In a previous article (See, Anti-Zionist Conference Gives Ammo to ADL) I related how anti-Zionist leaders participated in the International Islamic Conference on August 16 in Baltimore. This provoked a devastating three-page attack by the Anti-Defamation League. ADL says it proved that anti-Zionists and radical Islam are one in spirit.
Mark Glenn, a prime mover behind this effort toward “solidarity” with Islam, wrote an impassioned rebuttal to my concerns. He intends to continue in the same direction. Others of the group say the ADL attack was a “badge of honor.” Clearly, I must continue to speak out. (See Glenn's rebuttal)
Knowledge of Truth is Perishable
Movements of political and religious awakening, though ushered in with enthusiasm and even bravado, are extremely perishable. Under the big guns of Jewish media onslaught, our present worldwide anti-Zionist awakening could become a memory. Throughout my life I have seen media destroy such nascent movements with little pretext. (See, Jews Confirm Big Media Is Jewish)
Example: In the late 40s, Communism’s expansion was explosive. China had fallen; a Jewish-dominated spy ring gave US atomic secrets to the Soviets. Communists had infiltrated the United Nations, US State Department, Hollywood, and the US labor movement.
My parents realized the threat of communism and liberalism to America. They left the conventional pastorate to awaken, through publishing and radio, a slumbering church and nation. Yet they had to stand by helplessly as the one man who attempted to expose such infiltration, a man of courage and conscience capable of awakening America, Sen. Joseph McCarthy, was crucified by Jewish media. The Christian/conservative enlightenment for which they fasted and prayed was snuffed out almost before it began.
Ten years later, in the very early 1960s, political conservative Robert Welch renewed hope for an anti-communist awakening. His “John Birch Society” hoped to succeed where McCarthy failed. Christian/conservatives sprang up with grassroots support. Yet liberal media discovered that Welch had written that Eisenhower was a “conscious agent of the communist conspiracy.” Immediately, national media went wild, claiming that “little old ladies in tennis shoes” were peering behind every bush for lurking communists. A hopeful anti-communist movement again foundered.
In 1963, a conservative superstar, Sen. Barry Goldwater, rose on the scene. A charismatic, articulate half-Jewish conservative, he revived patriots' dreams. He ran for President in 1964 but again, our hopes were dashed. The media trumpeted Goldwater's unfortunate remark that we should nuke North Vietnam 's military supplier, China. A horrified public again turned its back on conservatism. The liberal stranglehold in America, established by FDR’s New Deal, remained in power.
Yes, a Christian/conservative awakening finally occurred in 1980 under Pres. Ronald Reagan after nearly a half century of liberal dominion. Yet even that great step forward proved fatally flawed. Reaganites remained willfully blind to the Jewish origins of communism and liberalism. They ignored what Billy Graham warned Pres. Richard Nixon of in a 1972 taped conversation in the White House: Jews had a "stranglehold" on America through their control of big media.
As a result, the Reagan revolution was hijacked by powerful neo-conservative Jews. They played a definitive role involving America in foreign wars to make the Mideast safe for Israel. Such entanglements have almost fatally discredited the Republican, Christian conservative awakening for which my parents prayed almost 60 years ago. Despite the hopefulness provided by Sarah Palin, inheritors of the Reagan legacy are mired in as much of a dearth of conceptual clarity and vision as our troops are mired in senseless Mideast strife.
Our movement must not perish as did others before. I believe this is our last opportunity to save Christian civilization. That is why I am so concerned by the precedent set by five anti-Zionist leaders last month. These leaders did not say anything that the ADL could legitimately find “anti-Semitic” at the conference. Yet by identifying our movement with Islam and a roster of largely unknown Islamic speakers, these leaders placed themselves as sitting ducks in the ADL shooting gallery.
Fortunately, this proto-attack was confined primarily to ADL’s vast liberal readership. But as easily, ADL could flood thousands of media outlets worldwide. ADL is playing its first “war games” against the anti-Zionist right. If misguided leaders continue to provide ADL with propaganda ammunition, we will soon comprehend what ADL “media blitzkrieg” really means.
