Deporting Blair
Editor's Note: Yamin Zakaria is a London-based political Islamist. Though MND does not subscribe to the view of Mr. Zakaria, we nevertheless will publish his work as a public service to those who wish to understand the 'idea-gap' between us and them...
"I have travelled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar or who is a thief. Such wealth I have seen in this country, such high moral values & people of such calibre, that I do not think we would ever conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage." -- Lord McCauley in his speech of Feb 2, 1835, British Parliament
Mr Blair, before you raise the subject of deportation, you need to look in the mirror, and remember that the entire episode of migration started approximately four hundred years ago; when your ancestors arrived on our shores, without a visa, without invitation and without anything to offer. They (East India Company) arrived claiming to be traders, but constantly plotted and eventually, colonised the entire continent and plundered its resources; proving to be pirates disguised as businessmen. At that time, India was a fairly prosperous nation, as testified by Lord McCauley, by the time your people left in 1947/48 it was one of the poorest.
Unlike the Mogul rulers that they replaced, they never settled into the country, but pillaged its abundant raw materials, following the footsteps of their Dutch (Dutch East India Company) rivals in Indonesia. The building of roads and railways in India leading to the ports had one central purpose, transporting India’s rich raw materials, which gave employment to your populated cities. The goods manufactured in England were sold back into the Indian market. It made everyone wealthy, except the Indian population who owned those resources in the first place.
Likewise, in South Africa, all the Gold and Diamond mined has effectively been stolen, this naturally made your ancestors very rich but left the native Africans very poor. Then the missionaries tried to sugar-coat the grand theft by selling them the Bible. Those who resisted British Imperialism physically, like the Zulus were no doubt the ‘terrorists’ of that time, in their own lands, and those who opposed using political means must been the preachers of ‘hate’!
Many of the indigenous members who personally benefited from your rule, naturally argued in favour of British Imperialism, there are always profiteers selling their loyalties in every society. The likes of Khalid Mahmood (Birmingham MP) who passionately supports ‘your’ (or the US) foreign policies; he supports the actions of your armies that are helping the larger US armed forces to invade nations that have not attacked or threatened the UK or US, consequently, men, women and children in Iraq and Afghanistan have been murdered in their tens of thousands. The latest reports from Iraq, confirmed by humanitarian organisations, [1] highlight that even children are being imprisoned, raped and tortured at the hands of foreign forces. So now you are ‘liberating’ Iraqi children to deliver them into the clutches of sadists and paedophiles that fill that ranks in your armies, something you can’t deny, as the world has seen the Abu Ghraib evidence. From Abu-Ghraib to children, surely you have now excelled Saddam Hussein.
The self-serving individuals in our midst are like the coolies that served your forefathers in the British Raj. They argue in collusion with some of the Muslim moderates in favour of deportation, desperately trying to preserve their self-interest. How is it that immigrants are now behaving like those on the far right, by using a language that is racist? Too often, I get asked the same question by those so-called ‘free’ thinkers with a coolie mindset - why do you live here if you oppose the policies of the British government. Am I obliged to agree with the government on every issue or leave? I thought all citizens were equal and had right to disagree, the right to speak freely against wrongs, which is also an evidence of a free democratic society? In reality questions of “what are you doing here then?” are posed in desperation when they are unable to intellectually answer the arguments posed to them. It would be far more accurate to call such people non-thinkers, the neo-coolies of today who believe the only legitimate view, is that of “their masters.”
Anyway, Mr Blair, you may have left India and most of Africa but it is doubtful you have left the other parts of the Islamic world where you and/or your American cousins continued to rule through proxy (neo-colonialism), by imposing dictatorships that align with your interests and are supported or go off script and then get toppled (Saddam for instance). A further illustration is your early version of “X-Factor,” where your foreign policy found such talent amongst those illiterate Bedouins in the deserts, as they herded their goats, that you immediately recognised them as royalty and turned them all into Princes and Kings. After 80 years of ‘independence’ these Arabs are still incapable of extracting and refining oil by themselves, as those hand-picked Arabs have no interest, no desire and no will to become independent, as long their tribes are getting fatter than the camels. It is said that “if there is a will there is a way” so the reverse must also be true. In short, styles may have changed, but good old fashioned colonialism of exploiting the resources of other nations, has not!
