Conspiracy Theories – Official and Non-Official

What is an official conspiracy theory?

It is an explanation, usually in the form of a ‘commission report’, which the bureaucratic machinery finds politically safe to release to the public.

What is an unofficial conspiracy theory?

It is an explanation which the citizens come up with after they identify gaps and omissions in the official narrative.

Who is a Deep Throat?

He is someone who leaks information to the press as long as it is in his best interest.

عبد القادر بیدل دهلوی در بارگاه اقدس جناب ختمی مرتبت (صلی الله علیه وآله وسلم)

بیدل‌ کسی به عرش حقیقت نمی‌رسد

تا خاک راه احمد مرسل (ص ) نمی‌شود

Islam and the White Race – II

One of the most preposterous lines of thought that I often come across on various fora is the laughable assumption that ‘Islamization’ [another dubious term nevertheless] of a particular area implies complete decimation of indigenous races, languages, and cultures. In other words, you would ultimately be transformed into Arab Bedouins.

Being an Arab and being a Muslim are two entirely different things.

I am an Indo-Aryan by race. My distant ancestors stood against the invading waves of Arab armies when in the 7th century they moved eastwards towards what today constitutes Iran, Pakistan, and Afghanistan.

The defenders were defeated and became subjects of the new ruling elite. It was a purely political struggle between two Imperial houses. The Arabs replaced the Persian Sassanids as regional hegemons. This Arab expansion, at the expense of administratively collapsing neighbors, had a lot to do with deadly intra-Arab power struggles [which I will touch upon in some other post].

Just as in today’s world mediocre politicians polish their legacies by embarking on ‘humanitarian interventions’ and aggressive wars abroad, there were factions within the Arab power elite who had to build their own ‘legacies’ to denigrate those whose exemplary conduct during and after Prophet (Peace and Blessings be Upon Him and the Ahl al Bayt) had become indigestible due to tribal and personal jealousies.

That the Arab forces were religiously Muslim did not make this engagement an ‘Islam vs Zoroastrianism/Hinduism’ affair.

If battlefield and military engagements could fundamentally transform a people’s spirit, the Greek and Mongol incursions in the Khorasan and Western Indus regions would have resulted in the spiritual Hellenization and Tengerisation of this part of the world respectively. None of that ever happened. It takes more than that to revolutionize the spirit of a people.

Besides, anyone who thinks that his ancestors were forcefully converted to a ‘foreign faith’ unconsciously sketches a damning picture of his own forefathers. I am not prepared to condemn my direct predecessors.

As I wrote in the last part, Islam addresses the human nature; not Arab, Persian, Indian, Turkic, White, Han, Korean, Japanese, Black natures etc.

Race is a biological fact as obvious as life and death.

It has a certain sanctity.

As the Holy Quran says:

“O mankind! Lo! We have created you male and female, and have made you nations and tribes that ye may know one another. Lo! the noblest of you, in the sight of Allah, is the best in conduct. Lo! Allah is Knower, Aware.” [49:13]

In light of the above verse, if now someone denies races and ethnicities, he not only denies the divine order but also displays sheer ignorance of reality.

Similarly, he who advocates forced mixing of various nations and tribes to eradicate their natural differences tinkers with the divine equilibrium and invites disorder and mayhem.

Even people who live under one roof are expected to respect each other’s private space.

Naturally, then, it is expected that macro-differences [racial, ethnic, tribal, and linguistic] too should be acknowledged and not trampled upon.

Each race, ethnicity, tribe, etc. has the divine right to maintain its distinct outlook.

And, thus, the noblest is the one who recognizes the natural differences and ventures to align himself with divine wisdom.

(to be continued)

What is Taqiyah?….And What is NOT

Please carefully read the following definition. It will help you spot whether the term is being used correctly or someone is just showing off his/her pedestrian grasp of Islamic jurisprudence.

||| Taqiyah, literally meaning ‘to safeguard’ or ‘to defend’, is a defensive mechanism that becomes operational when one is confronted with severe religious oppression. To save his/her life, he/she dissimulates his/her true religious beliefs beneath the garb of the ‘official line’ which he/she is forced to adhere on pain of death by the oppressor. |||

Now, the italics in the above text are of crucial importance. These are the conditions which trigger this doctrine. If they are not present then the doctrine becomes automatically inapplicable.

Oftentimes ignorant writers use this term as a synonym for ‘deception’ as if it is some Machiavellian directive which is deployed to divert your opponent’s focus in some run-of-the-mill conflict.