Of course, there is nothing wrong with dialogue with Muslims; we benefit from increased understanding of each other and our common threat: Jewish supremacism. I've talked with Muslims about such issues for the past 24 years. Jesus freely talked with all, even His enemies. But He did not pursue solidarity with doubtful persons or groups, as Mark Glenn has told me he wants to do with Islam. Scripture says: "Many believed in His name…but Jesus did not commit Himself unto them…for He knew what was in man." (John 2:23-25) Creating an alliance with Islam is qualitatively different than discussion. It is a commitment of mutual cooperation and even loyalty.
Who Gains from “Solidarity” with Islam?
No wise military commander risks his troops in offensive action unless there is real hope of gain. What is the advantage of allying in a public way with Islam? I can only think of disadvantages - catastrophic ones.
We don't really need a formal pact with Islam; 1.3 billion Moslems already side with us against Jewish supremacism! Unlike in WW2, this battle is not about physical reinforcements, such as we had to ask from a dubious ally, Stalin. Today we are in a war of words and ideas. Victory can best be achieved if anti-Zionism in the West cooperates with Islam in the East by sharing the powerful ammunition of truth. What better way to do it than through the internet?
Public alignment with Islam works against us by giving photo-op "proof" of a lie that the pro-Zionist, anti-Islamic church and world already want to believe. This lie is that our movement shares the anti-Semitic, “terrorist values” of extremist Muslims.
What could more perfectly assist ADL clone Michael Chertoff and his Dept. of Homeland Security than to categorize us as "terrorist sympathizers" who support enemies of America and Israel in the war on terror? If that is established, the next step is to round us up (like Ernst Zundel in Canada) as “domestic terrorists.”
In my article criticizing the Baltimore conference, I point out that most Muslims today "spiritualize" jihad, “holy war,” to mean the war against evil in our souls. Yet the fact remains that Islam was birthed in violence. The Qur’an taught Muslim armies that Allah is merciful, and if infidels surrender and convert they may live. But nothing is nobler than holy war to rid the entire world of those who blaspheme Allah by resisting Islam. In only the first century of Islam's existence, it violently subjugated nations from Persia to the Arabian Peninsula and throughout North Africa to Spain in some of history's bloodiest conquests.
Islam still contains a demonstrably violent, terrorist element, especially in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, and Pakistan. In a number of Moslem nations, persecution of Christians is well-documented grim reality. Christian-persecuting Moslem nations include Sudan, where a reported 2 million Christians have been murdered by the extremist Moslem government. Somalia, Turkey, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Indonesia, and Malaysia also repress Christians. Just this week, many Coptic Christians in front of the White House protested the severe ongoing persecution of their 15 million Coptic brethren in Egypt. They claim Egypt's Moslem government turns a blind eye to almost daily murders of Coptic Christians. They allege large numbers of Christian girls are kidnapped by Arab men and forced to become Muslim members of their harems.
Let’s Face Islamic Reality
Glenn told me he thinks that when Muslims act against Americans and Christians, this behavior is an aberration - an adverse reaction to the West’s support of Israeli abuses. He says Islam is not anti-Christian. He believes if we unite with the Muslim world and oppose Zionist oppression, then Islamic violence will gradually subside; Islam, he contends, shares Christian values of respect for Jesus, protection of modesty and women, and veneration of the family. He is optimistic that Islam could become a tremendous ally to Christianity.
In reality, although Christian disapproval of Zionist abuses helps restore Christian credibility to the Moslem world, violent and anti-Christian tendencies have always existed within it, proceeding from a literal reading of the Qur’an. It’s too late to think Islam can substantially be transformed in the very little time we have left.
What is certain is that Islam carries enormous baggage of negative stereotypes - much created by Zionist propaganda, most of its own making. Our movement to tell the whole truth about the dangers of Jewish supremacy can only stay afloat through moderation, careful documentation, and the grace of God. It would be quickly pulled under by the enormous weight of Islam.
Yes, both Islam and American anti-Zionism oppose Jewish supremacy and Israeli injustices. But the similarity largely ends there. Both are best served by staying separate in their very disparate realms. The internet provides us all with the only really powerful forum to proclaim truth, a place of powerful advantage in an ideological battle against Zionism. Political alliances often sour. But the whole truth has proven, throughout history, to provide enlightenment, safety, and liberty to those who fervently seek it.
