#Slavery terrorism and Islam

[dchan87]

The Houthis

Are not an ethnic group

Are a shiite fundamentalist, radical Islamic terror organization

Brought slavery back to Yemen

Are helping to starve the Yemeni population

Kill and enslave Ethiopian migrants

Oppress women and non-shiite Muslims

Detain kids as young as 13 YEARS OLD, some for alleged homosexual acts and torture prisoners

Allegedly use child soldiers

Steal food aid

Take hostages

Attack shipping lanes

HATE JEWS

The houthis ARE NOT YOUR FRIENDS.

[la-cosmonauta-extraterrestre]

Many Muslims born in the west (both the children of immigrants and converts) want to move to a Muslim country, and many of them do. They want to move because they want their children to learn Quran in school (and not learn LGBTQ+ issues in school), or because they want it to be easier for them to be Muslim in their day-to-day lives (easy access to halal food and jobs that don't expect a lot from the workers during Ramadan), or because they want to fulfill the Islamic requirement to live under Sharia if not actively proselytizing, or they want to get away from Islamophobia in the west, or they are American and just need to get away after realizing how much being American screws one over, or maybe they're just emigrating for work or marriage.

The human rights violations occurring in Muslim countries generally don't occur to them as reasons not to immigrate. They might move to Qatar blissfully unaware that its infrastructure is the product of modern slavery, or move to Saudi Arabia despite being uncomfortable that the state sponsors terrorism, or move to Turkey not caring that their government continues to deny the Armenian genocide, or move to Malaysia and actively consider it a good thing that it's illegal to be gay.

Then those same Muslims assume that Jews who decide to make Aliyah all hate Palestinians and have some colonialist agenda, when in reality most Jews who make Aliyah immigrate because ... they want to send their children to a religious public school, or they want it to be easier to be Jewish in their day-to-day lives (easy access to kosher food and jobs that give shabbat and holidays off), or they want to fulfill the mitzvah of living in the land of Israel, or they want to get away from antisemitism in their country, or they are American and just need to get away after realizing how much being American screws one over, or maybe they're just emigrating for work or marriage. They may or may not be aware of or care about Arabs being tortured in Israeli state prisons, but ultimately every country has human rights violations.

[secular-jew]

While there were periods of tolerance with Jews in Islamic-populated and controlled regions of the Middle East & North Africa (MENA), let this chronology disavow any notion that Islam treated its Jewish neighbors "well."

The list of massacres of Jews throughout all of Europe largely at the hands of Christianity, is equally, if not even more exhaustive.

But for Jews in MENA, it all started with Muhammad, who gave birth to concept of regularly demonizing and terrorizing, the majority and minority Jewish communities, often ending in outright theft of property, and then rape and murder of those folks who would not "submit."

The horrific attacks on Oct 7, 2023, all filmed for the world to see (because Islamists now publicly revel in their barbarity of infidels), was just one in a long list of 100+ of atrocities at the hands of Muhammad and his followers:

622 - 627: Ethnic cleansing of Jews (who comprised roughly 50% of the population of Medina) carried out by Muhammad and his Jihadis. Over 800 Jewish men and boys (based on a pubic hair check), were killed by beheading. Women were forced into sexual slavery, and the children were given to Islamic Jihadis as slaves. Mohammad force-married Safiyyah, after murdering her husband and father.

629: 1st Alexandria Massacres of Jews, Egypt.

622 - 634: Exterminations of Arabian Jewish tribes.

1106: Ali Ibn Yousef Ibn Tashifin of Marrakesh decrees death penalty for any local Jew, including his Jewish Physician, and as well as his Jewish military general.

1033: 1st massacre of Jews in Fez, Morocco.

1148: Almohadin of Morocco gives Jews the choice of converting to Islam, or expulsion.

1066: Granada Massacre of Jews, Muslim-occupied Spain.

1165 - 1178: Jews of Yemen given the choice (under new constitution) to either convert to Islam or die.

1165: Chief Rabbi of the Maghreb was publicly burnt alive. The Rambam (Maimonides, Moses ben Maimon), forced to flee Spain to Egypt.

1220: Tens of thousands of Jews massacred by Muslims Turkey, Iraq, Syria, and Egypt, after being blamed for Mongol invasion.

1270: Sultan Baibars of Egypt resolved to burn all the Jews, a ditch having been dug for that purpose; but at the last moment he repented, and instead exacted a heavy tribute, during the collection of which many perished.

1276: 2nd Fez Pogrom (massacre) against Jews in Morocco

1385: Khorasan Massacres against Jews in Iran

1438: 1st Mellah Ghetto massacres against Jews in Morocco

1465: 3rd Fez Pogrom against Jews in Morocco, leaving only 11 Jews left alive

1517: 1st Safed Pogrom in Muslim Ottoman controlled Judea

1517: 1st Hebron Pogrom in Muslim-controlled Judea, by occupying Ottomans

1517: Marsa ibn Ghazi Massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Libya

1577: Passover Massacre throughout the Ottoman Empire

1588 - 1629: Mahalay Pogroms of Jews in Iran

1630 - 1700: Yemenite Jews considered 2nd class citizens and subjugated under strict Shi'ite 'dhimmi' rules

1660: 2nd Judean Pogrom, in Safed Israel (Ottoman-controlled Palestine)

1670: Expulsion of Mawza Jews in Yemen

1679 - 1680: Massacres of Jews in Sanaa, Yemen

1747: Massacres of the Jews of Mashhad, Iran

1785: Pogrom of Libyan Jews in Ottoman-controlled Tripoli, Libya

1790 - 92: Tetuan Pogrom. Morocco (Jews of Tetuuan stripped naked, and lined up for Muslim perverts)

1800: Decree passed in Yemen, criminalizing Jews from wearing clothing that is new or good, or from riding mules or donkeys. Jews were also rounded up for long marches naked through the Roob al Khali dessert

1805: 1st Algiers Massacre/Pogrom of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Algeria

1808: 2nd Ghetto Massacres in Mellah, Morocco

1815: 2nd Algiers massacres/pogroms of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Algeria

1820: Sahalu Lobiant Massacres of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Syria

1828: Baghdad massacres/pogroms of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Iraq

1830: 3rd massacre/pogrom of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Algiers, Algeria

1830: Ethnic cleansing of Jews in Tabriz, Iran

1834: 2nd massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Hebron, Judea

1834: Massacre/pogrom of Safed Jews in Ottoman-controlled Palestine/Judea

1839: Massacre of the Mashadi Jews in Iran

1840: Damascus Affair following first of many blood libels against Jews in Ottoman-controlled Syria

1844: 1st Cairo Massacres of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Egypt.

1847: Dayr al-Qamar massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Lebanon

1847: Ethnic cleansing of the Jews in Jerusalem, Ottoman-controlled Palestine

1848: 1st Damascus massacre/pogrom, in Ottoman-controlled Syria

1850: 1st Aleppo massacre/pogrom of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Syria

1860: 2nd Damascus massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Syria

1862: 1st Beirut massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Lebanon

1866: Massacre of Jews by Ottomans Kuzguncuk, Turkey

1867: Massacre of Jews by Ottomans in Barfurush, Turkey

1868: Massacre of Jews by Ottomans in Eyub, Turkey

1869: Massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Tunis, Tunisia

1869: Massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Sfax, Tunisia

1864 - 1880: Massacres of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Marrakesh, Morocco

1870: 2nd Alexandria Massacres of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Egypt

1870: 1st Istanbul massacre of Jews in Ottoman Turkey

1871: 1st Damanhur Massacres of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Egypt

1872: Massacre of Jews by Ottomans in Edirne, Turkey

1872: 1st Massacre of Jews by Ottomans in Izmir, Turkey

1873: 2nd Damanhur Massacres of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Egypt

1874: 2nd Izmir massacre of Jews in Turkey

1874: 2nd massacre of Jews in Istanbul Turkey

1874: 2nd massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Beirut, Lebanon

1875: 2nd massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Aleppo, Syria

1875: Massacre of Jews in Djerba Island, Ottoman-controlled Tunisia

1877: 3rd massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Damanhur, Egypt

1877: Masaacres of Jews in Mansura, Ottoman-controlled Egypt

1882: Masacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Homs, Syria

1882: 3rd Massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Alexandria, Egypt.

1890: 2nd massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Cairo, Egypt.