It is definitely unfair to continue to blame your government for all the ills in the Islamic world. However, you do still play a significant role in maintaining Western interests, by keeping the Islamic world divided into small artificial nations, as opposed to the Caliphate you have so strongly rejected. Now why would you not want the Muslims to be united and in control of their own people, resources and lands, I wonder? Maybe it is because you want to continue making lots of money? So you frown at the idea of a unifying Caliphate, and you consider it a crime for the Muslims to unify but not the Europeans or the Anglo-Saxon world. Many thanks for clarifying what you mean by democracy for the Islamic world, as many of the moderates are under the impression that you want the Muslims to decide their own destiny.
Your fanaticism against the unification of the Muslims was exposed, when Iraq invaded its own former province of Kuwait (which you had divided some 40 years earlier). It was enough to move you into military action to maintain your puppets and interests. You killed indiscriminately, women, children, the old and the retreating soldiers on the road to Basra (highway of death) without remorse, but none of that is terrorism or genocide. Let us be honest for once, the US General said “if Kuwait grew carrots we would not give a dam about its fate” and I suppose your inaction over the real genocide in Rwanda is further proof of the reasons behind your militarism in the region. Iraqis never hurt your people, but you think in your arrogance you have right to do as you please.
The continuous destruction of our economies through maintaining these despotic puppet rulers, burdening our nations under crippling loans, strangling domestic industry and craft by dumping your subsidised over productions into our lands and the resulting misery, these are the main reasons why you have so many economic migrants, not counting those displaced by wars fought in your name or interests. Your successive governments have maintained colonialist foreign policies that have made our countries unliveable and ungovernable. Those ugly despotic puppets are not interested in anything beyond their tribal interests, and that suits you as long as your economic interests are met. A recent example of this petty self interest from ruling elites is the Tsunami disaster; the meanest contributors were the richest Islamic countries. Only recently we saw those same miserly regimes donating 20 million pounds to a French Museum that apparently has an ‘Islamic’ section, while the mothers and children in Niger, Iraq, Palestine and Afghanistan starve and bleed to death.
Now, Mr Blair, you threaten to expel second and third generation Muslims who have lived peacefully in the UK. You push for their assimilation, capitulation and complete subservience to your dictates; at the same time repeating your mantra of upholding multi-cultural identity and ‘freedom’! Being drunk with imperial arrogance you do not see the internal contradictions of your message. Note the distinction; we live in the UK as law abiding citizens that have made substantial contributions towards this society, unlike the example of your colonisers in our lands with stealth bombers and cruise missiles. However, deportation may not be such a bad idea, if it is carried out consistently and we all know inconsistencies are traits of hypocrites and liars, the selective application of UN resolutions naturally comes to mind!
So, deport the Muslims from UK, and in return Christian Anglo-Saxons should be expelled from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, America, Caribbean, South Africa, Zimbabwe .etc where they have not integrated, they have refused to learn the language despite living their for years, refused to accept the desirability of the indigenous peoples culture and practises, and have instead used violence and extremism, preached hate for there neighbour, totally destroyed “their way of life,” and abused their hosts' hospitality. We welcome your bold and courageous steps, and welcome your applying these rules consistently across all such extremist, violent and racist communities wherever they are. Also don’t forget to close all the embassies and remove the military bases and the multinational companies from the Islamic world.
Who knows, eventually the Celts in Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland may also demand the deportation of your tribes. Effectively, then you would be quarantined to a section of your own tiny island. Then you can enjoy the company of Nick Griffin, Richard LittleJohn and all the other like minded little-people and enhance your ‘cultural’ diversity, while the rest of the world can finally live in real peace.
Note: [1]. http://www.sundayherald.com/43796
Yamin Zakaria
London, UK
Copyright © 2005 by Yamin Zakaria. Published by permission of the author.


