of the superpower nation who famously uttered these scripted words in the US Congress like a puppet on a string, and which were duly televised live to the shocked world, fully understood it himself:
We have seen their kind before. They are the heirs of all the murderous ideologies of the twentieth century. By sacrificing human life to serve their radical visions, by abandoning every value except the will to power, they follow in the path of fascism, nazism, and totalitarianism. And they will follow that path all the way to where it ends. In history's unmarked grave of discarded lies. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.” [7]
We have of course seen the actual results of that pious ultimatum and who abandoned, and continues to abandon, “every value except the will to power” by their massive military invasions under false pretenses, DU bombings of civilians in defenseless nations, and police-state at home.
A shortlist of examples of significant Newspeak by the superior intellect which has altered our world is given in Footnotes [a] through [h] below. These examples empirically illustrate the vast distance between pious language and the actual reality of their diabolical subversion or their intended meaning by the superman. The pious verbiage mainly serve the interest of perception management of hoi polloi so that the “history's actors” can carry on accomplishing their Übermensch agendas without interference from the public, often willingly acquiring the public's consent under the right set of “doctrinal motivation, intellectual commitment, and patriotic gratification” (Brzezinski) continually fed them by intellectual experts. The Übermensch create their own hard reality as “history's actors” while the rest of the world is caught up in their pious platitudes and propaganda warfare. And, after the inevitable fait accompli, is merely left to study it ex post facto, when the deeds are already cast in stone:
'“We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”' [8]
Morality is only Newspeak for public consumption to buy time and to induce compliance when the Übermensch is the history's actor. The dystopias of the twentieth-century fables have quite escaped from the library into the reality created by these history's actors. Newspeak is now so ubiquitous that we are even unconscious of its presence, like the air we breathe, but it cradles our thoughts, feelings, actions as well as inactions. It is the gift to mankind of will to power.
It would of course be a travesty of thought to end this missive without giving the punch-line that was printed on the T-Shirt noted above. I wish I had bought one – at the time it was only humorous. It read:
Nietzsche is Dead --- God!
I can hear someone laughing...
Because I can actually feel that laugh down my spine without any physical sound waves impinging upon my eardrums from across the ethernet, it shows me that, inter alia: Morality likewise is naturally felt, not naturally thought.
Morality originates from the heart where feelings reside, not the mind – Plato's virtuous philosopher-king notwithstanding. Such abstract intellectualism, including his Shapes, appear to reside in the vast immanent-space of the philosopher's mind alone since they can find no empirical verification in the far more constrained existential reality-space. The only morality that the intellect is empirically shown to beget from time immemorial, is the Nietzschean-Hegelian variety explored above, of might has rights! It is also known as the divinely ordained law of the jungle to some. To others, it constitutes the categorical imperatives of primacy for the superior intellect, superior power, superior race, superior civilization, which are always cast as exceptional, beyond good and evil, as uber alles, above all others. To still others, it is simply the amoral precision of “military-style objectivity” to achieve any agenda, public or covert, national or international. The actual mindset behind “military-style objectivity” in the pursuit of policy planning or achieving political agendas without being hampered by any conventional moral calculus or preconceived value judgments, is most straightforwardly dignified in the 1967 book “Report from Iron Mountain”. [9]
It is that Übermensch mindset which came to underwrite the Truman Doctrine, the policy of engaging the newly created USSR in a Cold War. The key Policy Planning Study, PPS No. 23, February 28, 1948, Top Secret until Declassified June 17, 1974, written by George F. Kennan as Head of the US State Department Policy Planning Staff, straightforwardly articulated that mindset lest some of its implementers started believing their own propaganda of high-minded “altruism and world-benefaction” devised for engineering the public's consent for the Cold War:
We have about 50% of the world's wealth, but only 6.3% of its population .... In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security. To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming, and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world-benefaction .... We should cease to talk about vague and – for the Far East – unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of living standards, and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.”
When morality is not based on the subjective intellect which, when left to its own devices, by its very nature, inevitably pursues objectives with the amoral precision of “military-style objectivity”, but on actual moral standards of which the world's wisdom traditions and holy scriptures have spoken of, we get something entirely different. We get an objective absolute. For instance, let's just take the oldest well-known morality of the Western tradition itself. The Old Testament's Mosaic law. It lays down the first principle of morality called the Golden Rule. It is golden because from it all else follow:
“Do unto others as you have others do unto you”
No superman would like that prescription of morality as the principal basis for devising laws, human rights, foreign policies, and settling disputes among men and nations. For it predicates absolute fairness, that no one shall take undue advantage of another. The superior intellect of the Übermensch simply cannot accept that hoi polloi and they are equal. Nature is not a relationship of equals. And man is a product of nature like all of existence. Since man is not seen to have a spiritual essence, and he is deemed to be made only of material substance, therefore the laws of nature equally apply to it as to space-time. Heart-felt and spiritual sentiments are deemed mere superstitions, or human weaknesses, and better made subservient to the power of reason and the intellect.
Ergo, the law of the jungle where only unequals live, is inevitable. The superman spearheading the path to further evolution through social Darwinian primacy, its only rational outcome. What is frightening to realize here is that there can be no other logical outcome when the heart is made subservient to the intellect. Social Darwinianism and Secular Humanism are conjoined twins from birth. They cannot be separated by the same yardstick of reason which gave birth to these constructs. Thus that logical outcome has to be cunningly disguised from its victims. Thus Newspeak is invented.
Whereas, interestingly, as in all lovers' happy or tragic tales also since time immemorial, the Heart also is where the Almighty resides! Read both the Qur'an and the Bible and one sees references to the heart as the container for morality, for spiritual eyes, for cleanliness of the heart begetting the cleanliness of the soul, for cognitively incomprehensible admonitions of none shall approach the truth unless they approach it with a cleansed heart, for there being a seal put on the heart of those who are heedless and who are the purveyors of falsehoods, who bring misery upon mankind by their 'uber' clever planning, etceteras. I have yet to recall knowing anyone who fell in love through their mind as opposed to through their heart. Or even recall reading any literature, sacred or divine, and I am an indefatigable reader, that alluded to the mind for matters of love, faith, courage, self-sacrifice, and yes, the notorious jihad – jihad-un-nafs – the primordial inner struggle of the soul to overcome the “banality of evil” only upon the conquest of which, the sword of resistance is automagically both found and comes unsheathed! And when I used to read comparative religions, I recall also the case of appeal to the heart being true of Hindu scriptures as well as others.
The twentieth century poet-philosopher of Muslims from the Indian subcontinent, “Sir” Allama Iqbal, [10] surely only endeavored to free man from the shackles of intellectual servitude when he too deemed the heart enslaved by the mind unworthy:
صبح ازل یہ مجھ سے کہا جبرئیل نے
جو عقل کا غلام ہو ، وہ دل نہ کر قبول
'Subh-e-Azal yeh Mujh Se Kaha Jibraeel Ne
Jo Aqal Ka Ghulam Ho Woh Dil Na Ker Qabool'
Gabriel on the Morning of Creation a piece of useful counsel gave:
Accept not the heart from a beloved whose mind enslaves it”
-- Allama Iqbal, Zarbe-e-Kaleem, [11]
(Sir) Rabindranath Tagore who, unlike his separatist compatriot “Sir” Allama Iqbal, expressing his heart-felt moral outrage at the 1919 Jallianwala Bagh massacre by the British troops returned his own title to the Crown, put the limitations of one sided use of the intellect thusly:
A mind all logic is like a knife all blade. It makes the hand bleed that uses it.”
In conclusion, “Cogito Ergo Sum” might have taken a tiny lesson from Zen were it not so imbued in its own arrogance of the intellect and so blinded by its own brilliance to actually have missed the commonsense. Watch Zen Master Bruce Lee so simply teach it here:
Bruce Lee teaching the Tao of Reflection, the Zen of Martial Arts, to a younger apprentice in the movie Enter the Dragon.
Caption Quote Bruce Lee: “We need emotional content. Don't think, feeeel; it is like a finger pointing away to the moon. Don't concentrate on the finger or you will miss all that heavenly glory”!
It should now be patently obvious to anyone that an intellect voluntarily serving under the command of morality can be the only possible solution for equitable and peaceable “Cogito Ergo Sum” for all mankind, rather than for the 'uber' few when it's put the other way around.
I will humbly further suggest that the clincher empirical proof that morality and intellect are separate entities, that morality is primarily rooted in feelings rather than in the intellect, is that had ordinary people simply retained even an iota of humanity in them, even a tiny feeling of empathy for the suffering of fellow man, for their own natural tribe of mankind, then, instead of intellectually watching the decimation of their own kith and kin all unfold on television looking from the side, [12] at best going tsk tsk, and at worst cheering, [13] we would have collectively marched in formation and forcibly neutered all the hectoring hegemons now so boldly munching on their victims no differently than the lowly wildebeest and buffaloes do against the hectoring hegemons of their jungle!
And no scientist in the universe can argue with a straight face that the poor buffaloes who feel the pain so immensely for their own humble kith and kin as depicted in the video below, are a very cognitive species – a fact also brazenly recognized by our own hectoring hegemons which is perhaps why they work so assiduously on desensitizing our feelings of empathy for our fellowman, including for our own selves, by continually bringing us all the manufactured Hollywood violence and other baser entertainment:
Battle At Kruger
Caption Battle at Kruger Park --- taking on the hectoring hegemons of their jungle in defense of their own species, a natural behavior that has evidently been culled from the human species.

Footnotes

[2] See THUS SPAKE ZARATHUSTRA – A BOOK FOR ALL AND NONE By Friedrich Nietzsche, http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1998/1998-h/1998-h.htm
[6] Transcription from a video of Talmudic reading by a Rabbi, The Coronation of Hashem: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2010/10/on-jews-becoming-masters-ofthe-world.html#masters-of-the-world
[7] Transcribed from president Bush's televised speech. Full speech transcript: http://www.npr.org/news/specials/americatransformed/reaction/010920.bushspeech.html
[8] President Bush's senior White House advisor quoted by Ron Suskind, New York Times, Oct. 17, 2004, http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/magazine/17BUSH.html
[10] “Sir” Allama Iqbal Introduced the antithesis of the superman as the Islamic “marde-momin”, see Sacred Cow: Allama Iqbal - marde-momin or superman?, http://faith-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2012/12/allama-iqbal-marde-momin-or-superman.html ( http://tinyurl.com/Allama-Iqbal-ubermensch )
[11] English translation and verse from Kalam-e-iqbal by Rahat Fateh Ali, Sanam Marvi (Virsa heritage revived)- Sultan Tipu ki wasiyat, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsuXQSJci6o
[12] John Pilger, 18 January 2007, Looking to the side, from Belsen to Gaza http://johnpilger.com/articles/looking-to-the-side-from-belsen-to-gaza
[a] An example of cunning wordsmithing in superman scholarship is the Balfour Declaration which gave real political rights to the Jews while giving some abstract civil and religious rights to the Palestinians. The actual result is quite visible today. The underlying legalism which led to it is visible in the deconstruction of its diabolical wordsmithing in: The Illusion of Power and the Calculus of Palestinian Dispossession, http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2011/07/response-to-alan-hart-by-zahir-ebrahim.html
[b] The clever wordsmithing of the EU Constitution which has cunningly caveated the loftily worded public Rights to limit them in practice by law, or by executive order, under the rubric of national security and expediency, much like the United States Constitution and its Bill of Rights have been trumped by the Patriot Acts for instance, is examined in an analysis that I once found on the web but don't have a citation for it at this time. Virtually every public Right in the EU Constitution has the caveat that it can be “lawfully” restricted! When the king makes the laws, whatever the king decides is the law. The same with the Parliament which often enact and implement laws handed them by forces unseen by the public mind. The National Security State and those controlling it are one such unseen force.
[c] The clever wordsmithing of the American Constitution which has cunningly subverted it in actual practice is examined in Cracks in the Constitution by Ferdinand Lundberg, http://amazon.com/Cracks-Constitution-Ferdinand-Lundberg/dp/0818402792
[d] The reality of “Democracy” as it actually played out while being layered upon that brilliantly worded US Constitution was also briefly analyzed by Carroll Quigley in THE MYTHOLOGY OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY, a presentation to the Industrial College of the Armed Forces on August 17, 1972, http://www.carrollquigley.net/lectures.htm
[e] See more reality of “Democracy” in Unequal Protection: The Rise of Corporate Domination and the Theft of Human Rights By Thom Hartmann, Rodale Inc., 2002.
[f] See more reality of “Democracy” in The United States Isn't a Country — It's a Corporation! By Lisa Guliani, February 2004, at http://wariscrime.com/new/the-usa-isnt-a-country-its-a-corporation/ published Jan 15, 2009. Project Humanbeingsfirst's comment for this article extending it with additional material is archived at: https://web.archive.org/web/20140629082126/http://humanbeingsfirst.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/cacheof-wariscrime-the-usa-isnt-a-country-its-a-corporation-jan152009.pdf
[g] Even the United Kingdom is not a country. It is also a Corporation, controlled by another supra-national private Corporation, the real financial capital of the world, the City of London, or just “the City” for short. It is what H. G. Wells was referring to in his rallying call in his 1940 book New World Order: “And if we, the virtuous democracies, are not fighting for these common human rights, then what in the name of the nobility and gentry, the Crown and the Established Church, the City, The Times and the Army and Navy Club, are we common British peoples fighting for?”
[h] See the meticulous research unveiled by John Harris of the UK also being a Corporation, in the Lawful Rebellion Conference, January 24, 2009, titled: It's an illusion, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmmt0uonXzo .


First Published December 09, 2009 | Extended Monday, March 30, 2015 for inclusion in the 2015 Second Edition of Hijacking Holy Qur'an And Islam.





3

Is Islam the Problem for which Secular Humanism is pitched as the Solution or Is Primacy the Problem for which Islam is the only Solution?

Islam and Knowledge vs. Socialization

I sometimes like to tee off my writings on the human condition from the opinions I hear being expressed among the common man, in the grapevine, or in the news media. The quoted perspective below is from an unknown website written by an anonymous person. It expresses the seeds of a crucially pertinent topic to the human condition which is examined in considerable depth in this article.
'On occasions, I feel Muslims ‘lose’ something when it comes to religion. I am speaking about the second last prophet Jesus or Isa (E-sa) peace be upon him. ... My general opinion of Muslims is that they tend to take on a facile view of Christianity ... I get the feeling that this may be because: If an increase in discussions by Muslims of Jesus (pbuh) were to take place, it would be perceived as “being Christian”.' ---- article [1]
The interesting perspective embodied in that quote which inspired me to address this issue, is along the lines which reduce to the following empiricism: Human beings in general don't tend to appreciate what is not part of one's own socialization. Furthermore, with suitable inculcation, this lack of appreciation can span the gamut of behavior from remaining largely indifferent to being outright antagonistic to what's not perceived as one's own. The limit of that of course being intense doctrinal hatred and warfare.
This is pretty much a universal trait. An observable universal truism if there is one. And just as applicable to one as to another.
Upon this truism is the manipulative jingoism of antiquity to modernity constructed. We see this from tribalism to ethnocentrism, sectarianism to religionism, racism to culturalism, and nationalism to patriotism.
It is even the basis of the following formulation in Zbigniew Brzezinski's The Grand Chessboard – American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives:
More generally, cultural change in America may also be uncongenial to the sustained exercise abroad of genuinely imperial power. That exercise requires a high degree of doctrinal motivation, intellectual commitment, and patriotic gratification.” The Grand Chessboard – American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives, pgs. 211-212
I mention that not to needlessly digress, but only to point out the universality of the principle that the seeding theme being responded to and developed, has outlined just one instance of.
It is one thing for an outsider to not appreciate what's not theirs, or be only superficially familiar with it based on vicarious sources, as in my internet-confrere Peter Meyer's musings on the template of Bertrand Russell's uber finger to the Church: Why I am not a Christian, in: Why I am not a Muslim. Surely, Peter may be forgiven his absurd understanding of Islam – since he is evidently on a life-long journey of truth-discovery if his website is any evidence, and like Kim, is still searching for his own River of the Arrow – when he makes the following facile observations of what is not part of his own heritage:
As a young man, since I was a seeker after spiritual truth, I read much about religion and the various religions, including Islam, and thus I discovered Sufism (or at least, that there was a spiritual tradition of that name). I read about the Sufi quest for union with the divine, which appealed to me (and which is considered heretical by orthodox Muslims).
I also discovered the beauty of Islamic art. The geometrical designs found in Islamic art and architecture are a wonder, and some grand mosques (especially when illuminated at night) are beautiful to see. However, as noted previously, the beauty of the art (and architecture) of a religion is not evidence of the truth of its doctrines.
When one examines how Muslims live and act there are are good and bad features. The good is that there is a strict code of ethics, according to which good Muslims are honest, reliable, fair, generous and considerate of others; they do not lie, cheat or steal. Fine. I wish everyone was like that.
On the other hand, Muslims act this way (if they do) because they are are following a strict code of conduct (not just a code of ethics) which tells them how to act in all situations. There is not just a Muslim way to pray (which, in the case of the Sunnis, is the same in all mosques from Casablanca to Jakarta) there is also a Muslim way to do anything (including defecating). This code of conduct, which regulates the behavior of a strict Muslim in every way (Islam is thus a totalitarian religion), is modeled on the life of the Prophet Muhammad and subsequent Muslim religious leaders. If Muhammad did something in a certain way then that must be the right way to do it and as a good Muslim one must do it that way. Thus in Muslim societies cats are looked upon with favor but dogs are not (consequently cats far outnumber dogs) because Muhammad supposedly liked cats but disliked dogs.”
Then he makes some perceptive observations of the state of the Muslims:
"Islam" means "submission", more exactly, submission to the will of God (Allah), and a "Muslim" is "one who submits". One who submits has thus given control of his life over to something else, in this case, to the decrees of the mullahs who interpret the Koran and to the social customs characteristic of Islamic societies. A Muslim is thus not a free person. It is thus hard to see how anyone who values their freedom could remain a Muslim, still less convert to that religion.
Muslims are fatalists, since they believe that everything happens according to the will of God, and nothing happens unless God wills it (Inshallah). This is a prescription for the abrogation of personal responsibility. Strictly speaking, one cannot be held responsible for one's actions if everything happens because Allah wills it to be so. (Of course, this does not prevent thieves being punished under sharia law by having their right hand cut off — actually quite a deterrent to potential thieves.) And if something doesn't go according to plan, well, it's the will of Allah. Maybe tomorrow, Inshallah.
Islam is a grim religion. Of the five religions considered here, Islam is the most intolerant and the most puritanical. (A puritan is someone who worries constantly that someone, somewhere, may be having a good time.) In January 2010 Malaysia's "Islamic morality police" arrested dozens of Muslims for the crime of "khalwat", or "close proximity", under a sharia law that prohibits Muslims from being alone with a member of the opposite sex before marriage.”
Then he comically concludes with (I could only laugh until tears poured out):
There is simply no evidence of the existence of Allah beyond the assertions of Muhammad and the claims of all those since him who have believed what he said. It is said that Muhammad received revelations, claimed to be from Allah. These were spoken to Muhammad by an entity named "Gabriel" and subsequently codified in the form of the Koran. (Actually, on his first appearance, Gabriel showed Muhummad a book, and asked him to read. But apparently Gabriel or Allah was not aware, or had forgotten, that the future Prophet was illiterate. So Muhammad had to memorize what Gabriel said to him.) But if all who hear voices were to found religions then we would have more religions than we could count.”
Nothing need be said for that convoluted conclusion. To each their own. Perhaps Peter might change his mind if he reads this. One thing in Peter's favor is that he is a genuine seeker and that is his genuine opinion. He is not shilling for a master. Peter Meyer is quite open about his biases and his preferences as a life-long social justice activist. Having interacted with Peter for years, and having read and talked with him about his experiments with Ayahuasca and at Esalen Institute, that is my sense. I learn interesting things from him, like I do from almost everyone else interesting I encounter on planet internet. It would be rather boring to constantly run into oneself.
Peter Meyer is a template of the harmless outsider looking at the “other” in search of “truth” and we shall say goodbye to him (unless he publishes a propaganda book based on his crippled epistemology). In contrast, we have an insider turned “native informant” also claiming to be in search of “truth”, Dr. Khalid Sohail, formerly of Pakistan, now living in Canada and practicing the healing arts, as well as his poetry, upon mental pains in psychologically dysfunctional patients as a “Creative Psychotherapist”. Very laudable indeed. In my many conversations with him until he broke it off, I learnt to admire his genuine concern for his patients. His Green Zone therapy is a good model. However, Dr. Sohail's book with a great catchy title betrays everything about him in one short heading: From Islam to Secular Humanism. I tried my best to engage him on the subject. His entire suite of writings in that domain to me reeks of Uncle Tom, a House Nigger echoing what is popular with the massa. But I am sure he believes in it, in which case his silence betrays him. I kept calling him out on his omissions and his absurd emphasis on ignoring the shitting-trumpeting elephant in the bedroom, until he stopped writing to me and replying to my emails. Oh well.
If I ignore this aspect of his disingenuous psyche and his penchant for pseudo philosophy whereby he cannot hold a logical conversation in counterpoint with anyone who isn't exactly an imbecile, and quickly runs away preferring to preach to the choir instead, I actually find his work in psychotherapy most endearing. Many a time I had offered to put myself on his couch! And he had also invited me to have a meal with him if I visited Canada. Until he stopped speaking to me that is. I imagine the invite is long canceled. I am still happy to get on his therapist couch (or chair) though! And I hope that despite everything, he would become open to a scrutinizing examination of his inimical views on Islam and his lopsided views on current affairs to check their validity in the light of factual analysis by one who is not among his choir, but is fair and not prejudiced against those who don't think like him. How boring would that be, to only talk to people we agreed with, or to rows of cabbages; pretty soon we'd be reduced to quoting ourselves!
Dr. Khalid Sohail is the unfortunate template of the useful idiot House Nigger who shills for the massa and his core axioms; who carries the white man's burden with greater zeal than the white man; is more white than the white man; and deprecates what was once his own like any good Native Informant who is celebrated in his new group as their new insider for his adverse “expert” opinion of the other to which he once belonged. (Late) Dr. Professor Fouad Ajami of Johns Hopkins immediately springs to mind as the Olympic gold winner in this endeavor (see Dream Palace of the Arabs: A Generation's Odyssey; and The Native Informant: Fouad Ajami is the Pentagon's favorite Arab, By Adam Shatz April 10, 2003). Paraded daily in the American mainstream newsmedia as the Pentagon's favorite Arab expert on the Middle East in the aftermath of 9/11 and harnessed for furthering the doctrinal motivation for America's invasion of Iraq in 2003, house niggers may look at themselves in the despicable mirror of this Arab World's Negro who was staged into willingly becoming the prized useful idiot native informant for the massa, to help their own selves recognize their own roles.
Holding mirror to the blind is of course never productive. That's okay for we must all sleep in the bed we make. Except that in this case, Secular Humanism is the bane of civilization. It is a bed that all of us shall be compelled to sleep in by the fiat of law and the force of cultural persuasion. It is a cancer that must be unceremoniously exorcised before it metastizes any further into our societies.
For the wannabe social philosopher Dr. Khalid Sohail to not see that Secular Humanism cunningly underwrites Primacy and Social Darwinianism by removing all Divine standards of morality (see Morality derived from the Intellect leads to Enslavement!, Atheism and Social Justice a Non Sequitur, Axioms of Secular Humanism and Why It Must Lead to Primacy By Definition), is him only being disingenuous as the house nigger, nothing more. It is my observation that the good doctor enjoys being the tool of empire – for all the accolades and worldwide visibility he gets with it. Too bad princess Malala trumped him on the Nobel peace prize racket as the worthy victim of the baddies --- there is still open opportunity though, as Dr. Khalid Sohail's template is of that same ilk. There is a long line of these useful idiots in the waiting for their earthly reward for their great show of selective humanitarianism in the service of empire (see How to win the Nobel Peace Prize).
We shall say goodbye to the kindly faced Dr. Khalid Sohail as well, for we don't much care for the secular humanist's kind of compassionate concern for humanity that is templated on being Summun Bukmun Umyun on the highest order bit of the matter, Primacy of Empire. Even if the River of the Arrow (in Rudyard Kipling's Kim) runs in front of them, this type who proclaim to be after their own “truth” will quickly turn away pretending it isn't there. Sad. For, as a psychotherapist, I'd love to be on Dr. Khalid Sohail's creative couch – who doesn't need a therapist in these times! It is indeed rare to find a free-thinker among Muslims. But strangely, these supposed avant-garde in intellectual thought tend to run from me the moment they find out I am not in their incestuous choir. Am I so bad, Sohail? Six feet under, we meet the maggots regardless of what we believed, whom we shilled for, and what “truths” we told or held dear. Talk to me! Journey with me... we are on the same damn train of life with the same destination. Come by my cabin. I tried yours but you wouldn't open the door.
Before moving on to examine facile worldviews in more depth and to the self-realization of its divorcement from reality when one acquires some ma'arifat of the subject, a meaningful distinction between the useful idiot “native informant” vs. the “reformer” or “truth teller” seeking “social justice”, must be clearly drawn such that none are confused as to why is the template of Peter Meyer only a “harmless” activist when he has such inimical views on Islam, i.e., his caricature of Islam epitomizes facile, and why is the template of Dr. Khalid Sohail a pernicious “native informant” behind the transparent facade of selective “humanitarian” and “reformer” when he so boldly announces his inordinate love affair with the suffering humanity?
These are two different and distinct behavioral templates: one a brave soldier for truth (as he or she sees it, but may differ with you), and the other a Trojan horse, a house nigger propagandist shilling for the massa, often even unaware that he has become the massa's representative to his own people. The latter template does not see the monumental crimes of the massa. It only finds fault with his or her own brethren, the field niggers, for their malaise, subjugation, corruption, vice, and social-intellectual-moral backwardness. Whereas, the former template calls it as he or she sees it even under the threat of hemlock, minus any crippled epistemology. I.e., he or she may be genuinely mistaken, but does not suffer from the psychosis of inferiority or superiority complex, nor caters to the narratives of power, nor regurgitates its axioms and presuppositions. Peter Meyer does not give a blank check, or any check, to the white man's burden, to its noble lies, to its primacy imperatives. A visit to Peter Meyer's website serendipity.li makes that readily apparent. The latter template pretends the white man's burden does not exist while often participating in some aspects of it. Dr. Khalid Sohail's intellectual template has been amply and accurately deconstructed in the FAQ: What is an Intellectual Negro?. A visit to Dr. Khalid Sohail's website drsohail.com and even a cursory glance at his “creations”, “his love letters to humanity”, as he calls his overly-simplistic writings, prima facie validates that ignoble characterization of his pious labors that appear to aid and abet only the massa's primacy and its imperatives.
In our modernity with the phenomenal rise in supremacy of Western civilization and its norms that is rapidly replacing indigenous values and norms worldwide, the Muslim body-politic has become mortally infected by the house nigger virus. There appears to be no easy cure for this malady. A revealing diagnosis of this infection was made in the 1960s book “Occidentosis: A Plague From the West” by the iconoclast Iranian littérateur, Jalal Al-i Ahmad, who called it Gharbzadagi in Persian, or Westoxification in English. “The Art and Science of Co-option” appears to actively protect its dispersion and survival in one form or another spanning the gamut of persuasion from Left to Right. Its only benign cure is to induce metanoia (a gestalt shift in thinking, a reorientation of perspective leading to an internal transformation, a change of heart). The other methods to rid society of this plague are not easily contemplatable, but Dickens' fictional character from his rendition of the French Revolution, Madame Defarge, with her knitting needles keeps jumping to mind. All civilization and all social order is cataclysmically altered in the wake of such mass turbulence. It throws the baby out with the bath water. In our Machiavellian modernity, such cataclysms are manufactured synthetically using Hegelian Dialectic: fashioning opposites and getting them to battle it out wherein all participants are made sacrificial useful idiots to destroy what is existent and entrenched, in order to raise the phoenix from its ashes. To takeout Divine religions, secularism is the Hegelian Dialectic. The outcome sought is World Order in which the public mind is obedient to the superstate, its norms, values and styles standardized, and the global society organized in some form of scientific caste hierarchy. Just look around us and one sees its fingerprints everywhere. China's CCP state control of the public mind and behavior is its closest experimental template today of a Godless capitalist state's full spectrum control of public and private life where the state has replaced god, and the people willingly consent to its supremacy.