1890: 3rd massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Damascus, Syria.

1890: 2nd massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Tunis, Tunisia

1891: 4th massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Damanahur, Egypt.

1897: Targeted murder of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Tripolitania, Libya.

1903 &1907: Masaacres of Hews in Ottoman-controlled Taza & Settat, Morocco.

1901 - 1902: 3rd set of massacres of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Cairo, Egypt.

1901 - 1907: 4th set of Massacres of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Alexandria, Egypt.

1903: 1st massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Port Sa'id, Egypt.

1903 - 1940: Series of massacres in Taza and Settat, Morocco.

1907: Massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Casablanca, Morocco.

1908: 2nd Massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Port Said, Egypt.

1910: Blood libel against Jews in Shiraz, Iran.

1911: Masaacre of Jews by Muslims in Shiraz, Iran.

1912: 4th massacre in Ottoman-controlled Fez, Morocco.

1917: Baghdad Iraq Jews murdered by Ottomans.

1918 - 1948: Yemen passes a law criminalizing the raising of a Jewish orphan in Yemen.

1920: Massacres of Jews in Irbid Jordan (British mandate Palestine).

1920 - 1930: Arab riots resulting in hundreds of Jewish deaths, British mandate Palestine.

1921: 1st Jaffa (Israel) riots, British mandate Palestine.

1922: Massacres of Jews in Djerba, Tunisia.

1928: Jewish orphans sold into slavery, and forced toonvert to Islam by Muslim Brotherhood, Yemen.

1929: 3rd Hebron (Israel) massacre of Jews by Arabs in British mandate Palestine.

1929 3rd massacre of Jews by Arabs in Safed (Israel), British mandate Palestine.

1933: 2nd Jaffa (Israel) riots, British mandate Palestine.

1934: Massacre of Jews in Thrace, Turkey.

1936: 3rd riots by Arabs against Jews in Jaffa (Israel), British mandate Palestine.

1941: Masaacres of Jews in Farhud, Iraq.

1942: Muslim leader Grand Mufti collaboration with the Nazis, playing a major role in the final solution.

1938 - 1945: Full alliance and collaboration by Arabs with the Nazis in attacking and murdering Jews in the Middle East and Africa.

1945: 4th massacre of Jews by Muslims in Cairo, Egypt.

1945: Masaacre of Jews in Tripolitania, Libya.

1947: Masaacre of Jews by Muslims in Aden, Yemen.

2023: Massacre, rape, torture and kidnapping of ~1,500 Israelis (mostly Jews) by Muslims in numerous towns throughout southern Israel

[the-garbanzo-annex-jr]

by Michael Rubin

Secretary of State Antony Blinken smells like desperation. After meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for more than two hours, Blinken said the current proposal to achieve a ceasefire in Gaza and win the release of Hamas-held hostages is "maybe the last" opportunity.

Blinken is wrong. The last opportunity to win a ceasefire and release Hamas captives came when he agreed to negotiate with a terrorist group whose covenant embraces genocide and whose ideology envisions Islamic rule with religious and sexual minorities condemned to second-class status if not slavery or death.

When diplomats fall back on process, too often they lose sight of the forest through the trees. The fact remains: Hamas invaded Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, during a ceasefire to which the terrorist group had agreed. Its members raped, slaughtered, and took civilians hostage. The return of those hostages should always have been the precondition to negotiations rather than the conclusion. If Palestinians in Gaza did not want to see their territories' collateral destruction, they could return hostages under their control or inform about their whereabouts. This is not farfetched considering that Hamas has kept hostages in supposedly civilian hospitals, in private homes, and even with U.N. employees.

To negotiate with Hamas over its blatant violation of humanitarian law not only empowers Hamas, but it permanently degrades international law.

Blinken's second mistake was his choice of mediator. A good rule of thumb: Never place strategic interests in a mediator ideologically committed to your destruction. Egyptians may be aloof and, as the tunnels under the Philadelphi Corridor show, double-dealing, but Qatar too often uses its vast wealth to promote the Muslim Brotherhood's ideology that at its core rejects all aspects of Western liberalism and democracy.

Blinken has also tried to include Turkey in any post-conflict order. This, too, is bizarre. Years of pandering to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan combined with the Turkish despot's similar Muslim Brotherhood-infused ideology makes Turkey far less a partner for peace than an undesignated sponsor of terrorism. To offer Erdogan influence over post-Hamas Gaza would be akin to putting white supremacist David Duke in charge of post-apartheid South Africa.

Blinken's third mistake is treating the Palestinian Authority as a moderate alternative to Hamas. Palestinian Chairman Mahmoud Abbas is now in the third decade of his four-year presidential term. As Blinken has restored funding to Abbas, Abbas has shown his true colors. Speaking in Turkey just the other day, Abbas declared, "America is the plague and the plague is America."

There is no substitute for moral clarity. Moral compromise, meanwhile, substitutes groveling for justice.

After Iran released its 52 American hostages on President Ronald Reagan's first day in office, former Deputy Secretary of State Warren Christopher published a collection of essays by Carter administration alumni crowing triumphant for their success. Their thesis? The persistence of diplomacy led Ayatollah Khomeini to release his prisoners. Peter Rodman, a former Kissinger aide, responded in an article that Christopher and crew got it backward: The Islamic Republic let its hostages go when the cost of their captivity grew too high to bear.

Rather than pressure Netanyahu and have aides, underlings, and surrogates slime a duly elected leader, Blinken should be introspective. Had Blinken at every opportunity not indulged Hamas's conceits or played into the agenda of the group's enablers such as Qatar and Turkey, the hostages today might be free and the Hamas-imposed war over. President Joe Biden's base might hand wring and indulge in an orgy of antisemitism, but the road to peace rests on bringing so much pain to bear on Hamas that it has no choice but to release its captives and end its reign of terrorism over Gaza's 2.5 million Palestinians.

[sonofsatansworld]

Satan is My Higher Power!

“Satan doesn’t actually exist outside the human imagination- just like God, Satan is not a conscious external, independent being, but is the internal personification of a moral code- a construct of our minds to provide character and narrative to a common morality.

Christianity, Judaism and Islam are institutions which find power in dictating human morality, regardless of the real-life consequences and without purpose other than increased power and influence. Anarcho-Satanism promotes empowering the individual through the individual’s creative practice of moral judgment, and examining the evident consequences in detail for the purpose of gradual improvements to the overall quality of life. Anarcho-Satanists seek to reclaim the right of moral judgment from God, and entitle the communities and individuals with the self-confidence to decide for themselves what is right and what is wrong. The God of the monotheistic western religions is evil disguised as good, while Satan is good disguised as evil. As times change and human life evolves, this historic inversion of morality is slowly being corrected.

For hundreds and thousands of years, crusades, inquisitions, witch hunts, jihads, imperial colonization, slavery, and all other manner of organized cruelties have been carried out in the name of God. The cover of God provides the justification for the weak-minded and weak-willed to commit the worst atrocities, thinking that they will be forgiven by God rewarded in an afterlife for their mindless devotion.

When Christians Jews and Muslims are no longer able to create an illusion of eternal suffering for those who deny their God, they are no longer able to justify worship of their God as a path to salvation, as there is then nothing to be saved from, except the world which the influence of God has warped and twisted from an ancient paradise into a modern hell on earth.

Christianity, Judaism and Islam would have us believe that God is omnipotent; the source of existence and a benevolent entity, but to be all-powerful and to still allow atrocities to occur could only demonstrate the unjust cruelty of the source of these atrocities. If God had not wanted humans to suffer from rape, murder, disease, starvation, poverty, natural disasters, war, terrorism, torture and genocide, why would God create these conditions? Why would an all-powerful, omnipotent God allow such catastrophes to continually plague humanity? If it is part of God’s plan, then we as individuals must find the inner strength of our ability to reason and rightfully judge the plan as horribly flawed, or as the lack of any plan.

[3rdeyeblaque]

Today we venerate Elevated Ancestor El-Hajj Malik El-Shabaz aka Brother Malcolm "X" Little on his 98th birthday 🎉

A minister, scholar, orator, & legendary Freedom Fighter- who infamously bore the name "X" to signify our self-liberation from the shackles of a European legacy forced upon us during Slavery -, we elevate Brother Malcolm as one of THE most prolific voices of freedom, justice, self-determination, & Pan-Afrikan unity in modern history.