It unfailingly confirms exactly what Jesus predicted, “The truth shall set you free.”
Mark Glenn told me that all the verses from the Qur’an which advocate killing infidels were actually intended for the self defense of Mohammad and his followers.
Yet the Qur’an is almost as much a military manual as a religious guide. Here are a few of many passages which help explain the aggressiveness of Moslem armies against all who refused to convert:
Finally, this passage describes a Moslem army approaching one of the many hundreds of ancient cities which have decided to fight, rather than submit to forced conversion:
Rev. Ted Pike is director of the National Prayer Network, a Christian/conservative watchdog organization.
Let the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith teach you how they have saddled 45 states with hate laws capable of persecuting Christians: http://www.adl.org/99hatecrime/intro.asp.
Learn how ADL took away free speech in Canada and wants to steal it now in the U.S. Congress. Watch Rev. Ted Pike's Hate Laws: Making Criminals of Christians at video.google.com. Purchase this gripping documentary to show at church. Order online at www.truthtellers.org for $24.90, DVD or VHS, by calling 503-853-3688, or at the address below.
TALK SHOW HOSTS: Interview Rev. Ted Pike on this topic. Call (503) 631-3808.
NATIONAL PRAYER NETWORK,
P.O. Box 828, Clackamas , OR 97015
Additional commentary by William Fox
Editor, America First Books
Two forms of cowardice particularly irk me these days when it comes to political commentary:
1) Political commentators who are too cowardly to specifically identify their political enemies. This most common example in America today involves individuals too scared of being labeled "anti-Semitic" to criticize Jews. It can also include Protestants too scared to criticize Italian Mafioso Catholics who have allied themselves with Jewish leaders of organized crime in America, as well as WASPs too timid to criticize the Irish Catholics surrounding Senator Ted Kennedy (and various Irish Catholic big city political machine bosses) who allied themselves with the ADL and other Jewish lobbyists to open up the floodgates of Third World immigration into America in the mid-1960's. Lastly, it can include agnostics, atheists, secularists, skeptics, or indigenous Indo-European religion adherents (I am some combination of all of the aforementioned) too scared to directly criticize Christianity.
2) Political commentators who cannot make criticisms directly from their own position, but always have to use alien peoples as proxies to deflect possible retaliation away from themselves. Examples might include closet white racialists or separatists who always have to quote some black academician like Dr. Thomas Sowell in order to highlight the absurdities of affirmative action rather than openly state their own views. It may also include WASP libertarians who exclusively rely on latter-day Jewish anarcho libertarians such as Dr. Murray Rothbard or Ludwig von Mises to make their points rather than refer to more original Northern European-descended libertarians such Carl Menger, the founder of the "Austrian" school of economics, or early American political and economic analysts such as Thomas Jefferson, John C. Calhoun, and George Mason. Similarly, many European Americans feel that they have to lean on Muslims to criticize Zionists rather than reference their own unique religious, cultural, and political institutions of their own ancestors.
A friend of mine recently sent me an email with the following summary of the book by Dr. Peter Hammond titled "Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat." Although I have not been able to read the book yet (according to Amazon it is currently out of print), I still think that social and political analysis contained in the email is worth publishing here.
On a broad philosophical level, this analysis should not be terribly surprising. Certainly one of the basic rules of Right Wing 101 is that whenever any group grows in power, it tends to remold the surrounding environment to fit its innate characteristics. Muslims are definitely part of this pattern. Furthermore, as I observe in my summary of the ebook Civil War Two: The Coming Breakup of America by Thomas Chittum,
There is such a thing as too much ethnic-racial `diversity.' In fact, as Tom Chittum points out in his historical analysis, as a dominant racial-ethnic group drops below 75% of the total population of a country, the statistical probabilities escalate dramatically that the country will eventually fission apart or undergo violent suppression campaigns between warring racial-ethnic groups. This is simply part of innate human nature, and no amount of liberal propaganda can change this fact of life, whether it entails the former Yugoslavia or the future of North America.