The Face of Religion of Islam in the Holy Qur'an

Recognizing this innate psychological trait of mankind of having natural affinity with one's own kind when one is not laboring under any inferiority complex, (one presumes) is why the author of the Qur'an, which Muslims of course believe is the Creator (while other's believe was a lunatic), makes an extraordinary pronouncement on this very topic in Surah Al-Maeda – behold the unmatched principle of Pluralism and Multi-culturalism that is integral to the Holy Qur'an – and they dare to burn this Book(!), dare to revile and caricaturize this template for exemplary behavior among mankind (!):
It was We who revealed the Torah (to Moses); therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the Prophet who bowed (as in Islam) to Allah’s will, by the Rabbis and the Doctors of Law: for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah’s Book, and they were witnesses thereto: therefore fear not men, but fear Me, and sell not My Signs for a miserable price. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) Unbelievers. (5:44)
إِنَّا أَنْزَلْنَا التَّوْرَاةَ فِيهَا هُدًى وَنُورٌ ۚ يَحْكُمُ بِهَا النَّبِيُّونَ الَّذِينَ أَسْلَمُوا لِلَّذِينَ هَادُوا وَالرَّبَّانِيُّونَ وَالْأَحْبَارُ بِمَا اسْتُحْفِظُوا مِنْ كِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَكَانُوا عَلَيْهِ شُهَدَاءَ ۚ فَلَا تَخْشَوُا النَّاسَ وَاخْشَوْنِ وَلَا تَشْتَرُوا بِآيَاتِي ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا ۚ وَمَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ
We ordained therein for them: “Life for life, eye for eye, nose for nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal.” But if anyone remits the retaliation by way of charity, it is an act of atonement for himself. And if any fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) wrong-doers. (5:45)
وَكَتَبْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ فِيهَا أَنَّ النَّفْسَ بِالنَّفْسِ وَالْعَيْنَ بِالْعَيْنِ وَالْأَنْفَ بِالْأَنْفِ وَالْأُذُنَ بِالْأُذُنِ وَالسِّنَّ بِالسِّنِّ وَالْجُرُوحَ قِصَاصٌ ۚ فَمَنْ تَصَدَّقَ بِهِ فَهُوَ كَفَّارَةٌ لَهُ ۚ وَمَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ
And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah. (5:46)
وَقَفَّيْنَا عَلَىٰ آثَارِهِمْ بِعِيسَى ابْنِ مَرْيَمَ مُصَدِّقًا لِمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ ۖ وَآتَيْنَاهُ الْإِنْجِيلَ فِيهِ هُدًى وَنُورٌ وَمُصَدِّقًا لِمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ وَهُدًى وَمَوْعِظَةً لِلْمُتَّقِينَ
Let the people of the Gospel Judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel. (5:47)
وَلْيَحْكُمْ أَهْلُ الْإِنْجِيلِ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فِيهِ ۚ وَمَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ
To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety; so judge between them by what Allah hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the Truth that hath come to thee.
To each among you have We prescribed a Law and an Open Way.
If Allah had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues.
The goal of you all is to Allah; it is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute. (5:48) Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Maeda 5:44-48
وَأَنْزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ بِالْحَقِّ مُصَدِّقًا لِمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ الْكِتَابِ وَمُهَيْمِنًا عَلَيْهِ ۖ فَاحْكُمْ بَيْنَهُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ ۖ وَلَا تَتَّبِعْ أَهْوَاءَهُمْ عَمَّا جَاءَكَ مِنَ الْحَقِّ ۚ لِكُلٍّ جَعَلْنَا مِنْكُمْ شِرْعَةً وَمِنْهَاجًا ۚ وَلَوْ شَاءَ اللَّهُ لَجَعَلَكُمْ أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً وَلَٰكِنْ لِيَبْلُوَكُمْ فِي مَا آتَاكُمْ ۖ فَاسْتَبِقُوا الْخَيْرَاتِ ۚ إِلَى اللَّهِ مَرْجِعُكُمْ جَمِيعًا فَيُنَبِّئُكُمْ بِمَا كُنْتُمْ فِيهِ تَخْتَلِفُونَ
Caption Holy Qur'an Surah Al-Maeda verses 5:44-48 on Islam's fundamental acceptance of plurality of beliefs, and its enjoining mankind to strive for good alone as in a race in all virtues, while staying within their own socialized belief systems. Observe that there is no “saving” by conversion in Islam as in the religion of the Christian; and there is also no everlasting certificate of virtue as “god's chosen people” as in the religion of the Jew; and nor any class hierarchy by birth as in the “karma” infused religion of rebirth of the Hindu. Mankind in Islam is judged by his and her acts alone, of both commission and omission, as per the Qur'anic Accountability Equation: Output / Input. How much more egalitarian, and explicit, can Islam's singular scripture, the Holy Qur'an, be? And yet, the incessant propaganda barrage against Islam and its noble Messenger, as in the FBI training presentation graph (see The face of Jews' Islam “violent Islam” below), as in “International Burn a Quran Day” (see Christian pastor Terry Jones below), continually succeeds among the “information-age” soaked Western minds – just as indifference, apathy, and fatalism of “god is running the world”, continually succeeds among the religion-soaked Muslim minds. Facile? Or, the veritable success of perception management by The Mighty Wurlitzer ( http://tinyurl.com/mightywurlitzer )?
And to ensure that the point is not lost here, permit me to highlight the solution-space outlined in the above passage by none other than the presumed Almighty Creator of mankind: “To each among you have We prescribed a Law and an Open Way. If Allah had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to Allah; it is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute.”
The Author of the Qur'an is in fact most emphatic about “matters in which ye dispute”:
And in whatever thing you differ, its decision is unto God. Holy Qur’an, Surah Ash-Shura 42:10
وَمَا ٱخۡتَلَفۡتُمۡ فِيهِ مِن شَىۡءٍ۬ فَحُكۡمُهُ ۥۤ إِلَى ٱللَّهِ‌ۚ
If one were to judiciously extract the core first-principle from that straightforward and explicit multicultural pronouncement, while also observing that:
    • the Author of the Holy Qur'an affirms that It did not deny Its Message or Its Messengers to any among mankind (even though only a very few are explicitly mentioned in the Holy Qur'an such as in Surah Al-Maeda 5:44-48 above):
And verily We have raised in every nation a messenger, (proclaiming): Serve Allah and shun false gods. Holy Qur’an, Surah An-Nahl 16:36 ;
وَلَقَدْ بَعَثْنَا فِي كُلِّ أُمَّةٍ رَسُولًا أَنِ اعْبُدُوا اللَّهَ وَاجْتَنِبُوا الطَّاغُوتَ
And for every nation there is a messenger. And when their messenger cometh (on the Day of Judgment) it will be judged between them fairly, and they will not be wronged. Holy Qur’an, Surah Yunus 10:47 ;
وَلِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ رَسُولٌ ۖ فَإِذَا جَاءَ رَسُولُهُمْ قُضِيَ بَيْنَهُمْ بِالْقِسْطِ وَهُمْ لَا يُظْلَمُونَ
Surely We have sent you with the Truth as a bearer of good news and a warner; and there is not a people but a warner has gone among them. Holy Qur’an, Surah Faatir 35:24 ;
إِنَّا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ بِالْحَقِّ بَشِيرًا وَنَذِيرًا ۚ وَإِنْ مِنْ أُمَّةٍ إِلَّا خَلَا فِيهَا نَذِيرٌ
    • and that furthermore, the Author of the Holy Qur'an even requires anyone who accepts Its teachings to also accept all Its past Revelations to all peoples as an article of faith:
And who believe in that which has been revealed to you and that which was revealed before you and they are sure of the hereafter. Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Baqara 2:4 ;
وَالَّذِينَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكَ وَمَا أُنْزِلَ مِنْ قَبْلِكَ وَبِالْآخِرَةِ هُمْ يُوقِنُونَ
one would discover a most progressive and natural principle of freedom of choice that is universally applicable to all of mankind, to peoples of all beliefs, and to peoples of no belief:
    • [to] mind one's own business for what one does not feel is one's own, as in the case of what's outside one's own sphere of socialization; and
    • [to] compete with each other in virtuous conduct as in a race in all virtues ( فَاسْتَبِقُوا الْخَيْرَاتِ Surah Al-Maeda 5:48) rather than theological upmanship of whose understanding of religion is the greatest!
In my humble view, this is simply outstanding, nay, mind-blowingly progressive and liberal advocacy of mutual tolerance to a fractious mankind that is psychologically prone to tribalism, ethnocentrism, the modern version of it being nationalism – all by the natural artifact of birth and socialization into a tribe, religion, and nation!
By the admission of the Author of the above verses, it is by design that the Creator made mankind into separate peoples, tribes and nations, and gave each of them their own localized affiliations and emotional attachments: “If Allah had so willed, He would have made you a single people” ( أُمَّةً۬ وَٲحِدَةً۬ Surah Al-Maeda 5:48). The Author proclaims that it is He Who deliberately Fashioned man in due proportion in the best of form:
We have indeed created man in the best of moulds, (Surah Al-T'in, 95:4)
لَقَدْ خَلَقْنَا الْإِنْسَانَ فِي أَحْسَنِ تَقْوِيمٍ
He Who has made everything which He has created most good: He began the creation of man with (nothing more than) clay, (32:07)
ٱلَّذِىٓ أَحْسَنَ كُلَّ شَىْءٍ خَلَقَهُۥ ۖ وَبَدَأَ خَلْقَ ٱلْإِنسَٰنِ مِن طِينٍ
And made his progeny from a quintessence of the nature of a fluid despised: (32:08)
ثُمَّ جَعَلَ نَسْلَهُۥ مِن سُلَٰلَةٍ مِّن مَّآءٍ مَّهِينٍ
But He fashioned him in due proportion, and breathed into him something of His spirit. And He gave you (the faculties of) hearing and sight and feeling (and understanding): little thanks do ye give! (Surah As-Sajdah 32:09)
ثُمَّ سَوَّىٰهُ وَنَفَخَ فِيهِ مِن رُّوحِهِۦ ۖ وَجَعَلَ لَكُمُ ٱلسَّمْعَ وَٱلْأَبْصَٰرَ وَٱلْأَفْـِٔدَةَ ۚ قَلِيلًا مَّا تَشْكُرُونَ
Caption Surah As-Sajdah verses 32:7-9 declaring that the Author of the Holy Qur'an fashioned man in due proportion (and not as a random event), Surah Al-T'in 95:4 declaring man is created in the best of form.
Therefore, when “He fashioned him in due proportion in the best of moulds, and breathed into him something of His spirit. And He gave you (the faculties of) hearing and sight and feeling (and understanding)”, He surely must also Know the psychological bent of every human mind, borne of its natural socialization and cultural programming due to being born in a specific nation and specific tribe. The Author therefore also Knows the “fitrat”, i.e., nature, of every man and woman. Specifically, what he and she is most susceptible to. Only because of this empirical fact of natural socialization by birth that the Author of the Holy Qur'an strongly Countenances the pursuit of: فَاسْتَبِقُوا الْخَيْرَاتِ , instead of theological upmanship, clearly predicating that the human mind which He Fashioned in due proportion, and which He Knows well, in its most natural state will face grave difficulty overcoming its socialized programming without expending considerable striving!
Of course, when own looks at evolutionary biology and social psychology, that is also the natural outcome of how mankind has developed from many different tribes and nations across the earth.
And the Author of the Holy Qur'an provides guidance du jour taking empiricism of mankind's present and future condition into account, while also inexplicably asserting that in the past, mankind was but one people (arguably suggesting a single social source of mankind before its geographic spread on earth into tribes and nations):
Mankind was but one nation, but differed (later). Had it not been for a Word that went forth before from thy Lord, their differences would have been settled between them. Holy Qur'an, Surah Yunus 10:19
وَمَا كَانَ النَّاسُ إِلَّا أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً فَاخْتَلَفُوا ۚ وَلَوْلَا كَلِمَةٌ سَبَقَتْ مِنْ رَبِّكَ لَقُضِيَ بَيْنَهُمْ فِيمَا فِيهِ يَخْتَلِفُونَ
What is apparent from even these few quoted verses in accurate and full context of the Holy Qur'an, is that for all future times from its Last Messenger's revelation of the Holy Qur'an, which was itself declared by the Author of the Holy Qur'an as the completion of its favors and the perfection of its religion which it named “Islam” (see verse 5:3 Surah Al-Maeda below), the Holy Qur'an unequivocally accepts, and guarantees, diversity of beliefs based on the natural artifacts of individual and group socialization!
Contrast the aforementioned principled understanding of the religion of Islam which unequivocally enjoins mankind to “strive as in a race in all virtues” in its singular scripture the Holy Qur'an, to the propaganda manual of the prominent Anglo-American Jew, Professor Bernard Lewis of Princeton University: Crisis of Islam – Holy War and Unholy Terror. Billed in the West as “a leading Western scholar of Islam”, [a] the “vulgar propagandist”, [b] and the obvious heir apparent to Dr. Joseph Goebbels for the construction of the present global Fourth Reich, namely, one-world government, speciously devoted much verbiage to Islam's “Triumphalism” in order to scare the Western public mind into waging West's perpetual “war on terror” against “Islamofascism”! The FBI training presentation titled “Militancy Considerations” made by another Jew to America's foremost law enforcement agency to poison their mind against Islam and American Muslims (see below), not to forget the likes of America's favorite Christian pastor burning a copy of the Holy Qur'an in Florida while proclaiming “Islam is of the Devil” to further embellish the propaganda line on West's “war on terror” (also see below), all have an imposing propaganda pedigree to be sure! What is perhaps the saddest and the most despicable fact in all this is that many Muslim intellectuals worldwide, men and women of arts, science, and letters, not to forget statesmen and politicians, have become a willing appendage of this Western perception management of the public mind as the inveterate House Niggers and Uncle Toms of empire
(
http://tinyurl.com/faq-intellectual-negro ).
Whereas the Holy Qur'an itself proclaims: if you don't prefer the message of Islam, no problem – “there is no compulsion in religion” (see verse 2:256 Surah Al-Baqara below). Follow the guides, imams, prophets, that were sent to your own people and on the Day of Judgment, declares the Holy Qur'an: “One day We shall call together all human beings with their (respective) Imams” (see verse 17:71 Surah al-Israa' below) and “it will be judged between them fairly, and they will not be wronged.” (see verse 10:47 Surah Yunus above).
The clear message of the Holy Qur'an to everyone among mankind, Muslim and non Muslim, whatever sect, whatever ethnicity, whatever nation, and whatever epoch, is to compete for virtuous conduct ( فَاسْتَبِقُوا الْخَيْرَاتِ ) amongst themselves – not for resources, not for territories, not for hegemony, and not power!
The Holy Qur'an continually harkens mankind towards dealing with each other in full justice, even unequivocally averring that God loves those who are just and deal equitably with each other:
For Allah loveth those who judge in equity. Holy Qur'an Surah Al-Maeda 5:42
إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ الْمُقْسِطِينَ
That straightforwardly puts to rest all religious and sectarian arguments for all times! Just that much is sufficient to both repel all propaganda against Islam, and eliminate all internecine fracture points and facile views among Muslims. But we have only just begun.
The obvious overarching point to ponder here is that why go through all this repetition once again if justice among mankind is the core first-principle the Holy Qur'an is teaching for mankind's conduct amongst each other? Everything else of course naturally follows from that core first-principle. But it is not a new or unfamiliar concept.
The following Biblical Commandment from antiquity was, and still is, at least in my view, both complete and sufficient for governing the peaceable, equitable, and virtuous conduct of mankind:
“Do unto Others as you have others do unto you.” The Bible: Matthew 7:12, Luke 6:31; Old Testament Mosaic Law; Socrates; Confucius; Solon
So, why does mankind need anything more than that one primary fundamental Biblical statement? Indeed, one can easily surmise that all beneficial national constitutions, international and local laws, trade treaties, foreign policies, inter and intra governing principles, and even effective principles for dispute resolutions, are logically derivable from just that one ancient first principle, for a fairly equitable co-existence of mutual benefit for all mankind. There'd be no room for masters and slaves under the corollaries derived from such an egalitarian first principle!
While that universal pithy wisdom is deemed Biblical, I have found evidence of its truism in other antiquity as cited above. For instance, Solon the Athenian law giver, according to Plutarch's Lives, when asked which city he thought was well-governed, said:
That city where those who have not been injured take up the cause of one who has, and prosecute the case as earnestly as if the wrong had been done to themselves.” Solon in Plutarch's Lives
Even beyond divine religion, in the realm of logic and rational empiricism alone, the following operations-research (OR) logical formulation due to Bertrand Russell, a man of considerable beliefs in no religion, is the most commonsensical recipe of governing peaceable human conduct. In my own succinct rendition, Bertrand Russell's formulation goes something like this (and I am putting it in single quotes to indicate that the formulation belongs to Russell but the words may not all be his):
'Maximize individual happiness while minimizing social conflict for optimizing the overall common-good.' (Bertrand Russell's prescription to do away with religion as the bearer of moral law, probably in 'Why I am not a Christian' and similar writings)
With just a little bit of reflection, one will see that Bertrand Russell captures the beneficial essence of many religions, including Islam, in at least so far as “haquq-al-ibad”, i.e., the rights of man upon man, otherwise known as moral law, are concerned, quite admirably.
By just using rational empathetic logic which hinges on spreading virtue rather than glory, vice, hegemony, and conquest, one can come up with reasonably equitable methods of governing oneself in any age, and among any peoples.
However, the Author of the Holy Qur'an advocating the path of mutual co-existence to mankind through the perfection of its message which it called “Islam”, is just as meaningless as man coming up with his own protocol for mutual co-existence using his own sensible logic and reason, if man is unwilling, or unable, to implement the protocol:
This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion. Verse fragment Holy Qur'an, Surah Al-Maeda 5:3, 632 AD
الْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ وَأَتْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِي وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ الْإِسْلَامَ دِينًا ۚ



Hegemony is as old as mankind.” Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard – American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives, 1996 AD, pg. 3 – the book's dedication reads: “For my students—to help them shape tomorrow's world”
Thus, if nihilist followers of Zbigniew Brzezinski's predatory foreign policies which predicate upon primacy and its geostrategic imperatives because they believe that “Hegemony is as old as mankind” so why change it, choose sociopathic mass psychology to mobilize the public to villainy and infamy by bequeathing to them only facile worldviews, well, that's not because there is any shortage of great platitudinous recipes in either the divine books of antiquity, or the modern mind of reason as the Deistic philosophers of eighteenth century enlightenment argued (of which Bertrand Russell was the atheist legatee).
That choice, of exercising villainous hegemony or equity and benevolence upon the 'untermenschen', is entirely man's of course. The Author of the Holy Qur'an itself asserts that such a choice between life's governing principles is entirely up to mankind in all its diversity of existence, and is neither a monolithic diktat of triumphalism, nor a choiceless matter like being born to one's parents:
There is no compulsion in religion. Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Baqara 2:256
لَآ إِكۡرَاهَ فِى ٱلدِّينِ‌ۖ
There surely came over man a period of time when he was a thing not worth mentioning. 76:1
هَلْ أَتَىٰ عَلَى الْإِنْسَانِ حِينٌ مِنَ الدَّهْرِ لَمْ يَكُنْ شَيْئًا مَذْكُورًا
Surely We have created man from a small life-germ uniting (itself): We mean to try him, so We have made him hearing, seeing. 76:2
إِنَّا خَلَقْنَا الْإِنْسَانَ مِنْ نُطْفَةٍ أَمْشَاجٍ نَبْتَلِيهِ فَجَعَلْنَاهُ سَمِيعًا بَصِيرًا
Surely We have shown him the way: he may be thankful or unthankful. Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-insaan 76:3
إِنَّا هَدَيْنَاهُ السَّبِيلَ إِمَّا شَاكِرًا وَإِمَّا كَفُورًا
The overarching point being, at the risk of being repetitious, whatever the religion, whatever the people, and whatever the culture and geography, man naturally gravitates firstly towards one's own kith and kin, and secondly towards one's own socialization which principally gives birth to one's dominant worldview. It is all but a truism that just as one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, one man's “messiah” is another man's lunatic.
And Islam, recognizing this natural human tendency for partisanship and tribalism due to socialization from birth, proffered the above quoted solution of Surah Al-Maeda 5:44-48 to those who believe in Islam, and also to those who wish to learn about Islam, that this religion, this way of life, this “deen” which Allah perfected for those who wish to believe in it of their own free will, does not bring the threat of forced triumphalism to mankind.
That Islam cherishes diversity and enjoins the people to compete only in virtuous conduct ( فَاسْتَبِقُوا الْخَيْرَاتِ ) amongst themselves even as they live in their own respective socialization of birth, faiths, tribes and nations, forming a diverse multicultural milieu of mankind.
That, if God wanted to, mankind could have been made into all one people just as they were in the past and “their differences would have been settled between them” (see 10:19 Surah Yunus above).
That, if people disagree in matters of theology, religion, and other esoterica upon which faith is often based, to leave the resolution of such disagreements to God alone (see 42:10 Surah Ash-Shura above) --- lest the Muslims at any time in the future, senselessly imbued with empire and its 'la mission civilisatrice', criminally come to carry the 'white man's burden' (http://tinyurl.com/the-white-mans-burden):
And if your Lord had pleased, surely all those who are in the earth would have believed, all of them; will you then force men till they become believers?
وَلَوْ شَاءَ رَبُّكَ لَآمَنَ مَنْ فِي الْأَرْضِ كُلُّهُمْ جَمِيعًا ۚ أَفَأَنْتَ تُكْرِهُ النَّاسَ حَتَّىٰ يَكُونُوا مُؤْمِنِينَ
And it is not for a soul to believe except by Allah's permission; and He casts uncleanness on those who will not understand. Holy Qur’an, Surah Yunus 10:99-100
وَمَا كَانَ لِنَفْسٍ أَنْ تُؤْمِنَ إِلَّا بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ ۚ وَيَجْعَلُ الرِّجْسَ عَلَى الَّذِينَ لَا يَعْقِلُونَ
Surah Al-Maeda 5:44-48, Yunus 10:99-100, and other supporting verses quoted above in their full context, put to rest in finality, all false charges brought by Western war-mongers, of their merely defending themselves from Islam's “Triumphalism” in their holy war against “Islamofascism”.
As these unambiguous verses in their complete context clearly convey in the direct words of the Holy Qur'an itself, there isn't any “Triumphalism” in Islam. It is a charge more suited to Pauline Christianity (today's mainstream Christianity of almost every denomination and sect), whereby, to “save” mankind from eternal damnation, the unworthy humanity has to all be converted to belief in Christ!
All such charges are vulgar propaganda against Islam, conveyed today no differently than it was conveyed during the Christian Crusades, by some very diabolical “Western scholars of Islam” in order to cultivate facile views among their ignorant Western peoples. (See for instance, Bernard Lewis: Crisis of Islam – Holy War and Unholy Terror)
Without such facile views, the masses cannot be readily mobilized against “Islamofascism” in the fabricated “clash of civilizations” – a transparent facade for exercising primacy, supremacy, hegemony, mass behavior control.
As Zbigniew Brzezinski, former American president Jimmy Carter's National Security Advisor, self-servingly but accurately presaged in his American Mein Kampf:
“Hegemony is as old as mankind. ... Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization ... except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public's sense of domestic well-being.” The Grand Chessboard – American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives, pgs. 3, 36. (See Pastor Terry Jones below)



Sociopathy of Hegemony, Primacy, Social Darwinianism, the exercise of Supremacy, mass behavior control, all one and the same genre, is the real problem. A problem that is as old as hegemony, as old as mankind. It thrives on the facile mind. Consequently, the sociopaths who often rise to power easily, ensure that the public mind stays facile. Making the public mind is the first art of governance from caliphate to democracy --- for unlike a dictatorship, ruled at the point of the bayonet, caliphate to democracy depend on a measure of consent from the governed. Unless that governance is changed first, until the non sociopaths in society force their way into ruling corridors of power to devalue the villainy of the facile mind, all Divine Books will be “mahjoor” (verse 25:30), and the public mind shall forever remain chained to its unturning neck in Plato's Cave.
The directive of Surah Al-Maeda 5:44-48 is also very explicit for Muslims. There is no ambiguity in it. These are not allegorical verses ( مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ ); their meaning is very straightforward, established, and unequivocally clear ( آيَاتٌ مُحْكَمَاتٌ ). (See verse 3:7 of Surah Aal-'Imran for Qur'an's own definition of the two types of verses in the Holy Qur'an; every verse and verse fragment of the Holy Qur'an has to be understood in the entire context of the Holy Qur'an, and not just in isolation of its occurrence or else it can easily lead to constructing a facile or even false understanding of the topic. See the case study “Islam: Why is the Holy Qur'an so easy to hijack? Part-I” [2])
Although, it must be admitted that, the universal principle of virtuous and amicable co-existence among the diversity of nations as those outlined in Surah Al-Maeda 5:44-48, and the corollaries to be deduced from it and from several verses like it in the Holy Qur'an, requires at least a modicum of reflection and some basic ability to reason.
Parrots memorizing the Holy Qur'an as an inheritance, can no more come to understand it than any other talking parrot, regardless of the beauty of its voice and feathers!
Were such reasoning a characteristic of Muslim scholarship, the scholars of Islam would have long extinguished the flames of sectarianism among the Muslims which had originally arisen in the epoch of the Prophet of Islam itself, not due to any misunderstanding of the Holy Qur'an and the Prophet's teachings for the Exemplar lived and taught among them, but purely due to vested interests. These vested interests ab initio planted the pernicious seeds of absolutist kingdoms and empires to come in the future. These empires subsequently endowed their scholars to interpret and canonize the imperial religion – the hijacking of Islam into an unsurpassed Muslim empire lasting 700 years in the name of Islam's God – for their masses. (Ibid.)
Today, we are merely their inheritors and unable to go back to the fundamental teachings of Islam beyond the superficial rituals. For the only original sources we have beside the Holy Qur'an, are the works of these very partisan and sectarian scholars of empire who had hijacked Islam! More details can be gleaned in the investigative case study on how the Holy Qur'an itself contributed to its own subversion in what prima facie appears to be a fascinating plan By Design. A plan in which algebraic variables instead of constants are sprinkled judiciously in all the key verses which, had they been clearly Determinate instead of requiring mankind to solve systems of algebraic equations to figure out their values, such a crown as the Holy Qur'an itself opening the Pandora's box to a plurality of interpretations, both unwittingly misperceived as well as with diabolical intent, could not have been laid upon its head. (Ibid.) The reason for repeated entreaties in the Holy Qur'an for reflection with a cleansed heart is very clear for this reason alone (see below). One needs a minimal ability to reason in addition to being able to do basic arithmetic correctly, such as to add two plus two equal four when instead of two constants being added, two variables in two equations are being added. For instance, if x+y=4 and x-y=0, what are x and y?
This is of course predicated on knowing that there is even a riddle to solve, and then correctly setting up the riddle before attempting to solve it. Often times, even that awareness does not exist --- that the Holy Qur'an hides many a riddle in its mellifluous verses. Fourteen centuries have passed and yet the Good Book still remains a Book of paradoxes and riddles. Some Determinate and easily soluble, others open-ended and Indeterminate, meaning, not known whether or not they have unique solutions and which ones if any are correct and which ones aren't --- as there is no absolute reference present today to compare the answers to. It is virtually akin to decoding a cipher. Indeed, viewing the Holy Qur'an as a cipher text leads to its much greater understanding because emphasis now shifts to viewing it as a sophisticated and complex text that requires much reflection of the whole rather than a simple plaintext of individual unconnected verses which it isn't. (Ibid.)
Evidently, it is well-nigh impossible to find a scholar of Islam with any colored turban who even knows basic algebra let alone be able to solve algebraic riddles and ciphers! In the age of universal deceit which has in fact always existed, and is virtually guaranteed to always exist so long as mankind in its present form exists, both self-righteous fools and Machiavelli will continue to dominate the world. The consequent of which will continue to be the domination of facile world views. Everything but setting up and solving the algebraic riddle x+y=4 correctly! Never mind when it is x+y=z and the many equations are not independent in the three variables. Recognizing what is what, what is Determinate and what is Indeterminate, is the heart of the problem. It is explored in the aforementioned case study. (ibid.)