Born into a legacy of freedom fighters, Brother Malcolm was raised on the cusp between Black Nationalism unity & White Supremacist terror. His father was a member of Marcus Garvey’s Universal Negro Improvement Association (UNIA), in which he served as an orator publicly advocating for Black liberation before his murder.

Though a gifted student, Malcolm dropped out of school when a teacher ridiculed his aspirations to become a lawyer. He later drifted into a life of hustling on the streets of Harlem. He cleverly avoided the draft in WWII by making the outrageous declaration that he'd organize Black soldiers to attack their White counterparts which classified him as "mentally unfit to serve". After his burglary arrest in Boston, Malcolm faced 10 years in prison. Here, he found Islam via the NOI.

Upon his parole release, Malcolm took the name "X" as he began to serve in the NOI as a speaker, organizer, and minister. He quickly grew in his prominence & drew national attention after an expose on the NOI was aired on CBS. Both, Black & White Americans, saw the stark contrast in his/NOI views from that of other Black religious leaders/organizations of the time. Thus planting the first seeds of warped perception & fear.

Meanwhile, Brother Malcolm's personal views & interests slowly began to split from the leaders of the organization he'd come to love. Malcolm grew increasingly frustrated with the NOI's bureaucracy & outright refusal to join the Civil Rights Movement. His forbidden response to the assassination of JFK earned him a 90 suspension from the NOI; at which time he announced his departure from the organization.

In March 1964, he founded the Muslim Mosque, Inc. Three months later, he founded a political group called, the Organization of Afro-American Unity (OAAU). Malcolm firmly placed Black Revolution in a global context of an anti-imperialist struggle here, in Afrika, Latin America, & Asia. This is what set him & his work further apart from any Black leader & organization in the U.S. at the time. And this is what sparked the breadth of his influence & mapped out the future of his work.

Brother Malcolm toured North & East Afrika as well as the Middle East Region in the late Spring of 1964. He met with heads of state from several countries (i.e.: Kenya, Tanzania, Egypt, Ghana, Nigeria) before making his hajj to Mecca, Saudi Arabia. Here, he added "El-Hajj" to his Muslim name, "Malik El-Shabazz". This journey into the Motherland & Self brought Malcolm to the realization that his revolutionary vision/influence superceded any colour line.

Once he returned to the U.S, he infamously declared Pan-African unity amid struggle for freedom “by any means necessary.” This marked a turning point in Malcolm's life & revolutionary fight against White Supremacy on a global scale. He spent 6, albeit unsuccessful, months in Afrika petitioning the U.N. to investigate the Human Rights violations of Black Americans by the U.S. Government. From then on, threats to his safety and that of his family & the OUAA mounted. Still, he continued the fight until his assassination that was ultimately orchestrated & carried out by the CIA.

"If you’re not ready to die for it, put the word ‘freedom’ out of your vocabulary" - Malcolm X

Today, Brother Malcolm rests alongside his wife at the Ferncliff Cemetery in upstate NY.

We pour libations & give him💐 today as we celebrate him for his incomparable leadership, love, commitment, & sacrifice for the socioeconomic & sociopolitical freedom of our people.

Offering suggestions: libations of water, read/share his work, & prayers from the Quran

Note: offering suggestions are just that & strictly for veneration purposes only. Never attempt to conjure up any spirit or entity without proper divination/Mediumship counsel.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

Christopher Hitchens: Let me give you an example. From Mr. Jefferson - since you asked me to mention my book, which I'll happily do - in 1788, when the United States was barely a country, it was having its sailors taken as slaves by the Barbary states, the states of the Ottoman Empire in North Africa.

Bill Maher: Tripoli. The shores of Tripoli.

Christopher Hitchens: Tripoli. And its ships stopped, and its crews carried off into slavery. We estimate one and a half million European American slaves taken between 1750 and 1850, Jefferson and Adams went to their ambassador in London and said, "why do you do this to us? The United States has never had a quarrel with the Muslim world of any kind. We weren't in the crusages, we weren't in the war in Spain. Why do you do this to our people and our ships? Why do you plunder and enslave our people?"

And the ambassador said very plainly, "because the Qu'ran gives us permission to do so. Because you are infidels. And that's our answer."

And Jefferson said, "well, in that case, I will send a navy which will crush your state." Which he did. And a good thing too.

Islamic fundamentalism is not created by American democracy. It's a lie to say so. It's a masochistic lie, and it excuses those who are the real criminals, and it blames us for the attacks made upon us."

--

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Barbary_War

"It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise. He said, also, that the man who was the first to board a vessel had one slave over and above his share, and that when they sprang to the deck of an enemy's ship, every sailor held a dagger in each hand and a third in his mouth; which usually struck such terror into the foe that they cried out for quarter at once."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_slave_trade

Robert Davis estimates that slave traders from Tunis, Algiers, and Tripoli enslaved 1 million to 1.25 million Europeans in North Africa, from the beginning of the 16th century to the middle of the 18th century.

==

Islam doesn't hate the west because we're "imperialists" or "colonizers." That's the excuse, not the reason. It hates the west because we're kuffar, and it has a divine mandate to destroy us. Starting with the Jews.

https://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/USC-MSA/Volume-4/Book-56/Hadith-791/

Narrated `Abdullah bin `Umar: I heard Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) saying, “The Jews will fight with you, and you will be given victory over them so that a stone will say, 'O Muslim! There is a Jew behind me; kill him!’”

Islamic fundamentalism is not caused by the west. It's caused by Islam. It's endemic to Islam. It's the entire point of Islam.

Stop faffing around, making up stupid, self-flagellating excuses for why we deserve to be attacked. There's nothing we could ever do to make Islam happy and still resemble the west. The only acceptable response is unconditional surrender and submission.

https://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/USC-MSA/Volume-4/Book-52/Hadith-196

Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah 's Apostle said, " I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,' and whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,' his life and property will be saved by me except for Islamic law, and his accounts will be with Allah, (either to punish him or to forgive him.)"

It's not bigotry to hold Islam responsible for its actions; it's only bigotry to refuse to.

[ausetkmt]

https://x.com/Joe__Bassey/status/1701860296493547847?t=z8gLfv41GiIWPQq83c58Ng&s=09

Image: a Moor on sale after the beginning of their fall in Spain. The last expelled Moor was in 1492 CE

THE 'CHURCH' WAS THE DRIVING FORCE OF TRANS-ATLANTIC SLAVE TRADE AS MUCH AS ISLAM WAS AT THE HEART OF ARAB SLAVE TRADE

IN 1455 CE, Pope Nicholas V. wrote a Roman bull(romanus pontifex) declaring that all Moors, Saracens and all non-christian blacks were to be sentenced to perpetual slavery and Charged as heretics during the early stages of the 'Inquisitions'. By 1492 CE, the Moors (African Maghrebs and some Arabs) surrendered their castles in Iberian peninsula with Spain claiming most of the Moorish territories and persons of black-skin became the 'property' of Spain. Some escaped back to Africa.

In 1493 CE, another declaration was made by Pope Alexander VI(inter caetera), known as 'doctrine of discovery' which gave rise to the idea of 'discovery' as a concept in Europe. What followed this was noted by Karl Marx thus; "what was good for the europeans was obtained on the expense of untold suffering by the Africans and American Indians... the discovery of gold in the America, the extra patient enslavement and the entombment of the minds of the aboriginal population... the turning of Africa into a commercial warrant for the hunting of black skins, signaled the rosy dawn of the capitalist production". Little wonder, Rev. Richard Furman, President of the S. Carolina Baptist convention in 1823 CE, stated that, " the right of holding slaves is clearly established in the holy scriptures, both by precepts and by example ". He was a slave owner. "I draw my warrant from the Scripture of the old and new testaments to hold slaves in bondage" -Rev. Thomas Witherspoon of the Presbyterian church of Alabama, in a letter to 'the emancipator' in 1839 CE. These 'justifications' were stated by many churchmen and women, drawing from the Judeo-Christian Bible.

