The Ignoble Path: Long Road To Secular Humanism
Zahir Ebrahim's Letter to Muslims: Is Islam really the Last Obstruction to World Government and Absolute Scientific Global Dictatorship?
Please read the article “Thought police muscle up in Britain” by Hal G. P. Colebatch which appeared in The Australian on April 21, 2009, in conjunction with watching these revealing videos:
- Brian Gerrish's talk “State of the Nation” from the Jan 24, 2009 Lawful Rebellion Conference ;
- Brian Gerrish's talk “Common Purpose - Exposing the Real Traitors” from the Dec 12, 2009 Wakeup Call Conference ;
- American documentary by William Lewis One Nation Under Siege ( http://undersiegemovie.com ).
And connect with the impetus towards the introduction of Secular Humanism as the “religion” of the New World Order!
To understand what Secular Humanism really means in practice, please watch the cited videos. To understand its philosophical underpinnings, please read my article “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!
These documentaries reveal a 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 this introduction chapter by David Livingstone of the book “Surrendering Islam – The subversion of Muslim politics throughout history until the present day”: http://surrenderingislam.com/surrendering-islam/surrendering-islam.
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 British creating sects through Machiavellian infiltrations). 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 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: 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. 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.
Caption Video Face of “moderate Islam” featuring Dr. Tahir-ul-Qadri, the “Ambassador of Peace”. An even more entertaining version of Daniel Pipe's choice for “moderate Islam” with its leader* basking in the adulation of his prostrating fans, is here (search)
This sophisticated Machiavelli 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 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, and between neo-colonialism and struggle for daily bread, 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, news media, politicians, et. al., have all been so 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 have turned Native Informant. So who is left to explain Realityspeak to the Muslims?
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. 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.
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)
See my exact deconstruction of that Machiavellian definition of “Islam” in Behavior Control: Architecture of Modern Propaganda. 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;' ( Arabic الْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ وَأَتْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِي وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ الْإِسْلَامَ دِينًا ۚ Holy Qur'an, Surah Al-Maida 5:3)
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 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?)
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 1961, 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, 1961 UC Berkeley, minutes 3:05 to 5:17, transcribed by Project Humanbeingsfirst http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/VideoTest/hux1.ram )
What empirically stands in the path of fully realizing that state of affairs today?
The 1984 style 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 Times Square bombing plot, I just heard Retired General Michael Hayden, the terrorist “tickling” specialist as the former director of the CIA and now with the Chertoff group selling all those body-scanners to the United States, on MSNBC describing the new Al-qaeeda threat, and 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. 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 West the hardest. They 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.
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” described above.
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.
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. 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, it is only self-interests that trump morality which co-opt us and perpetually enslave us to any tyrant. Once such inner-struggle 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, Hussein before Yazeed, Rosa Parks before KKK, Viva Palestina before Israel, …. As the late George Bernard Shaw had wisely 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.
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?' (Arabic: أَئِفْكًا ءَالِهَةً دُونَ ٱللَّهِ تُرِيدُونَ Holy Qur'an, Surah As-Saffat 37:86)
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, Muhammad Iqbal's attempts at transforming the Muslim umma from the shackles of ubiquitous colonialism and servitude (see poem in the sidebar).
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 petty livelihood and ephemeral station!
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. Poet Iqbal said it a bit more delicately:
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. As Edward Bernays stated it bluntly in the opening passage of his 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: FBI Teaches Agents 'Mainstream' Muslims Are 'Violent, Radical' and 7th-Century Simpletons July and September 2011 ). 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 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, 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 was being used as the pretext for ushering in one-world government is completely absent in these (yawn) narratives! Perhaps these brilliant pundits are poorly read only in certain impermissible scholarship. Or, the more likely, the most respectable looking academic scholarship and award-winning journalists are being engaged by the Mighty Wurlitzer to convey both the empire's opprobrium of “Militant Islam”, as well as what's permissible dissent. Notice how – by retaining the notion of “Militant Islam” in the guise of critiquing the reactionary excesses of the sole superpower in response to 9/11. That is the standard line of acceptable dissent. (See Zahir Ebrahim's Response to Chris Hedges' amalgam of half-truths 'A Decade After 9/11: We Are What We Loathe' )
Caption 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. Watch FBI Presentation Video artfully Hijacking Islam.
It's a pretty slick game of full spectrum assault on all human senses, cognitive as well as subliminal. Hollywood has already interjected that thought of banning the 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)
Evidently, the God of the Muslims says different from what a lot of Muslims have been led to believe (vicariously) that Allah chala raha hai (God is running the world). If someone were to ask me, I'd suggest that obsessive immoral devils 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 “Wa ta wa so bil haq” and with patience if their life is not to be a total loss despite all its material as well as spiritual advancement (see my examination of my understanding of Surah Al-Asr).
– End Letter –
Date of Letter: Friday, May 07, 2010
Endnote: All quotes and unfamiliar concepts in the text can be studied further by using the Search-box on Project Humanbeingsfirst's homepage. Please help give wide circulation to this letter. The most pious institutions of the Muslims, and our most learned men and women of Letters and the Cloth heading them, are the most villainous Trojan Horses among us –– empowering the individual with knowledge and understanding is its only antidote. Thank you.
Supplemental Reading: http://faith-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com
Short URL: http://tinyurl.com/Islam-vs-Secular-Humanism
Original Source URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2010/10/between-islam-and-secular-humanism.html
Source PDF: http://humanbeingsfirst.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/between-islam-and-secular-humanism-in-world-government-by-zahirebrahim.pdf
Mirror URL: http://bloghumanbeingsfirst.wordpress.com/2010/11/02/islam-vs-secular-humanism-in-world-government-by-zahir-ebrahim/
Mirrored at wordpress: http://humanbeingsfirst.wordpress.com/letter-to-muslims/
Mirrored at blogger: http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/p/letter-to-muslims.html
The author, an ordinary researcher and writer on contemporary geopolitics, a minor justice activist, grew up in Pakistan, studied EECS at MIT, engineered for a while in high-tech Silicon Valley ( http://tinyurl.com/zahir-patents ), and retired early to pursue other responsible interests. His maiden 2003 book was rejected by numerous publishers and can be read on the web at http://PrisonersoftheCave.org. He may be reached at http://Humanbeingsfirst.org. Verbatim reproduction license at http://humanbeingsfirst.org#Copyright.
Original date of Letter: Friday, May 07, 2010 | Last updated Rev. 5g December 6, 2012 8742
Islam vs. Secular Humanism and World Government 21 / 21