8 Comments:
An excerpted script off Noam Chomskys "hegemony or survival". Quite illuminating though.
What a load of drivel.
The Kuwatics were to have no say in this "reunion" of the Caliphate?
I suppose the atrocities inflicted by Saddams thugs upon the Kuwatis were all in the spirit of muslim brotherhood. And as far as UK and US forces killing women and children, I guess the best way to do propaganda is to take your own actions and blame it on the other side. I've seen the pictures of Saddam's inglorious defeat, sorry, no women and children there. Only dead male Iraqi soldiers.
If this fool is so offended by western society, why is he living in Britian? Doesn't the Koran require all good Muslims to remain in Dar Al Islam? Or is Britian just another extension of the Caliphate these days?
"The latest reports from Iraq, confirmed by humanitarian organisations, [1] highlight that even children are being imprisoned, raped and tortured at the hands of foreign forces. So now you are ‘liberating’ Iraqi children to deliver them into the clutches of sadists and paedophiles that fill that ranks in your armies, something you can’t deny, as the world has seen the Abu Ghraib evidence."
There are three kinds of lies; lies, damn lies and Muslim evidence.
"I thought all citizens were equal and had right to disagree, the right to speak freely against wrongs, which is also an evidence of a free democratic society?"
And Britain is not deporting citizens. Besides, there is a significant difference between disagreeing and inciting to kill. Perhaps, they aren't so different to the Muslim mind, but to the Western mind it is considered barbaric to kill someone based on simply disagreeing. To the Muslim mind, they are one and the same. Look no further than the lands of the Prophet for proof.
"Arabs have no interest, no desire and no will to become independent, as long their tribes are getting fatter than the camels."
When it is the Muslim that is wealthy over another, it is considered a gift from Allah; the rewards for a deserving life. But, somehow when foriegners are allegedly involved, then it is no longer Allah rewarding the faithful. Is it meant to imply that the foriegners can provide the same wealths that Allah provides? Certainly, it cannot be. So, it must be the petty jealousy of the ones deemed not faithful enough for the rewards.
"Now why would you not want the Muslims to be united and in control of their own people, resources and lands, I wonder? Maybe it is because you want to continue making lots of money?"
Because we have seen what good neighbors the Muslims make. Remember the Ottoman Empire and its conquest of Europe? How about the words uttered these days of how the Muslims percieve that the world should be united under Islam? The rest of us have seen the Muslim ideal of humanity and have rejected it outright. How can a people devalue half of its population (women) and hope to be seen as humane?
"Your fanaticism against the unification of the Muslims was exposed, when Iraq invaded its own former province of Kuwait (which you had divided some 40 years earlier). It was enough to move you into military action to maintain your puppets and interests."
How far back do you want to go on who owns what? How about back to Joseph (Israel)? And now Muslims seek to even drive them out of the small part that they have.
Perhaps we should go back to a time before the Prophet? Then, no Muslim owns anything.
"Let us be honest for once, the US General said “if Kuwait grew carrots we would not give a dam about its fate”
Sad to think. But giving a damn for the wrong reasons is better than not giving a damn at all.
Which is what the Muslims are doing when they are killing people for believing differently in Muslim countries. Where is your outcry against the Sudan?
Let's see. You complain that Britain is deporting people for thinking differently. And you neglect that the Sudanese and even the Sunni Arabs in Iraq are killing people for thinking differently.
I'm finished reading about the
Muslim evidence. Nothing more is relevant by this point.
Lurk
I did not realise the Americans loved the Kuwaitis so much! Looking at their track record with the Africans, Native Americans etc. how is it that these white Anglo-Saxon-Christian boys have so much loove for those Sand-NIggers in Kuwait?
Again let us be a bit more honest.
The love of the US is for their oil and 'protecting-them-execuse' to occupy and bully the rest of the Arab world.
The evidence is cited from a western sources regarding torturing kids (reference is given below the article), the only damm lies are the LIES ABOUT IRAQS WMDS oozing through FUX-TV, WHICH the WORLD can SEE, even if you cant.