The revered book of the Mohammedans, the Qur'an, which was written in the 8th/9th century CE, by those who took over from the Nabataean, also indicated in many verses that slavery was 'just'. But in this case, it was often Stated that the followers of the Islamic ideology were to by loving and gentle among themselves but to "fight them[non-followers of the ideology] and allah will punish him by your hands" (Quran 9:14, 15) and that "allah will strike terror unto the unbelievers(Q. 8:60)... and until they pay gizya(Q. 9:29). 'Gizya' was supposed to be an Islamic tax, targeted at the non-followers of the ideology, even if they are not enslaved but if their lands are taken over by followers of the Islamic ideology.

Following several injunctions in the Arabian Quran, the Mohammedans in Iberia had sought to control the situation: "anyone who is known to be from those lands which are known to be lands of Islam should be let go and should be adjudged free. This is the ruling of the jurist of Andalusia "-( Al Umari, 14th cen. Arab historian. But for all else, slavery was allowed.

This was the ugly web that Africa was caught in, in the 7th cen. CE and the 15th cen. CE. And in this way, many Africans became Mohammedans for convenience, especially the Garamantes(an ancient black skinned people with kinky hair), of north Africa, who joined forces with the Islamizing Arabs, whom together went in and took over Iberia in 711CE.

According to Dr. Josef Ben Jochannan, " Africa took-in both the hook, the line and sinker" and that had stretched to this very day. Africans born into this just 'follow the followers', sometimes, even somewhat blindfolded.

[papirouge]

Liberal muslims on TikTok trying to convince us that Islam is the most feminist safest religion for women where any girl can be a business owner and have her own life while every male muslim believes women are inferior, despite praying will be destined for hell for being female, made to only make children and stay inside a house while those males justify child marriage, abuse and sex slavery is so ironic to see. And it’s harder even to see so many Christians fall for this.

I had watch a brief clip of some guy asking people what they feel when they heard the name of Jesus and the Islam prophet and so many people were emotional for the muslim on. This all feels like a spell to me being castedon the public

Muslims who grown up & live in the West have no room to talk about "feminist Islam" when the countries mistreating women the most are all Muslim. It's no coincidence.

We all know that Western culture is the only thing that keep Muslim men on check. I will never trust them when it comes to talk about female rights or whatever.

It's funny to see Muslims trying to debunk the Aisha being married at 6 saying "oh but the age calculation system was different!!!" when Aisha age was not debated like that in Islam UNTIL Westerners started inquiring them about it (I guess it didn't occur to Muslims that child marriage was a problem until then....) that's why they started resorted to flimsy excuses to not expose themselves as a pedophile enabling cult Soooo they pull out those coping excuses, saying that Aisha was actually twice older than the age described in their book.....which is stupid because you don't see them argue over other Islamic characters age, saying they are twice their described age. Like, WHY Aisha is the only character whose age is with a Islamic age calculation...but others characters' age isn't? 🤔 The math ain't mathing lol

And yeah I think people now are just scared to speak ill of Islam/Mohamed because of terrorism and Muslim overall aggressiveness whenever you dare criticize them. Look at them harassing apostates, and it's worse for ex Muslim converting to Christianism. Say what you want about Christianism, but ex Christians aren't out there changing identity because their family/community would literally KILL THEM for leaving Christianity. I do feel emotional when I hear the name of Mohamed too, but that's because I think of the countless victims his demonic cult did.

[chthonic-cassandra]

do you know of any scholarly~ works re: concubine narratives? or re: historical (or mythic, etc.) concubines? been thinking a lot about concubine narratives lately. x_x

You bet I do.

(Usual caveat here that I use the term 'concubine' to describe a range of situations where someone is forced into an ongoing sexual relationship involving a spectrum of levels of violence and coercion. These are situations that have occurred frequently across cultures and historical periods especially in the context of war, imperialism, and slavery. I include both situations where someone is actively enslaved or otherwise taken captive in war as well as cultural circumstances in which the position of concubine to someone in power might be a respected role that gives someone access to some levels of power, even if it does not confer the same societal position as a spouse.

The term concubine itself has not great implications and associations, but I prefer it to something like 'sex slave' which I actively despise. Many of the people written about in these texts would not identify with that term and some might be insulted by it.)

On this topic, I eagerly await Kathy Gaca's forthcoming book, Rape, Enslave, or Kill: Men, Women, and the Religion of Sexual Warfare and Colonialism from Antiquity to Modernity. But, until then:

Camilla Townsend, Malintzin's Choices: An Indian Woman in the Conquest of Mexico

Leslie Pierce, Empress of the East: How a European Slave Girl Became Queen of the Ottoman Empire

Galina A. Yermolenko (ed), Roxolana in European Literature, History, and Culture

Ibn al-Sai, Consorts of the Caliphs: Women and the Court of Baghdad (trans. Shawkat M. Toorawa) [this is a very cool 13th century text]

Matthew S. Gordon and Kathryn A. Hain (eds), Concubines and Courtesans: Women and Slavery in Islamic History

Heidi J. Nast, Concubines and Power: Five Hundred Years in a Northern Nigerian Palace

Nina Kushner, Erotic Exchanges: The World of Elite Prostitution in Eighteenth-Century France

Elizabeth D. Heineman (ed), Sexual Violence in Conflict Zones: From the Ancient World to the Era of Human Rights

Gwyn Campbell and Elizabeth Elbourne (eds), Sex, Power, and Slavery

Ruth Bernard Yeazell, Harems of the Mind: Passages of Western Art and Literature [this is an analysis of western orientalist narratives]

The essay collections are more varied in quality than the single authored books in this list, but all of them have interesting material in them.

And several very strong texts on the role of sexual violence in the transatlantic slave trade:

Thavolia Glymph, Out of the House of Bondage: The Transformation of the Plantation Household

Lisa ze Winters, The Mulatta Concubine: Terror, Intimacy, Freedom, and Desire in the Black Transatlantic

Vincent Woodward, The Delectable Negro: Human Consumption and Homoeroticism within US Slave Culture

[quill-of-thoth]

Letters From Watson: The Five Orange Pips

Crimes in Context: Lynching and the Klu Klux Klan

I don't intend to go into graphic details regarding historic terrorism and murder, but I thought I'd give a quick summary of the reconstruction era after the American Civil War, and the Klu Klux Klan, a formerly secret society of some of the worst people in the country, since it would be conceited to assume that everyone studied it in history class. When it comes to the KKK pre-emptively punching them is self defense, just like Nazis. American Civil War, 1861-1865: The Confederate (southern) states secede from the United States, leading to a civil war over whether slavery should remain legal. It's important to note that the economy of the southern states, which endorsed slavery, was largely tied up in the production of cotton and other major cash crops, which was largely profitable because the people doing all the agricultural work were enslaved in terrible conditions. In 1863 the emancipation proclamation ended chattel slavery in the United States, and in 1865 the Confederate states surrendered and the Union was reunited. The Reconstruction Era, 1865-1877:

The 14th and 15th amendments are passed, granting formerly enslaved people the same civil rights as all other citizens on paper. The former confederate states do not, in practice, guarantee this. Pretty much immediately there are hate crimes against black people, to the point that the former confederate states were under military control by 1866, and there is an entire political party formed on the basis of rolling back black people's new civil rights, particularly the right to vote. Confusingly, it's not the same party that is currently working to undermine civil rights in the United States: back in the 1860's, the Republican party was the good guys. For the approximate era where that completely reversed, see the 1960's which are outside the scope of this write up.

During this time there was a wave of black politicians, community building among groups of newly free black citizens and their compatriots who had escaped to northern states prior to the war, and federal involvement to attempt to ensure that everyone actually had their civil rights.

The rest is under the cut because that's where I will outline the crimes of the Ku Klux Klan.