The fascinating riddle of multi-culturalism in the Holy Qur'an

Pertinent to the topic at hand, Surah Al-Maeda 5:44-48 bears such a momentous general concept of acceptance of others in the religion Islam, that this concept is even formulaically rehearsed countless times each day in daily prayers by its adherents without any reflection whatsoever. For, if one spent even 10 minutes thinking about what many “pious” among Muslims likely repeat at least 17 times daily, if not more, one would easily see that very core-principle at work for oneself.
That repetitive formulation is Surah Al-Fatiha of the Holy Qur'an, its very first Surah. It is recited countless times daily by Muslims as a prayer. Just look at it with some reflection rather than rehearsing it as a parrot and matters become transparent. And what does it say?
First let's see what it does not say:
    1. there is no mention of the word “muslim” in it ;
    2. nor is there any mention of the noble name of the harbinger of the Qur'an, its Exemplar.
If one were not so imbued with one's own socialization since birth, one would surely ask the following question to oneself: why not?
If Islam is the last Testament, its Prophet the last Messenger, and the Holy Qur'an the last Word on the matter of Divine Guidance to mankind, why have the following riddle in its the most essential Surah:
Show us the straight path, 1:6
اِهۡدِنَا الصِّرَاطَ الۡمُسۡتَقِيۡمَۙ
The path of those whom Thou hast favoured. Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Fatiha 1:7
صِرَاطَ الَّذِيۡنَ اَنۡعَمۡتَ عَلَيۡهِمۡ
Why command the reciter of that Surah to beseech the Creator to show him or her the “straight path”, a path that is not named or labeled or identified in any other way other than as the “straight path”, a singular path, and only identified as the path of those whom (plural) have been bestowed “divine favors” (plural), or who have been divinely favored? But no names are mentioned for any further identification!
Why send the poor seeker of divine wisdom in search of solving what appears to be a complicated riddle?
How is he, or she, to know what those unknown “quantities” are?
Is the man of faith simply to be socialized into fixing those unknowns – like choosing a value for the variable “x” in an elementary school level algebraic expression – by his parents, grandparents, teachers, scholars, culture, civilization, by osmosis, diffusion, vicariously?
Given that the average intelligence of the masses in any nation is rather low, and the Author of the Holy Qur'an if it is indeed the Creator of man would certainly have known that, why then did the Author of the Holy Qur'an not straightforwardly just say for all and sundry Muslim to understand in its most oft recited Surah: follow the path laid out in the Holy Qur'an, follow the path of Muhammad, its last Messenger and Exemplar?
How ironical that what the Surah calls a “straight path” is not identified straightforwardly!
All Muslims feel they already know (by virtue of their socialization) that that's what is implied. But that's not what the Surah Al-Fatiha says at all. One is only interpreting it to mean that based on one's own socialization bias!
The answer to the riddle, as invariably in all Qur’anic riddle cases, the Holy Qur'an itself also provides.
The author of the Qur'an has repeatedly alluded to Its Word as the Book of Reflection which none shall approach, except with a cleansed heart.
So, not everyone can glean the wisdom of the Qur'an even though they may be reading or mouthing its words – how interesting!
And the solution to the riddle is hinted, inter alia, in the afore-quoted verses from Surah Al-Maeda 5:44-48. It is still obviously not the complete solution, but we are an inch closer to solving the riddle.
For one thing, we learn that the solution is multicultural, and is indeed very much socialization dependent.
Different peoples will naturally have different perspective on what is “divine favor”, who those favored ones are, and are thus encouraged to seek out the path followed by those whom they naturally psychologically feel closer to – that is the basis for what appears to the riddle of Surah Al-Fatiha, 1:6-7.
And Surah Al-Maeda 5:44-48 quoted above is an exemplary partial hint to solving that riddle.
Wow! What an incredible Book!
Nevertheless, it is still a Book of reflection first and foremost, which none shall penetrate, except with a cleansed heart. The rest are naturally misled. The Author of the Holy Qur'an even asserts that only It Guides Whom It pleases and leads others astray. Is this just rhetorical tautology? The Western mind un-attuned to the language of the Qur'an may think so.

Who can understand the Holy Qur'an and who cannot – in the Holy Qur'an's own words

Here are some verses from the Holy Qur'an on the cleansed heart.
That this is indeed a Qur'an Most Honourable, 56:77
إِنَّهُ لَقُرْآنٌ كَرِيمٌ
In a Book well-guarded, 56:78
فِي كِتَابٍ مَكْنُونٍ
Which none shall touch but those who are clean (purified): 56:79
لَا يَمَسُّهُ إِلَّا الْمُطَهَّرُونَ
A Revelation from the Lord of the Worlds. 56:80
تَنْزِيلٌ مِنْ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ
Is it such a Message that ye would hold in light esteem? 56:81, Surah Al-Waqia, 56:77-81
أَفَبِهَٰذَا الْحَدِيثِ أَنْتُمْ مُدْهِنُونَ
Those are they whose hearts, ears, and eyes Allah has sealed up, and they take no heed. Surah An-Nahl, 16:108
أُولَٰئِكَ الَّذِينَ طَبَعَ اللَّهُ عَلَىٰ قُلُوبِهِمْ وَسَمْعِهِمْ وَأَبْصَارِهِمْ ۖ وَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْغَافِلُونَ
Allah hath sealed their hearing and their hearts, and on their eyes there is a covering. Theirs will be an awful doom. Surah Al-Baqara, 2:7
خَتَمَ اللَّهُ عَلَىٰ قُلُوبِهِمْ وَعَلَىٰ سَمْعِهِمْ ۖ وَعَلَىٰ أَبْصَارِهِمْ غِشَاوَةٌ ۖ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ
In their hearts is a disease, and Allah increaseth their disease. A painful doom is theirs because they lie. Surah Al-Baqara, 2:10
فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ مَرَضٌ فَزَادَهُمُ اللَّهُ مَرَضًا ۖ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ بِمَا كَانُوا يَكْذِبُونَ
Do they not then reflect on the Quran? Nay, on the hearts there are locks. Surah Muhammad 47:24
أَفَلَا يَتَدَبَّرُونَ الْقُرْآنَ أَمْ عَلَىٰ قُلُوبٍ أَقْفَالُهَا
Caption A few verses from the Holy Qur'an on the cleansed heart metaphor.
The understanding of the message contained in the Holy Qur'an is only made accessible to those who try to approach its contents not with pre-conceptions, or agendas bearing the diseases of the heart, or other prejudices, but with a genuine desire to learn what exactly is the Book Saying! Only the purified ones, “al-muttaharoon” الْمُطَهَّرُونَ may approach its full understanding. The meaning of the Qur'anic word الْمُطَهَّرُونَ in the context of the Holy Qur'an is layered and nuanced. The Holy Qur'an explains الْمُطَهَّرُونَ itself, as it continually points them out in terms of various defining characteristics in its own emphatic explanation of whom it is intended for, who will be able to extract its message, who its custodians are, and who it is not going to benefit at all:
This is the Scripture whereof there is no doubt, a guidance unto those who ward off (evil). Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Baqara 2:2
ذَٰلِكَ الْكِتَابُ لَا رَيْبَ ۛ فِيهِ ۛ هُدًى لِلْمُتَّقِينَ
The Holy Qur'an by its own statement is a guidance only for those who are “muttaqin” ( هُدًى لِلْمُتَّقِينَ ), and not for others! The “muttaqin” characteristics are further defined, inter alia:
Who believe in the Unseen, and establish worship, and spend of that We have bestowed upon them;
ٱلَّذِينَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِٱلْغَيْبِ وَيُقِيمُونَ ٱلصَّلَوٰةَ وَمِمَّا رَزَقْنَٰهُمْ يُنفِقُونَ
And who believe in that which is revealed unto thee (Muhammad) and that which was revealed before thee, and are certain of the Hereafter.
وَٱلَّذِينَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِمَآ أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكَ وَمَآ أُنزِلَ مِن قَبْلِكَ وَبِٱلْءَاخِرَةِ هُمْ يُوقِنُونَ
These depend on guidance from their Lord. These are the successful. Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Baqara 2:3-4-5
أُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ عَلَىٰ هُدًى مِّن رَّبِّهِمْ ۖ وَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلْمُفْلِحُونَ
These “muttaqin” (must) approach the scriptures with an attempted cleansed heart in order to incrementally endeavor in seeking its meaning. And they will succeed in comprehending its message dependent only on the level of their spiritual cleansing – that's a promise of the Holy Qur'an! Different seekers of guidance will have different levels of comprehension of the Holy Qur'an based on how much “muttaqin” and how much “al-muttaharoon” they are!
This is why the Holy Qur'an further differentiates among them – all Muslims, believers in Islam, are not equal in the sight of the Author of the Holy Qur'an who identifies Itself as “the Lord of the Worlds” ( رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ ):
Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Hujraat, verse fragment 49:13 (see full verse below)
إِنَّ أَكْرَمَكُمْ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ أَتْقَاكُمْ
Is one who worships devoutly during the hours of the night prostrating himself or standing (in adoration), who takes heed of the Hereafter, and who places his hope in the Mercy of his Lord― (like one who does not)? Say: 'Are those equal, those who know and those who do not know?' It is those who are endued with understanding that receive admonition. Holy Qur’an, Surah Az-Zumar 39:9
أَمَّنْ هُوَ قَانِتٌ آنَاءَ اللَّيْلِ سَاجِدًا وَقَائِمًا يَحْذَرُ الْآخِرَةَ وَيَرْجُو رَحْمَةَ رَبِّهِ ۗ قُلْ هَلْ يَسْتَوِي الَّذِينَ يَعْلَمُونَ وَالَّذِينَ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ ۗ إِنَّمَا يَتَذَكَّرُ أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ
Incredible!
How does one embark on such a mission of a cleansed hearted journey to understand the Holy Qur'an today and overcome, in a meaningful way, one's socialization biases and natural tendencies, to actually be counted among those even mildly “honoured in the sight of Allah” rather than being among those who are “in a state of loss” (see Surah Al-Asr below)? If the Holy Qur'an claims to be a book of guidance for all mankind for all times rather than merely a revered scripture of antiquity, then clearly it must be comprehensible today in today's epoch, offer prescriptive principles to adhere to which are vibrant, effective and pertinent for today's living conditions, just as they must be for tomorrow's living conditions, and just as they were for the time of the Prophet of Islam when the Holy Qur'an reputedly revolutionized that Age of Jahiliya.
Well, the answer the Holy Qur'an itself provides in its very first Surah, Surah Al-Fatiha, verse 1:6-7 quoted above – to beseech the Creator in daily supplication to “Show us the straight path, The path of those whom Thou hast favoured.”

The fascinating riddle of “Al-Wasilah”

Evidently, according to the prima facie prescription of Islam itself, the cleansed hearted journey to understand the Holy Qur'an for Muslims (like all other peoples seeking divine guidance) can only be undertaken by seeking out the path of some unnamed people whom God has favored. This is further underscored:
O ye who believe! Do your duty to Allah, seek the means of approach unto Him, Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Maeda 5:35
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَابْتَغُوا إِلَيْهِ الْوَسِيلَةَ
Caption Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Maeda 5:35, unequivocally putting to bed for all times the argument on how to approach Allah: “O ye who believe! Do your duty to Allah, seek the means of approach unto Him,” Who are these “means of approach unto Him”? See below Surah Al-Baqara verse 2:166-2:167, and Surah An-Nahl 16:25, for Qur'anic constraints on الْوَسِيلَةَ , “Wasilah”, whereby both followers and leaders are respectively condemned! Who specifically then meets the highly constrained requirements of “Wasilah” of this pivotal verse 5:35 wherein “believers” are commanded to “seek the means of approach unto Him,” as an obligatory “Duty to Allah”?
It follows therefore, rather straightforwardly in fact from the logic of the Qur'anic Message, that ONLY “the path of those whom Thou hast favoured” as proclaimed in Surah Al-Fatiha 1:7, and subsequently clarified as “seek the means of approach unto Him,” the “Wasilah” ( الْوَسِيلَةَ ) in Surah Al-Maeda 5:35, can exemplify, interpret, and explain the journey of the straight path ( الصِّرَاطَ الۡمُسۡتَقِيۡمَۙ )!
Verse 1:7 teaches the supplicant to beseech the Creator to show the path of His Favored Ones. And verse 5:35 commands the supplicant to first seek the means of approach unto Him as his duty to the Creator, in order to even approach the straight path! The Author of the Holy Qur'an specifies how to seek Guidance from His Scripture in order to approach Him --- to seek His designated “Wasilah”!
In simpler words for the language and logic challenged, let's break that down step by step. This is what is meant by reflection when the Author repeatedly invites reflection on the verses of the Holy Qur'an with a cleansed heart: “Do they not then reflect on the Quran? Nay, on the hearts there are locks.” – for its greater meaning is only understood when one thinks and reasons through the whole because the whole is much larger than the sum of its individual parts. There is a great deal of advanced understanding contained even in very simple verses when their obvious interconnections are grasped. These are the low hanging fruits of the tree so to speak, within reach of anyone who is willing to reach up to pluck them, but is not available when one makes no effort at reflection or stays mired in its Cliff notes:
    • By the proclamation of the Holy Qur'an itself, the supplicant, the seeker of the straight path, cannot approach the Creator directly, but only through the specified means, of seeking the “Wasilah”, the means of approach unto Him.
    • For emphasis, it is even presented as a “duty” of the “believers” to first seek the “Wasilah”!
    • And it is further emphasized that only the Author's own favored ones can delineate the straight path unto Him.
    • The Author's own favored ones, and not the believers' favorite ones, are veritably the Wasilah, “the means of approach unto Him.”
    • The Holy Qur'an categorically affirms that the straight path is indeed a guided journey under the leadership of the Divinely Favored Imams, Al-Wasilah, and not a solo journey by one's own interpretation, imagination, due diligence! Al-Wasilah must specifically be sought and followed for the journey on the straight path in order to benefit from Divine Guidance. The rest are led astray because they end up on the paths of the wrong types of people!
    • Since the straight path is singular, it follows that all the favored ones who are Al-Wasilah, the show-ers of the straight path upon whom God has bestowed favors, the Guides to follow, the Imams who lead on that path, are directing believers to the same one path without making an error and without disagreeing with each other one iota. Like the airline flight path, once divined by the ATC, is singular and has no margin of error --- it has to be exactly followed without deviation.
    • It follows that Al-Wasilah are inerrant by the very definition of their job function!
Mind blowing... putting to bed all facile views pertaining to the path of spiritual guidance and spiritual ascendance in the pristine Religion of Islam. [c] This is not the man-made Islam penned by the hand of man. But the untampered and unadulterated Islam that eagerly beckons when one approaches the study of its singular Scripture with even a moderately cleansed heart! Imagine the depth of understanding one may be able to reach with greater self-control of the mind to remove all vestiges of socialization bias, confirmation bias, self-interest and perception management.
Putting it together with verse 39:9 of Surah Az-Zumar then makes that rhetorical question obviously prescriptive, rather than being merely tautological: “Are those equal, those who know and those who do not know?”
Meaning, it further follows that these “Wasilah”, the show-ers of the straight path upon whom God has bestowed favors, the Guides to follow, the Imams who lead on that straight path, must also be the ones highest in knowledge and understanding of that straight path among those whom they guide. Otherwise, how can they guide others more knowledgeable than themselves? Or, if their own understanding concerning this straight path was error prone? Especially of an obscure path which Allah ordained that no man may otherwise know of his and her own accord, except through those who were divinely favored. Which, of course, also automatically implies that their teacher can be none among those whom they have been divinely chosen and ordained to guide! And the Holy Qur'an precisely confirms this, that their teacher is only Allah, in verse 6:90 of Surah Al An'aam: “These are they whom Allah guided, therefore follow their guidance”!
These are they whom Allah guided, therefore follow their guidance. Say: I do not ask you for any reward for it; it is nothing but a reminder to the nations. Holy Qur’an, Surah Al An'aam 6:90
أُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ ٱلَّذِينَ هَدَى ٱللَّهُ ۖ فَبِهُدَىٰهُمُ ٱقْتَدِهْ ۗ قُل لَّآ أَسْـَٔلُكُمْ عَلَيْهِ أَجْرًا ۖ إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا ذِكْرَىٰ لِلْعَٰلَمِينَ
That there is a didactic significance to the notion of “Wasilah” for knowing and approaching the straight path, and which is not to be dismissed as merely allegorical ( مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ ), is emphasized again:
One day We shall call together all human beings with their (respective) Imams Holy Qur’an, Surah al-Israa' 17:71
يَوْمَ نَدْعُو كُلَّ أُنَاسٍ بِإِمَامِهِمْ
A brief explanation of the word “Imam” ( إِمَامِ ) is perhaps in order as few Muslims evidently comprehend it – judging from the honorific which they continually adopt for themselves and ascribe to every tom dick and harry who can regurgitate in Arabic or tie a turban on his head. The word “Imam” is frequently used in the Holy Qur'an. Its meaning fortunately is unambiguously explained by the Holy Qur'an itself. We don't have to use a language dictionary nor hijack Qur'anic terminology as a common noun when it clearly is not intended to be. (See Hijacking the word 'Islam' for Mantra Creation for how Qur'anic terminology is routinely hijacked with semantic overload by vested interests). But first, let's see what the language dictionary says about the word. The Arabic-English dictionary of the Holy Qur'an in the hands of this scribe defines the common noun “Imam” thusly:
Imam: “Leader; President; Any object that is followed, whether a human being or a book or a highway”.