I tend to prefer classical liberal principles and traditional American conservative values, which focus upon economic progress through technological and industrial advancement within our own borders rather engaging in imperialistic and oppressive activities abroad. I also have strong humanitarian instincts.
At the same time, I am a strong believer in the right of Northern Europeans to determine their own destiny.
Northern European societies have traditionally had a unique blending of "loose-tight" characteristics that involve a combination of individual liberty and respect for private property rights
on the one hand, and a high capacity for rational, self-restrained social organization on the other. Our cultural and political institutions have a strong basis in the innate characteristics of our own people. We have a perfect right to defend the integrity of our own people and their indigenous culture within our own borders, and not be invaded or otherwise imposed upon by alien peoples with alien sensibilities.
One of the major points of Dr. Lothrop Stoddard's famous book Racial Realities in Europe is that the Muslim invasions of the Balkans in the Middle Ages have brought nothing but chronic instability to the region ever since. In contrast, homogeneous Nordic countries have been famous for their amazing stability, innovativeness, and continuing productivity --that is, up through the 1920's when Stoddard's book was written, but much less true today with the impact of the ongoing Third World invasion. Some Swedish cities such as Malmo are now majority Muslim, and one reads articles about Muslim men who take the attitude that Swedish women who do not wear scarves and other Islamic attire deserve to get raped for being so "provocative." See for example, To Rape An Unveiled Woman by Jamie Glazov.
So while the controlled national media usually always recognizes the right of nonwhites to retain their own indigenous territory and ethnic-racial integrity (with the exception of any Palestinians, Arabs, or other peoples who stand in the way of Zionism), when it comes to the indigenous habitat of the Nordic peoples it is a different story. This is despite the fact that Nordics have the greatest track record on this planet compared to other peoples for scientific development, authentic republican and democratic forms of government, and reverence for individual liberty and human rights.
The following is the aforementioned book review of Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat by Dr. Hammond:
Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In it's fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life.
Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components. The religious component is a beard for all of the other components.
Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious rights.
When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious rights, some of the other components tend to creep in as well. Here's how it works.
As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part be regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to other citizens. This is the case in:
United States -- Muslim 0.6%
Australia -- Muslim 1.5%
Canada -- Muslim 1.9%
China -- Muslim 1.8%
Italy -- Muslim 1.5%
Norway -- Muslim 1.8%
At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs. This is happening in:
Denmark -- Muslim 2%
Germany -- Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%
Spain -- Muslim 4%
Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%
From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. This is occurring in:
France -- Muslim 8%
Philippines -- Muslim 5%
Sweden -- Muslim 5%
Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad & Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%
At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world. When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris, we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam, and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam, with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections, in:
Guyana -- Muslim 10%
India -- Muslim 13.4%
Israel -- Muslim 16%
Kenya -- Muslim 10%
Russia -- Muslim 15%
After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in:
Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%
At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare, such as in:
Bosnia -- Muslim 40%
Chad -- Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%
From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels, such as in:
Albania -- Muslim 70%
Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%
Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%
Sudan -- Muslim 70%
After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and in some ways is on-going in:
Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%
Egypt -- Muslim 90%
Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%
Iran -- Muslim 98%
Iraq -- Muslim 97%
Jordan -- Muslim 92%
Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan -- Muslim 97%
Palestine -- Muslim 99%
Syria -- Muslim 90%
Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%
100% will usher in the peace of 'Dar-es-Salaam' -- the Islamic House of Peace. Here there's supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrasses are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word, such as in:
Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%
Somalia -- Muslim 100%
Yemen -- Muslim 100%
Unfortunately, peace in never achieved, as in these 100% states the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons.
"...Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; the tribe against the world, and all of us against the infidel. -- Leon Uris, 'The Haj' ...."
It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under 100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia Law. The national police do not even enter these ghettos. There are no national courts nor schools nor non-Muslim religious facilities. In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. The children attend madrasses. They learn only the Koran. To even associate with an infidel is a crime punishable with death. Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and extremists exercise more power than the national average would indicate.
Today's 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world's population. But their birth rates dwarf the birth rates of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, and Jews, and all other believers. Muslims will exceed 50% of the world's population by the end of this century.