AS for inciting to kill, how about the mad-Bible-basher Pat Robertson calling for the assassination of Chevez ? What about the letters printed in the US urging the US citizens to kill Muslims in US for the loss of US soldiers in Iraq?
You see, again, incitement to kill is wrong only when it is done to you Americans - Likewise it is terrorism when a few of yours are killed but when you kill ten times the number it is ok! Or is it more of that Whiteman's burden you are carrying?
Whatever the faults of the OTTOMANS were, they did not ANNHILATE a race, like the NAtive Americans. Christians, JEws and Muslims lived happily for centuries under ISlamic Ottoman Rule (1391 to 1924). Where did the Jews flee to from the Inquisition? Another classic example is the tolerant Muslims rule in SPAIN versus the intolerance of Christian INquisition. Your track record could not even reach the ankles of the ISlamic State in terms of tolerance exhibited by it. Just alone in this American century more people have been annhilated than any other in human history, of course it was all done by the Muslims and Saddam, even the nukes over Japanese cities!
As for going back to owning lands it is you that claims that JEws have a right over Palestine (naturally as you did not want to give them a home in Europe) going back 2000 years, so the argument comes from you not us. ANd it is you that are not applying such pricniples consistently.
AS for the Palestenian claim is not historical but current as those displaced are still alive. BUt like the Native Americans they are expendable to make way for you obese boys!
Finally I see the age old 'logic' is there. When Saddam (Who the US did not create but came out of Aladin's magic lamp) killed say 100,000 is bad so it is ok for the US to kill 99,999 since it is lesss than Saddam. Right?
Biggoted minds have a disease, they do not see even when their eyes see. The disease is inside their minds and hearts.
Biggoted minds have a disease, they do not see even when their eyes see. The disease is inside their minds and hearts.
"Sand-niggars"
"White Anglo-Saxon Christian Boys"
"Whiteman"
Yeah, I'd say you do have a disease there.
If it had just been for oil, it would have just been bought. It would have been cheaper than overthrowing a government and far more efficient.
The Ottomans killed Armenians. The Turks kill the Kurds. You want to bring up the Inquisition as proof of "evil Christian doings"? It was politically motivated. There is nothing in the Catholic religion that condones the forced conversion or death of anyone. However, there is quite a lot of it in the Koran.
Which goes to show you that there is going to be good examples and bad examples of every and any religion in this world.
Want to talk of our unfortunate track record due to race relations? We were wrong in keeping slaves, and now there are no slaves. We were wrong to fight the idegenous peoples of America, and we no longer do it. We were wrong to segregate due to races and we no longer do. And all things said, America and Americans are far more tolerant than any other people on this planet.
Speak of historical claims to land for the Palestinians? I'll point out that before Rome took over that area all those years ago it was called Israel and Judea. Both Jewish kingdoms. So the Jews have a historical claim to that land that supercedes the Palestinians, who if Rome had not renamed the area would be called Israelis as well (providing no other name change went on).
Pat Robinson? Who actually considers him seriously? Are other Americans getting behind him in his words, or are they horrified and forcing him to explain what he meant by taking Chavez out? (He says we could remove the man from power, but I doubt he would have been heartbroken if Chavez was killed) Do you actually think he speaks for us?
We didn't create Saddam. We helped him during the days he was against Iran, yes. Were we foolish to do so? Most definitely. But as all victors know, "The ends will justify the means." Horrify you? Perhaps it does, but you can't escape the fact that it is back there in your mind right now. We are all made hypocrites in the defense of our ideals.
And you know what? I am a Scot-Irish Catholic with Prussian, French Canadian, and American ideginous tribesman blood in me. I have relatives who are Lebanese. I have a cousin who is going to marry a Hispanic man. And I have never cared what skin color the woman I took to bed had. Is that non-biggoted enough for you disease minded one?
Why don't you give us your name? The one I posted is mine.
To "anonymous"
google "arab slave traders"
and "banna nazis"
Yamin Zakaria is Noam Chomsky. I mean the arguments style is identical and the content is nearly so.