The fascinating riddle of the “Imam” – a Divine family's story

However, in the language of the Holy Qur'an, the terminology “Imam” is a proper noun when referring to apostolic leaders whom Allah chose above all others – as in the following verses where its clearest meaning is made manifest for those upon whose eyes there is no covering, and upon whose ears and heart there is no lock of self-interest or self-deception:
Surely Allah chose Adam and Nuh and the descendants of Ibrahim and the descendants of Imran above the nations.
Offspring one of the other; and Allah is Hearing, Knowing. Holy Qur'an Surah Aal-e-Imran 3:33-34
إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ ٱصْطَفَىٰٓ ءَادَمَ وَنُوحًا وَءَالَ إِبْرَٰهِيمَ وَءَالَ عِمْرَٰنَ عَلَى ٱلْعَٰلَمِينَ
ذُرِّيَّةًۢ بَعْضُهَا مِنۢ بَعْضٍ ۗ وَٱللَّهُ سَمِيعٌ عَلِيمٌ
And when his Lord tried Ibrahim with certain words, he fulfilled them. He said: Surely I will make you an Imam of men. Ibrahim said: And of my offspring? My covenant does not include the unjust, said He. Holy Qur'an Surah Al-Baqara, 2:124
وَإِذِ ٱبْتَلَىٰٓ إِبْرَٰهِۦمَ رَبُّهُۥ بِكَلِمَٰتٍ فَأَتَمَّهُنَّ ۖ قَالَ إِنِّى جَاعِلُكَ لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا ۖ قَالَ وَمِن ذُرِّيَّتِى ۖ قَالَ لَا يَنَالُ عَهْدِى ٱلظَّٰلِمِينَ
Caption Verses of Holy Qur'an explaining its use of terminology of “Imam” as the leader of “naas” (mankind), لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا , asserting that Allah shall also make Imams in the offspring of Prophet Ibrahim as a Divine Covenant (Contract) for Ibrahim's request as his everlasting reward. Observe that Prophet Ibrahim is already a Prophet of Allah when his Lord tried Ibrahim with certain words that he fulfilled, and as a reward Allah said: Surely I will make you an Imam of naas. Prophethood and Messengership represent Allah's Guidance to mankind, and Allah's appointed Imams lead mankind in accordance with that Divine Guidance. The verse makes it clear that the Imam need not be a Prophet or Messenger of Allah, but will be a Leader of man who shall not be unjust or from among the oppressors, ٱلظَّٰلِمِينَ . Since verse 2:124 prima facie is neither time bound nor limited to any geography, it is an evergreen Covenant that begs the obvious question: who are these Allah's appointed Imam(s) today who are from among the offspring of Prophet Ibrahim? How shall we identify them? By DNA? Or, is our modern age denied the benefit of the Covenant that Allah made with Prophet Ibrahim thousands of years ago? Did the benefit of that Covenant of a Divinely made Imam end with the Last Prophet of Allah, Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him? If that conjecture is presumed, then verse 2:124 is trivially falsified because it espouses no sense of limit in the Imams from among the offspring of Prophet Ibrahim, except that they shall not be unjust. Therefore, verse 2:124 must still be presumed true. So, might we look for just leaders(?) with the Prophetic DNA – (Prophet Muhammad's as well as all Jewish Prophets')... I am still searching... where art thou? Or is 2:124 yet another one of those metaphorical verses ( آيَاتٌ مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ ) of the Holy Qur'an?
Thence we see that when verses 17:71 and 10:47 (quoted above) respectively state: “One day We shall call together all human beings with their (respective) Imams”, “And for every nation there is a messenger. And when their messenger cometh (on the Day of Judgment) it will be judged between them fairly, and they will not be wronged”, the word “Imam”, like “Messenger”, a proper noun, prima facie refers to those guides and leaders whom Allah has chosen to lead men (and women) onto the straight path from a specific Divine family, “Offspring one of the other” as per verse 3:34, and in the progeny of Prophet Ibrahim as per the Covenant in verse 2:124. “Imam” is thus one Divine family's story! That's what the Good Book itself says right before one's eyes. But being perpetual victims of facile views, Muslims tend to follow anyone with a turban on the pulpit with the title “imam” – and therein lies the pièce de résistance of conundrums. The “tahreef”, corruption, alteration, of the meaning of the Qur'anic word “Imam” and its replacement with the dictionary meaning common noun “imam” is only part of the problem.
Apart from the logical reasoning noted earlier for the solution to the obvious puzzle that why can't one just read the Holy Qur'an and be done with the dispensation of divine guidance directly from it rather than seek out the path of some favored ones who are not even straightforwardly identified in the most common Surah; that why does one, even today fourteen centuries later, in obligatorily repeating Surah Al-Fatiha in mandatory daily prayers, have to seek that straight path of divine guidance via some “Wasilah” who also remain unnamed in the Holy Qur'an, except for the fact that we are told they are in the progeny of Prophet Ibrahim? How are we to identify them today? But that's not the end of the conundrum, only its beginning!
If only the business of divine guidance were so straightforward – for the average intelligence level of humanity is certainly not up to solving complex riddles in order to pursue faith by way of reasoning about it (which is why the vast majority are simply socialized into their respective belief system by birth, and stay in it for their entire life). That empirical reality must be accounted for otherwise the Holy Qur'an remains just un-implementable theory.
The first of these accountings for the empirical reality of socialization already mentioned above, is to compete with each other in virtuous conduct ( فَاسْتَبِقُوا الْخَيْرَاتِ Surah Al-Maeda 5:48 above) as individual behavioral responsibility, rather than in theological upmanship among God's religions brought by different Messengers among whom there is no difference (Surah Al-Baqara 2:285 below).
Now, we have the second empirical reality. It is proffered to not only “seek the means of approach unto Him”, but also that “We shall call together all human beings with their (respective) Imams” on the Day of Reckoning.
What if the socialization of a Muslim polity is outright, or partially, based on falsehoods, half-truths, three-quarter truths, and subtle distortions that have crept into the divine teachings? What if that which is followed is not accurately the teachings of the Messengers and Imams dispatched by God to every people – including to the Muslims?
Since: “We shall call together all human beings with their (respective) Imams”, and the false “imams” will disclaim their followers (see verses immediately below), we have both, a practical and a theological problem. Finding the “straight path” just got a lot harder and trickier – because now there is a penalty attached to getting it wrong and following false teachers and false leaders despite the best of plebeian intentions!
Therefore, to ensure correct guidance for the supplicant of the straight path that they don't end up mistakenly following false paths, false prophets, false leaders, false imams, false pontiffs, false kings, false khalifas, false pulpits, and false paths laid out by usurpers, tyrants, and impostors, while thinking they are following the divinely guided straight path, the following verses of the Holy Qur'an proffer the clearest admonishment ( آيَاتٌ مُحْكَمَاتٌ ) of perpetual vigilance as the caveating qualifier to seeking the straight path ( الصِّرَاطَ الۡمُسۡتَقِيۡمَۙ ) of only those people whom God hath favored ( اَنۡعَمۡتَ عَلَيۡهِمۡ ):
(On the day) when those who were followed disown those who followed (them), and they behold the doom, and all their aims collapse with them. 2:166
إِذْ تَبَرَّأَ الَّذِينَ اتُّبِعُوا مِنَ الَّذِينَ اتَّبَعُوا وَرَأَوُا الْعَذَابَ وَتَقَطَّعَتْ بِهِمُ الْأَسْبَابُ
And those who were but followers will say: If a return were possible for us, we would disown them even as they have disowned us. Thus will Allah show them their own deeds as anguish for them, and they will not emerge from the Fire. Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Baqara 2:167
وَقَالَ الَّذِينَ اتَّبَعُوا لَوْ أَنَّ لَنَا كَرَّةً فَنَتَبَرَّأَ مِنْهُمْ كَمَا تَبَرَّءُوا مِنَّا ۗ كَذَٰلِكَ يُرِيهِمُ اللَّهُ أَعْمَالَهُمْ حَسَرَاتٍ عَلَيْهِمْ ۖ وَمَا هُمْ بِخَارِجِينَ مِنَ النَّارِ
Let them bear, on the Day of Judgment, their own burdens in full, and also (something) of the burdens of those without knowledge, whom they misled. Alas, how grievous the burdens they will bear! Surah An-Nahl 16:25
لِيَحْمِلُوٓا۟ أَوْزَارَهُمْ كَامِلَةً يَوْمَ ٱلْقِيَٰمَةِ ۙ وَمِنْ أَوْزَارِ ٱلَّذِينَ يُضِلُّونَهُم بِغَيْرِ عِلْمٍ ۗ أَلَا سَآءَ مَا يَزِرُونَ
Caption Holy Qur’an Surah Al-Baqara 2:166-2:167 unequivocally disclaiming followers, and Surah An-Nahl 16:25 unequivocally disclaiming false imams who will equally be apportioned their due for misguiding the foolish people without knowledge who followed them!
And specifically, the following admonishment is especially for the Muslims, in their blindly casting about for guides and imams, leaders to show them the way, benefactors, rulers, and interpreters of faith whom they obey as their vali, guardian, and ending up with false friends who betray their trust or who are themselves misled and take their followers to hell on earth as well as in the Hereafter:
The Day that the wrong-doer will bite at his hands, he will say, 'Oh! Would that I had taken a (straight) path with the Messenger!' 25:27
وَيَوْمَ يَعَضُّ الظَّالِمُ عَلَىٰ يَدَيْهِ يَقُولُ يَا لَيْتَنِي اتَّخَذْتُ مَعَ الرَّسُولِ سَبِيلًا
'Ah! Woe is me! Would that I had never taken such a one for a friend!' 25:28
يَا وَيْلَتَىٰ لَيْتَنِي لَمْ أَتَّخِذْ فُلَانًا خَلِيلًا
'He did lead me astray from the Message (of Allah) after it had come to me! Ah! the Evil One is but a traitor to man!' 25:29
لَقَدْ أَضَلَّنِي عَنِ الذِّكْرِ بَعْدَ إِذْ جَاءَنِي ۗ وَكَانَ الشَّيْطَانُ لِلْإِنْسَانِ خَذُولًا
Then the Messenger will say: 'O my Lord! Truly my people took this Qur'an for just foolish nonsense.' Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Furqaan 25:30
وَقَالَ الرَّسُولُ يَا رَبِّ إِنَّ قَوْمِي اتَّخَذُوا هَٰذَا الْقُرْآنَ مَهْجُورًا
Caption Surah Al-Furqaan 25:27-30 making it shockingly plain that the religion of Islam would become so distorted and misrepresented among the Muslims that even the Messenger of Allah who brought the revelations will lament on the Day of Judgment that his own people shackled its meaning, “mahjoor”, to erudite study, stale rituals, and mindless recitations to seek Heaven, instead of living its meaning as a vibrant constitution of life which singularly hinges on not just disaffirming all falsehoods (kalima), but also actively striving to end them (103:3) – “mahjoor” includes that woven by Machiavellian power through their proxy agents planted as Trojan Horse to shackle it, the great betrayal of trust by the turbans who have occupied the pulpit in the service of empire: 'O my Lord! Truly my people took this Qur'an for just foolish nonsense.'
This lament of betrayal by Muslims creates a fascinating riddle when juxtaposed next to verse 4:59 of Surah an-Nisaa' which makes obedience to a third party besides Allah and his Messenger, the “ulul-amar”, compulsary:
O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you.
If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination.” Surah an-Nisaa' 4:59
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ ۖ
فَإِنْ تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّهِ وَالرَّسُولِ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ خَيْرٌ وَأَحْسَنُ تَأْوِيلًا
Caption Verse 4:59 of Surah an-Nisaa', the Verse of Obedience, itself opening the door to a riddle, the source of abuse by all rulers and empires who have lorded over the Muslim public in the name of Islam, and the primary reason for the fundamental bifurcation between Sunni and Shia sects whereby each understands this verse solely in accordance with their respective socialization.
Who are these third unnamed entity, mentioned in plurality, “those charged with authority among you” ( وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ ۖ ), that the Muslim public mind is enjoined to obey at the same command precedence level as God and His Messenger, during the lifetime of the Prophet of Islam (the command is in present tense), and thereafter ( appears open-ended?), while simultaneously not becoming a victim of the aforesaid lament? What a riddle! And no turban today appears any closer than he was yesterday to having any expertise in simple algebra to solve this puzzle outside of his own narrow sphere of socialization, or outside of his self-serving pusillanimous service to rulers who make recourse to this verse to demand obedience from the public in the name of God. This riddle and its impact upon Muslim polity over the past fourteen centuries, and still counting, is examined in the aforementioned case study. [op. cit.]
Speak of facile views! The Prophet of Islam, vouches the Holy Qur'an, will himself complain on the Day of Reckoning that: “Truly my people took this Qur'an for just foolish nonsense.” The disturbing consternation, expressed in the language of the Qur'an, is an admonishment so that people have the opportunity to rectify it, and not a foregone conclusion.
Something all the latter day mosque going holy turbans sporting white flowing beards with self-righteous piety stamped upon their forehead, not to ignore the pious mother of man who hides in black tent as the ultimate mark of her virtue and obedience to God, might worry about, at least a little. While the tyrants run supreme strangulating mankind with mere perception management, the Muslim mind bows in ever more fervent obeisance to who knows which god --- for it is surely not the God that conveyed the religion of Islam in the Holy Qur'an!
What a challenge for the earnest seeker of the straight path ( الصِّرَاطَ الۡمُسۡتَقِيۡمَۙ ), especially when religion intersects with imperial mobilization and its diabolical confrere, the Machiavelli, as it has done since time immemorial.
How is a Muslim, born and raised under the cloud of sectarian schisms and empire's favored version of Islam, to navigate this minefield which is replete not just with socialization artifacts of birth, culture, and historical baggage, but also ongoing false friends cultivated from the highest pulpits in every generation?
Not a single Muslim thinks these admonishing verses apply to him or her – as is typical of all self-righteous indoctrination. See “Hijacking the word 'Islam' for Mantra Creation”, the 600 page Fatwa on Terrorism, and the CAIR report for contemporary examples of false friends and Trojan horse institutions devilishly implanted among Muslims for precisely this purpose of diabolically manufacturing consent and engineering controlled dissent for aiding imperial mobilization. Well-intentioned people seeking guidance hither and thither continually fall for them! The modus operandi of this betrayal by friends who present themselves as being on the side of the weak (the weak being perennially ripe for cognitive infiltration by false friends as their predicament inclines them naturally to the well-known Biblical and Qur'anic beatitudes that have become more of a gift to Machiavelli than do anything for the weak, such as the “meek shall inherit the earth” in the Bible, and “And We desired to bestow a favor upon those who were deemed weak in the land, and to make them the Imams, and to make them the heirs,” in Surah Al-Qasas verse 28:5 in the Holy Qur'an), is examined in The Masters of Dissent and The Dying Songbird. [2a]
One needs to be fully awake and thinking in the matters of faith no differently than in any other matter of political science – for faith and political science continually intersect to ensure both the support of religion, and no interference from religion, in the pursuit of empire's business. Whereas God's “deen” has nothing to do with empire! And this is the most significant fact of the matter from which all macro good and evil follow, for every people, of every religion, and no religion.
Furthermore, the cleansed hearted learning for the journey of the straight path ( الصِّرَاطَ الۡمُسۡتَقِيۡمَۙ ) is not just with the intellectual left-half brain, i.e., cognitive, analytical, logical, reasoned, based on empirical knowledge. But also with the poetic and linguistic right-half brain, i.e., with feelings, emotions, empathy, intuitions, insights, inspiration, all of which may transcend the causality principle of cold objective intellectual empiricism. (Think Mr. Spock vs. Captain Kirk in the fable of Star Trek television series of the 1960s). For a discussion of why these are independent human faculties and why both are necessary to pilot human wisdom and spiritual learning towards the straight path, see the essay Morality derived from the Intellect leads to Enslavement!. [3] The report Islam: Why is the Holy Qur'an so easy to hijack? Part-II [4] further dwells upon this bifurcation of left and right half brain metaphors and what the language of the intellect (verses like 67:3-4 see discussion below), and the language of the heart (verses like those quoted above), respectively speak to in the context of the overarching spiritual teachings of the Holy Qur'an (such as in verse 20:114 discussed below). One without the other is at best one-eyed! More often, usually blind.
Seeing with the spiritual eye is how the journey of the straight path even becomes discernible. But it is not a spiritual journey of the Sufis and dervishes withdrawn from the affairs of this world – it is a bold physical life's journey of striving in this world amidst all its travails and tribulations as further outlined in the recipe of a successful life in Surah Al-Asr discussed below. The inner motivation to embark and to stay on that journey of the straight path is principally seeded only with the spiritual eye to even perceive the straight path ( الصِّرَاطَ الۡمُسۡتَقِيۡمَۙ ), and the urgency to be on it – for one does not know how much time one has remaining to one's life.
This is why the Holy Qur'an refers to the spiritual condition of being lost in darkness away from the straight path in similitude like: “on the hearts there are locks” and “Allah hath sealed their hearing and their hearts, and on their eyes there is a covering.”
Caption Image Pastor Terry Jones burning the Holy Quran
Caption Image Pastor Terry Jones burning the Holy Quran
That's the cleansed heart metaphor – inter alia, a genuine desire to learn using all human faculties at our disposal. Whereas anyone may pick up a copy of the Qur'an, read it, torch it, defecate on it, shoot at it, and of course, even recite it in in the most surreal and melodious of incantations that is prized by all Muslims worldwide. The cleansed heart is an empirical demand not just of the Author of the Holy Qur'an to those who seek its teaching, but also of rational commonsense.
Don't bring perceptual, ingrained, residual, or prejudicial biases to reading any book or else you won't comprehend the complete message that was put in the book by its author. You'll only get what you want to hear, believe, or argue to serve your own narrow interests! That's how fine literature is supposed to be read, argued, and enjoyed – using one's own interpretation and imagination. A fine book of poetry or allegorical fiction can reasonably mean different things to different people – and they can argue about it all day if they like without loss of sensibilities.
But try doing that to a city's handbook of traffic laws, or the tax laws. One has to precisely understand what the authors of the traffic regulations – the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) – mean in the full letter, the full intent, and the full spirit of the regulations if one wants to pass that pesky written test to get one's driver license. More importantly, in order to be a safe driver which only comes about by repeatedly putting into best practice what one has learnt in theory. The practice helps clarify the theory, and the theory helps refine the practice.
Indeed, the Holy Qur'an is like any other convoluted law book – one has to absorb it with concentration, contemplation, and with the clear motivation to exactly comprehend what its Author had in mind. This is also a common topic of exposition by genuine scholars of Islam. But unfortunately it has been relegated to dusty old books in local Muslim languages which few ordinary people read. The advent of the internet has made at least some of these works accessible in translation to anyone today and there is hardly any excuse for the lack of commonsense on how to sensibly study the complex and unusual text of the Holy Qur'an. [5]
Acquiring such non-facile theoretical Qur'anic knowledge, and living it in practice in the straight path ( الصِّرَاطَ الۡمُسۡتَقِيۡمَۙ ) established by those whom God hath favored, just made both the comprehension and practice of the Religion of Islam a lot harder than the prostrations stamped upon the forehead! (See: Islam: Why is the Holy Qur'an so easy to hijack? Part-I, Part-II)
Furthermore, hijacking the Qur'an for vested interests also just got easier. Deliberately purveying facile views on Islam serve their own diabolical agendas. Let's take a moment to examine the intent behind Terry Jones', the 'Burn a Quran' pastor in Gainesville Florida, statement to CNN.
Caption Image bookcover of Pastor Terry Jones “ISLAM is of THE DEVIL”
Caption Image bookcover of Pastor Terry Jones “ISLAM is of THE DEVIL”
(CNN) — In protest of what it calls a religion “of the devil,” a nondenominational church in Gainesville, Florida, plans to host an “International Burn a Quran Day” on the ninth anniversary of the September 11, 2001, attacks. The Dove World Outreach Center says it is hosting the event to remember 9/11 victims and take a stand against Islam. With promotions on its website and Facebook page, it invites Christians to burn the Muslim holy book at the church from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m.
We believe that Islam is of the devil, that it’s causing billions of people to go to hell, it is a deceptive religion, it is a violent religion and that is proven many, many times,” Pastor Terry Jones told CNN’s Rick Sanchez earlier this week.
Jones wrote a book titled “Islam is of the Devil,” and the church sells coffee mugs and shirts featuring the phrase.
I mean ask yourself, have you ever really seen a really happy Muslim? As they’re on the way to Mecca? As they gather together in the mosque on the floor? Does it look like a real religion of joy?” Jones asks in one of his YouTube posts.
No, to me it looks like a religion of the devil.”
In Islam, many actions that we consider to be crimes are encouraged, condoned or sheltered under Islamic teaching and practice, though. Another reason to burn a Quran.”’ (CNN, July 29, 2010) [6]
When someone utters of a scriptural religion of 2 billion peoples which unequivocally enjoins justice and equity among mankind regardless of religion, which unequivocally forbids committing excesses in the land, unequivocally forbids the killing of innocent people, and unequivocally likens the virtue of saving one innocent person from injustice being akin to saving an entire peoples, that: “to me it looks like a religion of the devil”, is not just simple ignorance:
    • For Allah loveth those who judge in equity.” Holy Qur'an Surah Al-Maeda 5:42
    • ... so strive as in a race in all virtues.” Holy Qur'an Surah Al-Maeda 5:48
    • On that account We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land, it would be as if he slew the whole people; and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our Messengers with Clear Signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land.” Holy Qur'an Surah Al-Maeda 5:32
Furthermore, to go to the bother of writing a full book-length treatise egregiously titling it: 'Islam is of the Devil', seems to be following directly in the footsteps of the propaganda manuals written by the “foremost Western scholar of Islam”, Princeton University professor emeritus of Near Eastern Studies, primarily of Islamic history, Bernard Lewis, such as Crisis of Islam – Holy War and Unholy Terror.
Clearly Terry Jones' case isn't the simple situation of mere prejudice, of being mistaken about Islam in the information age of 2011, of an orientalist misreading the Holy Qur'an. Pastor Terry Jones actually went ahead and torched a copy of the Holy Qur'an in March 2011. [7] Such demonstrated malice is beyond ignorance. It is designed to inflame, to hurt, to elicit an uncontrolled response from the Muslims. No hate laws were applied to Pastor Terry Jones of course in the name of free speech any more than these were applied to the Danish cartoonist drawing hideous caricatures of the Prophet of Islam in 2006 under guidance from his own Jewish confreres in America, Daniel Pipes and company. [8] Instead, Terry Jones is now smugly mounting a campaign for becoming the president of the United States for 2012! [9]
It is easy to misread into Terry Jones' misanthropy as being either an isolated case of a crackpot jackass (as the Western media projects it to be), or an example of revived Crusades against Islam (which Muslims holding facile views are wont to believe). It is neither. Apart from perhaps personal malice, it is entirely political science in the same vein as all propaganda manuals are. And the word “Islam” is the scapegoat! As I had summed it up in September 2010:
'(yawn.... sooo reminiscent of Bible Burning in Zionistan [9a] and pissing-spitting on the symbols of Christianity for advanced entertainment and mirth [9b] –– common progenitors [9c] and instigators harboring more or less equal contempt for the faith of all 'untermensch' and thenceforth, without fear of accountability or retribution, nurturing the figment of a “clash of civilizations” to justify the ongoing murderous “Imperial Mobilization”)' [9d]
That Machiavellian maligning of Islam as “doctrinal motivation” (see Brzezinski quote at the beginning) is examined in the report “Hijacking the word 'Islam' for Mantra Creation” [10] where I take an in-depth look into the Dynamics of Mantra Creation of Islamofascism, starting with the crafty Jewish penmanship of Bernard Lewis in the service of “imperial mobilization”.
I should just add in passing that the unenviable destiny of all such vulgar propagandists who at the peak of their hubris fuel unspeakable war-mongering upon mankind, is perhaps timelessly captured in the Goebbels family's fate! [11] But only under the spectre of victor's justice.





Returning back to inadvertently misunderstanding the Holy Qur'an as opposed to deliberately distorting it for vested interests as illustrated above, it should be obvious to any sensible person that memorizing the Holy Qur'an like a tape recorder has zero pertinence to understanding its message, never mind comprehending it sufficiently as “muttaqin” for practicing its spirit beyond its daily rituals. I hope I can be forgiven for drawing the apt parallel of the pleasure of daily Qur'anic recitation with daily reciting the DMV driver's handbook just for the pleasure of hearing the sound of the latter instructive words!
That is in effect what the Muslims have done with the Holy Qur'an – read the DMV handbook for the sheer pleasure of hearing the sounds and rhythm of its words and sentences! As useful as that might be to wean oneself from sleeping pills, can one pass the DMV test that way? “Is it such a Message that ye would hold in light esteem?” demands the Author of the Holy Qur'an, while simultaneously asserting “In a Book well-guarded, which none shall touch but those who are clean”!
Clearly, the warning to Muslims (and non-Muslims alike) by the Author of the Holy Qur'an to not make a mockery of the “well-guarded Book”, is very emphatic, repetitive, and unequivocal ( آيَاتٌ مُحْكَمَاتٌ ). Even verse 25:30 of Surah Al-Furqaan vouches a severe condemnation of the Muslims themselves by none other than the Messenger who brought them the Holy Qur'an: “Then the Messenger will say: 'O my Lord! Truly my people took this Qur'an for just foolish nonsense.'” The primary focus is veritably on understanding the message: “Do they not then reflect on the Quran? Nay, on the hearts there are locks.” (refer to Surah Muhammad, 47:24 quoted above) as it commonsensically should be, and not on its mere recitation, memorization, ritual reverence, and ritual practice: “Is it such a Message that ye would hold in light esteem?” (refer to Surah Al-Waqia, 56:81 quoted above). Of course, as all Muslims will surely testify, there is a more profound effect upon the spirit on hearing or reciting the Holy Qur'an in its original Arabic than doing the same to the DMV driver's handbook in any language!
The Holy Qur'an, first and foremost, is an aural recitation, not a written word. The authenticity and correctness of the written copy of the Qur'an, as Muslims are aware, is testified by a hafiz of the Qur'an, one who has memorized it in its exactness, like a tape recorder, and the memorization has itself been authenticated by his teacher – successively going back to the time of the Prophet of Islam when the Prophet himself (the historical narrative unanimously states) approved the full recitation as it exists today. (For a history of its written compilation see: Some Old Manuscripts of the Holy Qur'an ) [12]
As divisive as Muslims are, and in as many sects as we are divided in, and in as many languages we speak on all five (or six) continents that we live, one thing we agree upon is the text of the Qur'an – that it remains unchanged.
There is nothing which unites the fractious 2 billion Muslims more than the text of the Holy Qur'an. The following verse asserts that unlike previous scriptures, the Author of the Holy Qur'an takes the responsibility of protecting its Message from man's corruption:
We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption). Holy Qur'an, Surah Al-Hijr 15:9
إِنَّا نَحْنُ نَزَّلْنَا الذِّكْرَ وَإِنَّا لَهُ لَحَافِظُونَ
This is perhaps why there is so much emphasis among Muslims of all nations, cultures, and civilizations since the very time of the Prophet and the spread of Islam, to learn the memorization of the Holy Qur'an as both a sacred as well as a utilitarian virtue. Its verbatim perfect memorization continually protects the Holy Qur'an from tampering by those who own the printing presses. And it protected the Holy Qur'an in antiquity from malicious scribes working for kings, and from copying errors. And we see the proof of the pudding in its eating even today, fourteen centuries later. But while the text of the Holy Qur'an all Muslims agree remains the same, they all slightly disagree on what it means! See Islam: Why is the Holy Qur'an so easy to hijack? Part-II for a first of its kind forensic examination into this matter.
Sticking with the recitation of the Qur'anic Word for the moment, there is also something undeniable and uncanny about the calmness and feeling of spiritual peace which comes with reciting a Surah from the Holy Qur'an as an act of worship. Such calmness does indeed benefit many Muslims temporally – meaning, in the here and the now. Our psychiatric bills are almost negligible (unless we are physically being bombed to smithereens on a daily basis), and ProzacTM sales never took off among the Muslim nations as it did in the West. Empirically speaking, it is undeniable that even memorization, recitation, and parroting by the ordinary peoples has brought Muslims throughout the fourteen centuries some very unique benefits of spiritual strength and empowerment to withstand daily vicissitudes of life and tyrants.
Nevertheless, commonsense tells us that something has terribly gone wrong here.
We have kept the shell and thrown away its fruit! [12a]
The Muslims have come to believe, or been led to believe, collectively, that making the Arabic offering of the Qur'an to Allah with its attendant rituals will take one to Heaven!
More recitation offerings to Allah will bring more Heaven in the Hereafter by compensating for our failings in the here, of both commissions and omissions.
Personal elevation of the spirit notwithstanding – the Shaman priest too derives much elevation of the soul in reciting his mantras as does the Hindu swami reciting the Vedas (for man, evidently, is naturally endowed with a spiritual bent of mind that seeks psychological comfort in the pursuit of the “why” of existence) – often times the words being recited are in a foreign tongue (Arabic) which the vast majority of Muslims on earth don't even speak or understand!
Of the nearly 2 billion Muslims on planet earth today, just about 10% are native speakers of Arabic. A few others speak it as a second language.
But most Muslims mouth the words of the Holy Qur'an formulaically in its original Arabic, or in its transliteration into their local language script, for some vague notion of reaping rewards in the Hereafter.
Acts of courage, valor, dignity, self-respect, standing up for what's right, standing up to oppression, tyranny, breaking the bonds of servitude, have all been replaced by joyous recitations.
Muslims do such pious recitations every opportunity we get, which is mostly on deaths and death-anniversaries of loved ones. We solemnly bring down the Qur'an from the topmost shelf of our choicest closet or bookcase, often kept wrapped in many layers of fine silk to preserve its dignity from dust and spiders, and gather around with friends and family to “finish” mouthing the Qur'an a maximum number of times as blessings and reward for the dear departed. More often than not, because of our busy lives, unable to gather sufficient number of people to mouth the Qur'an, we farm off the task to the nearest mosque and get children studying there to come-over and do so in proxy services in lieu of some food and generous gratuity to the mullah. More money we spend in such efforts, more we feel our prayers have traveled farther into purgatory relieving the burden of accountability on our loved ones!
As per the concept of sadqa-jariya, it is believed by many Muslims that such Qur'anic recitations and prayers of good-will help those who are no longer in this world when their loved ones miss them and pray for mercy for their souls (as opposed to forget them or curse them). Let's just accept, to avoid any red herring contentions, that it helps the damned to be less damned in purgatory if they leave a good legacy of love and charitable works behind. For those rare virtuous people not damned, perhaps the prayers of the living helps them gain greater Heaven. Sadqa-Jariya is a unique concept in Islam which helps foster love, brotherhood, and charitable works that keep on accruing benefit to one even after one has left this abode, so long as the good-will left behind keeps bearing fruit for those still living.
But does such ceremonial mouthing of the Holy Qur'an help us while we are still living?
And during Ramadan of course, we again rush to “finish” mouthing all its 114 chapters divided into 30 sections, in just under 27 days as the fast-path to Heaven. If we overshoot by one day, we are in panic mode to finish the remaining sections quickly before the night of moon-sighting for the next day's Eid festivities.
When do Muslims actually study the Holy Qur'an to comprehend its message for the here and the now, as one would study the DMV handbook? Or more aptly, as one studies to learn one's profession and trade?
How much more facile than that can anyone get?





