Hypocrisy all over again
Hypocrisy has been raised to an art form, and double standards
have become the only standards applied to public life. Revelations
of immoral conduct are no longer a reason to step down. But whilst
there is institutionalised racism in the police force, and not only
the Metropolitan Police or Greater Manchester Police, there is also
an institutionalised hypocrisy when it comes to dealing with
Muslims.
The government machine and the media establishment were working
on overdrive when trying to help the nurse Lucille escape Saudi
justice, insisting that she could never get a fair trial in that
Muslim country. She has since been convicted of theft and forging
references in a Sheriff's court in Scotland, and the circumstances
of the theft are remarkably similar to that of a victim's bank card
in Saudi Arabia.
Contrast this with the lukewarm assurance of support given to
British Muslims arrested in the Yemen whose confessions to having
been involved in terrorist activities were extracted under torture.
One might be forgiven to think that they were the price the British
government paid to get the Yemen government's assistance in the
release of a non-Muslim Britain from his kidnappers.
An equally striking example of such double standards operating on
the international scene is the leniency displayed by US Secretary of
State Madeleine Albright (alias Maria Jama Korbel, born a Jew,
baptised a Catholic, now an Episcopalian, and brought up in Serbia)
when engaged in endless talks with Serb butchers about the status of
Kosovo. No such leniency when it comes to US bombing raids against
Iraq for alleged non-compliance with UN weapons inspectors.
The American justification of their brutal genocide contains two
major lies: Firstly, the UN did not authorise the US bombing of
Iraq. Secondly, since the resumption of weapons inspections on
November 17, 1998, there were 427 inspections, 128 of them at new
sites, with a total of five obstructions. Those obstructions were a
45-minute delay in one case, the rebuff of the suggestion that
inspectors should be allowed to interview all of the undergraduate
students in the science department of Baghdad University, the demand
of justification for an inspection of the headquarters of the Baath
party, and the insistence in the case of two inspections on a
Friday, that, as per agreement, inspections carried out on the
Muslim holy day, when all establishments are closed, were to be
conducted with the accompaniment of Iraqi officials. Those five
minor disagreements are the justification for dropping thousands of
pounds of explosives onto the civilians of Iraq, as less than half
of the so-called smart bombs hit their allegedly intended target.
American punitive actions against Iraq are nothing to do with
keeping the destructive capability of a dangerous country in check.
They are about controlling a country with contains 10% of the
world's known oil reserves. As Edward Said put it, America is a
country which has, along with Israel, "flouted more Security Council
resolutions, has more unpaid UN bills, and has refused to sign more
international conventions (including those against chemical and
biological weapons) than any other".
In fact, the destruction America has unleashed over Iraq, is
worse than the worst chemical warfare nightmare they try to warn us
about in their propaganda. During the gulf war, one million rounds
of bullets tipped with uranium were fired. Since then, three times
more children are being born with congenital deformities, including
children without or with an unduly enlarged head, with stumpy arms
like those of a thalidomide victim, with two fingers instead of
five, with missing ears, etc. We were not going to be told about
these horrific crimes, if it wasn't for the fact that gulf war
veterans in Britain and the United States were coming forward with
reports of sick and dying children. And forget the fuss about
genetically modified soya – due to the use of radioactive war heads
in Iraq, produce growing there is altogether abnormal. According to
the Department of Defence in the United States at least 40 tonnes of
Depleted Uranium were left on the battlefields of southern Iraq.
As if this wasn't enough, a most inhumane regime of sanctions is
killing at least six thousand Iraqi children per month. This is why
the chief humanitarian co-ordinator of the UN and former assistant
secretary-general, Denis Halliday, resigned in August 1998, because
he could not, in his own words, any longer "be identified with a
United Nations that is maintaining sanctions programme which kills
and maims people through chronic malnutrition, and continues this
programme knowingly… that is in fact killing and maiming the
children, and the next generation of Iraqis. This is a disaster for
the Iraqis and a disaster for the UN."
Of course, we are not meant to know too much, nor try to register
our disapproval. New laws are brought in rapidly to stem the free
flow of information, particularly through the internet. The
pretended fight against racism and anti-semitism is being used to
justify the infringement of civil rights. The European Union, for
example, is laying the foundation for an agreement which will allow
law enforcement officials to eavesdrop on internet, fax and mobile
phone conversations whilst forcing the communications provider to
foot the bill. The plan, known as Enfopol 98, was tabled behind
closed doors by the European Justice and Home Affairs Council in
December. Its alleged purpose is to combat serious crime, such as
drug trafficking, child abuse and terrorism. It will enable police
to track and record email and mobile phone calls across
international boundaries without specific prior authorisation, and
internet service providers must give police forces access to their
computer systems. Is it too far fetched to assume that the police,
suffering from institutionalised racism and prejudice against Islam,
will target particular groups of people selectively?
What Western strategists fear more than so-called Islamic
terrorism or the alleged capability of mass destruction to be
unleashed from a Muslim country is the power of Islam to convince,
especially in an age where Christianity has given in to secularism
with the Catholic Church redefining the existence of the devil into
a vague concept of evil and the inter-church body Churches Together
In England drawing up a millennium resolution which does not make
mention of either God or Jesus. This is why secular countries take
to desperate and fanatic measures, as France, which has again denied
school girls the liberty to wear headscarves.
Nabil Matar's new book "Islam in Britain" shows that this fear of
the convincing message of Islam dates a long way back. In the 17th
century Muslim technological superiority at sea led to the capture
and sinking of large numbers of British vessels. Between 1609 and
1616, it was reported that 466 English ships were attacked by
Ottoman or Barbary galleys, and their crews led away in chains. By
May 1626, there were more than 5000 British captives in the city of
Algiers, and a further 1500 in Sali, and frantic arrangements were
being made in London to redeem them "lest they follow the example of
others and turn Turk", i.e. convert to Islam.
What was more worrying still were reports that some of these
raids against British vessels were being led by Englishmen who had
converted to Islam, for example, in September 1645, seven ships
"from Barbary" landed in Cornwall and were led inland "by some
renegade of this country". Large numbers of British captives were
converting to Islam, and while some of these conversions were
forced, most were clearly not, and British travellers in the East
regularly brought back tales of their compatriots who had "crossed
over" and were now prospering in Ottoman service.
"Indeed, Brits were constantly popping up in the most unlikely
places: one of the most powerful Ottoman eunuchs during the late
16th century, Hassan Aga, was the former Samson Rowlie from Great
Yarmouth, while in Algeria the 'Moorish King's Executioner' turned
out to be a former butcher from Exeter called 'Absalom'
(Abd-es-Salaam). When Charles II sent Captain Hamilton to ransom
some Englishmen who had been enslaved on the Barbary Coast his
mission was unsuccessful as they all refused to return: the men had
all converted to Islam... In a great many cases, the Englishmen who
converted to Islam were not slaves, but free merchants or servants
of the Crown who were attracted by what they saw." Sir Thomas
Shirley had warned that "conversation with infidels doeth much
corrupte", and in 1606 even the British consul in Egypt, Benjamin
Bishop, converted and promptly disappeared from public records.
Today's political and military leaders and their media tycoon
propagandists seem to have learned little from history. Brute force
cannot, ultimately, keep people from the truth, and "only the truth
will set us free."
Author: Sahib
Mustaqim
Bleher |
Date Published:
Winter
1998/1999 |