As another interesting perspective, please consider also the article "Slavery Lessons That the Anti-White Establishment Will Not Teach Our Children" by the British National Party News Team:
In the anti-white mania which has gripped modern Britain, the Atlantic Slave Trade is to be given wide prominence in schools from this term onwards — but the million Europeans who were enslaved by Muslims in North Africa between 1530 and 1780 will be ignored.
The untold story of the million whites enslaved by non-whites is covered in a new book by Robert Davis, professor of history at Ohio State University. He developed a unique methodology to calculate the number of white Christians who were enslaved along Africa’s Barbary Coast, arriving at much higher slave population estimates than any previous studies had found.
Most other accounts of slavery along the Barbary coast didn’t try to estimate the number of slaves, or only looked at the number of slaves in particular cities, Davis said.
Most previously estimated slave counts have thus tended to be in the thousands, or at most in the tens of thousands. Davis, by contrast, has calculated that between 1 million and 1.25 million European Christians were captured and forced to work in North Africa from the 16th to 18th centuries.
Davis’s new estimates appear in the book Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast, and Italy, 1500-1800 (Palgrave Macmillan).
“Enslavement was a very real possibility for anyone who traveled in the Mediterranean, or who lived along the shores in places like Italy, France, Spain and Portugal, and even as far north as England and Iceland.”
“Much of what has been written gives the impression that there were not many slaves and minimizes the impact that slavery had on Europe,” Davis said. “Most accounts only look at slavery in one place, or only for a short period of time. But when you take a broader, longer view, the massive scope of this slavery and its powerful impact become clear.”
Davis said it is useful to compare this Mediterranean slavery to the Atlantic slave trade that brought black Africans to the Americas. Over the course of four centuries, the Atlantic slave trade was much larger — about 10 to 12 million black Africans were brought to the Americas.
But from 1500 to 1650, when trans-Atlantic slaving was still in its infancy, more white Christian slaves were probably taken to Barbary than black African slaves to the Americas, according to Davis.
“One of the things that both the public and many scholars have tended to take as given is that slavery was always racial in nature — that only blacks have been slaves. But that is not true,” Davis said. “We cannot think of slavery as something that only white people did to black people.”
During the time period Davis studied, it was religion and ethnicity, as much as race, that determined who became slaves.
Pirates (called corsairs) from cities along the Barbary Coast in north Africa — cities such as Tunis and Algiers — would raid ships in the Mediterranean and Atlantic, as well as seaside villages to capture men, women and children.
The impact of these attacks was devastating — France, England, and Spain each lost thousands of ships, and long stretches of the Spanish and Italian coasts were almost completely abandoned by their inhabitants.
Although hundreds of thousands of Christian slaves were taken from Mediterranean countries, Davis noted, the effects of Muslim slave raids was felt much further away: it appears, for example, that through most of the 17th century the English lost at least 400 sailors a year to the slavers.
Even Americans were not immune. For example, one American slave reported that 130 other American seamen had been enslaved by the Algerians in the Mediterranean and Atlantic between 1785 and 1793.
Davis said the vast scope of slavery in North Africa has been ignored and minimized, in large part because it is on no one’s agenda to discuss what happened. “The enslavement of Europeans doesn’t fit the general theme of European world conquest and colonialism that is central to scholarship on the early modern era,” he said.
Many of the countries that were victims of slavery, such as France and Spain, would later conquer and colonize the areas of North Africa where their citizens were once held as slaves. Maybe because of this history, Western scholars have thought of the Europeans primarily as “evil colonialists” and not as the victims they sometimes were, Davis said.
Davis said another reason that Mediterranean slavery has been ignored or minimized has been that there have not been good estimates of the total number of people enslaved. People of that time — both Europeans and the Barbary Coast slave owners — did not keep detailed, trustworthy records of the number of slaves. In contrast, there are extensive records that document the number of Africans brought to the Americas as slaves.
So Davis developed a new methodology to come up with reasonable estimates of the number of slaves along the Barbary Coast. Davis found the best records available indicating how many slaves were at a particular location at a single time. He then estimated how many new slaves it would take to replace slaves as they died, escaped or were ransomed.