The fascinating acceptance of ALL Previous Prophets, of the Jews, of the Christians, and of the un-named peoples in every time and every space, making ALL of them comparable, equal, without difference, to the Prophet of Islam

Returning to the topic of the remarkable pluralism of Surah Al-Fatiha and Surah Al-Maeda, what does the Author of the Holy Qur'an commend to Muslims about His many Prophets, Apostles, and Messengers?
Witness:
Say (O Muslims): 'We believe in Allah and that which is revealed unto us and that which was revealed unto Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the tribes, and that which Moses and Jesus received, and that which the prophets received from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and unto Him we have surrendered.' Holy Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara 2:136
قُولُوٓا۟ ءَامَنَّا بِٱللَّهِ وَمَآ أُنزِلَ إِلَيْنَا وَمَآ أُنزِلَ إِلَىٰٓ إِبْرَٰهِۦمَ وَإِسْمَٰعِيلَ وَإِسْحَٰقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ وَٱلْأَسْبَاطِ وَمَآ أُوتِىَ مُوسَىٰ وَعِيسَىٰ وَمَآ أُوتِىَ ٱلنَّبِيُّونَ مِن رَّبِّهِمْ لَا نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّنْهُمْ وَنَحْنُ لَهُۥ مُسْلِمُونَ
The Messenger believeth in what hath been revealed to him from his Lord, as do the men of faith. Each one (of them) believeth in Allah, His angels, His books, and His messengers. 'We make no distinction (they say) between one and another of His messengers.' And they say: 'We hear, and we obey: (We seek) Thy forgiveness, our Lord, and to Thee is the end of all journeys' Holy Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara 2:285
ءَامَنَ ٱلرَّسُولُ بِمَآ أُنزِلَ إِلَيْهِ مِن رَّبِّهِۦ وَٱلْمُؤْمِنُونَ ۚ كُلٌّ ءَامَنَ بِٱللَّهِ وَمَلَٰٓئِكَتِهِۦ وَكُتُبِهِۦ وَرُسُلِهِۦ لَا نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّن رُّسُلِهِۦ ۚ وَقَالُوا۟ سَمِعْنَا وَأَطَعْنَا ۖ غُفْرَانَكَ رَبَّنَا وَإِلَيْكَ ٱلْمَصِيرُ
This is principally why Muslims do not return the villainous propaganda warfare waged against Prophet Muhammad by the Judeo-Christian soldiers carrying the white man's burden – for instance, like the Danish cartoons of 2006, and the American movie of 2012, dehumanizing the noble Prophet of Islam, or the Qur'an burning exercise resurrected in Norway in 2019 – with counter propaganda warfare against the prophets of antiquity whom the Christians and the Jews revere. For, the Holy Qur'an enjoins the Muslims to revere these same prophets of antiquity and to “make no distinction between one and another of His messengers.” (See many similar verses, e.g. 4:163, 6:83, 57:26).
This is despite the Holy Qur'an simultaneously vouching that the earlier messages brought by these prophets of antiquity had been lost or distorted by the impudence of human hands (see Surah Al-Maeda 5:12-16), and that Islam now superseded them all as the last Testament to mankind which the Author had Himself undertaken to safeguard: “We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it” (Surah Al-Hijr 15:9 quoted earlier), with no more Messengers and Testaments to come in future times (see Surah Al-Ahzaab 33:40).
But does the Author of the Holy Qur'an forbid Muslims reading other people's books?
No! I have not found any occasion when such a travesty has been advocated.
Does the Author of the Qur'an forbid speaking to the people of other nations?
No! I have not found any occasion when such a travesty has been advocated.
Does the Author of the Qur'an call upon Muslims to force themselves upon others?
Well, we have already seen what Surah Al-Maeda 5:44-48, Surah Yunus 10:99-100, Surah Al-Baqara 2:256 quoted above, say about no compulsion and amicable co-existence. The author of the Holy Qur'an goes even further, categorically stating the following:
O mankind! Lo! We have created you from male and female, and have made you nations and tribes that ye may know one another. Lo! the noblest of you, in the sight of Allah, is the best in conduct. Lo! Allah is Knower, Aware. Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Hujraat, 49:13
يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنَّا خَلَقْنَاكُمْ مِنْ ذَكَرٍ وَأُنْثَىٰ وَجَعَلْنَاكُمْ شُعُوبًا وَقَبَائِلَ لِتَعَارَفُوا ۚ إِنَّ أَكْرَمَكُمْ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ أَتْقَاكُمْ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَلِيمٌ خَبِيرٌ
My goodness! Is there another Scripture like it? And how can “ye may know one another” ( لِتَعَارَفُوا ) unless ye talk to each other, partake of each others joys and sorrows?
The straightforward logic of verse 49:13 in full context demonstrates that the Author of the Qur'an made the religion of Islam both non-isolationist, and non-triumphalist by force, to the core!
Does the Author of the Qur'an forbid Muslims imbibing themselves of knowledge and wisdom from any source?
No! I have also not found any occasion when such a travesty has been advocated.
Quite the opposite in fact. The Author of the Qur'an commands Its own last Messenger to pray to his Creator to increase his own “ilm” as a virtue:
and say: My Lord! Increase me in knowledge. Holy Qur’an, Surah Ta-Ha, 20:114
وَقُلْ رَّبِّ زِدۡنِىۡ عِلۡمًا
And therefore, since the Author's last Messenger is also the Exemplar for his followers, the commandment is to the Exemplar's followers as well, i.e., to the Muslims, to do the same: “and say: My Lord! Increase me in knowledge.” This pithy prayer is recited by many Muslims in their daily prayers. It is also plastered prominently on the entrance doors of universities and seminaries. Unfortunately, this increase evidently hasn't come to pass for a vast majority of us.
What's more, the author of the Qur'an even advocates pursuing boundless “ilm” thusly:
Thou seest not, in the Creation of the All-Merciful any imperfections. Return thy gaze, seest thou any fissure, Then return thy gaze, again and again. Thy gaze comes back to thee dazzled, aweary. Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Mulk, 67:3-4
مَا تَرَىٰ فِي خَلْقِ الرَّحْمَٰنِ مِنْ تَفَاوُتٍ ۖ فَارْجِعِ الْبَصَرَ هَلْ تَرَىٰ مِنْ فُطُورٍ ثُمَّ ارْجِعِ الْبَصَرَ كَرَّتَيْنِ يَنْقَلِبْ إِلَيْكَ الْبَصَرُ خَاسِئًا وَهُوَ حَسِيرٌ
The profound significance of these pithy verses of Surah Mulk to knowledge, to “ilm” acquisition can perhaps also be judged from the fact that Muslim physicist Dr. Abdus Salam rehearsed it in Stockholm upon accepting The Nobel Prize in Physics 1979, boldly stating at the Nobel Banquet on December 10, 1979, before other Nobel laureates, scientists, dignitaries, the Nobel Foundation and the Royal Academy of Sciences, that: “This in effect is, the faith of all physicists; the deeper we seek, the more is our wonder excited, the more is the dazzlement for our gaze.” [13] That wonder excitement by the study of nature, of the heavens, of creation, of existence, is innate to the religion of Islam! Who says to separate religion from science when Islam itself advocates science? They probably mean not to conflate the processes of religion with the processes of science as explained in Falsification in the Scientific Method.
But does the author the Qur'an advocate such pursuits, singlemindedly, to the exclusion of all else, such that such pursuits become the self-serving pursuit of the 'American Dream'?
Or, is such an advocacy for the pursuit of “ilm” as a noble endeavor, made an essential component of a greater all encompassing moral imperative by the author of the Qur'an? A categorical imperative which devolves upon man an even greater system of personal and social responsibility for which the wholehearted pursuit of “ilm” is necessary, but not sufficient?
The answer is obvious, despite the question not being merely rhetorical.
It is plainly given by the author of the Qur'an in the pithy Surah Asr, in the verse fragment:
and those who strive for haq, Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Asr, 103:3
وَتَوَاصَوۡا بِالۡحَقِّ
The Arabic word “haq” حَقِّ (pronounced 'huq' like 'hug' and not like 'faq') is an all encompassing word and its single-word translation into English is impossible. It means all of the following (and then some): truth, Truth, justice, rights, rectifying injustice, not violating rights, not being unjust, demanding one's own rights, not permitting others to violate one's own rights, etceteras.
It is but simple logic and commonsense to deduce that the pursuit of accurate knowledge in all matters is an essential prerequisite to the pursuit of “haq” in all matters – lest one be deceived, be manipulated, end up believing in falsehoods, and act unjustly.
The aforementioned tiny but self-sufficient verse fragment of the Qur'an forms the foundational basis for what is called “jihad”, striving as a moral imperative, in other verses of the Qur'an:
And strive they with their wealth and their lives in the way of God; they are the truthful ones. Holy Qur'an, Surah Al-Hujraat 49:15
وَجَاهَدُوۡا بِاَمۡوَالِهِمۡ وَاَنۡفُسِهِمۡ فِىۡ سَبِيۡلِ اللّٰهِ
But what should they “strive” ( وَجَاهَدُ ) for, inter alia, with their wealth and their lives, without any expectations in return from their fellow man, to be so nobly designated as the “truthful ones” ( الصّٰدِقُوۡنَ‏ ) by none other than the one who claims to be their Creator?
The Qur'anic answer, once again unequivocally provided by the author of the Qur'an in the Qur'an itself, is in Surah Asr.
It is to principally strive for “haq” ( وَتَوَاصَوۡا بِالۡحَقِّ ) with all of one's wealth, resources, talents, and energies! The lack of striving of which, the Author of the Holy Qur'an emphatically re-asserts in the same Surah Al-Asr, leads to:
Lo! man is in a state of loss Holy Qur'an, Surah Al-Asr 103:2
اِنَّ الۡاِنۡسَانَ لَفِىۡ خُسۡرٍۙ
For completeness, reproduced below is the full recipe of the pithy Surah Al-Asr for a noble life which is “not in a state of loss”, one which is not perpetually full of facile views, ignorance, apathy, vile servitude to the harbingers of inequity and injustices, and wild revolutions and further injustices in the name of redressing injustices. Notice what's stated and what's omitted in this self-sufficient tiny Surah. There is no reference to Muslims, or to Islam, or to any particular people or religion. It is directly addressed to man ( الۡاِنۡسَانَ ) , “insaan”, to every people of all religions, and to people of no religion, the overarching context for which has already been elucidated above:
By the declining day, (103:1)
وَالۡعَصۡرِۙ‏
Lo! man is in a state of loss (103:2)
اِنَّ الۡاِنۡسَانَ لَفِىۡ خُسۡرٍۙ‏
Save those who believe,
and do good works,
and strive for “haq”,
and are patient (103:3)
اِلَّا الَّذِيۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا
وَ عَمِلُوا الصّٰلِحٰتِ
وَتَوَاصَوۡا بِالۡحَقِّ
ۙ وَتَوَاصَوۡا بِالصَّبۡرِ
Caption Surah Al-Asr, Chapter 103 of the Holy Qur'an (see full exposition [14])
The aforementioned few words of the Author of the Holy Qur'an, as straightforward as they appear to be, still do require plenty of reflection and context to grasp the full import of its message towards an equitable and mutually beneficial multicultural co-existence without the imposition of anyone's values and/or “facile views” upon another.
It is important to re-emphasize for the first of the four clauses of verse 103:3 of Surah Al-Asr quoted above, even at the risk of being repetitious once gain, that on theological matters of belief, including no belief, when one disagrees with another, the dispute is not up to man to decide. It is for some abstract entity called “God” to decide, as already quoted from the author of the Qur'an in the preceding discussion. It is not the business of man what another's beliefs are. That business is God's, and is defined as being among the Rights of God upon man, the “haquq-Allah”. No mortal may interfere in that Right even if, due to their own natural socialization and/or self-ascribed learnedness, they perceive that some Right of God is being violated by others holding a facile view. This clear demarcation of respective Rights in Islam between the Rights of God (beliefs) and the Rights of man (moral law), ends for all times, at least from Islam's point of view, all arguments of the type: whose conception of god is better; is there a god or isn't there; etc.
Everyone gets to believe in whatever theology they want! The Author of the Holy Qur'an in defining the religion of Islam, already took the inherent differences in beliefs, natural inclinations, bent of mind, and perception biases due to the very nature of socialization of man into account!
Thus, apart from friendly discourse, any forceful disputation with another on the nature of their personal beliefs is transgressing the limits set by the author of the Qur'an for Islam's practitioners:
And if your Lord had pleased, surely all those who are in the earth would have believed, all of them; will you then force men till they become believers? Holy Qur'an, Surah Yunus 10:99
وَلَوۡ شَآءَ رَبُّكَ لَأَمَنَ مَن فِى ٱلۡأَرۡضِ ڪُلُّهُمۡ جَمِيعًا‌ۚ أَفَأَنتَ تُكۡرِهُ ٱلنَّاسَ حَتَّىٰ يَكُونُواْ مُؤۡمِنِينَ
Wonderful.
This leaves man, as per the other three clauses of Surah Al-Asr verse 3 quoted above, in his short gift of life, to not worry about saving another's soul, but to primarily contend with his own conduct with his fellow man, the previously mentioned “haquq-al-ibad”.
The commonsense advocacy of that method of conduct, of doing good to fellow man, of striving for “haq” in removing injustices from oneself and from fellow man, and being patient in adversity rather than committing suicide or becoming a suicide bomber, is beneficial guidance to all mankind no differently than the Biblical commandment: “do unto others as you have others do unto you”, and Bertrand Russell's non-religious and secular formulation: 'Maximize individual happiness while minimizing social conflict for optimizing the overall common-good', are beneficial for all mankind.
(Note caveat on unbridled emphasis on intellect alone and the religion of deception which it naturally birth-pangs upon mankind called Secular Humanism, in: Morality derived from the Intellect leads to Enslavement!)
Take from whichever system of thought that naturally resonates with one; but don't be iniquitous to oneself, or to another; and the only practicable method to achieve that enlightened state of affairs regardless of the belief system one is socialized into, is the pursuit of “ilm” (in order to minimally be able to differentiate truth from falsehoods), social justice, and benevolence, as if in a race in all virtues instead of being in a race for Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives – i.e., imperial mobilization. This is the prima facie principal message of the Author of the Holy Qur'an. There is absolutely no drive for empire, or triumphalism, in the principled teachings of the Holy Qur'an which describes itself as the completion of a divine favor of a “deen” in verse 5:3 ( الْإِسْلَامَ دِينًا ), and a divine guidance only to the “mutaqeen” in verse 2:2 ( هُدًى لِلْمُتَّقِينَ ).
(The Holy Qur'an's self-description naturally begs the obvious question which is addressed in the aforementioned case study Islam: Why is the Holy Qur'an so easy to hijack? Part-II: where is empire in the Holy Qur'an? Especially, as were witnessed in the Ummayad, Abbasside, Fatimide, the Spanish Moor, and the Ottoman dynastic empires during the heyday of Arab and Mongol Muslim domination of the world for nearly a millennium?)
If only man were to take heed of any of this platitudinous stuff from any of the Books of wisdom among mankind, and implement that which is his preferred choice by socialization or natural inclination, in his respective tribe and nation.
That singular failure to implement moral platitudes, from time immemorial, is the one fundamental problem of social failure to strive in “haq”! That social failure is the first cause for the creation of unjust empires and tyrants, and their subsequent quest for hegemony and domination of tribes and nations of the world as was justified by Zbigniew Brzezinski in his own American Mein Kampf of 1996 titled The Grand Chessboard – American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives: “Hegemony is as old as mankind.”
It is because of this empirical fact that the author of the Qur'an, in what it claims to be its last Testament to mankind, has laid such strong emphasis on striving for “haq” – even making it the underpinning of a life which is at a loss in its absence ( اِنَّ الۡاِنۡسَانَ لَفِىۡ خُسۡرٍۙ‏ ). Otherwise, the Biblical wisdom “do unto others as you have others do unto you” is still sufficient general principle among any enlightened peoples. However, while the latter was merely advisory, striving for “haq” has been made compulsory in Islam! In order to comprehend just how difficult that is in practice, and always has been, which is evidently why it has been made a cornerstone of Islam in the Holy Qur'an, please see the full exposition of Surah al-Asr. (op. cit.)
And what has man, “insaan”, done about such striving for “haq” as the principal engine of human development and social progress?
Nothing.
Caught between facile world views on the one hand, and bread and circuses on the other, man continues to be manipulated into voluntary servitude to tyrants of modernity just as he was in antiquity. While one may arguably understand the servitude in the Dark Ages to the tyrants of antiquity, in the modern information age, the Technetronic Era (term coined by Zbigniew Brzezinski), for the disease of the Dark Ages to persist is indicative of something far deeper which has not changed despite the march of civilizations, liberations, exponential increases in public knowledge, and the Technetronic progress.
Those who pursue “ilm”, knowledge, don't necessarily do so to strive for “haq”, or to redress the human condition, but for their own narrow self-interests to achieve their own version of the 'American Dream'. As the knowledge bearers, they are often either the direct harbingers of, or the silent bystanders to, the untold crimes against humanity. In the Technetronic Era of today, the former are the scientists, engineers, and technicians of empire laboring under facile delusions of all kind.
Tyranny of course only flourishes when many good men, and many good women, learned and pious, too busy pursuing their 'American Dreams', stay silent, indifferent.
That is just too well-worn a statement to be anything but one of the best moral clichés of all time. Edmund Burke wasn't the first to think of it. All the sages throughout the ages have reflected upon it. And Solon, the Athenian law giver, as noted previously, even made coming to the aid of fellow man a legal obligation (as opposed to solely being a moral one imparted by religions)!
Apart from the copious evidence of blood-stained pages of recorded history, the obvious import of accurate knowledge to the pursuit of “haq” as its principled primemover, can also be contemporarily judged by the empirical fact that due to the Muslims having a rather facile view of their own religion throughout history, and remaining quite ignorant of its interplay with imperial matters in every epoch, “jihad” was once again vilely harvested for an imperial agenda in the modern epoch with nothing but snake oil.

The face of Brzezinski's Islam “God is on your side”

(Click to download video news clip) Caption Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski, America's National Security Advisor: 'God is on your side'This time around by Zbigniew Brzezinski for “giving to the USSR its Vietnam War” in Afghanistan 1979-1988 by creating the “Mujahideens”. It is worth reproducing here Zbigniew Brzezinski's 1998 interview to French magazine Le Nouvel Observateur for his own confessions of the utility of promulgating facile world views to accomplish this:
'Question: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs [“From the Shadows”], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?
Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.
Question: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?
Brzezinski: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.
Question: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?
Brzezinski: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.
Question: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?
Brzezinski: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?
Question: Some stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today.
Brzezinski: Nonsense! It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn't a global Islam. Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries.' (source Global Research [15])
It is also worth reproducing here how Brzezinski fashioned these “Some stirred-up Moslems”:
News voice over 1980: “US National Security Advisor Brzezinski flew to Pakistan to set about rallying resistance. He wanted to arm the Mujahideen without revealing America's role. On the Afghan border near the Khayber Pass, he urged the Soldiers of God to redouble their efforts”
Brzezinski 1980: “We know of their deep belief in God, and we are confident that their struggle will succeed. That land over there, is yours, you'll go back to it one day, because your fight will prevail, and you'll have your homes and your mosques back again; because your cause is right; God is on your side.” [enthusiastic clapping by the future 'Mujahideens']
Brzezinski in the studio speaking to the interviewer: “The purpose of coordinating with the Pakistanis will be to make the Soviets bleed, for as much, as long, as possible.” (transcription is mine from the documentary video clip [16])
The mass ignorance and the facile world views that lay behind “their deep belief in god” among the Muslims was devilishly harvested with “god is on your side” to leave the Muslim civilization of Afghanistan into dust, and to set the stage for the future disintegration of Pakistan, with nothing but “Some stirred-up Moslems”!
It is the same fundamental lack of wherewithal today among the Muslims which is also enabling the same grandmasters to wage the perpetual 'Global War on Terror' upon the world as the age-old pretext for “imperial mobilization” on The Grand Chessboard. The enemy in yesteryear was crafted as Communism. The enemy today is crafted as Islam. (See Hijacking the word 'Islam' for Mantra Creation, op. cit.) That enemy is being taught to be feared worldwide, including to the world's foremost policing agency of the sole superpower, the FBI.

The face of Jews' Islam “violent Islam”

(Click image to watch) Caption An FBI presentation titled “Militancy Considerations” measures the relationship between piety and violence among the texts of the three Abrahamic faiths (the god's chosen people obviously coming out on top!!!)
Caption An FBI video presentation titled “Militancy Considerations” measures the relationship between piety and violence among the texts of the three Abrahamic faiths [ the god's chosen people obviously coming out on top!!! ] As time goes on, the followers of the Torah and the Bible move from “violent” to “non-violent.” Not so for devotees of the Koran, whose “moderating process has not happened.” The line representing violent behavior from devout Muslims flatlines and continues outward, from 610 A.D. to 2010. In other words, religious Muslims have been and always will be agents of aggression. Watch FBI Presentation Video (click on image, alternate watch, source video link) artfully Hijacking Islam. See Islam vs. Secular Humanism and World Government by Zahir Ebrahim for its full implication. [16a] [16b] [16c] (Image source)
In both endeavors, Muslim rulers and their intelligence apparatuses played, and are still playing, prostitutes to empire against the common-good of their own public.
Evidently, all empires, past and present, from antiquity to modernity, are built upon promoting facile views of certain truths among their public, and among their prostitutes.
St. Augustine of Hippo had aptly summed this matter millennia ago:
When the King asked him what he meant by infesting the sea, the pirate defiantly replied: 'the same as you do when you infest the whole world; but because I do it with a little ship I am called a robber, and because you do it with a great fleet, you are an emperor.'” St. Augustine, The City of God Against The Pagans, pg. 148

Man against Superman

It is not surprising then, that the One who claims to be the Creator of man, the Author of the Holy Qur'an, correctly gauged the natural psychology of the masses among mankind and how they will be manipulated by the devil's apprentices, and for which it universally advocated the pursuit of “ilm” and “haq” for every “insaan” in a lifelong striving it termed “jihad” as the only effective counter to facile world views from which all evil follows.
It is therefore also not surprising then, that the superlative devil's apprentices too, from time immemorial, also recognized that encouraging facile views among the masses was essential in order to rule them!
Thus was created the narrow specializations and superficial generalization of education systems since the dawn of the Industrial Age, to craft the “likkha parrha jahils” of modernity, meaning, literate morons with pieces of paper proclaiming their august qualifications. It wasn't just by the happenstance of rapid knowledge expansion of the Technetronic Era, as Zbigniew Brzezinski speciously implied in his 1970 book Between Two Ages, that this transpired:
'... it can be argued that in some respects “understanding” ... is today much more difficult for most people to attain. ... It is simply impossible for the average citizen and even for men of intellect to assimilate and meaningfully organize the flow of knowledge for themselves. In every scientific field complaints are mounting that the torrential outpouring of published reports, scientific papers, and scholarly articles and the proliferation of professional journals make it impossible for individuals to avoid becoming either narrow-gauged specialists or superficial generalists. The sharing of new common perspectives thus becomes more difficult as knowledge expands; in addition, traditional perspectives such as those provided by primitive myths or, more recently, by certain historically conditioned ideologies can no longer be sustained.' Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages, 1970, pg. 15
Let me highlight the two key empirical observations from that aforementioned passage: “make it impossible for individuals to avoid becoming either narrow-gauged specialists or superficial generalists. The sharing of new common perspectives thus becomes more difficult as knowledge expands;”. The self-serving cyclic argument of Brzezinski is that firstly, ignorance about knowledge, due to the sheer explosion in knowledge, is the natural outcome of scientific modernity. Secondly, that people can no longer easily reach a common “understanding” of their common condition. Both those observations are empirically true today. But one can easily imagine an alternate modernity where that need not be the case despite the abundance of knowledge explosion.
It was the corporatization of knowledge in the service of empire in the vast military-industrial-academe complexes of the industrialized world, and its tight coupling to the exercise of hegemony, that has made it so. Science and technology today equate with hegemony. Therefore, since the quest for hegemony is perpetual, those pursuing science and technology have to continue slaving in the service of empire as “narrow-gauged specialists.” It is a self-serving, self-sustaining game of flourishing ignorance.
And it isn't just incidental to knowledge explosion as Brzezinski has tried to portray it. It is in fact according to a premeditated plan, deftly put into motion at the very onset of Western industrialization, for the crafting of “a large number of men who are content to labor hard all day long.”
Here is Bernard de Mandeville in the eighteenth century, cleverly planting the very seeds of modern self-serving ignorance of the people for a production-consumption economy wherein, human masses are deemed only useful as economic widgets for the economic well-being of a nation:
'The economic well-being of the nation depends on the presence of a large number of men who are content to labor hard all day long. Because men are naturally lazy they will not work unless forced by necessity to do so.' Bernard de Mandeville, The Fable of the Bees, 1705
This man-made value system of human beings as economic widgets “content to labor hard all day long”, has today spread like a virus across the full gamut of gainful employment in the globalized corporate world, from blue collar to white collar, from traders to craftsman, from superficial generalists to narrow-gauged specialists.
That philosophy, to create “a large number of men who are content to labor hard all day long ... forced by necessity” espoused in The Fable of the Bees, inspired Adam Smith, the author of Wealth of Nations, to propose the pursuit of selfish industriousness for the overall common good. Of course, common good primarily of the ruling class with trickle-down economics, but that's just buried in the definition of common good where the common man labors hard all day long, and the elites enjoy the good. Patterned upon the bees collectively making that marvelous tasting honey, each bee narrowly staying busy in its own specialized micro-task, while the queen bee rests and enjoys all the benefits, lies the entire edifice of modern civilization. It hinges entirely upon what Bernard de Mandeville stated 300 years ago. At the risk of being repetitious, it needs to be emphasized once again: “The economic well-being of the nation depends on the presence of a large number of men who are content to labor hard all day long ... forced by necessity.”
This 300 years old philosophy of inculcating selfish, myopic, narrow-gauged industriousness for the common good has been easily adapted to the high-tech Technetronic Era of modernity which naturally requires highly specialized, passionate, skilled, ultra-hard working bees “content to labor hard all day long” due to their natural fascination with the subject. It goes hand in glove with creating specialized narrow-gauged morons with advanced university degrees who can very patriotically “United We Stand” for the common good while staying productively engaged in narrow specializations in the economy.
Kept perpetually too busy to either think independently from the herd even when capable of doing so, or to pursue knowledge outside of their narrow-gauged spheres of specializations by the sheer demands of time and the endless debt-bills in pursuit of their endless “American Dreams”, statecraft today relies on inflicting exactly The Fable of the Bees upon man for its own functioning as an empire. In this scheme of things, vast amounts of useless information has been recast as knowledge, and parrots have been turned into learned savants. While wisdom and commonsense have been driven out from the acumen of men and women “content to labor hard all day long ... forced by necessity.”
That pursuit, by its very nature, promotes holding only facile world views among the dreamers of the 'American Dream'. The more one is invested in one's American Dream, the more averse one automatically becomes to losing that dream if one wakes up to “ilm”. Natural psychological forces do the rest, by automatically bringing to the cognitive surface incessant rationalizations and self-delusions to maintain status quo in order to suppress the discomfort of cognitive dissonance. (See Leon Festinger's study of mental gymnastics for harmonizing dissonance.)
The end result is that one prefers to maintain only a nodding acquaintance with “ilm”, remaining mostly content with what's salutarily written on that piece of decorative parchment necessary for becoming an economic widget. The devil's apprentices building their palatial heavens right here on this earth, have further ensured that the very nature of participating in modernity also only permits the hardworking bees just sufficient time and inclination for either very superficially-broad, or very narrow-gauged specialized acquaintance with “ilm”.
We have already seen above that without “ilm”, striving for “haq” is impossible. Thus, between self-deception, deception by Machiavelli, and full time engagement in bread and circuses, one automatically becomes a captive audience to one's ignorance in all important matters which occupy the elites enjoying all that common good from the work of those “content to labor hard all day long.” This diabolically induced state of ignorance makes one easy putty in the rulers' cold calculating hands. The cumulative impact of this to society is exactly as presaged by Brzezinski in Between Two Ages – a must read ode to legitimizing the tyranny of the elite in the Technetronic Era (subtitle of the book). The era of global scientific dictatorship.
The proof of this is the empirical evidence that the most industrialized, most powerful, the greatest and richest Republic on earth today whose economic foundation was laid by Adam Smith, trumped the foundation of liberty and separation from empire laid by its founding fathers with the prime directive that it was to be a Republic. It has silently descended into a police-state without a murmur of protest from either its super-educated or its rank and file. They both today stupidly stand together in line to have their body cavities examined, groped, molested, humiliated, or irradiated with deadly radiation every time they travel by air. Soon, it will be every time they visit a shopping mall, governmental office, school, and perhaps even getting on and off highways to and fro from work. Mobile radiation scanners are already deployed in many cities which scan all passerbys, cars, trucks, for the so called “terrorists”. The rulers meanwhile have their own private jets which take off and land on private runways and terminals bypassing the fate of the masses. No radiation scanners violate their physical being, and no perverts molest their women and children.
All this travesty only exists because the public is continually taught the facile view, or forced to acquiesce to the facile view at the threat of themselves being labeled “terrorist”, that they are under mortal threat from the “terrorist”.