It does NOT mean wherever Muslims are in a minority, they are religiously sanctioned to lie, cheat, and swindle whenever they come into contact with those who do not happen to be Muslims. Anyone who holds on the contrary is only making a fool of himself.

You only undermine your own credibility if you toss around terms which you might find difficult even to pronounce correctly.

Yesterday I came across this essay [ https://m.rediff.com/news/column/rajeev-srinivasan-pakistan-will-soon-control-all-of-afghanistan/20210714.htm ], which was published on Rediff.com, an Indian web news portal. It was written by someone named Rajeev Srinivasan.

At the end of his ‘geopolitical analysis’, Mr. Srinivasan cautions his readers against taking him seriously.

He writes:

“One, the Afghans are not superhuman. Maharaja Ranjit Singh did defeat the Afghans and keep them under his control for some years.

Two, unless they are doing taqiya, both the Taliban and Pakistan, despite avowed support for Muslims, have been deathly silent about the Uyghurs.”

Till next time.

‘You DO NOT Have a Right To An Opinion On A Topic About Which You Know Little or Nothing’

I have tremendous regard for Dr. Matthew Raphael Johnson who presents a weekly podcast at Radio Albion.

Being a scholar of Russian Orthodox Church and philosophy and belonging to the Orthodox tradition himself, he brings a fresh perspective on things which one rarely comes across in the Anglophone world.

At the start of a podcast, which was broadcasted almost a decade ago, he said:

“Today is October 18th 2011. It is my 40th birthday today…As I get older there are a few things that are happening; I am losing patience with the pedestrian mentality in politics and history. This is a big problem largely because it’s not harmless. This sort of thing is not a hobby. This kind of thing is not something you should be doing because you need to prove to the world that you are smart. You could do a lot of damage. And if you go through the blogs and you see people some of whom have good intentions some of whom have very bad intentions spreading a lot of rumors and half-truths, not necessarily because they are deliberately manipulating people but they simply don’t know any better. And I tell you something. These forty years, forty years today and there is one thing about our social life that I have learnt and that really going to be on my tombstone one day. An epitaph. And that’s this simple phrase, and I want you to think about it in great detail and depth: ‘You DO NOT have a right to an opinion on a topic about which you know little or nothing.’ That statement in a lot very important ways summarizes the epistemology of Plato. It summarizes a lot of the semi-aristocratic approach to these disciplines. You know when I first got into this field 21 years ago, I haven’t taken a vacation; even when I do go away or do something that supposed to be fun, I bring all my books with me. I never stop thinking about these things which is a good thing and a terrible thing in many ways…In coming with even a tentative opinion on let’s say the political thought of James Madison, Napoleon, the French Revolution, you are talking about 10 solid full time years minimum in my opinion of going over the massive almost ridiculously massive amount of material out there. And then may be you can a very tentative opinion that you put forth with great trepidation. When somebody is talking about a topic, a very important topic, a very complicated topic, they think they know a few things; they have read a couple of books about it and they think they something. They have NO IDEA what they are missing. They have no idea the amount of material that you need to go through even for a tentative opinion. I am saying 10 years minimum and that’s as a full-time occupation. When I was in grad school and then afterwards at the Barnes Review and places like this, I lost a lot of sleep because I needed to solve certain problems. Who was right in the 19th century say the Russian Empire or Ukraine? What makes more sense form our point of view? An empire or a strong nation-state? These kind of questions. I lost sleep. And let me tell you I have lost friends and even family members over these issues. And the amount of material, the tens of thousands of pages whether it be in English or Russian or Ukrainian or Serbian that I poured through. And the amount of time I lost, the occupations I couldn’t do, the attacks that I have come under by the professional academics for even bringing up some of these topics in the way that we do and going through this ridiculously massive amount of material that the amateurs out there don’t even know exists, never mind, has ever been through. And 20 years of this non-stop, pretty much 365 days a year and that level of intensity; constant reading and constant writing and constant talking with professors and other experts and trying to ask the right questions and getting everything together and really developing almost an obsession, almost a pathological condition; going over this stuff for this many years in a relatively specialized field, YOU WILL PARDON ME IF I GET A LITTLE SNIPPY WHEN SOME PUNK WRITES ME WHO HAS READ A COUPLE OF BOOKS ON THIS…AND HE IS GONNA START LECTURING ME ON IT; SO ONE OF THE FEW TIMES YOU KNOW I AM GONNA CLOCK SOMEBODY IF THEY ARE IN FRONT OF ME. If you are not a bona fide expert on a topic; either you have the education; you have the publications; you have all the years you got to put in to even come up with a tentative opinion on these topics; especially topics like the British Empire, French Revolution, or Unification of Germany; the amount of material you couldn’t shoot through; you could build a house with just the English language material on this topic; PLEASE SHUT UP IF YOU HAVEN’T GONE THROUGH ALL OF IT OR MOST OF IT. YOU DON’T KNOW. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU MIGHT BE MISSING; WHAT YOU HAVEN’T COME ACROSS. One if the things that I have learned in these…now 20 full time years. I have never had a normal job. This is what I have done FULL-TIME since I was 18. When you simply don’t know and you go out and you are on these stupid blogs and you are trying to say something and if you make an error; we all make silly errors, but I am talking about serious stuff where you are coming up with theories that are contradicted by facts you don’t know exists because you haven’t been through the material and the years it takes to get through it all and the SUFFERING that it takes; this is not something you used to read after dinner because it’s relaxing; this is something that you do and it’s painful sometimes. You are constantly suffering through these problems. I used to wake up at 2 in the morning; run to my desk and go through…because I have some inspiration on a particular topic. I mean this is how you live. This is a life style that you choose. It’s not a hobby. It’s not something you people decide to do because it makes you seem smart or because you think it is going to impress someone or you are going to change the world or you are gonna be a leader or you wanna make a couple of bucks. When you get on these blogs you see this crap; just pure factual absurdity…think of a young student going through this and they start believing some of this stuff is true; you are poisoning the atmosphere; you are poisoning the debate when you inject this kind of ignorance and extreme amateurism into these things. You could do a lot of damage and you could hurt a lot of people because if they believe some of this is true and they go spouting it, they are gonna sound like morons.”