There was also the KKK, or Ku Klux Klan, a white supremacist terrorist organization that focused on preventing black participation in voting, community involvement, or having any civil rights by intimidation and murder. They murdered whites who supported black citizenship, and they murdered black people for literally any excuse that they could come up with, often via torture or public hanging. As with all white supremacist groups they also expanded into christofascist terrorism, so they've also added jewish and islamic people, as well as latino, asian, and native american people to their list of targets. The first iteration of the KKK ended (mostly) in the early 1870's, due to prosecution of their crimes and the fact that decentralized terrorist organizations tend to crumble when they don't see results and some of their leaders are in jail. Unfortunately, like all white nationalist and christofascist terrorist organizations, it keeps being resurrected, notably in 1915 and the 1960's. In 1915 it was based on the film The Birth of a Nation, a movie based upon a book that had romanticized the KKK, and masqueraded as a fraternal organization, and it broadened its focus to anti-immigrant, anti communist, anti-science, and anti non-christian-protestant-religion activity. If this sounds familiar it's because politics is a flat circle and I want to get off. It dissolved again due to the arrests of leaders, and infighting between chapters. In the 1950's and 60's it arose again specifically to combat civil rights activisim and legislation, and although it has since waned in membership there are still members who still conduct, or conspire to conduct, terrorist activity. They also actively collaborate with other white supremacist and christofascist organizations, including neo-nazis. Historians will sort out if the increased white supremacist, christofascist, queerphobic, misogynistic, insurrectionist, antisemitic, antislamic and anti-science political activity of the last decade and change has anything to do with them, but when mass shooters have a white supremacist manifesto in the USA, chances are they were somewhat influenced by the history of the Klan even if they were never a member. The Case All of this to say that the facts of The Five Orange Pips are, to an extent limited by England's position across an entire atlantic ocean, fairly accurate to the historical record. Our uncle Openshaw, who presumably either had enough money from repartitions (yes, former plantation owners were paid reparations and the people they enslaved were not, in an attempt to stabilize the economy of the former confederacy that remains infuriating) not to worry about his finances and fuck off back to England, or stole his fortune from the rest of the Klan, unarguably got what he deserved. I have no idea why the threatening letters first came from India, which seems like the last place an American group of racially motivated murderers would flee to to avoid prosecution (The whole west, and Latin America are more convenient) but it's not impossible that Openshaw's former compatriots were also originally from England.

[stanestreet]

Jews around the world have recently celebrated Passover, a festival commemorating the exodus of the Israelites from slavery in ancient Egypt. To mark the occasion, the BBC screened a documentary about a modern exodus, the flight of Jews from France. With an estimated 475,000 Jews, France remains home to Europe’s largest Jewish population. But in recent years, rising anti-Semitism and a series of terror attacks have forced out a growing number. As many as 8,000 left in 2014, up from 1,900 five years earlier, a fourfold increase. Most of them are moving to Israel but many are seeking refuge in Britain. French Jewish children now make up half the intake at Jewish schools in London. Anyone who has travelled recently to Paris will have seen signs of the tense atmosphere that French Jewish refugees are leaving behind. Every Jewish building is guarded by soldiers in full combat gear.

Sadly, anti-Semitism in France is only the starkest manifestation of a growing contemporary Jew-hatred in Europe and across the world. The cancerous belief that the world is run by an international Jewish conspiracy shapes the world-view of much of Iran’s governing elite, operatives of Islamic State (IS), nationalist leaders in Slovakia and Hungary, and a major Palestinian political organisation. It even pervades parts of a mainstream British political party, and our university campuses, too. Where did this poison come from, and is there an antidote to it?

1. European origins

Conventional religious Jew-hatred is thousands of years old. Across the Christian world, the Jews’ claim to be a “chosen people” and the accusation that Jews killed Jesus led to violent persecution. Throughout Europe, anti-Jewish pogroms were sparked by the accusation that Jews kidnapped and killed Christian children in order to use their blood for religious purposes, particularly in unleavened bread consumed on Passover. One of the earliest cases of the blood libel occurred in Norwich in 1144. Within 150 years, the entire Jewish community was expelled from England. Across Europe, Jews were confined to ghettos and restricted to certain professions, such as moneylending, inculcating an image of Jews as nefarious Shylocks.

Most European Jews were emancipated by the mid-19th century. Thereafter, a new brand of paranoid, racial, political anti-Semitism emerged. As feudal systems fell across Europe, Jews were held responsible for the social and cultural ills that accompanied the collapse of the old order. The Jews were viewed as the vanguard of the department store, which ruined small shopkeepers, of the Industrial Revolution, which gave advantage to the few at the expense of the many, and of a global financial system that enslaved economies through the market and its servant parliamentary democracy. It was in response to this new anti-Semitism, and in particular the Dreyfus affair in France, in which a Jewish army officer was falsely accused of treason amid an atmosphere of intense anti-Jewish bigotry, that Theodor Herzl developed modern Zionism – the re-establishment of a Jewish state in the Jews’ ancient homeland.

Adolf Hitler came to anti-Semitism by way of anti-capitalism, particularly of the “international”, Anglo-American variety, which he accused of reducing post-First World War Germany to the status of a “colony”. The socioeconomic decline of the German middle class after the First World War and particularly during the Great Depression helped bring him to power and make the Holocaust possible.

Jew-haters have thus built on different tropes in different contexts and countries. What unites modern anti-Semites, however, is the conspiratorial belief that Jews run the world. Its foundational text is The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. First published in a St Petersburg newspaper in 1903, and subsequently reprinted many times by Russia’s political and religious authorities, this forgery purported to be a blueprint for a secretive scheme to overthrow all existing governments, institutions and religions and, in their place, to construct a Jewish world empire.

The Protocols was neither the first nor the last publication of its kind but it was by far the most successful. After the Russian Revolution, this fabrication was brought to central and western Europe by White Russian émigrés. In the febrile atmosphere across the continent after the First World War, the Protocols offered a simplistic explanation for global unrest. The Jews served as convenient scapegoats for German and Russian right-wingers, seeking to explain their traumatic defeats, and offered an external and internal enemy against whom to rally their countrymen.

Since the Protocols first appeared, millions of copies have been published and the text has been translated into many languages. But nowhere has it been disseminated more widely in the past half-century than in the Islamic world, where political anti-Semitism is a relatively recent phenomenon.

2. Middle Eastern connection

Previously, the Muslim-Jewish relationship was an ambiguous one. While there are verses in Islamic scripture that some have taken as commanding all Muslim believers to kill Jews and Christians, there are also verses urging tolerance towards both.

There were pogroms against Jews in Granada (1066) and Fez (1465) in which thousands were killed. Within the Ottoman empire, however, Jews enjoyed protection as second-class citizens (dhimmis), allowed to practise their religion quietly as long as they paid a special poll tax, abided by various proscriptions, including bans on bearing arms and riding horses, and accepted their inferior status. Up until the 18th century, Jews fared far better in the Muslim world than in Christian Europe.

When anti-Jewish persecution grew more pronounced in the 19th century, responsibility often lay with Christian Arab communities, whose propagation of the European-sponsored blood libel produced the Damascus outrage of 1840 in which 13 leading Jews were arrested and four killed. It was only after the First World War, the Balfour Declaration and the establishment of European protectorates over parts of the former Ottoman empire that growing anti-Zionism provoked violence against Jews across the Arab world. Massacres of Jews occurred in Hebron (1929), Baghdad (1941) and Tripoli (1945). The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who resided in Germany for much of the Second World War, urged the Nazis and their allies not to allow Jews to escape to Palestine, but to send them “to Poland” (meaning Auschwitz) instead. Even before the establishment of Israel in 1948, therefore, paranoid, political anti-Semitism had gained a foothold in the Islamic world.

After 1948, anti-Semitism among Arabs was exacerbated by the defeat of their armies by a people traditionally confined to a subservient position in the Muslim world. A tragic consequence of the war was that hundreds of thousands of Palestinian Arabs fled or were expelled and, in response, hundreds of thousands of Jews from across the Arab world, members of 2,000-year-old communities, were now identified as Zionist agents, persecuted and ultimately driven to seek refuge in Israel. The Protocols, which first appeared in Arabic in 1927, and Hitler’s Mein Kampf, partially published in Arabic in the 1930s and fully in 1963, now found even more enthusiastic readers across the region. As the USSR emerged as a political ally of the Arab nations, and the United States forged closer ties with Israel after the 1967 war, Arab anti-Semites increasingly focused on the allegedly capitalist and imperialist character of world Jewry, and on Jewish control over US foreign policy.

In recent decades, this brand of anti-Semitism has become increasingly Islamised. As early as 1950, the seminal Islamist thinker and Muslim Brotherhood leader Sayyid Qutb was writing about “Our Struggle With the Jews”. Qutb claimed that “world Jewry’s purpose is to eliminate all limitations, especially the limitations posed by faith and religion, so that the Jews may penetrate into [the] body politic of the whole world and then may be free to perpetuate their evil designs”. But it was only with the failure of Arab nationalism by the late 1970s that Islamist anti-Semitism really took off.