Sociopathy of hegemony is the real problem

Referring back to Zbigniew Brzezinski's ode to hegemony quoted at the very beginning, the method of circumventing domestic impediments to the “sustained exercise abroad of genuinely imperial power” become empirically self-evident:
Moreover, as America becomes an increasingly multicultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat. [Because] the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public's sense of domestic well-being.” Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard, pgs. 211, 44
Sociopathy of Hegemony, Primacy, Social Darwinianism, the exercise of Supremacy, mass behavior control, all one and the same genre, is the real problem. A problem that is as old as hegemony, as old as mankind. It thrives on the facile mind. Consequently, the sociopaths who often rise to power easily, ensure that the public mind stays facile. Making the public mind is the first art of governance from caliphate to democracy --- for unlike a dictatorship, ruled at the point of the bayonet, caliphate to democracy depend on a measure of consent from the governed. Unless that governance is changed first, until the non sociopaths in society force their way into ruling corridors of power to devalue the villainy of the facile mind, all Divine Books will be “mahjoor” (Holy Qur'an, 25:30), and the public mind shall forever remain chained to its unturning neck in Plato's Cave. [16d]
Q.E.D.
As the aforementioned examination discloses, in this perpetual battle between good and evil, strong and weak, hegemons and victims, wolves and sheep, rulers and masses, evidently both sides have been well equipped. But unfortunately, it is only the one side which has continually figured out, from time immemorial, how to capitalize on its own core strengths and others' weaknesses. And it has artfully trapped the other in bread and circuses.
This was the craft of kings from antiquity who ruled in the name of the divine for their own private interests with “all authority is an extension of god's authority”. And is now the craft of Machiavelli in modernity who showed the prince how to rule for private interests in the name of democracy with “god is on your side”. Indeed, it is only upon that singular characteristic that the following observation of Zbigniew Brzezinski in his own bible of hegemony, The Grand Chessboard, is so penetratingly accurate even today: “Hegemony is as old as mankind.” (pg. 3)
The very foundation of hegemony and empire lie in the public holding largely facile views of truths essential to the rulers. It doesn't matter which view they hold, in fact, they can hold any view they want, so long as it is not the whole truth, and is anything but the truth.
Like every people, such facile views are also promoted by Christians themselves of their own religion upon their own masses – never mind others doing it for them – when it is convenient to the exercise of imperial power. There is virtually no exception to this empiricism throughout the pages of recorded history. It exists among every people, including Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, etc. Pick an empire and its people have been subjected to facile worldviews which have served the interests of empire. Indeed, the first imperative of all empires is always primacy. That exercise requires subverting the religion or beliefs of the people, preferably by giving them new absurdities to believe in. For if you can convince the public of absurdities that are convenient to your own imperial mobilization agenda, you can get them to accept anything.
And modernity is no exception.
Promulgating Zionism among the Jews, and Christian Zionism in the Bible Belt of America, readily come to mind. The following is just one example of religion in the service of empire. A facile sermon ostensibly from the Holy Bible, Romans 13, by a Christian preacher harkening back to the divine kings of antiquity to teach his own flock to “Honor the King. Do it anyway, whether the king deserves it or not”:
I am free to submit to authority. I am free to make myself a slave. My friends, you are free, you are free to respect and appreciate the authority of the government that god gives to you - Honor the King! The way you talk about your government, it's so easy to complain isn't it? It is so easy to criticize, it is so easy to find fault. Honor the King. Do it anyway, whether the king deserves it or not. All authority, all authority is an extension of god's authority!” ('New American Theology of Civil Submission', transcription is mine from a Youtube video of the sermon cited by prisonplanet.com [17], April 14, 2008)
Caption New American Theology of Civil Submission – the Christian pulpit brazenly in the service of king and empire in the name of God which would make even George Orwell roll in his grave! Pastor Chuck Baldwin dispels this absurdity for Christians. [17a]
What can be a more self-servingly facile view of Christianity than that Orwellian double-speak?
Any Muslim's facile views of Christianity surely pale in comparison!
As is amply evidenced above, anyone can promote facile views, and also be the victim of them. To remove facile views on any subject, including Christianity and Islam, it is commonsensical to go directly to its source. Approach the Good Book with a desire to understand what the Book actually says, whether or not one believes or accepts it – as when writing an A+ book report for a high school English honors class – and one shall know.
Worn out from holding facile views in the land of absurdities, journalist and “accidental theologist”, Lesley Hazleton tried it. She sat down one day to read the Holy Qur'an as “an agnostic Jew reading someone else's Holy Book” – by her own description. And what she found -- as a non-Muslim, a self-identified “tourist” in the Islamic holy book -- wasn't what she had expected. It ended for her the tyranny of facile views on Islam and the Holy Qur'an. Watch [18].





Summation and Impact Analysis

To finally bring this long riposte to a summation, the short theme being keyed off here has posed a good specific question whose general answer has been explained to those Muslims who can understand the wisdom of the Qur'an. Ignorance, like being naked at birth, is the natural state of being. But we don't go prancing about as civilized adults in the au natural state of our body anymore than we should as civilized adults, of the au natural state of our mind!
Having facile views is natural, of others especially, but is not limited to the 'other'. One can be just as ignorant of what's one's own as illustrated above. And as an antidote to holding facile views, the full spectrum pursuit of knowledge as the precondition for the pursuit of a noble life – to be counted among the “truthful ones” – is rationally advocated by the author of the Qur'an as a categorical imperative for the civilized and harmonious co-existence of man.
That quest for harmonious co-existence at times requires measured and effective self-defence against predators, both physical and psychological. And the prescription for that striving against man's natural predators, the sociopaths and tyrants from among mankind itself, is captured by the universal striving for “haq”. Meaning, just as the natural state of creation is the jungle, but we don't live in one as a civilized people, the natural law of the jungle too is not the law of civilization. That law, the Qur'anic prescription of striving for “haq”, is the most well balanced and comprehensive prescription that exists in any book of wisdom from time immemorial. It prescribes how to be effective and pragmatic in standing up to barbarians without ourselves becoming one. It offers the criterion for resolving the existential dilemma often faced by all peoples of conscience, whether to confront, or to be co-opted. To know what it is, one still needs to acquire its “ilm”, as with everything else. We no more naturally know it in our au natural state of ignorance and barbarianism than we are born with our clothes on.
Interestingly, it is also a commonsense wisdom. Acquire Knowledge – 'even if one has to journey to China', as the Prophet of Islam is reputed to have also stated to his followers in that Age of Jahiliya (ignorance).
The difficulty of physically journeying to China is of course considerably less today. However, we continue to suffer another Age of Jahiliya in our modernity today. One that is dominated by facile views and deception all around. The most pervasive of these facile views among Muslims today is their own self-deception to avoid taking on the responsibility for rectifying their own subjugated condition. It is that oft heard self-serving proclamation of the pious and the scoundrel alike: “Allah chala raha hai”. Meaning, “God is running the world”. [18a] Its natural but specious corollary which incapacitates action against tyranny then easily follows: “let Allah take care of his world while I take care of my camels.” (with reference to context to the story of the Prophet of Islam's grandfather having made that fabled statement in pre-Islam Arabia when the king Abraha had assaulted Mecca before the birth of the Messenger.)
The devil's apprentices who actually are running the world, from time immemorial, deliberately cultivate such servile dogmas and facile views among the foolish masses living in their au natural mental state. To await their favorite savior or messiah; to patiently suffer life for the future expectation of reward in heaven; to focus on taking care of one's own camels and to leave the affairs of state to god, president, or king, except to vote every four years as that's called “democracy” which one must worship; etceteras, while the rulers continue to enjoy their own unlimited heavens right here on earth.
The devil's apprentices also find an irresistibly natural fertile soil among the Muslims for imperial plowing and harvesting. Divided into partisan sects from birth, each having not just a different understanding of the early history of their religion, but also a slightly different understanding of the religion of Islam itself despite possessing the same Holy Qur'an that they all share, Muslims rush to draw upon their respective sectarian narrations of history and doctrinal mumbo jumbo (that's the only way I can fairly describe what pious Muslim scholars utter from their highest pulpits to indoctrinate their flock), to dignify their pathetic silence to tyranny. That's the “good Muslim” variety (sic!). The “bad Muslim” of course rush to join “Al Qaeeda” (sic!). The Muslim ethos, born in servitude to the crown and pulpit, [18b] cultivated into co-option, [18c] and dreaming of rewards in heaven, lends naturally to the Hegelian Dialectic of “good Muslim” vs. “bad Muslim”. [18d]
And precisely that facile world view was engaged from the very day of 9/11 by Muslim scholars with assistance from the many Trojan Horses and Uncle Toms. It made, and still continues to make ten years later, the otherwise un-congenial task of “imperial mobilization” all that much more un-impedimental for invading and occupying “bad Muslim” nations while the “good Muslims” who stay silent, or support the empire's narratives, are applauded and rewarded for their “United We Stand”. See for instance, the 2010 600 page Fatwa on Terrorism [19] which earned its Uncle Tom author a place next to the massa at the World Economic Forum in 2011.
As one can hopefully appreciate very clearly by now, the observation by Zbigniew Brzezinski: “Hegemony is as old as mankind”, has only been true because of an almost infinite gamut of facile views being deftly cultivated among the peoples who have lived and died for maintaining the glory of their rulers from the very beginning of civilization.
Where to seek knowledge, wisdom, when all bearers of knowledge and wisdom, both in the East and the West, appear to be shilling for self-interest? When the bearers of knowledge today also appear to be the greatest manipulators and predators of man? And when the knowledge seeker too is naturally beholden to socialization and susceptible to accepting facile world views ingrained since birth? See Some Problems in Epistemology for how easily we divorce ourselves from understanding what is the way it is due to our presuppositions which unconsciously become axioms of faith. [19a]
See the CAIR report [20] for the difficulties faced in overcoming facile views by even the most learned and pious when their own chiefs mislead them. For writing and disseminating that response to CAIR report pointing out its significant omissions, one Muslim board member of one of the largest Muslim community and mosque of California Bay Area responded: “Whose interests are you serving? Hateful zionists or the hateful christian zioinists or both? Take me off your list.”!
It will be noticed that I have refrained from offering any specific solutions here beyond what is naturally obvious by way of commonsense, or automatically falls out from the text of the quoted passages from the Holy Qur'an. Instead, I have focussed mainly on highlighting the myriad dimensions of the problem-space surrounding the cultivation of self-serving facile views birthed by socialization but aliased as “knowledge” and “wisdom”. Apart from vested self-interests, it is the improper rush to solutions by short attention span sincere peoples which often preclude really understanding the problem domain to the depth of ab initio, which in turn precludes any effective redressing. Thus, it is observed that most invariably end up applying palliative ointments to symptoms of systemic diseases which instead of healing, continue to eat-away a people from within. See “The Poor-Man's Guide to Modernity” [21] for more aspects of the problem domain.
That vile curse of modernity, wrought by hectoring hegemons, is the common challenge for all people of faith, as well as no faith. Namely, self-preservation from predatory forces disguised as friends and governments who thrive mainly by cultivating facile and outright nonsensical views among the public as gospel truths! Even the best and the brightest often get taken in by both socialization and self-interests, and end up 'United We Stand' with what is in fact absurdities.
Additional real world examples of how very difficult this endeavor of seeking knowledge which can help separate truth from falsehoods, has become in the super-abundance of our information-age due to a) self-absorption in the pursuit of the proverbial 'American Dream'; b) being perpetually kept busy between bread and circuses throughout our adult lives; and c) Machiavellian total perception management being the cornerstone of modern statecraft; can be found in “The IVY League Morons Syndrome” [22] and “Response to 'Why I'm leaving Harvard'”. [23]
A review of the FAQ: What is an Intellectual Negro?, [24] and the report on Behavior Control titled “The Mighty Wurlitzer, [25] will I hope help in becoming self-aware of some of the mental gymnastics of servitude routinely inflicted upon mankind which naturally encourage holding self-serving facile views.
How we ended up in this tortuous New Age of Jahiliya where everything the public is made to believe is either facile or false; where liberty is to get people to love their own servitude obeying orders; and where happiness is in the public being content laboring hard all day long for the benefit of the few; is examined in depth in my response to a brilliant scientist inducted into the National Inventors Hall of Fame in 2011, “The Fable of the Bees”. [26] The fable of the bees directly underwrites “The Art and Science of Co-option” such that even when one wants to escape the Age of Jahiliya, co-option ensures a Janus face with shackles of permanent silence. [27] For the more suave of mind and avant-garde in intellectual thought bearing the hefty weight of imamate of millions of followers worldwide, it becomes a bridge through tyranny, the Doctrine of Neutrality. [28]
The cumulative end result of all these, despite their respective self-rationalizations, is greater than the sum of its individual parts: the production of our Age of Jahiliya for which all bear a measure of culpability.





Footnotes

[a] See the (late) Jewish American professor at Harvard University, Samuel P. Huntington, and his Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, wherein he incestuously anointed his Talmudic tribe-mate with the lofty epithet: “In 1990 Bernard Lewis, a leading Western scholar of Islam, analyzed 'The Roots of Muslim Rage,' and concluded:
'It should now be clear that we are facing a mood and a movement far transcending the level of issues and policies and the governments that pursue them. This is no less than a clash of civilizations – that perhaps irrational but surely historic reaction of an ancient rival against our Judeo-Christian heritage, our secular present, and the worldwide expansion of both. It is crucially important that we on our side should not be provoked into an equally historic but also equally irrational reaction against our rival.'” pg. 213.
See its full deconstruction in Zahir Ebrahim, Hijacking the word “Islam” for Mantra Creation, http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2009/05/note-on-mighty-wurlitzer.html
[b] Epithet from Jewish American scholar Professor Noam Chomsky of MIT for his Jewish imperialist tribe-mate at Princeton, Professor Bernard Lewis. In a candid interview on CBC, Noam Chomsky stated:
... now, until Bernard Lewis tells us that, and that's only one piece of a long story, we know that he is just a vulgar propagandist and not a scholar. So yes, as long as we are supporting harsh brutal governments, blocking democracy and development, because of our interest in controlling the oil resources in the region, there will be a campaign of hatred against us!” --- Interview to Evan Solomon, CBC, part-2, at minute 5:50, December 9, 2003, http://youtube.com/watch?v=bieFwutoqvA
[c] A non-Muslim inquisitive reader may perhaps sensibly stop to ponder at this point that why did the Author of the Holy Qur'an not directly impart its self-proclaimed divine guidance directly to each human being instead of employing the “Al-Wasilah”, His Messengers and Imams? Instead of mandating seeking “the means of approach unto Him,” the “Wasilah”, in an alternate system every human being could have just as easily been his or her own Imam, his or her own Wasilah, employing his or her own inner moral compass – the perfect egalitarian system with direct connection to the Creator – thus obviating the need for chosen Messengers and Imams to start with.
It may be argued that this could have perhaps avoided the corruption of the pulpit by rulers and the concomitant bloodshed of several millennia altogether! Why such an obvious earthly measure was not adopted by the self-proclaimed All Knowing and All Seeing Author of the Holy Qur'an, may at best only be baselessly speculated upon by the brilliant intellectual – for that's clearly not the method adopted by the Author of the Holy Qur'an – leading to even more idle chatter and furtherance of even more facile unfounded views of Islam.
[1] The first extempore version of this missive was submitted to the tiny anon website as comment for the article which inspired delving into this topic: http://lwtc247.wordpress.com/2011/06/09/jesus-isa-alahi-salam/#comment-5241
[5] A straightforward exposition can be found in Murtada Mutahhari, Understanding the Uniqueness of the Qur'an, http://www.al-islam.org/al-tawhid/unique-quran.htm , albeit with the characteristic presuppositions common to all ingrained sectarian socializations already examined in Part-I of Islam: Why is the Holy Qur'an so easy to hijack? http://faith-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2011/08/islam-why-is-quran-easy-to-hijack-pt1.html
This fact of ingrained socialization bias is unfortunately not acknowledged by Mutahhari in his exposition even though it is embedded in the teachings of the Holy Qur'an in its emphasis on the separation of righteous beliefs (Haquq-Allah 42:10) from righteous acts (Haquq-al-ibad 5:48). The Holy Qur'an calls itself Al Furqaan, the criterion, by which to judge both for one's own strivings in the path of “haq”. That lack of recognition fortunately does not detract from Murtada Mutahhari's sensible examination of how to study the Holy Quran despite that fact that he does lend an a priori conclusion to such study based on his own socialization which is amply in evidence in his exposition. It is in fact hard to find a scholar of any religion who fervently believes in that religion, who would be immune to such a priori conclusions even as he might endeavor to teach others how to study the religion and letting them arrive at their own conclusions AFTER that study!
This appears to be the inherent nature of socialization and of the subjectivity, and hence the religiosity, conferred to it by the right-half brain. This is perhaps why the Holy Qur'an while accepting socialization as a human fact, has also laid so much emphasis on striving for “haq” under all conditions for everyone among mankind whereby, striving for overcoming the nafs, the personal inclinations due to proclivity and socialization, is termed the greater jihad and a co-requisite to the reflective study of the Holy Qur'an. See Part-II of Islam: Why is the Holy Qur'an so easy to hijack? (Ibid.) for some inherent impediments in its path.
[6] Church plans Quran-burning event By Lauren Russell, CNN, http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/07/29/florida.burn.quran.day/index.html
[7] USA Today, March 21, 2011: Florida pastor oversees Quran burning By Adelle M. Banks, Religion News Service, http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2011-03-21-quran-burning-florida_N.htm
[8] European media provokes Muslims to inflame Zionist “CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS” by Christopher Bollyn, American Free Press, 3-Feb-2006, http://www.rense.com/general69/zz.htm
[9] Terry Jones 2012: Pastor Who Burned Quran Running For President, The Huffington Post 10/27/11, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/27/terry-jones-2012-president_n_1035631.html
[9c] Satanic Pictures By Israel Shamir, http://www.israelshamir.net/English/Satanic.htm
[12] A short history of the compilation of the Holy Qur'an, Some Old Manuscripts of the Holy Qur'an by Kazim Mudir Shanehchi, Astaneh-ye Quds-a Radawi, Mashad, Iran http://www.al-islam.org/al-tawhid/manuscripts.htm
[12a] Sentiment attributed to Imam Ali, the father of the progeny of the Prophet of Islam, paraphrased from Najhul Balagah. To appreciate the import of this statement, one has to understand the person who expressed his consternation with it, an unsurpassed victim of facile views of the Muslims of his time, and evidently, that vile legacy still endures. See What does the Holy Qur'an say about the Ahlul Bayt?, http://islam-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2013/03/what-does-quran-say-about-ahlul-bayt.html
[13] Abdus Salam's speech at the Nobel Banquet, December 10, 1979, http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1979/salam-speech.html
[15] Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser, Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 15-21 January 1998, Posted at globalresearch.ca 15 October 2001, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/BRZ110A.html
[16] Zbigniew Brzezinski, 'God is on your side' news clip, http://sites.google.com/site/humanbeingsfirst/download-pdf/god_is_on_your_side.wmv
[16c] FBI Teaches Agents: ‘Mainstream’ Muslims Are ‘Violent, Radical’, Spencer Ackerman, 09.14.11, http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/09/fbi-muslims-radical/2/
[16d] See pertinent excerpt from Plato's The Republic, Simile of the Cave, http://prisonersofthecave.blogspot.com/2007/04/introduction.html#Myth-of-the-Cave
[17] New American Theology of Civil Submission, Monday, April 14, 2008, prisonplanet.com, http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2008/140408_b_Theology.htm
[18] On Reading the Koran, Lesley Hazelton TED talk filmed Oct 2010, http://www.ted.com/talks/lesley_hazelton_on_reading_the_koran.html
[21] Introduction, The Poor-Man's Guide To Modernity, 2011-2015, http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2011/06/poor-mans-guide-to-modernity.html


Credits
Arabic Qur'an recitation by Shaykh Mahmoud Khalil al-Husary, audio courtesy of Verse By Verse Quran, acquired 8/13/2011 from http://versebyversequran.com
Arabic verses courtesy of the open source Qur'an Tanzil Project, acquired 8/13/2011 from http://tanzil.net/download/
Most (not all) English translation of Qur'an verses are by Yusuf Ali, Shakir, and Pickthall, acquired 8/13/2011 from http://tanzil.net/trans/
With humble thanks to all.


First published on June 11, 2011 | Last updated to sync with 5th Edition of Pakistan Decapitation Papers 2019 on Arba'een 1441 A.H.





4

Open Letter to Muslims: Is Islam really the Last Obstruction to World Government?

Islam vs. Secular Humanism and World Government

Please read the article “Thought police muscle up in Britain” (cached) by Hal G. P. Colebatch which appeared in The Australian on April 21, 2009, in conjunction with watching these revealing videos:
And connect with the impetus towards the introduction of Secular Humanism as the “religion” of the New World Order!
(Click image to watch) Caption BBC5 TV Brian Gerrish - State of the Nation talk at the Stoke Lawful Rebellion Conference, 24th January 2009
(Click image to watch) Caption BBC5 TV Brian Gerrish Common Purpose - Exposing the Real Traitors Wakeup Call Conference Fife 12 December 2009
(Click image to watch) Caption One Nation Under Siege Police State Rising By William Lewis
To understand what Secular Humanism really means in practice, as opposed to looking appealing on paper to the liberal mind, please watch the cited videos. To understand its philosophical underpinnings, please read my article “The Reality of Secular Humanism: Morality derived from the Intellect leads to Enslavement!” permanently linked to with this photograph:
Caption Secular Humanism is the Moral Relativism of the New Age: Morality derived from Intellect leads to Barbarianism and Enslavement under the false pretense of Enlightenment!
Caption The real face of Secular Humanism. Secular Humanism is the Moral Relativism of the New Age: Morality derived from Intellect leads to Barbarianism and Enslavement under the false pretense of Enlightenment! (http://tinyurl.com/superman-morality)
These documentaries reveal an on going and concerted effort to subvert Theism, mainly Islam and Christianity respectively. Since this letter is addressed to Muslims, its focus is on Islam. However, a universal truth which applies to all Theism regardless of religion, and which appears to be a major impediment to the nihilism of the New World Order, is that only Theism teaches man in absolute moral codes how to overcome self-interests for higher moral cause; only Theism teaches man how to break his bonds of servitude to fellow man. And that is why the genuine practice of Theism and its absolute morality poses a real impediment to Secular Humanism and World Government which depend on moral relativism to promulgate their nihilistic agenda for the New Age.
As noted by Brian Gerrish in his Lawful Rebellion talk, all other major religious and ethnic populations in the West have become so secularized in the Western culture that only Islam today remains the effective impediment in its path – even though it is not much of one, as seen by the subversion of the Muslims and their religion!
I quite agree with the introduction chapter by David Livingstone of his book “Surrendering Islam – The subversion of Muslim politics throughout history until the present day”.
Moral codes in Theism are indeed encased in the absolute semantic strait-jacket so feared by all tyrants across space and time and therefore, remain forever under attack and subversion. Islam, like all Theistic religions, has already answered the question of bondage to fellow man in showing the way to its effective severing. It is even part of the cryptic formula, the Kalima, recited by the adherent daily, without evidently understanding any of it:
La ilaha ilallah”, “there is no god but God” (Arabic: لا إله إلا الله )
Islam's clear prescription of bowing in servitude only to the One God of Truth is completely pre-conditioned upon first breaking the bonds of servitude to all other gods of falsehoods. A simple substitution of “God” with “Truth”, and “god” with “falsehoods” including the worship of “self-interests” and “society's gods” in the above daily declaration of faith makes the all encompassing import of Kalima self-evident.
What Livingstone has perhaps missed in his zeal (I haven't read his entire book), but which does not change his point about the subversion of Islam today made in that chapter, is that the subversion of Islam historically was started the day of 'Fatah Mecca', and not just by the later British empire creating sects harmless to their own imperial interests through Machiavellian cognitive infiltration. One can easily judge for oneself which ones are the creation of imperial psyops, and which ones have profited from their alien benefactors, by simply looking at the stances of its founding pontiffs towards British rule: who advocated obedience to the alien rulers by engaging that most abused verse of the Holy Qur'an for political purposes, verse 4:59, and went so far as to prohibit rebellion against the colonizing foreign power which was in direct competition with Muslim ruling states at the time?
Each one of these “imperial Islam” creations still flourishes today in some variation, and those born into them cannot distinguish their pedigree anymore than any other longer running Muslim sect can. Some sects have become important gate-keepers of Islam. Some have even been given sanctuary in the Jewish state in Palestine in the name of “freedom of religion”. These latter ones along with those that advocate strict political neutrality or apoliticalism, are presented to the world as the perfect model of “moderate Islam". Their adherents remain among the most peaceful and docile of all Muslim sects, indistinguishable in their socialization characteristic of self-righteousness from any other Muslim sect. So who can ever define who is a Muslim and who isn't? Which is precisely why this can of worms is periodically opened with utmost cunning for deriving political gain and distracting the public mind.
As an intellectual exercise however, all one has to do is simply apply that aforementioned criteria and ascertain for oneself the pedigree of one's own kaaba o qibla. It constitutes a most straightforward rejection criterion. It is not a complete acceptance criterion however, for that is where “militant Islam” and “warrior Islam” and “fanatic Islam” enter the theatre of the absurd as the dialectical “imperial Islam” equally in the service of empire. To appreciate just how difficult that task of self-examination can be as a self-referential problem, see Islam and Knowledge vs. Socialization where the practical wisdom of the guidance in the Holy Qur'an in its own words is made apparent (http://tinyurl.com/Islam-Socialization). One can only surmise that it has stayed a secret from the public mind because no benefit of its common knowledge and understanding of its meaning accrues to the exercise of political power that relies on division and deceit to conquer.
A dispassionate non-partisan study of recorded history itself shows that Islam was viewed differently by different peoples, many of whom converted overnight to the new religion of Arabia after a lifetime of opposition to it. As one critically examines the most momentous of times in the early days of Islam in the immediate aftermath of the death of its Prophet, even when one glosses over the first 25 years of tumultuous ad hoc political successions and rapid expansion of territories through their own la mission civilisatrice, the first dynastic imperial empire was really seeded by Abu Suffian.
The mighty trader and leader of the Meccans, and the Prophet of Islam's greatest antagonist, Abu Suffian, standing next to Ibn Abbas (the Prophet's relative), on the mountains surrounding Mecca on the night of 'Fatah Mecca' – following the conquest of Mecca without bloodshed, and the Prophet's blanket proclamation of full pardon without seeking any retribution for the ten years of imposed military warfare by the Meccans upon the Muslims – and watching the vast field of thousands of bonfires dotting the Muslim tents in the valley below, realized that Islam potentially meant a lucrative “empire”, and told Ibn Abbas so!
From Abu Suffian, the harbinger of ill-begotten Muslim dynastic empires, to Bernard Lewis, the harbinger of fabricated “clash of civilizations”, spanning the gamut of those 14 centuries and with all the Muslim empires which David Livingstone glorifyingly mentions in-between, they all corrupted the Holy Qur'an's designated “straight-path” of guidance in Islam, the “sirat-e-mustaqeem” of Surah Al-Fatiha, into “empire” – one way or another.
In today's modernity, Islam is principally subverted in the same mold by introducing “beneficial cognitive diversity” (sic!) into that original singular formulation of “straight-path”. See Islam and Knowledge vs. Socialization for details on how exactly it is accomplished today.
The sophistication of Islam's subversion however that is evidently running circles around the Muslim mind today, relies in the employment of complex political theory called Hegelian Dialectic (http://tinyurl.com/Hegelian-Dialectic-PSYOPS): invent two or more opposing and polarized ideologies (or lies), say one entirely militant, and the other entirely spiritual, and get them to clash by forcing people to choose between them while perniciously harvesting each one in the greater service of “imperial mobilization”. This is the underlying philosophy in the “good Muslim” vs. “bad Muslim” dialectic, and in Presidential statements like “either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists”. The conflict that is naturally seeded in any clash of the opposites is an opportunity for birth-panging something far greater from the burnt ashes left behind.
Tortuous processes so unleashed upon the unsuspecting public can leave so much confusion and chaos in its wake that as David Ben Gurion had explained the purpose of seeding controlled chaos: what is inconceivable in normal times is possible in revolutionary times”. And the Council on Foreign Relations proposed exactly that same modus operandi to seed world government:
'In short, the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built from the bottom up, rather than from the top down. It will look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion’ to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.'
Watch the fabrication of the Hegelian Dialectic of “militant Islam” vs. “moderate Islam” in the following two videos. Both are officially sponsored by the ruling establishment of the Hectoring Hegemons. In the previous era, “militant Islam” was known as “mujahadeen Islam” or “Brzezinski's Islam”. These promulgate their respective asininity among the Muslims for a purpose so diabolical, that it can only be fully comprehended in the domains of political theory, game theory, employing dynamic systems analysis, and not by studying each component separately.