Islam and the White Race – I

Note: What follows lacks the progression of a properly structured essay. I apologize to the reader in advance if he finds its disorderliness irritating.

I have been following dissident cyberspace for some time now. An ocean of audio-visual material, blog posts, e-books, etc., occupies my hard drive. The reason being that the critique of modernity that arises in the dissident sector aligns greatly with what we have been saying for years against the Ravanas of ‘enlightenment’ and ‘liberal reform’ in our part of the world. And then there is the English language which I happen to know as well as my mother tongue. Naturally, it makes the endeavor all the more interesting since I do not have to rely on secondary and biased sources to get familiarized with the subject at hand.

Our contact with the Western White races during the colonial era incubated an army of native ‘social reformers’, ‘rationalists’, ‘modernists’, etc. who pushed something which was purely historical [Renaissance, Enlightenment, etc.] as natural.

Thus, we were introduced with absurdities like:

-‘a modernist interpretation of Islam’,

-‘a scientific approach towards Quran’,

-‘too much religion took us no where; just look at the West how it abandoned superstition and moderated its religious opiate and attained such prosperity.’

That ‘prosperity’ [whatever that means] proved a poisoned chalice for the White race. Today, when it is facing ethno-cultural dispossession on its own soil, its spiritual arsenal lacks effective weapons to repulse highly organized and absolutely satanic assaults.

Now, many a writers, bloggers, vloggers, activists, etc. just consume sub-standard, intellectually lazy ‘critiques’ of Islam when displaying their anger towards continuous non-White migration into their territories.

They may counter this objection by saying, ‘why should we care?, what do we gain by caring about semantics?, we just don’t want Muslims on our lands; plain and simple.’

But precisely here lies the rub. ‘Muslim’ is a theological category. It is not racial.

(((Whoever))) first deployed phrases like ‘Islam vs the West’ or ‘Muslims are on the verge of taking over Europe’ in mass communications killed many birds with one stone.

It denied Whites a mobilization on the basis of race. A racial mobilization implies that the threat is first and foremost biological. And since ‘Islam’ & ‘Muslim’ are not biological terms, room could be made for those who oppose Islam but are not themselves necessarily White.

An equation like ‘Islam vs the West’ hollows out the White racial element from the term ‘the West’. Just as anyone can embrace Islam, likewise, anyone can also adopt the West and become Western.

Welcome to ‘civic nationalism’.

The battle has never been between Islam and the West. Islam is innate. It deals with the metaphysical dimension of the human nature. One can adhere to Islam and be a White Nationalist at the same time. There is no contradiction.

It was a mistaken view of history plain and simple perpetuated by Whiggish historiography; an approach that blurred many visions.