The founding charter of Hamas, the Sunni Muslim fundamentalist organisation that governs Gaza, refers approvingly to the Protocols and quotes a disputed hadith that says: “The hour of judgment shall not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them, so that the Jews hide behind trees and stones, and each tree and stone will say: ‘O Muslim, o servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.’”

The leader of the 1979 Iranian Revolution, Ayatollah Khomeini, declared in his book Islamic Government (1970) that “Jews and their foreign backers are opposed to the very foundations of Islam and wish to establish Jewish domination throughout the world”. Khomeini’s successor, Ayatollah Khamenei, often denies the Holocaust, and he and other Iranian leaders routinely refer to the global dominance of “Jewish” and “Zionist” forces – terms that they use interchangeably.

Iran’s Shia proxy, Hezbollah, has fought to keep Anne Frank’s diary out of Lebanese schools as part of a Holocaust denial campaign and its leader, Hasan Nasrallah, stated that if the Jews “all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide”. However, this did not preclude Hezbollah from targeting a Jewish community centre in Buenos Aires (1994) or bombing Israelis on a bus in Bulgaria (2012).

Even in Malaysia, remote from Israel and home to barely any Jews, anti-Semitism is rife. In 2003 Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad urged the world’s Muslims to unite against Jews, claiming that although Europeans had killed six million of them, “today the Jews rule the world by proxy”. Just last month, Dr Fouad Bseiso, the Palestine Monetary Authority’s first governor in the 1990s, claimed on Hamas satellite TV that “global Judaism” had caused the 2008 fin­ancial crisis, fulfilling plans revealed in the Protocols. Explicit anti-Semitism is routine in Middle Eastern political discourse. At the same time, this toxic ideology is being reimported into its continent of origin and is now flourishing among disenfranchised Muslim immigrant communities in Europe.

3. The reimportation of anti-Semitism to Europe

The embodiment of this new anti-Semitism is the proudly anti-Zionist and Jew-baiting French “comedian” Dieudonné M’bala M’bala. His shows are particularly popular among disadvantaged French youth from immigrant backgrounds. They feature Holocaust revisionism, jokes about the gas chambers and the “quenelle”, an inverted Hitler salute that M’bala M’bala invented. M’bala M’bala also likes to refer to the Shoah as the “shoannas” (as in ananas), likening the Holocaust to a pineapple. In January, he responded to the killings of Jews at a kosher supermarket in Paris by signalling solidarity with the perpetrator, Amedy Coulibaly.

Coulibaly’s armed assault, two days after the Charlie Hebdo killings, followed a pattern that has long been evident in Islamist terror attacks. In March 2012, Mohamed ­Merah killed seven people in Toulouse. Four of his victims, including three children, were murdered at a Jewish day school. In 2014 Mehdi Nemmouche, a French national of Algerian origin, killed four visitors to the Jewish Museum in Brussels. Security services now view this as the first in a succession of attacks in Europe linked to Islamic State. Nemmouche was part of the European network set up by Abdelhamid Abaaoud, thought to have masterminded the November Paris terror attacks that left 130 dead.

Nor is this pattern evident only in Europe. One target of the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks was a Jewish centre, where hostages were tortured before being killed. After the 19 March suicide bombing in Istanbul, where three of the five victims were Israelis, intelligence offers uncovered advanced plans by IS terrorists to murder Jewish children in Turkey.

What is striking about all these attacks is that they are directed against Jews worldwide, rather than Israel itself. In part, to be sure, this reflects the Jewish state’s capacity to defend itself, but it is also a sign that these anti-Semites see themselves as engaged in a global struggle against Jewry, rather than just a regional contest against Israel.

4. Resurgence of fascist anti-Semitism

Though Islamist anti-Semitism is the most virulent strain of this hatred today, the old-style, fascist variant is also experiencing a revival in Europe. Far-right parties are advancing across the continent and many are directing their hatred against Muslims and Jews alike. Anti-Semitism is very pronounced in Hungary, home to the largest population of Jews in the eastern European Union. Gábor Vona, chairman of the racist Jobbik, which recent opinion polls rate as Hungary’s second-strongest party, told a rally in Budapest against the World Jewish Congress in 2013: “Israeli conquerors, investors and expansionists should look for a country in another part of the world because Hungary is not for sale.” Vona accused Hungarian “Jews” (pure and simple) of being “anti-Hungarian”. A Jobbik MP called on the Hungarian government to “establish how many people of Jewish descent there are here, and especially in the Hungarian parliament and the Hungarian government, who represent a security risk”.

Another manifestation of a far-right movement motivated by anti-Judaism, sometimes masquerading as anti-Zionism, is in Slovakia, home to a minuscule Jewish population since the Holocaust. In March, Marian Kotleba and his ultra-nationalist People’s Party Our Slovakia made a strong showing in parliamentary elections. Until recently, he wore the uniform of the Hlinka Guard – the militia of the Nazi-sponsored Slovak state – which was an eager participant in the transportation of 75,000 Slovakian Jews to the gas chambers. Kotleba’s party newspaper reprinted a Nazi propaganda cartoon featuring a stereotypical image of a Jewish moneylender. This is part of a broad attack on the West and its values. Kotleba has condemned Roma as “gypsy parasites”, denounced Nato as “criminal”, supported Vladimir Putin’s annexation of Crimea and denounced Western democracy for spreading “dangerous sects and sexual deviations”, all standard themes of the far right across Europe.

Like Nazi ideology, Islamist extremism and far-right fascism are rooted in a deep-seated anti-Semitism that begins by targeting Jews and expands its focus outwards. Islamists and European fascists are convinced that a global Jewish conspiracy runs the world. They regard Jews as the embodiment of the West and as symbols of all they most despise about its values: tolerance, liberty, freedom and democratic capitalism. The West is thus regarded as politically “Jewish” whether it is aware of this or not.

Far from being an exclusively Jewish problem, paranoid, political anti-Semitism endangers us all. It is the harbinger of a broader assault on Western modernity.

5. Anti-Semitism and the left

As the heir of the Enlightenment and ideals of the French Revolution, the European left championed emancipation, equality and tolerance in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Thus, it was regarded favourably by Jews. And yet hostility to Jews animated the world-view of some pioneering socialists. For instance, the late-18th- and early-19th-century utopian socialist Charles Fourier regarded Jews as “parasites, merchants, usurers”. They were agents of capitalism and commerce, personified most powerfully by the Rothschilds. Karl Marx, even though he was of Jewish descent, claimed that Jews had made money the “God of the world” and called for humanity to be emancipated from Judaism. It was these manifestations of anti-Judaism that led the German Social Democrat August Bebel to refer to anti-Semitism as the “socialism of fools”.

That Jewish leftists were heavily represented in the leadership of the socialist and communist movement, from Trotsky down, led right-wing racists to equate Judaism with Bolshevism. At first, the Soviet Union embraced this association. In 1931 Stalin declared that anti-Semitism was “the most dangerous vestige of cannibalism” and that “under USSR law . . . active anti-Semites are liable to the death penalty”. The USSR was the first state to grant de jure recognition to Israel, and supported it with arms during the 1948 conflict. However, it turned sharply against Israel and global Jewry from the 1950s onwards.

In the early 1950s, Stalin launched a major anti-Jewish campaign that culminated in the arrest of Jewish doctors accused of poisoning Communist leaders. In 1952, he told the Politburo: “Every Jewish nationalist is the agent of the American intelligence service.” America was the USSR’s principal enemy in the Cold War and its sizeable Jewish community was believed to be at the centre of a worldwide network that was doing the bidding of the new Israeli state, and which had operatives across the globe, including the USSR and communist-controlled eastern Europe.

This anti-Semitic, anti-Zionist campaign was taken up throughout the communist world. Its anti-Jewish nature was clear in the show trials of Jews and their removal from critical positions in local Communist Parties, accompanied by a barrage of openly anti-Semitic propaganda. The most notorious instance of this was the 1952 Slansky trial in Czechoslovakia, during which the state denounced the defendants, not all of whom were Jewish, as “Zionists”, “Jewish capitalists” and “Jewish Gestapo agents”.