The face of “Brzezinski's Islam” – 'God is on your side' “warrior Islam” loved by empire

(Click image to watch) Caption Brzezinski's Islam - Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski, America's National Security Advisor, to Afghan Mujadeen on the Pak-Afghan Border: God is on your side
Caption Video Face of “Brzezinski's Islam” – Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski, America's National Security Advisor, selling the Carter Doctrine to Afghan Mujahadeen on the Pak-Afghan Border: “We know of their deep belief in God, and we are confident that their struggle will succeed. That land over there, is yours, you'll go back to it one day, because your fight will prevail, and you'll have your homes and your mosques back again; because your cause is right; God is on your side.” See Time Magazine, Monday, Feb. 18, 1980 (http://tinyurl.com/6jqefz).





The face of “moderate Islam” – “absurd Islam” loved by empire

(Click image to watch) Caption Video Face of “moderate Islam” featuring Dr. Tahir-ul-Qadri, the “Ambassador of Peace”.
Caption Video The face of “moderate Islam” – “absurd Islam” waging war on terror against “militant Islam” – featuring Dr. Tahir-ul-Qadri, the “Ambassador of Peace”, who issued the widely promulgated 600 page Fatwa on Terrorism in the service of empire. BBC News Magazine excitedly reported it as 'A fatwa they can work with?': “An Islamic scholar turned up in London last week to deliver a religious ruling denouncing terrorism in all its forms – but what was it about him that made everyone sit up and listen? He’s a man on a mission – a mission to state the obvious.” This imperial “Islamic scholar” who issued a fatwa that the empire could work with, was rewarded by empire for his due diligence in not denouncing the superpower's own state sponsored super terror when he denounced “terrorism in all its forms”, with a place-setting at the massa's table! An even more entertaining version of Daniel Pipes' choice for “moderate Islam” with its idiotic leader basking in the adulation of his even more idiotic prostrating fans, is here (search)
For those unfamiliar with the name Daniel Pipes who loves “moderate Islam”, he is the Zionist neo-con Jew in the United States of America who was recommended by the President of United States no less, George W. Bush Jr., to head the United States Institute of Peace, and who has since 9/11 been working assiduously in 'Recruiting Soldiers Against Radical Islam' claiming that: “It's not a Clash of Civilizations, It's a Clash between the Civilized World and Barbarians.” The good Pipes wants to “Defeat radical Islam, strengthen moderate Islam.” See Open Letter to Daniel Pipes, April 03, 2007, inviting the fellow to World Court ala the fate meted to vulgar propagandists for “Lebensraum” at Nuremberg where all feigned protestation by the Nazi leadership was denied by the chief prosecuting counsel for the United States, Justice Robert H. Jackson, who coldly asserted that it was not victor's justice but violation of international law “to goosestep the Herrenvolk across international frontiers” under false pretenses of false flag operation that was being punished (http://tinyurl.com/Zahir-to-Daniel-Pipes-Invite and http://tinyurl.com/Nuremberg-Elephant-in-Bedroom ).
This sophisticated Machiavelli rooted in the Hegelian Dialectic process of thesis vs. anti-thesis, is primarily the reason most Muslims, while knowing that there is something wrong with the 'War on Terror' in that the way the UK-US-EU imperial axis of evil is going about it only creates more terror, remain perpetually confused by what is it that the West really wants when it arbitrarily seems to support opposites simultaneously. Inextricably caught between suicide bombers and F-16s on the one hand, and between neo-colonialism and struggle for daily bread on the other, most clutch at every strawman spun by any detracting snake-oil salesman in town. Thus we see the proliferation of conspiracy theories and plausible sounding false explanations with the concomitant “beneficial cognitive diversity” which these naturally engender, many of them deliberately created as red herrings (see Anatomy of Conspiracy Theory). And our learned scholars, intellectuals, pious pulpits, news media, politicians, et. al., all behave like prostitutes or brainless fools. The reality behind that behavior is in fact this: that they have all been co-opted; that they willingly lead the Newspeak chorus of 'war on terror', taliban, al-qaeeda, song and dance routine as the House Negroes of the West. Our best minds at best have turned Native Informant. Those whom we trust most betray us every day. So who is left to explain Realityspeak to the Muslims? Who is not co-opted? Who can dare call a spade a spade? None who is a somebody or who commands any audience, big or small, for all those needed to make the public mind by empire do make the public's mind in their respective spheres of influence.
As any knowledgeable person – who is not entirely deprived of mental acuity to have largely become a glorified parrot of history, often with imposing titles stamped upon his turban to lend respectability before the masses – would straightforwardly know, there are no empire’s in the religion of Islam itself. Or, for that matter in any Theistic religion that is intended to be a way of life for ordinary peoples. Only ‘religions’ of the elite have empires. And empires love such religions for the masses. Interestingly, one can trivially spot the subversion of any religion by simply observing the stances of its pontiffs to the powers under which they flourish. This is true of the religion of both the Christian and Muslim peoples throughout the ages. The subversion of Theistic theologies to support empire is empirical. The truth of these words is beyond doubt. It is self-evident.
Find a word for “empire” for me in the Holy Qur’an as a commandment to seek it – as distinct from finding it in the history of the despotic Muslim rulers who did indeed build vast dynastic empires with the help of their own doctrinal scholars, from historians to narrators, no different than has been done since time immemorial. There is no basis for such dynastic imperialism in the Holy Qur’an. Indeed, Muslim civilizations, its arts, letters, and sciences, all flourished during those first 700 years after the Prophet of Islam. And these dominant Muslim civilizations also defined the “modernity” of their epoch. But so have many other civilizations of history including the present modernity of the Americans – the Classical Greeks arguably flourished even more than the Muslims, and for a lot longer period. But what does that have to do with a religion? The Muslim rulers of all these Muslim empires espoused as much moral gravitas as any other preceding or succeeding rulers in recorded history, ancient and modern. Who can deny that? The empirical fact that these Muslim empires were long running family dynasties acquired by bloodshed, and often maintained and perpetuated by the same sort of intrigues and bloodshed as Shakespeare’s Henry the whatever, is not hidden from anyone, except perhaps the Muslims.
Whereas, Islam defines itself rather precisely in the Holy Qur'an, and it is entirely about moral existence along a divinely defined path – the “sirat-e-mustaqeem” noted in its very first Chapter. Islam's unequivocally stated aim is to give mankind the free-will of elevating itself to “Ashraf-ul-Makhlooq-aat” – the best among all creations – while fully engaged in the vicissitudes of this life as commanded in its Surah Asr. And furthermore, to also be equally free to go the converse route, be the worst of all creations. The twain, Islam the religion, and Muslims (with their concomitant histories, narratives, cultures, civilizations, and good and evil choices throughout history which has ultimately led us to our present), are not the same thing. Only Bernard Lewis is confused about it. He even opens his formidable thesis titled: “Crisis of Islam – Holy War and UnHoly Terror”, redefining “Islam” in precisely that way (which evidently has also confused David Livingstone like many other Muslims):
'It is difficult to generalize about Islam. To begin with, the word itself is commonly used with two related but distinct meanings, as the equivalents both of Christianity, and Christendom. In the one sense, it denotes a religion, as system of beliefs and worship; in the other, the civilization that grew up and flourished under the aegis of that religion. The word Islam thus denotes more than fourteen centuries of history, a billion and a third people, and a religious and cultural tradition of enormous diversity.' (page 1, Bernard Lewis, Crisis of Islam)
That Machiavellian redefinition of the word “Islam” is deconstructed in Report on the Mighty Wurlitzer - Architecture of Modern Propaganda for Psychological Warfare. Suffice it to note here that the Holy Qur'an has given a very precise meaning to the word “Islam” to exclusively designate a divine religion, a “deen” ( الْإِسْلَامَ دِينًا ), and not a civilization, not a people (for which a separate word “Muslim” is used in the Holy Qur'an), and not an empire (for which there is no word in the Holy Qur'an):
This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion; Holy Qur'an, Surah Al-Maeda verse fragment 5:3
الْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ وَأَتْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِي وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ الْإِسْلَامَ دِينًا ۚ
As corrupted, subservient, powerless, and mentally colonized the two billion Muslims are today despite our vast piety and full mosques, and as convoluted and tortuous the understanding of Islam and what passes as its history has become, still, according to Brian Gerrish in his aforementioned video, Islam and Muslims are evidently the single biggest social impediment to Secular Humanism!!
In other words, Islam is the last wall to breach in order to usher in the full 1984-like Orwellian New World Order, and all the details of enslavement which it portends, including, the elimination of religion, of family, and the big-Brother big-State birthing and owning the kids and raising them according to the new precepts of Secular Humanism. (See What’s the truth about modern medicine?, http://tinyurl.com/Modern-Medicine )
Hollywood movies like Logan's Run and Aldous Huxley's fable A Brave New World, while offering fun futuristic entertainment to the masses, have also been psychologically priming the Western public to this state of voluntary servitude wherein, a combination of Orwellian-Huxleyan worlds coupled with full mind-body control and total social engineering will simply make human revolt against the communist-style regimentation of the oligarchy as unthinkable as the revolt of sheep against the habit of mutton eating! That phraseology is borrowed from Bertrand Russell. Aldous Huxley had (perhaps self-servingly) observed in his talk at UC Berkeley in 1962, that eliciting such voluntary compliance from the plebes has remained the focus of all social engineering throughout the ages, “to get people actually to love their servitude” in what could only be called the “ultimate in malevolent revolution”:
'Today, we are faced, I think, with the approach of what may be called the ultimate revolution. The final revolution where man can act directly on the mind-body of his fellows. Well needless to say, some kind of direct action on human mind-bodies has been going on since the beginning of time. But this has generally been of a violent nature.
The techniques of terrorism have been known from time immemorial and people have employed them with more or less ingenuity, sometimes with the utmost crudity, sometimes with a good deal of skill acquired by a process of trial and error, finding out what the best ways of using torture, imprisonment, constraints of various kinds.
But, as, I think it was Mettenif, said many years ago, you can do everything with bayonets except sit on them! If you are going to control any population for any length of time you must have some measure of consent. It's exceedingly difficult to see how pure terrorism can function indefinitely. It can function for a fairly long time, but I think sooner or later you have to bring in an element of persuasion. An element of getting people to consent to what is happening to them.
Well, it seems to me that the nature of the Ultimate Revolution with which we are now faced is precisely this: that we are in process of developing a whole series of techniques which will enable the controlling oligarchy who have always existed and presumably always will exist, to get people actually to love their servitude!
This is the, it seems to me, the ultimate in malevolent revolution shall we say.'
(Aldous Huxley, 1962 UC Berkeley, minutes 3:05 to 5:17, transcribed by Project Humanbeingsfirst http://archive.org/download/AldousHuxley-TheUltimateRevolution/AldousHuxley-TheUltimateRevolution_64kb.m3u )
The dystopic fables are piece-meal encroaching on reality space in baby-steps. What stands in the path of fully realizing that dystopia?
The Nineteen Eighty-four style full spectrum thought control paradigm being enacted in the US--UK is portentous of what's to come to all of Western civilization as a very visible force. Its signs are already visible all around us, thus far only disguised as the “war on terror”. See this article “War on Terror is not about Islamofascism – get with the agenda you people” for how it is perniciously making its way into the very fabric of American and European society where the “terrorists” now “look Western”. And with this latest Times Square bombing plot, I just heard (on May 07, 2010) Retired General Michael Hayden, the terrorist “tickling” specialist as the former director of the CIA, now with the Chertoff group selling all those body-scanners to the United States, on MSNBC News describing the new Al-qaeeda threat. Soon new laws will be enacted or enforced to deal with those. Already we are being conditioned to obey orders by forcing us to take our shoes off at airports, and compelling us to exhibit our anatomical perfections to the perps manning the FAST scanners. Hollywood entertainment in “Total Recall” had presaged full body scanners at airports with people going through them without a second thought a full two decades ago (Arnold Schwarzenegger, 1990). And we are doing exactly that today. The RFID implants are next. Zbigniew Brzezinski, like his intellectual confrere Aldous Huxley before him, had also predicted with matching chutzpah in his seminal 1970 book Between Two Ages : America's Role in the Technetronic Era, that:
'In the technetronic society scientific and technical knowledge, in addition to enhancing production capabilities, quickly spills over to affect almost all aspects of life directly. Accordingly, both the growing capacity for the instant calculation of the most complex interactions and the increasing availability of biochemical means of human control augment the potential scope of consciously chosen direction, and thereby also the pressures to direct, to choose, and to change.
Reliance on these new techniques of calculation and communication enhances the social importance of human intelligence and the immediate relevance of learning. The need to integrate social change is heightened by the increased ability to decipher the patterns of change; this in turn increases the significance of basic assumptions concerning the nature of man and the desirability of one or another form of social organization. Science thereby intensifies rather than diminishes the relevance of values, but it demands that they be cast in terms that go beyond the more crude ideologies of the industrial age.' (page 10)
This re-casting of values that “go beyond the more crude ideologies of the industrial age” with “biochemical means of human control [which] augment the potential scope of consciously chosen direction,” is the incontrovertible flag of scientific totalitarianism we see rapidly being unfurled today. While much less biochemical in its present state of deployment than in Aldous Huxley's narrative (but not for the want of it, for example see RFID Implants), it is no less coercive than in George Orwell's narrative. Brzezinski went on to prognosticate the “trend” in his book, and mind you with a foresight so uncannily accurate that he could only have been sitting at the same oligarchic dinner tables when the future that is already here today, was being planned into existence:
'In the technetronic society the trend seems to be toward aggregating the individual support of millions of unorganized citizens, who are easily within the reach of magnetic and attractive personalities, and effectively exploiting the latest communication techniques to manipulate emotions and control reason.
Reliance on television—and hence the tendency to replace language with imagery, which is international rather than national, and to include war coverage or scenes of hunger in places as distant as, for example, India—creates a somewhat more cosmopolitan, though highly impressionistic, involvement in global affairs.' (page 11)
'Life seems to lack cohesion as environment rapidly alters and human beings become increasingly manipulable and malleable. Everything seems more transitory and temporary: external reality more fluid than solid, the human being more synthetic than authentic. Even our senses perceive an entirely novel “reality”—one of our own making but nevertheless, in terms of our sensations, quite “real.”
More important, there is already widespread concern about the possibility of biological and chemical tampering with what has until now been considered the immutable essence of man. Human conduct, some argue, can be predetermined and subjected to deliberate control. Man is increasingly acquiring the capacity to determine the sex of his children, to affect through drugs the extent of their intelligence, and to modify and control their personalities. Speaking of a future at most only decades away, an experimenter in intelligence control asserted, “I foresee the time when we shall have the means and therefore, inevitably, the temptation to manipulate the behaviour and intellectual functioning of all the people through environmental and biochemical manipulation of the brain.” ' (page 12)
'Another threat, less overt but no less basic, confronts liberal democracy. More directly linked to the impact of technology, it involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled and directed society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite whose claim to political power would rest on allegedly superior scientific know-how.
Unhindered by the restraints of traditional liberal values, this elite would not hesitate to achieve its political ends by using the latest modern techniques for influencing public behavior and keeping society under close surveillance and control.' (page 97)
Zbigniew Brzezinski's elite have already embarked on achieving their political end “by using the latest modern techniques for influencing public behavior and keeping society under close surveillance and control” as witnessed today. The culmination of this path of engineered social control, the “tampering with what has until now been considered the immutable essence of man” – a tortuous combination of Orwellian and Brave New World in which “Human conduct [is] predetermined and subjected to deliberate control” – will hit the developed West the hardest.
Westerners were the most used to living in free societies, and thus, by the necessity of management of the masses by the controlling oligarchy, had been given the illusions of freedom more than us in the East where we were long conditioned to god, kings, and dictators. As Goethe had observed: “None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free”. I do believe that mentally, as colonized the East has been physically, it is has been far freer than the West. In the East, we don't trust our elite, nor our government. In the West, most even refuse to believe that there is even an elite which runs their elected governments, and the vast majority “United We Stand” as is evident from 911.
The Orwellian-Huxleyan social engineering presently in the works takes away even those freedoms and those illusions – because, the West is headed towards full-spectrum dominance, but not just of the world, but of its peoples. I.e., totalitarianism the likes of which have not been seen in history. The East is not targeted for such mind-controlled totalitarianism, because, for one thing it is difficult to implement. We are too backwards as a scientifically controlled modernity. But not to fear, we are a direct target of population reduction and all the rest of Malthusian crap. See my deconstruction of NSSM-200, and Bertrand Russell's “Impact of Science on Society”.
But, as is the truism of life, we all have to go some day of course. So, arguably, at least let's live with a mind that isn't enslaved, even though the body may be in chains and under the constant threat of physical “shock and awe” from both the pirate suicide bombers working for the emperor as patsies, and the emperor's drones once again bringing us the white man's burden, its renewed la mission civilisatrice.
The only place left today to seek to make a home to raise one's family, appears to be back in the East – yes, where we are under constant “shock and awe”. The psychological attacks and sophisticated social engineering transpiring in the West, coupled with its scientific modernity, make surviving outside the “matrix” of thought control a rather challenging if not outright impossible task in the West. Crazy, isn't it? But crazy or not, choosing lesser of two evils has become part of the calculus of life's decision making – whatever the decision. Only fools and ignoramuses will ignore these parameters though – for ignorance is surely bliss. Taking the “blue-pill” does have its rewards. In the evergreen Platonic fable Simile of the Cave depicted in the Hollywood movie Matrix, the “red-pill” is the bitter pill of reality that is hard to swallow. (See dialog in side bar)
This potential obstruction to the elite's religion of Secular Humanism for their world government posed by Islam as a Theistic religion, and by ordinary practicing Muslims just living their ordinary family lives, is an entirely different and orthogonal dimension from the hectoring hegemons' harnessing of “militant Islam” and “moderate Islam”. To ensure the steady supply of controlled chaos, “Revolutionary Islam” has been added to the mix as the trifecta, a perfect storm for Muslim on Muslim violence. See Revolutionary Islam in Pakistan – Pawn of World Order
(
http://tinyurl.com/Revolutionary-Islam-Pawn-of-WO).
Before hearing Brian Gerrish's evidence last year and reflecting upon the matter ever since, I did not really believe Islam, the last of the great Theistic religions, to be anything other than a diabolical instrument of hegemony in the minds of hectoring hegemons in the pre and post 9/11 world – just like Communism of the USSR was before it was dismantled. Something they brilliantly subverted to create a boogieman for seeding “doctrinal motivation, intellectual commitment, and patriotic gratification” in order to sustain “Imperial mobilization” on Zbigniew Brzezinski's Grand Chessboard. But something they had only utter contempt for.
Evidently, they also find Islam to be a genuine impediment to achieving their ultimate agenda of Secular Humanism. An impediment reaching outside of their direct ability to eliminate or even control. An empire in its own statecraft of hegemony never holds genuine impediments to its primacy ever in contempt. Rather, it always deals with them as a real enemy to subdue and dominate with “military-style objectivity” and “avoidance of preconceived value assumptions”. That amoral phraseology is from the Report from Iron Mountain. The myriad Pentagon and think-tank documents such as the Joint Vision 2020 and PNAC which blithely strategize for “full spectrum dominance”, afford a glimpse into that primacy mindset of empire.
“(Morpheus) The matrix is everywhere, it is all around us. Even now in this very room, you can see it when you look out your window, or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work, when you go to church, when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.
(Neo) What truth?
(Morpheus) That you are a slave Neo. Like everyone else you were born into bondage, born into a prison that you cannot smell or taste or touch. A prison for your mind. Unfortunately no one can be told what the matrix is. You have to see it for yourself. This is your last chance. After this there is no turning back. You take the blue-pill, the story ends, you wakeup in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red-pill, you stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes. Remember, all I am offering is the truth, nothing more.” (Dialog from Matrix)
Incredible! Muslims today, despite our pathetic servile condition slaving under the yoke of both mental and physical colonization, still potentially have something that is perceived as a real obstruction by the hectoring hegemons in their nihilist calculus of world government.
That alone is an excitement I cannot contain! I have something they can't control nor take away from me if I don't let them. Indeed, the pithy Surah Al-Asr of Islam, is perhaps the most potent political-spiritual weapon system in the Muslim possession if we can only learn to use it effectively. It can straightforwardly achieve what Etienne de La Boétie could not bring about in his “The Politics of Obedience: The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude”!
Islam's prescription to end man's voluntary servitude to tyranny, one which escaped Etienne de La Boétie's commonsensical Discourse, is Jihad-un-nafs. Contrary to what many are led to believe as just an “inner struggle” with no outward manifestation, its true import is nothing less than revolutionary. Jihad-un-nafs principally directs us in our inner struggles to break our bonds of servitude to fellow man, to overcome our fears, apathy, and silence. It is the reservoir from which saying 'No' to the banality of evil springs from. It is the principal fount of moral integrity, not ritual or selfish piety seeking Heaven. Jihad-un-nafs enables us to deny our own petty as well as existential self-interests when they conflict with morality and 'higher purpose'.
For, indeed, it is only self-interests that trump morality. Self-interests co-opt us and perpetually enslave us to any tyrant. Once such inner-struggle to break free of self-interest is underway, when fears and allegiances to falsehoods start melting away, when determination sets in which no denigrating labels may circumvent, when the fear of the loss of paycheck or confinement to state hospitality centers can no longer preempt moral stance, then, and only then, doors automatically open up, feet automatically start marching in the streets, mouths automatically come un-stitched, and in the limit, one fearlessly stands-up before the D9-Caterpillar bulldozer like Rachel Corrie, and before the armies of tyrants like David before Goliath, Imam Hussein before Yazeed, Rosa Parks before the white man's bus driver, Viva Palestina before Israel, …. As the late George Bernard Shaw had trenchantly observed: “We are made wise not by the recollections of our past, but by the responsibility for our future.” That responsibility becomes easier to shoulder when our self-interests can no longer trump our moral callings. The forces which preempt such wholesome goodness from percolating widely in society are examined in The Art and Science of Co-option (http://tinyurl.com/Art-and-Science-of-Co-option). Even the more resourceful ones bow before these existential forces as can be seen in The Aga Khan's Doctrine of Neutrality (http://tinyurl.com/Doctrine-of-Neutrality).
Pious peoples continually ask me what can they do as the justification for their silence and apathy. As consummate victims of the banality of evil, evidently they are so saddled with self-interests that they either pretend to not see the clear path as they rather stay busy in their various ritual acts of seeking Heaven instead of stand-up to wrong-doings, or, suffer from a myopia characteristic of self-absorption and/or indoctrination. Well, Heaven, if there is one in the future, is surely denied to those who help create hell on earth today – for, evil only flourishes when well-intentioned people remain silent spectators and do nothing to stop it. Often times they even directly collaborate in it as part of their daily grind, collectively culminating in horrendous evils – the banality of evil! Jewish scholar Hannah Arendt had already explored that aspect of it in copious detail in the context of the Third Reich in 1963. Just two score years later, I too had dwelled upon it in my very first piece of public writing in the context of the Fourth one. For our purposes here however, let's briefly examine this idea of apathy logically within the Theistic beliefs of the Muslims themselves. I have examined indoctrination and the reigning twisted epistemology which blinds one to it elsewhere.
Do pious Muslims filling their mosques in relative comforts while humanity everywhere is oppressed at the altar of the lusts of the Hectoring Hegemons, think that Jahanam will be the abode of only the few tyrants and their soldiers of fame and fortune who directly inflicted the evils? That their own souls are spotless since they stayed busy in ritual piety waiting for Allah?
If it is true that tyrants flourish only with the assistance of the majority who silently comply, and empiricism and history both lend substantial evidence to this view (Etienne de La Boétie almost 500 years ago gave a compelling description of it in his Discourse cited above), then, it logically follows that the first-cause enablers of tyranny and its spread throughout the lands is the silently spectating apathy of the peoples! Those who enable crimes are no less culpable than those who commit crimes.
The inescapable logic of this condemns the first-causers to be the backbone fuel of the very inferno they so wish to escape with their obsession with ritual piety while Creation burns. If the god whom pious Muslims worship is a rational god, then this must be true – for, only in courageously rising to break the bonds of servitude to fellow man is Islam's “Ashraf-ul-Makhlooq-aat” birth-panged into existence. If however, their god is irrational, as many learned scholars proclaim when they attribute arbitrariness to god's justice due to its self-proclaimed omnipotence, then is such a god anything more than Zeus, the anthropomorphic god of ancient Greece? Why fall in prostration to Zeus 5 times each day?
Even Nuremberg, as fallible as that Military Tribunal was in its administration of 'victor's justice', focussed on the first-cause (self-servingly) ignoring the Allied bombings of civilian population centers and dropping of atomic bombs. Nuremberg called the Nazi aggression the first-cause of war, “the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.”
When the first-cause is always held more culpable even in our fallible courts on earth, do Muslims think that in the Court of the Most Just the first-cause enablers will get a free-ride?
Many thinking Muslims presume that the god they worship is absolute in its Justice. Otherwise, they feel that the whole notion of Accountability on the Day of Judgment in the Hereafter becomes meaningless gibberish, devoid of substance. Indeed, were that not the case, God's Justice would be reduced to the whimsical moral relativism that is already being thrust upon us in these times as propositioned by a US Supreme Court Justice:
Nothing is more certain in modern society than the principle that there are no absolutes, that a name, a phrases, a standard has meaning only when associated with the considerations which give birth to nomenclature. To those who would paralyze our Government in the face of impending threat by encasing it in a semantic strait-jacket, we must reply that all concepts are relative.” Justice Vinson, U.S. Supreme Court, 1951
Moral codes in Theism are indeed encased in the absolute semantic strait-jacket so feared by all tyrants across space and time and therefore, remain forever under attack and subversion. Islam, like all Theistic religions, has already answered the question of bondage to fellow man in showing the way to its effective severing. It is even part of the cryptic formula, the Kalima, recited by the adherent daily, without evidently understanding any of it: “La ilaha ilallah” (Arabic: لا إله إلا الله‎ ) – “there is no god but God”.
Islam's clear prescription of bowing in servitude only to the One God of Truth is completely pre-conditioned upon first breaking the bonds of servitude to all other gods of falsehoods. A simple substitution of “God” with “Truth”, and “god” with “falsehoods” including the worship of “self-interests” and “society's gods”, in the above daily declaration of faith makes the all encompassing import of Kalima self-evident. The logic of that declaration itself mandates this mental substitution in the proclamation of Monotheism in order to prevent it from degenerating into an absurdity. The Holy Qur'an admonishes not to make a mockery of its teaching:
That this is indeed a Qur'an Most Honourable, In a Book well-guarded, Which none shall touch but those who are clean: A Revelation from the Lord of the Worlds. Is it such a Message that ye would hold in light esteem?” Holy Qur'an, Surah Al-Waqia, 56:77-81
And the Holy Qur'an unequivocally equates lies and falsehoods before which one bows, in fear or in expectations, with false gods – as commonsense would dictate:
Is it a falsehood – gods beside Allah – that ye desire? (Surah As-Saffat 37:86)
أَئِفْكًا ءَالِهَةً دُونَ ٱللَّهِ تُرِيدُونَ
Islam, for its followers, is anything but an absurdity. They'd sooner die than mock their religion. And yet, their facile understanding of it directly reduces their practice of their lofty proclamation of Monotheism to the absurdity of polytheism. Silence and apathy in the face of the ubiquitous spread of oppression and falsehoods in our time, is akin to directly bowing in servitude before the gods of tyranny. That silence and co-option permits tyranny to spread unchecked becoming its de facto first-cause enabler! Islam calls the allegiance to another superpower, or bowing in servitude before other gods, polytheism. The abode of polytheists, the Holy Qur'an oft proclaims, is Jahanam (the metaphorical abode in the Hereafter where accounts are to be settled for creating, aiding and abetting, the hell on earth).
Q.E.D.
The invitation to break bondage to all false gods and idols is the first Abrahamic creed of Islam. Without it, there is no Islam – only hypocritical pretensions. This Qur'anic similitude was well understood by previous generations of Muslims. This is even evidenced in the twentieth century poet-philosopher of Muslims, “Sir” Muhammad Iqbal's* attempts at liberating the Muslim umma from the shackles of mental servitude. In Zarb-E-Kaleem, “Sir” Allama Iqbal went on to most eloquently explain the meaning of the first sentence of the Kalima: “there is no god but God” (see famous poem below and footnote on “Sir” Allama Iqbal at the end).
But Muslims in our present age of Jahiliya have been deftly indoctrinated into believing that polytheism is only about worshiping the stone statues like the ones which inhabited the Kaaba before the advent of Islam and its latter day variants, both physical and abstract, seen among peoples of many faiths. Such as, the Holy Trinity of the Christians (the Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost), and the physical representations of the many gods of the Hindus! While loudly decrying those gods of others, Muslims daily reaffirm their own allegiance to all the false gods of pelf and power to advance their own petty livelihood and ephemeral station.
Indeed, most among us bow before empire in full ablution!
“Sir” Allama Iqbal's Poem in Zarb-E-Kaleem explains
“there is no god but God”
خودي کا سر نہاں لا الہ الا اللہ
خودي ہے تيغ، فساں لا الہ الا اللہ
Khudi ka sirr-e-nihaaN La ilaha il Allah
khudi hai tegh-e-fasaaN La ilaha il Allah
The secret of the Self is hid, In words "No god but He alone".
The Self is just a dull-edged sword, "No god but He," the grinding stone.