It is the convergence of radical leftist and Islamist worldview which is incredible to me. Enemy of my enemy indeed..
"how is it that these white Anglo-Saxon-Christian boys have so much loove for those Sand-NIggers in Kuwait?
Interesting how in defense, you apply derogatory names to those you defend. Are you trying to pin the name calling on me? I did not use the names.
You complain that the US entered the fight to protect the oil. Yet, the gas prices in the US continue to rise dramatically. If we were there for the oil, why would we bother with the government? Why aren't the Iraqi oil fields at full capacity pumping oil to the US?
I don't buy the sources because if child molestation was happening, the MSM (main-stream-media) would be having a field day with the reports. They couldn't let that go at all. But while we are on the subject of treatment of prisoners, explain the difference between naked men in humiliating positions and men being decapitated on television? Doesn't the Koran specifically say that Muslims must treat persons well that lay down their weapons? Doesn't it say that Muslims are not to kill women and children? I'm sure you can find the passage in the Koran if you try. then compare that to the decapitations. These happen now, not in some history book.
And if you gave me 6 months to get rid of evidence of WMDs, I'd probably find a way to sneak them out of the country, too. But, the evidence exists that they were there and the evidence exists that Iraq (and Sadam Husein) supported terrorism. We removed Saddam from power taking fewer lives in combat than he took in a year for giggles.
Whichever way you look at it, the Christian are helping the Muslim people in Iraq to get out from under the reign of terror that was Sadam. The people now killing Muslims in Iraq are Muslims. Now, tell me where in the world today the Muslims are helping the Christians.
AS for inciting to kill, how about the mad-Bible-basher Pat Robertson calling for the assassination of Chevez ?
One man at one moment talking about one man, and probably ripped out of context. AND, since retracted and apologized for.
Now, how many Clerics? And how many times? How often? Against how many people? And have they once retracted a single statement for their own comment? Have they ever apologized for the thing said?
Do you not detect a difference?
Whatever the faults of the OTTOMANS were, they did not ANNHILATE a race, like the NAtive Americans.
Overemphasis again? I bet I can find some "Native Americans" that have not been ANNHILATEd. I bet you can, too.
tolerant Muslims rule
What was was and is no more. How tolerant of Christians and Jews is Saudi Arabia? Palestinians? Syrians? Iranians? But, to give credit. Turkey which was once the Ottomans, is more tolerant than any middle eastern Muslim country. Guess what? they have a secular government. Not a religious one.
Just alone in this American century more people have been annhilated than any other in human history, of course it was all done by the Muslims and Saddam, even the nukes over Japanese cities!
Well, if you don't count the Jews being killed in the gas chambers, but you don't, do you?
And is it a question of how many people are killed vs what was happening? We were involved in several wars liberating people other than ourselves. the Muslim tendancy seems to lean more to killing outside of a war and to forward the Muslim dominance or control of other governments.
As for going back to owning lands ...
Historically, Palestine didn't exist at that spot. The British, upon their departure from the Middle-East created three countries of their land taken in the war against the Ottomans. Israel for the Jews. Lebanon for the Christians. And Palestine for the Muslims. But, the freindly neighborhood Muslims didn't like the Jews living there in the desert. So, they planned a war against Israel and told the Palestinians to vacate the lands because they were coming through. Israel took the land in a defensive war, and as such it was internationally legally theirs. Palestine has no historical claim to the lands, and even though they are being given the land, they will continue to attack Israel. Just watch, and then of course justify the further bloodshed after the offering of peace.
Finally I see the age old 'logic' is there. When Saddam (Who the US did not create but came out of Aladin's magic lamp) killed say 100,000 is bad so it is ok for the US to kill 99,999 since it is lesss than Saddam. Right?
How and why did Saddam kill those Iraqis? How and why did the Americans kill those Iraqis? and how many have the "insurgents" killed since?
Biggoted minds have a disease. They do not see even when their eyes see. The disease is inside their minds and hearts. Got a mirror?
Post a Comment
<< Home