The battles, however, were ethnic/racial and tribal:

– Arabs VS the Germanic tribes of Hispania,

– Berbers VS Hispanic Celtics,

– Ottoman Turks [most of them were erstwhile Byzantine Romans and Greeks who gradually got Turkified when they adopted Islam] VS Greeks, Slavs, and Romanians.

– Berbers VS Franks

– Arabs VS Franks

(to be continued)

The Occident Has Blown its Brains Out

Today, the Western civilization (whatever that means now) manifests itself as ‘Desmond is Amazing’.

How did that happen?

Well, the West had been playing Russian roulette with itself with a fully loaded pistol for centuries. Every time the trigger was pulled, the firearm got jammed. Then, one fine morning it did not jam and the West blew its brains out.

No geographical region in recorded history, not even the mighty Mongols with all their territorial aggrandizement, held the fate of the world in its hands as firmly as the one occupied by the European races at the beginning of the 20th century.

Now, after almost 125 years which would be approximately five generations later, those same Western races are being self-annihilated at the hands of their Satan worshipping political elites.

The descent has been as unparalleled as was the ascent.

Things that are common sensical in spiritually healthy dwellings, today, invite Orwellian howls when uttered in the Occident.

Presently, sense can only be uttered in the Occident on ‘alternative platforms’.

Mechanized Vitality

In a mechanized civilization, every standstill of technology produces a feeling of intolerable emptiness in the technically organized peoples, a void in their lives which they cannot endure and from which they try to escape by intensified motion. The individual may bemoan the inexorable organization of time to which his day is subjected, he may curse the mechanical job to which he is tied, but at the same time he cannot be without his mechanical organization; he adheres to its pattern even in his amusements. Motion has a narcotic attraction for him in intoxicating power, particularly where the going is fast, where the speed is record-breaking. He needs this stimulant as an addict needs his drug to feel alive. He must always feel that something is going on, that he is participating in some action. Hence, his insatiable thirst for news, a thirst that no rotary press can quench. His concept of life is dynamic. He puts the highest value on life’s vitality, but this very evaluation betrays the growing hunger for life that torments the masses. Modern life is dominated by the consuming force of that hunger.

Friedrich Georg Jünger [The Failure of Technology, pg. 158]

Michael Scheuer’s CIA Disinformation

‘Islamist terrorism aka War on Terrorism’ was a superhit TV series that ran for almost 25 years. Then, it was succeeded by ‘War against White Supremacist Terror’.

Where there were once ‘Middle East Experts’ and various ‘academic authorities on Islam’ populating the (((mass communications))) to rationalize the White man’s heroic struggle against rogue CIA officials like Bin Laden, Zawahiri, Zarqawi etc., there are now ‘gender experts’, ‘race relations offices’ etc., directing the ‘narrative’.

Banned Hipster

Michael Scheuer is an interesting guy. The head of CIA’s “Bin Laden unit” before and after 9/11, he became infamous writing a book, Imperial Hubris, critiquing the “War On Terror.” He maintained a public posture of strict non-interventionism and made sharp critiques of the Israel lobby and the Zionist entity itself.

But as with all CIA people, he’s a liar and a propagandist, as that is his job after all. As a young man reeling from 9/11, I bought his gimmick hook, line and sinker, but as I gained some wisdom I realized how all of his output was more or less just attempts to maintain the 9/11 official story.

He used a very effective type of lying; simply lying less than everyone else. At the time, the moronic conservatives were telling people that “radical Muslims” hated America “for our freedoms” and because women wore swimsuits at the beach. Scheuer…

View original post 918 more words

اسلام و وحشی گری عرب

:از نظر من

عنوان نادرست است. آنها وحشی بودند. حق با شماست. اما نه به این دلیل که آنها مسلمان بودند. وحشی گری آنها از اسلام قدیمی تر بود. چرا اگر زمین بایر است ، باران رحمت را متهم کنیم؟ ماسه های فارس و خراسان از بیابانهای عربستان حاصلخیزتر بودند. بنابراین، این خاک همیشه مردان وفادار به پیام عالی پیامبر اکرم (ص ) و آئمہ معصومین (ع ) را تولید می کرد

وقتی آن قطرات باران را دریافت کرد ، فیلسوفان، مورخان، شاعران و دیگر استادان را به دنیا آورد مسلمان بودن و عرب بودن چیزهای کاملاً متفاوتی است

منم بندهٔ اهل بیت نبی (ص)

ستایندهٔ خاک و پای وصی (ع)

جناب ابوالقاسم فردوسی