يہ دور اپنے براہيم کي تلاش ميں ہے
صنم کدہ ہے جہاں، لا الہ الا اللہ
Yeh daur apne 'Braaheem ki talaash mein hai
Sanam-kadah hai jahaaN La ilaha il Allah
An Abraham by the age is sought To break the idols of this Hall:
The avowal of God's Oneness can Make all these idols headlong fall.

کيا ہے تو نے متاع غرور کا سودا
فريب سود و زياں ، لا الہ الا اللہ
Kiya hai tu ne mataa'-e-gharoor ka sauda
fareb-e-sood-o-ziyaaN ! La ilaha il Allah
A bargain you have struck for goods Of life, a step, that smacks conceit,
All save the Call "No god but He" Is merely fraught with fraud and deceit.



يہ مال و دولت دنيا، يہ رشتہ و پيوند
بتان وہم و گماں، لا الہ الا اللہ
Yeh maal o dawlat-e-dunya, yeh ristha o paivand
butaan-e-vehm-o-gumaaN! La ilaha il Allah
The worldly wealth and riches too, Ties of blood and friends a dream
The idols wrought by doubts untrue, All save God's Oneness empty seem.

خرد ہوئي ہے زمان و مکاں کي زناري
نہ ہے زماں نہ مکاں، لا الہ الا اللہ
Khird huwee hai zamaan o makaan ki zunaari
na hai zamaaN, na makaaN! La ilaha il Allah
The mind has worn the holy thread Of Time and Space like pagans all
Though Time and Space both illusive "No god but He" is true withal.

يہ نغمہ فصل گل و لالہ کا نہيں پابند
بہار ہو کہ خزاں، لا الہ الا اللہ
Yeh naghma fasl-e-gul o laaleh ka nahin paband
bahaar ho ke khizaaN, La ilaha il Allah
These melodious songs are not confined To Time when rose and tulip bloom
Whatever the season of year be "No god but He" must ring till doom.



اگرچہ بت ہيں جماعت کي آستينوں ميں
مجھے ہے حکم اذاں، لا الہ الا اللہ
Agarche buth hain jama'at ki aasteenoN mein
mujhe hai hukm-e-azaaN, La ilaha il Allah
Many idols are still concealed' In their sleeves by the Faithful Fold,
I am ordained by Mighty God To raise the call and be much bold.

(Kalaam-e-Iqbal, Zarb-E-Kaleem. Text from youtube by Syed Akbar Ali Shah, listen)





All those signature prostrations on the prayer-mat and the circumambulations around the Kaaba leaving their indelible mark of piety on the forehead of silence to the hell on earth, may yet turn out to be the key evidence for the eternal purgatory of Hell for polytheism in the Hereafter. For Islam to make any rational sense at all, that is the only logic of justice which falls out. And that logic has been reaffirmed in Surah Al-Asr of the Holy Qur'an, in the second most misunderstood formulaic daily rehearsal by Muslims: “Wa ta wa so bil haq” (Arabic 103:3 وَتَوَاصَوۡا بِالۡحَقِّ ) – “and those who strive for haq” (see exposition of Surah Al-Asr). What is “haq” but another synonym for truth, justice – the exact antithesis of silent collaboration with tyranny? 2 + 2 still equals only 4, even when the pious might insist upon 5!
It is surely the most ironical of empirical paradoxes that it is not the theists by and large, but the moral atheists who have courageously risen to shoulder that “responsibility for our future”! See Islam and Knowledge vs. Socialization for why, contrary to popular belief, even the atheist is not without an inner moral compass (see Bertrand Russell's formulation cited therein). Perhaps the pious living for the Hereafter in obliviousness to the tyranny around them, might strive to learn from the godless to value the here and the now more than Hereafter; to endeavor to make the present less hellish in order to avoid it in the Hereafter; to be more concerned with affairs of the here than of the Hereafter; and in doing so perhaps come to learn the real intent of Theism – “Wa ta wa so bil haq” – from these moral atheists!
It would be a well-deserved divine irony if moral atheists who stood by their fellow man without fear of hell or favor of heaven, come to constitute the largest citizenry of any Heaven if God does turn out to exist! They will end up with the last laugh in either case! That’s all I can say to the pious silent bystanders of modernity prostrating daily in ritual prayers. Once again, poet laureate “Sir” Allama Iqbal*, the Indian Knight of The Round Table of the British Empire, said it a bit more trenchantly in Bang-e-Dara to unveil the secret face of Musalman's Islam (see his famous verse below, perhaps staring at himself in the mirror).





The face of Musalman's Islam – the hypocrite's Islam


جو ميں سر بسجدہ ہوا کبھي تو زميں سے آنے لگي صدا
تیرا دل تو ہے صنم آشنا، تجھے کيا ملے گا نماز ميں
Jo Mein Sar-ba-sajada Hova Kabhi, To Zameen Se Aane Lagi Sada
Tera Dil To Hai Sanam Aashana, Tujhe Kya Milega Namaaz Mein (transliteration)
'Ever I bowed my head in prostration, there arose hue and cry from the ground:
Thy heart is enamoured by idols, what shalt thou find in prayers?'

(Kalaam-e-Iqbal, Bang-e-Dara. Text from youtube by Syed Akbar Ali Shah, listen)



East or West, theist or atheist, being aware of the real challenges for those who choose to not merely exist in a dream-state, I believe, will prepare one to meet them more effectively. Self awareness however is the key to the awareness of reality. Edward Bernays stated the reality of modern social engineering bluntly in the opening passage of his 1928 book titled Propaganda: “We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of.” The videos cited at the top of this letter empirically show that a formidable totalitarian system is being engineered even as we speak, and we are being convinced to accept it. Why are they succeeding? How are they able to control our perceptions? I am afraid that most Muslims remain unaware of all this concerted social engineering as many continue to sing the empire's 'War on Terror' song against the Islamofascists. Soon, Muslims might be surprised to find their own religion banned in the West and their very identity as Muslim being associated with “terrorism”. In a generation or two, there won't be any overt Muslims. A far cry?
Not if this Oped in Pakistan's Dawn of May 06, 2010 is portentous:
Hussain immigrated to the United States in 2003 and said his children had once even asked if they could change their names due to the image of their homeland in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks.”
The headline screaming in today's Dawn, May 07, 2010, is even more revealing, even if perhaps mainly as Mighty Wurlitzer's psyop to get others to follow suit:
Pakistanis pose as Indians after NY bomb scare: NEW YORK: Pakistani merchants and job seekers in the United States, still reeling from economic hardship since the Sept. 11 attacks of 2001, are posing as Indians to avoid discrimination in the wake of the Times Square bomb attempt.”
The systematic demonization of Islam and Muslims is being conducted not merely by the vile ignoramuses and the agents provocateurs in burning the Holy Qur'an (see Hijacking the word 'Islam' for Mantra Creation ), but officially by the State itself as evidenced in what the FBI is teaching its agents even in the tenth year of 9/11 (see Wired.com “FBI Teaches Agents: 'Mainstream' Muslims Are 'Violent, Radical'” and “7th-Century Simpletons”, September 14, 2011, and July 27, 2011, respectively, cached). And who is teaching this theology to the FBI? See the face of “Jews' Islam” graph below that is being used for training the FBI. The graph is self-evident and speaks to the identity of its authors itself. Mother Jones magazine September/October 2011 issue reports that the FBI has built a massive network of spies to prevent another domestic attack (sic!), “The bureau now maintains a roster of 15,000 spies, some paid as much as $100,000 per case, many of them tasked with infiltrating Muslim communities in the United States.” Teamed up with the University of California-Berkeley's Investigative Reporting Program, the author of that Mother Jones report gallantly asked – perhaps to add a measure of chutzpah after carefully omitting to challenge the core-axiom of the State that 9/11 was the work of Muslim terrorists – “But are they busting terrorist plots—or leading them?”
That Machiavellian trend of calculated lying by way of omissions in respectful looking reportage, backed by academic prestige which retain the core presuppositions of empire necessary to craft the Hegelian Dialectic of Dissent (http://tinyurl.com/Hegelian-Dialectic-Dissent), is ubiquitous. It was brazenly apparent in the May 2011 CAIR report which was co-sponsored by the University of California-Berkeley’s Center for Race and Gender (see CAIR Documenting Islamophobia on the rise in the USA – Calling CAIR to Account for its Omissions By Zahir Ebrahim ). It was also evident in the followup August 2011 report by a private Washington think-tank called American Progress, gallantly titled “Fear, Inc.” (see Zahir Ebrahim's response to Fear, Inc. The Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America ). Both of these reports respectably documented the rise of Islamophobia in America. But they also egregiously failed to examine its root cause and motivation in the geopolitical context of the 'War on Terror'.
The concept that this synthetic 'war on terror' is being used as the pretext for ushering in one-world government is completely absent in these (yawn) narratives!
One hopes that one might be forgiven if its authors remind one of the three wise monkeys.





The face of “useful idiot's Islam” – the “dissent Islam”

Caption The three wise monkeys: hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil 2
Caption The three wise monkeys: hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil
(image via wikipedia)
Perhaps these otherwise brilliant academic pundits are poorly read only in certain impermissible scholarship. Being “innocent of knowledge” does appear to keep them gainfully employed as “useful idiots” in the service of empire. Or, the ever more likely case, the more respectable looking academic scholars and award-winning journalists are the Mighty Wurlitzer's assets. This is not just an opinion but actual public fact of the intelligence apparatus of the United States planting its stooges and assets both in the news media and in the academia. Which is what the term Mighty Wurlitzer means --- please see the Report on Mighty Wurlitzer if one is unfamiliar with the techniques of perception management. Whatever the case, willfully ignorant useful idiots, or vulgar propagandists who lie by omission, these dissent con-artists prima facie convey both, the empire's opprobrium of “Militant Islam” necessary to lend fuel to its “doctrinal motivation”, and what the empire considers permissible dissent to corral the recalcitrant public mind. Note how dissent is made permissible and why it is necessary in democratic societies which constitutionally permit dissent, for it also sells to the world and to their own public the superiority of Western democracy which looks awfully good in words: By retaining the axiom of “Militant Islam” as a presupposition, while critiquing the reactionary excesses of the superpower in response to 9/11.
That is the standard party line presupposition of all acceptable dissent in the West under its vaunted freedom of speech. It is also the dissent of all house niggers and vassal states in the East. And it is a propaganda lie outright, part of the manufactured Hegelian Dialectic of Dissent, a tune played by the Mighty Wurlitzer to attract and corral the handful of public consciences left in society while retaining the core axioms of empire. You have your cake and can eat it as well. The Hegelian Dialectic of Dissent is a most potent concoction of Machiavelli and its anatomy is carefully dissected from limb to limb and psyop to psyop in the Report on Mighty Wurlitzer. Some of the biggest brand names of dissent are part of this staged Act. See an immediate example of this sophisticated propaganda lie in action – the journalist here is a an award winning former New York Times war correspondent: Zahir Ebrahim's Response to Chris Hedges' amalgam of half-truths 'A Decade After 9/11: We Are What We Loathe' (http://tinyurl.com/Zahir-to-Chris-Hedges-rubbish). More examples are carefully scrutinized and documented for war crimes accounting someday of all vulgar propagandists who play this game of betraying the public trust, in Songbird or Superman – You Decide! (http://tinyurl.com/Songbird-or-Superman-You-Judge).





The face of “Jews' Islam” – the “violent Islam”,
“militant Islam”, “radical Islam”,
“Clash of Civilizations Islam”,
“Clash of the Civilized World and Barbarians Islam”

(Click image to watch) Caption An FBI presentation titled “Militancy Considerations” measures the relationship between piety and violence among the texts of the three Abrahamic faiths (the god's chosen people obviously coming out on top!!!)
Caption Video face of “Jews' Islam” – “violent Islam” As reported by Wired on September 14, 2011, an FBI training presentation titled “Militancy Considerations” measures the relationship between piety and violence among the texts of the three Abrahamic faiths [ the god's chosen people obviously coming out on top!!! ] As time goes on, the followers of the Torah and the Bible move from “violent” to “non-violent.” Not so for devotees of the Koran, whose “moderating process has not happened.” The line representing violent behavior from devout Muslims flatlines and continues outward, from 610 A.D. to 2010. In other words, religious Muslims have been and always will be agents of aggression. Click on the graph to watch the FBI Presentation Video artfully Hijacking Islam. See its full deconstruction in FBI Muslims and Militancy Considerations --- Heads up. (Image source wired.com)
It's a pretty slick game of full spectrum assault on all human senses, cognitive as well as subliminal, which tickle both the primordial fears and anxieties for self-preservation on the one hand, and emotional attachments to the relevant political and religious ideologies on the other for seeking safety. Hollywood has already interjected that thought of banning the Holy Qur'an into Western consciousness in the movie “V for Vendetta”. Soon – that demand might actually be heard on mainstream television in the many choruses of the Mighty Wurlitzer. It ought not to surprise anyone if Muslim faces are presented as Hegelian counterpoint, demanding a “moderate” Islam instead of banning the Qur'an outright! (See Hijacking the word 'Islam' for Mantra Creation). Muslims have plenty of House Niggers and cultivated agents and assets in the West who will be harvested for this purpose. (See FAQ: What is an Intellectual Negro) Such a demand simply cannot be plausibly made, or effectively implemented, in the East! Judging from the riots that break out on the “mere” cartooning of the Prophet of Islam – O yes, we are surely slated for population reduction, the “useless eaters” of humanity, while we apathetically wait for Allah to change our condition:
For his sake there are angels following one another, before him and behind him, who guard him by Allah's commandment; surely Allah does not change the condition of a people until they change their own condition; and when Allah intends evil to a people, there is no averting it, and besides Him they have no protector.” (Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Ra'd, 13:11)
That which is left you by Allah is best for you, if ye (but) believed! but I am not set over you to keep watch!” (Holy Qur’an, Surah Hud, 11:86)
Surely We have shown him the way: he may be thankful or unthankful.” (Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-insaan 76:3)
Evidently, depending on whether or not one believes these verses are the God of Islam's categorical admonishment to Muslims on how to conduct their worldly affairs, the God of the Muslims says different from what a lot of Muslims have been led to believe (vicariously and from the pulpits) that Allah chala raha hai (God is running the world)!
If someone were to ask me, I'd suggest that obsessive immoral devils, the Übermensch social Darwinians, are running the world. Because, Allah has unequivocally proffered all human beings to stand up to these devils; to not wait for Allah to change their condition; to manage their own affairs with justice “Wa ta wa so bil haq”, and with perseverance “Wa ta wa so bis sabr”, if their life is not to be a total loss despite all its material as well as “spiritual” advancement. This kind of modern advancement, if it continues, will spell the death knell for mankind as we once knew it as a new totalitarian global police state emerges from the ashes of Muslim dust. The side that belongs to the naturalists, meaning, the predatory social Darwinian side, is thus far winning the battles on all fronts. Both the religion of Islam and Muslims appear to be impediments to its quest for total Secular Humanism. Muslims need to prepare ourselves beyond our present commendable asininity despite it plausibly being a nuisance speed bump to World Order. The religion of Islam can take care of itself. Its Guardian has taken explicit responsibility for it:
    • We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption). (Holy Qur'an, Surah Al-Hijr 15:9)
But that same Guardian has unequivocally stated time and again as in the aforesaid verses, that He has not taken responsibility for the Muslims. Muslim are not the “god's chosen people” that no matter what they do, they will remain “god's chosen people”, and even surpass god to become god themselves (see “On Jews Becoming the Masters of the World – The Coronation of Hashem from the Torah”).
Instead, the God of Islam has given mankind a universal prescription plan, as in Surah Al-Asr, leaving it timelessly up to the believing man and believing woman in every epoch to choose to fill it, or to not fill it. It is stated pretty categorically. And time invariantly --- meaning, the God of Islam swears by the passing time in the very first verse of Surah Al-Asr, and one undeniable property of time is time invariance. Time only marches forward, and past time cannot be brought back. It is, in a sense, “lost”. There is an opportunity cost to not following that prescription is what the Surah is warning mankind in its own unique and incomparable style. The veracity captured in these words of the Holy Qur'an is beyond doubt. The matter is self-evident even for those who have no belief in the supernatural or Divine origin of these words. Solon for instance, the ancient Athenian lawmaker of the Hellenic Civilization a millennium before Islam, asserted similar principles but in a much reduced ambit. When asked which city he thought was well-governed, Solon stated: “That city where those who have not been injured take up the cause of one who has, and prosecute the case as earnestly as if the wrong had been done to themselves.”
It is the Muslim public that needs to defend itself by all means that will be effective as the first victim of World Order, instead of asininely waiting for Allah, or the Last Days of Gog and Magog and the arrival of Imam Mahdi in an Eschatology that is as absurd as the Christians'. And for good reason. It is arguably derived from Pauline Christianity and holy scribes laboring for Muslim empires to get the public mind to accept its own servitude in the here, for the promise of a better tomorrow in the hereafter. Muslims have been conned by the Übermensch who have persistently hijacked the pulpit of Islam since its early rise as world power and world ruling state. They, virtually without exception, singularly abused and distorted 4:59 to achieve that aim. Muslims today, comfortable resting at the bottomless pit of their trough, are still taught by their intellectuals, scholars, pulpits, books after books, in poetry, in proverbs and parables, and in their public as well as private education systems that “Islam's domination” of the world for over 700 years, and its dynastic empires lasting close to thirteen centuries, is something to gloat over. The most idiotic are even encouraged to dream about bringing the “good times” back. A pound of flesh has been extracted for the privilege of that has-been gloat.
We have lost the meaning of the religion of Islam; kept the shell and thrown away the fruit.
We have no friends and helpers among the elite, among the pulpits, among the establishments, and among the seasoned intellectuals. The rest of the world will follow on our heels based on what happens to us. Unfortunately, we are hoi polloi, the unwashed masses, whose fate routinely hangs in the balance of pawn sacrifices on the Grand Chessboard. If only we can alter that calculus to the delicate balance of survival between two scorpions trapped in a bottle. The social Darwinians can never be licked for Übermensch shall always exist just as they have always existed from time immemorial. At best they can be held in perpetual check. Since the first order battle that is being waged for World Order by the Übermensch is with the power of intellect, it is a great equalizer if only we can learn to use it. Its first baby-step is to actually try using it – sort of like learning to ride a first bicycle; no amount of reading the instruction manual, or getting a college degree, or a doctorate, or acquiring a high position in the Technetronic society, can create that skill. And it can even be virtually impossible to acquire in the age of universal deceit when all the forces of social engineering are arrayed against it. Especially when hear no evil, speak no evil, and see no evil is amply rewarded in both prestige and pecuniary gain on the one hand, and not being conformant with the mantras du jour is punished on the other. Minimally, one is socially and professionally outcast, and its fear alone puts one in shackles of conformity.
So now one understands the challenges on all fronts. The enemies in front and those behind and sideways. We also understand that we are slowly dying as humanity in a surfeit of deceit for the want of an ounce of mental acuity to understand what is happening to us. The fact that we display a total disdain for any moral courage to revolt against what is happening to us, merely follows in its wake. The fact that we have been house niggers for centuries, far longer than the poor black slaves brought to the shores of America for cotton picking in physical chains, always echoing the core axioms and presuppositions of the ruling class in every epoch, equally follows. Very soon, we shall surpass even the sheep who can never think of revolting against the habit of mutton eating.
Are there any He Mans among the Muslim men and women in the West and the East to rise to these challenges before it is all a fait accompli? It does not need to be many, but a tad more than zero to be effective in becoming the first cause of its butterfly-effect. If we stay at count zero, the superman among us winning our trust will continue to harvest us for fodder. Muslims and non-Muslims alike. It is that other fellow over there today... tomorrow it will be you!
If you got this far, thank you for reading.
End Letter –
Date of Letter: Friday, May 07, 2010
Updated Friday, April 17, 2015


Footnote: * “Sir” Dr. Allama Muhammad Iqbal, while extolling the virtues of Islam in unsurpassed versification before the subjugated Muslims of the Indo-subcontinent, himself eagerly bowed before the British ruling agendas willingly accepting knighthood for his services rendered to the Crown. See Sacred Cow: Allama Iqbal - marde-momin or superman? (http://tinyurl.com/Allama-Iqbal-ubermensch)


First Published Friday, May 07, 2010 | Updated Friday, April 17, 2015 for inclusion in the 2015 Second Edition of Hijacking Holy Qur'an And Islam.










Notes

This pamphlet comprising 160 pages is Gratis.
© 2019 Zahir Ebrahim, Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
Copyright Notice: © Zahir Ebrahim. Full permission to copy, repost, and reprint, in its entirety, unmodified and unedited, for any purpose, in any reproduction medium, granted, provided the PDF Source URL and this copyright notice are also reproduced verbatim as part of this license, and not doing so may be subject to copyright license violation infringement claims pursuant to remedies noted at http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html. All figures, images, quotations, and excerpts are used without permission based on non-profit “fair-use” for personal education and research use only in the greater public interest consistent with the understanding of laws noted at http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html. Partial replication or dissemination of this book with any page omitted is an infringement. Any use beyond “fair-use” requires written consent from all copyright holders. This pamphlet may not be sold. This pamphlet is for Gratis Distribution Only. This pamphlet may be printed. Full copyright notice and disclaimers at http://humanbeingsfirst.org/#Legal-N-Things ; http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/#Copyright


Download Free Pamphlet
Pamphlet first published on Tuesday October 22, 2019 | Last updated on Sunday, December 1, 2019 10:00 pm 81138 160 pages
PDF With Images Generated on Sunday, December 1, 2019 10:00 pm
160 1383 81138 496776 55 18 0 5783