After Stalin’s death, his successors upheld his legacy of conspiratorial, anti-Semitic anti-Zionism. Soviet propaganda portrayed “Zionism” as both a tool and a puppet master of US imperialism, peddled the delusion that a state established by Jews fleeing genocidal racism was in fact a Western colonialist enterprise, and depicted “Zionists” as the ideological heirs of Nazi Germany, controlling financial markets and the media. These calumnies were uncritically circulated by the communist press in Europe and seeped into the ideology of Soviet sympathisers on the socialist left. The residue of this can be seen in the former Labour parliamentary candidate Vicki Kirby’s suggestion that Hitler was “the Zionist God” and the Trotskyist former Labour member Gerry Downing’s contention that a capitalist offensive against workers is led by “the Jewish-Zionist bourgeoisie”.

Soviet-sponsored anti-Semitism was reinforced by a third-world romanticism that regarded Zionism as reactionary imperialism and the Arab opponents of Israel as progressive fighters for national liberation who could never be condemned, however radical their rhetoric and tactics.

Western extreme leftists attended Palestinian terror training camps and participated in attacks against Israelis and European Jews. In 1976, operatives from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and members of the German Revolutionary Cells hijacked an Air France flight and diverted it to Entebbe. They released all non-Jewish passengers and held all Israelis and other Jews of various nationalities hostage.

Conspiratorial leftist, anti-Semitic anti-Zionism did not disappear with the collapse of the USSR. Instead, it mutated into an anti-globalist variant, maintaining the belief that Israel is a vestige of Western colonialism and that “Zionists” are behind the spread of global capitalism, run US foreign policy and seek world domination. The extent to which this poisonous perspective is thriving on British university campuses is illustrated by Malia Bouattia’s election as president of the National Union of Students (NUS). Bouattia has called the University of Birmingham a “Zionist outpost”, on the grounds that it has “the largest J-Soc [Jewish Society] in the country”. While serving as the NUS’s national black students’ officer, she refused to vote for a motion condemning IS and blamed UK anti-terrorism policy on a “Zionist and neocon lobby”.

Further evidence of left-wing anti-Semitism emerged when it was reported that the Labour MP for Bradford West, Naz Shah, until 26 April a PPS to the shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, and a member of a parliamentary select committee investigating British anti-Semitism, had urged the “transportation” of Israeli Jews to America en masse. Shah was consequently suspended from the Labour Party.

Unlike Islamist and far-right extremists, most of the “anti-Zionist” left does not think of itself subjectively as anti-Semitic; many would be appalled at the suggestion. They are often uncomprehending of the nature of Middle Eastern and Islamist anti-Semitism, as evidenced by Vicki Kirby wondering on Twitter why IS had not yet attacked “the real oppressors #Israel”.

One wonders what is more remarkable here: the spectacle of a member of a mainstream Western party handing out white feathers to an extreme Islamist terror group, or her failure to understand that it is primarily waging a global war on Jews and the West, not a regional struggle against Israel. One way or the other, leftist elements who speak of the “Zionist media”, conflate Jews with Israel and generally obsess about Palestine exhibit a structurally anti-Semitic world-view, whether they are conscious of it or not. It is striking that those who spend so much time talking about “discourses”, “dog-whistle politics” and suchlike should show so little sensitivity when it comes to the use of language about Israel, Zionism and the Jews.

All this shows that much of the British student left, and parts of the Labour Party, have “some kind of problem with Jews”, as Alex Chalmers stated when resigning as co-chair of the Oxford University Labour Club in February 2016. A coalition of apparently anti-racist, anti-colonial activists is united in its unwavering hostility to “Zionism”. They demand that Jews and only Jews give up their national self-determination, for the belief in the right to a Jewish state is all that the term “Zionism” means.

The absurdity of anti-racist anti-Semitism is perhaps most clearly demonstrated by a march in 2014 in Toulouse against anti-Semitism, homophobia and other forms of racism that ended in Jewish protesters being denounced as Zionists and urged to leave. When Jews are being chased away from rallies against anti-Semitism, the problem should be clear for all to see.

6. An antidote?

Dealing with anti-Semitism has become more difficult since 1945, after the mass murder of the Holocaust, as few anti-Semites, at least in Europe, are now willing to wear that label openly. Anti-Semitism is a virus that has taken so many forms and proved so resistant that it may be impossible ever to eradicate it. Yet we must begin by recognising that anti-Semitism is a world-view, rather than just another form of prejudice. Other groups – such as black people and gypsies – may suffer worse discrimination in European societies every day. Nobody, however, thinks that black people or gypsies run the world.

After the Charlie Hebdo and kosher supermarket attacks, the BBC correspondent Tim Willcox put it to a terrified Jewish woman that a possible explanation for the slaughter was that “Palestinians suffer hugely at Jewish hands”. Leaving aside that no action taken by Israel could justify the killing of Jews merely because they are Jews – in Paris or anywhere else in the world – it is clear that the murders were motivated not simply by a particular reading of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict but by a paranoid, conspiratorial anti-Semitism.

We must ensure that expressing solidarity for the Palestinian cause does not extend to sharing platforms, joining coalitions or marching in rallies that include anyone who justifies genocidal terrorism, invokes the blood libel or denies the Holocaust. We must reject cultural and moral relativism, and establish a new intellectual and political project committed to combating conspiratorial views of Jewish power, whoever expresses them.

We must make clear that the establishment of the state of Israel was a product of global, especially European, anti-Semitism and not the other way round.

We must recognise that, throughout history, the Jews have served as a “canary in the coal mine”, providing early warnings of extreme, xenophobic ideologies on the rise. This is evident in radical Islamism, the most extreme contemporary manifestation of anti-Semitism. While the West thinks it is fighting a war against “terrorism”, Islamists are fighting a war against what they perceive to be a world Jewish conspiracy. Islamist terror attacks are almost certain to be preceded by, involve, or be followed by attacks on Jews, and we must adjust our ­security measures accordingly.

Above all, we must all be aware of the stakes. Supporting Jewish people worldwide against the new anti-Semitism, be it Islamist, far-rightist or leftist, is not so much a matter of demonstrating solidarity, but of ensuring our own survival.

Although the French government has increased security at Jewish institutions, it is clear that governments alone cannot make Jews feel safe in France or elsewhere in Europe. Moreover, with Dieudonné and his ilk claiming that attacking Jews is the best way to harm the “establishment”, some say that governmental protection only stokes their paranoia. Well, as C P Snow said, the only way to deal with a paranoid man is to give him something to be paranoid about. Other European countries must follow France’s example and devote additional security resources to the defence of Jewish institutions across the continent. They must eschew the example of Belgium, where the authorities asked the Jewish community to drop Purim celebrations, pleading insufficient manpower to protect them after the Brussels attacks in March. The symbolism of the “Great Synagogue of Europe” in the political capital of our continent cancelling service on a major Jewish holiday was shattering.

By dedicating themselves to defending Jewish institutions across the country, the French security authorities have shown that they recognise that paranoid anti-Semitism is a threat to civilised values everywhere. As soon as the rest of the world wakes up to this, and ensures that Jews never again have to flee persecution, the safer we will all be.

[biarritzzz]

The way North Americans and their woke minions automatically put white in front of 'man', also adding straight is really telling.

White has come to mean evil, bad, awful and lame. Apparently that's not racism. Or so I'm told.

It's always: "oh this is because of white straight men that we can't do X". As if a gay black man wouldn't be as terrible. Or a muslim man. Or a gay white man. Or just... a man. Missing the forest for the trees. Much better to pretend that all men don't hate all women.

But no we all have to pretend that the root of all evil come from this tiny minority on the planet: white/European men.

Everywhere else is and has always been a dream. African conflicts and dictators? Ethnic cleansing? FGM? ISIS? Destruction of historical buildings? Child soldiers? Child brides? Slavery? Islamic terrorism? Rapes?

It was all the white man's fault. White men taught evil to savages who were good and pure at heart and now it's all terrible. It's exactly the same reasoning as insisting that men are 'socialized' to be evil. Socialized by who?? Aliens?

For sure, before Europe gained dominance (aka 500 years ago), the entire planet was obviously a feminist gay-friendly (not lesbian-friendly, let's not go too far) utopia.

Of course European women being raped and abused doesn't matter either. I mean, who cares about these bitches am I right.

They deserve it. The West is the punching bag any non westerner uses to feel better about their shitty life, punching down, venting their frustrations and neuroses at an acceptable target and what better target than white women (and to a lesser extent white men but they're male so careful there) who won't retaliate?

[former-leftist-jew]

Yes, because the Arab Muslim world NEVER engaged in mass chattel slavery...