“The only way I could come up with hard numbers is to turn the whole problem upside down — figure out how many slaves they would have to capture to maintain a certain level,” he said. “It is not the best way to make population estimates, but it is the only way with the limited records available.”
Putting together such sources of attrition as deaths, escapes, ransomings, and conversions, Davis calculated that about one-fourth of slaves had to be replaced each year to keep the slave population stable, as it apparently was between 1580 and 1680. That meant about 8,500 new slaves had to be captured each year. Overall, this suggests nearly a million slaves would have been taken captive during this period.
Using the same methodology, Davis has estimated as many as 475,000 additional slaves were taken in the previous and following centuries. The result is that between 1530 and 1780 there were almost certainly 1 million and quite possibly as many as 1.25 million white, European Christians enslaved by the Muslims of the Barbary Coast.
Davis said his research into the treatment of these slaves suggests that, for most of them, their lives were every bit as difficult as that of slaves in America. “As far as daily living conditions, the Mediterranean slaves certainly didn’t have it better,” he said.
While African slaves did grueling labor on sugar and cotton plantations in the Americas, European Christian slaves were often worked just as hard and as lethally — in quarries, heavy construction, and above all rowing the corsair galleys themselves.
Davis said his findings suggest that this invisible slavery of European Christians deserves more attention from scholars.
“We have lost the sense of how large enslavement could loom for those who lived around the Mediterranean and the threat they were under,” he said. “Slaves were still slaves, whether they were black or white, and whether they suffered in America or North Africa.”
As an ironic note, continuing with the theme that "the enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend" (in all things), I would note that Christianity, like Islam, is a universalistic religion. Many nationalists, to include myself. are very unhappy with the way many Christian churches are so leftist (or vehemently "anti-racist") that they have sided with Third World alien invaders against whites. They are also very unhappy with the way the Dutch Reform Church sold out white South Africans in favor of the Marxist African National Congress, which has proceeded to make a mess out of what was once the most prosperous country in Africa. Over a million whites have fled the country, and over another million have been reduced to poverty. South Africa is now going the terrible way of Zimbabwe, another notorious example about how everything tends to decline everywhere (to include places like Detroit, Washington, D.C., and Harlem) once whites relinquish control to black rule.
Therefore, ironically enough, just because I happen to agree with many of Rev Ted Pike's criticisms of Islam --and just because I also agree with his view on the need to vigorously defend First Amendment rights against such evil predators as the ADL --this does not necessarily mean that I agree with him about most Christian theological issues. In fact, my religious views are a lot closer to that of William Gayley Simpson, author of Which Way Western Man?, Acharya S. (D. M. Murdock), author of The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold, or to anything written by Asatru leader Steve McNallen than to those of Rev. Pike. I discuss all of this in more depth towards the bottom of the Rev Ted Pike articles archive web page. Please also see my discussion of the function of religion in society in my commentary to the "Have You Been Brainwashed? quiz.
As a final note, I think that when approached with an intelligent, analytical frame of mind, the study of Islam can be quite fascinating. Mohammed, the founder of Islam, was a very bright man who sought to reform many problems that he saw with Christianity, Judaism, and many pagan religions in his era. It is worthwhile to perform a functional analysis to try to understand how his approach addressed certain social and theological issues. Suffice to say, when it comes to social policy and theological changes, there are usually no free lunches, only trade-offs. While Mohammed's new theology helped solve certain problems in some areas, it also increased problems in other areas. These problem areas are incompatible with the greater political decentralization and ideological rationalism contained within most indigenous Indo-European religious traditions. (See, for example, The Religious Attitudes of the Indo-Europeans by Dr. Hans Gunther).