Or systemic enslavement of ethnic black Africans...

... Which still continues to this day...

Or violent religious/colonial conquests...

Resulting in a Pan-Arabism ideology.

Or large swaths of literal Arab Muslim ethnostates...

Or literal "apartheid" laws for non-Muslims living in Muslim-majority countries--laws not out-of-place in 1930's Germany, or the Jim Crow American South. (Like "Non-Muslims have to give up their seats for Muslims" a la Rosa Parks.)

Nor a vast history of both cultural genocide (outlawingand physical genocide of minority religions and cultures.

It's not like Hitler was direct inspired by the Islamic genocide of Armenians and the world's indifference to it, which made him confident that no one would care if he killed of the Jews.

And speaking of Hitler...

Remember when Haj Amin al-Husseini personally went to meet with his new ally Hitler, which later led to whole Arab SS divisions in the Middle East?

And finally, Palestinian "refugees" who contributions to horrific civil wars and terrorism that crippled surrounding Muslim nations who took them in, like in Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt?

"Tell me what you accuse the Jews of, and I'll tell you what you're guilty of." - Vasily Grossman, Soviet Jewish writer

Free Free Palestine!

[ausetkmt]

received an email yesterday concerning an article I wrote some time ago. The person asked me so many interesting and thought-provoking questions in that email. In this follow-up post, I will try to answer some of those questions to the best of my knowledge.

What role did the church play in the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade? What exactly does the Bible say about slavery? Is Christianity a “slave religion”? Why so many black people love the church and the Bible?

According to Jomo Kenyatta, the founding father and first president of Kenya, “When the missionaries arrived, the Africans had the land and the missionaries had the Bible. They taught us how to pray with our eyes closed. When we opened them, they had the land and we had the Bible”.

That was the beginning of the European colonization of Africa. As I said in my other post, the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade was introduced by the coming of the Europeans. The Europeans came with the Bible the same way the Arab raiders and traders from the Middle East and North Africa introduced Islam and the Quran through the Trans-Saharan Slave Trade. So yes, the church did play a major role in the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. In fact, the church was the backbone of the slave trade.

In other words, most of the slave traders and slave ship captains were very “good” Christians. For example, Sir John Hawkins, the first slave ship captain to bring African slaves to the Americas, was a religious gentleman who insisted that his crew “serve God daily” and “love another”. His ship, ironically called “the good ship Jesus,” left the shores of his native England for Africa in October 1562.

The church, especially the Roman Catholic and the Anglican Churches, had plantations with slaves working on them. For example, the United Society for the Propagation of the Gospel (USPG) – the world's oldest Anglican mission agency, owned several acres of slave plantations. It has been documented that the 800 acre Codrington slave plantation in Barbados was owned and operated by the United Society for the Propagation of the Gospel (USPG) during the 18th and 19th centuries.

One may ask, why would the church condone such barbaric acts as slavery? Well, the answer lies in the Bible the same way the answer for extremist Islamic terrorism in the world today lies in the Quran. Yes, slavery isn't just "normal" in the Bible. It is perfectly OK (or can be interpreted so) according to the scriptures. There are several chapters and verses supporting slavery in both the old and new testaments of the Bible.

Exodus 21 of the old testament of the Bible for example, gives clear instructions on how to treat a slave. Both Deuteronomy 20:10-14 and Leviticus 25:44-46 also give clear instructions on who should be slaves, how and where to buy slaves, etc.

Some Christians argue those chapters and verses are in the old testament and therefore don’t count but that is heresy. Also, there are several chapters and verses supporting slavery even in the New testament of the Bible. For example, the book of Ephesians 6:5 of the New Testament clearly states “Slaves, Obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ”. Not just that, 1 Timothy 6:1 of the New Testament also clearly states “Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed”. I can go on and on.

Slavery existed during the time of Jesus and continued after Jesus. Slavery got abolished nearly 2000 years after the death of Jesus. Jesus had every chance to speak against slavery. The question is, did he do it? And if Jesus did speak against slavery then why did his followers twist his words? If Jesus did speak against slavery then why does the New Testament of the Bible support slavery? And if the Bible got twisted along the way then does it make much sense for us to put our trust in it?

Now back to the question, "Is Christianity a slave religion?" Well, I am not that great with the Bible so I will leave that to the experts to answer.

Reverend Richard Furman, President of the South Carolina Baptist convention 1823 said, “The right of holding slaves is clearly established in the holy scriptures, both by precepts and by example”.

In a letter to the Emancipator in 1839, the Reverend Thomas Witherspoon of the Presbyterian church of Alabama in the USA wrote, “I draw my warrant from the scriptures of the old and new testaments to hold the slave in bondage”.

"The extracts from Holy Writ unequivocally assert the right of property in slaves"--Rev. E.D. Simms, professor, Randolph-Macon College.  I can go on and on.

So as we can see, the church and the early Christians saw nothing wrong with slavery and fully engaged themselves. Most churches and cathedrals owned several acres of slave plantations and owned several slaves. Even when slavery was abolished, most churches had to be compensated for setting their slaves free.

Yes, one of the ironies of the 1833 Slavery Abolition Act was that, it was slave owners, not the slaves, who were compensated at the emancipation of slaves. The Anglican Church received 8,823 pound sterling in compensation for its loss of over 400 slaves. The Bishop of Exeter, along with three of his colleagues received some 13,000 pounds in compensation for over 660 slaves. All these have been documented and I can go on and on.

Why so many black people love the church and the Bible? Well, that is a question I cannot answer all alone.

[dailyanarchistposts]

We repost below[1] a long text “The Veil Drops: anti-extremism or counter-insurgency?” from the third issue of Return Fire magazine. We think it is rich with insights, information and ideas about the situation we are living in today and how we can fight. But we know not everyone has the time and space to dive into a long and complex read like this. So, in order to tempt more people to read it in full, we have added a short preface of our own. This is very much our own personal response, highlighting and developing a few ideas that particularly resonated for us. We do recommend anyone to read the original text in full.

Preface by Rabble: Thoughts for Proto-Insurgents in the Age of Terrors

We live in a world at war. This is nothing new: for thousands of years, civilisation has been nothing but “a continual war against the Earth and humans as part of it”, colonisation, desertification, slavery, massacre, pillage and plunder. What is changing, in Europe, is just that the war is now unavoidably to be seen at “home”: the veil drops. The obvious violence is no longer “elsewhere” at the frontiers and in the colonies.

The authorities call this “war on terror”, whereas really it’s a “war of terror”. The atrocity-dealing death-gangs that pledge allegiance to islamic states or free market capitalist states are two sides of the same coin. In any case, they are just the most obvious faces of the violence that rages everywhere every day, the “pervasive terrorisation” that underlies every aspect of this “world founded on tortures religious, colonial and psychological”.

This essay by Return Fire surveys the deep structures of this every day war of terror. First of all, it gives us a serious rundown of four of the main terror structures we face:

the terror of the borders: that “prefers a migrant drowned than non-registered or imprisoned rather than ’smuggled’, that seeks to create a terrified and controllable underclass workforce disciplined by fear, racism, precarity and the whims of immigration bureaucrats and police”;

the terror of climate security: as 10% of the world’s population face displacement from floods and storms, in a world without forests, of oceans where more plastic waste swims than fish, and where every catastrophe is mobilised by corporate states presenting themselves as our saviours, and whose solutions are increasing hyper-industrial “green technologies”, genetic engineering, geo-engineering, and new colonial resource wars;

the terror of crisis: austerity, poverty and the end of welfare as “in Europe, the social democratic model of calculated concessions to placate the populace is whisked away piecemeal, replaced with even more debt-slavery and anti-depressants”, protected by private security armies and militarised police;

the terror of terror: death-cults locked in profitable symbiosis with the anti-terrorist security industry, rising para-states and nationalist paramilitaries, mass media inducing paranoia and anxiety.

However, as we list the horrors, it’s crucial to understand that, at its core, terror is not about killing and other physical destruction, but about psychological impact. The aim is not to wipe out the population, but to subdue and tame it, all the better to dominate and exploit us. To put it another way, as RF highlights throughout, the objective of all good military and governmental strategy is to win our “trust”, secure our acceptance of the regime’s “legitimacy”. To do this, certainly, it may be necessary to kill, disappear, torture, imprison, etc., a few, while seeking to quell and co-opt the majority.