From a secular Western viewpoint, Islamic societies have tended to be much more authoritarian and controlling in people's lives, even to the point of what Dr. Lothrop Stoddard described as "Asiatic despotism" in his work The New World of Islam. As an example, the widespread practice of harems and other forms of white slavery in older times were hardly crowning achievements in woman's liberation. (Imagine ordering your girl friend or wife to get on her knees, arch her back, grab her ankles, tilt her head back, wiggle her midsection, and otherwise go through "making the bow" like a Harem slave girl!). Despite all this, I must also be quick to point out that in the 20th century, educated classes in Arab countries were well aware of this situation as an impediment towards modernization. This is one reason why so many of them pushed hard towards secularism and the adaptation of many classical liberal principles in Islamic society. A good example involved Saddam Hussein and his Baath Party in Iraq, which ironically wanted to have nothing to do with "Al Qaeda" fundamentalist Moslems. Many middle class and professional people in 20th century Islamic societies have been infatuated with the level of freedom and innovativeness in America that originally stemmed from its founding White Anglo-Saxon Protestant stock. (Up until the massive Irish Catholic immigration caused by the Irish potato famine migration of the late 1840's, American whites and their power elites were overwhelmingly WASP). At the same time, many Arab leaders recognize that a society requires a certain level of pride in ancestry and shared indigenous culture in order to function effectively, and therefore they feel it unwise (and I agree) to "throw out the baby with the dirty bath water" and nihilistically trash all their Islamic traditions. This is why it has been particularly nasty and unfair for Zionist neo-cons to tar all Middle Eastern Islamic societies as "Islamo-fascists" in an effort to undermine their national pride and make them more vulnerable to subversion and takeover by the sinister forces of Greater Israel and other imperialists.
Let me also add that I have read many accounts by Americans who have traveled in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan under more normal, peacetime circumstances. They have dealt with the common people on a one-on-one level, much like the lead character in the famous book The Ugly American. (Incidentally, all the gross foreign policy errors identified in this book, first published in 1958, have been repeated over and over again in America's recent misadventures in the Middle East). Many Americans have commented on how amazingly hospitable various peoples of the Middle East can be when they are simply treated like fellow human beings (ie. Americans are not bombing them, ransacking their homes on search and destroy missions, polluting their water supplies with depleted uranium, shooting up their cars at check-points, expropriating their natural resources and archeological treasures, torturing them, etc). Again, the Zionist neo-con propaganda about "fanatical ragheads" and "sand niggers" is typically poisonous and unfair.
Getting back to Islam, there have also been important racial factors in the way the religion has been practiced in certain areas throughout history. For example, southward migrating Visigoths -a Nordic/Germanic people, gained control of Spain and major portions of North Africa following the collapse of the Roman Empire. After these areas were subsequently overrun by Islamic armies, quite a few North African Islamic caliphs emerged with blond hair and blue eyes. Their tenure coincides with an interesting renaissance in the Middle Ages that involved the founding of universities and the spread of higher learning in mathematics and other disciplines in certain Islamic areas. (Similarly where southward migrating Nordic and Nordic-Celtic tribes gained control elsewhere Europe as part of wave patterns going back thousands of years, such as the Lombards in Northern Italy, Franks in France, the Rus in western Russia --not to mention more ancient migrations such as the Oscian and Sabine tribes from Germany that provided the substrate for the Roman Republic or that Dorian and Ionian migrants who formed the ruling classes of ancient Greece of the heroic and classical eras-- we see a rise in more decentralized societies and parliamentary-type governmental systems as well as an increase in economic industriousness and innovativeness). As another example, the Persians of Iran ("Iran" is derived from the word "Aryan") are a more Indo-European people (ie. more of an admixture of Nordic/Germanic/Teutonic blood) than Arabs, and not surprisingly the practice of Islam in Iran is qualitatively very different than its practice in most Arab countries. (This is one reason why Arabs and Persians are not always each other's favorite people). All of this is in turn very different from the way Islam is practiced in black-run tropical African countries or its flavoring in southwest Asian countries controlled by Mongoloid peoples.
For those interested in more racial analysis regarding the practice of Islam, I would suggest Googling anything written by the late Dr. William Pierce and Dr. Revilo Oliver on this topic. One can also find some interesting insights from currently living racial nationalist activists such as Dr. David Duke, Kevin Strom, and Erich Gliebe (see for example "A Closer Look at Islam" --except I disagree that Muslims conducted 9-11 and instead believe it was a CIA-Mossad inside job. See the Capt Eric May web page and 9-11 related entries on the site map and audio archive pages for more details). Some American nationalists are more sympathetic towards Islam than Gliebe, such as Dr. Adrian H. Krieg who wrote "Islam: A Primer."