Al Qaeda ingratiates itself
Al Qaeda sets us all straight about that Obama fella.
In a propaganda salvo by Al Qaeda aimed at undercutting the enthusiasm of Muslims worldwide about the American election, Osama bin Laden’s top deputy condemned President-elect Barack Obama as a “house Negro” who would continue a campaign against Islam…Appealing to the “weak and oppressed” around the world…
Al Qaeda, appealing to the weak and oppressed around the world – that is truly rich. Al Qaeda thinks the weak and oppressed around the world should be kept out of school, out of hospitals, out of the police forces, out of all jobs, off the streets, locked up in windowless houses. Al Qaeda thinks that any weak and oppressed who struggle against such rules should have acid thrown in their faces, or their heads cut off. Al Qaeda pretending to be the defender of the weak and oppressed is one of the most disgusting jokes I know of.
“And in you and in Colin Powell, Rice and your likes, the words of Malcolm X (may Allah have mercy on him) concerning ‘house Negroes’ are confirmed,” Mr. Zawahri said, according to an English-language transcript…In the original Arabic, according to SITE, the words used are “house slave.”
Well that sounds about right. Ayaan Hirsi Ali spent some time in Saudi Arabia as a child, and she says her teacher called her Aswa Abda: black slave girl. ‘I hated Saudi Arabia,’ she concludes. (Infidel, p. 49) Here’s al Qaeda covering itself in glory by doing the same thing. They’re racist sexist murderous thugs – yes that’s appealing all right.
It’s worth pointing out that this sort of vicious racist attack on black American politicians isn’t confined to Al Qaeda, but has been the staple of certain elements of the white western left for some time. In fact I suspect that this is one of those cases where al Qaeda are deliberately using the language of the western left in a bid to drum up support.
How hard can it be for supposed lefties/supposed anti-racists to understand – it’s fine to criticise or attack a politician or official whose policies you disagree with. What isn’t fine is to use epithets that are only relevant because of the person’s race (and therefore wouldn’t apply to someone of a different race carrying out the same policies). To do that is racist – end of story.
I think it is only fair to remark that Muslims, especially Arab Muslims, are very racist. Not only are they anti-Jewish with a vengeance, based upon the Koran, but Arabia carried on, and perhaps still does, a slave trade with black Africa. Black has not been inferior only to whites. From an Arab Muslim point of view black is still the colour of slavery.
There may be many black Muslims, but they are not racially pure in the way that you must be in order to be close to Mohammed. So, Obama’s election as President of the US is much more disturbing, to many Muslims, than the election of a white President would have been. Zawahiri shares his racism with a good proportion of the Muslim world. This will surely be very clear to those who receive his pronunciamento. People like Zawahiri and Osama (and so many more, of course) really are ‘racist, sexist, murderous thugs.’ Most people will hear this message as a racist message from sexist murderous thugs.
Saudi Arabia, especially, is (notoriously) extremely racist. Domestic servants from third world countries are treated like dirt there – by employers and the courts and police alike.
Here, FWIW, is a URL, but it’s a biggie.
I need coaching in the use of TinyURL.
http://books.google.ca/books?id=aGAOWah8IT0C&pg=PA16&lpg=PA16&dq=%22Being+Black+Being+Sudanese%22&source=web&ots=ojT8p2NNCR&sig=Rfg517fTlIZLD-QgP74SIaYlPro&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA18,M1
Good Luck!
Thanks Elliott. It’s going to take an age downloading, but from the pages that have already come in, it is clear what tradition Zawahiri and Al Quaeda belong to. No wonder they are so dismissive of Obama. He is, from their point of view, nothing more than a house slave. What else could he be? All the talk of Malcolm X is irrelevant. He was only a house slave too.
It’s interesting to remember that Japan, during WWII, sought to create an Asian empire, one that could counter the evil colonialism of the West, but then they proceeded to cut a swathe of cruelty and suffering throughout South-East Asia, reminding us that Asian imperialism – like Muslim imperialism – does not signify a purer or a gentler imperialism.
In fact, for all the evils of Western imperialism, Asian or Muslim imperialism have been far less enlightened, on the whole, and equally, if not more, racist, than their Western counterparts. In fact, Western imperialism, at least in its British form (I know so little about the rest), took a real interest in the religions and cultures of the parts of the globe they ruled, and much of our knowledge of Indian or Muslim culture is due to Western curiosity and study, as Ibn Warraq points out in his book Defending the West. Unlike the shoddy scholarship of Edward Said, on which so much contemporary leftish sympathy for Islamism depends, European scholarship of Muslim, Hindu and Buddhist cultures was deep and accurate.
All this, just to point out once again that many Muslims are racist, and that Al Quaeda is a racist organisation.
‘I think it is only fair to remark that Muslims, especially Arab Muslims, are very racist.’
Typical of the revolting bigotry that goes unchallenged here.
For Mr MacDonald to use the word ‘fair’ to preface his remarks – is a good example of a lack of irony. If Mr MacDonald needs to know what a racist looks like, he has only to look in the mirror.
So, ‘resistor’, you laughable anonymous coward, do you worry much about the racism within Saudi Arabia? Do you worry about it at all?
resistor, bigotry in blog comments is a fine tradition, and decrying it in following replies is too. But in context, Eric’s slightly overblown remark looked quite valid until you stepped in. It is perhaps my prejudice that many, but not all, of the muslims I know can be as racist as say Republicans, who by just ordering a watermelon salad at lunch are apparently engaging in the dirty tactics of coded racism.
Good catch. Big deal.
‘So, ‘resistor’, you laughable anonymous coward, do you worry much about the racism within Saudi Arabia? Do you worry about it at all?’
I worry more about racism in my own country where the victims are most likely to be Muslims. You, however, ignore bigotry directed at Muslims on your own website – what a hypocrite!
‘It is perhaps my prejudice that many, but not all, of the muslims I know can be as racist as say Republicans, who by just ordering a watermelon salad at lunch are apparently engaging in the dirty tactics of coded racism.’
It is your prejudice and you defend it with a stupid anecdote.
Good, glad we got that straight. ‘resistor’ does indeed not worry about, for instance, Somali men beheaded for theft on two hours’ notice in Saudi Arabia because he’s much too busy monitoring comments on B&W. Excellent set of priorities. Finely tuned moral sense. Keen eye for what matters. That’s our ‘resistor’ – our impressive anonymous warrior for justice.
I said I worried more about racism nearer to home, not that I do ‘not worry about, for instance, Somali men beheaded for theft on two hours’ notice in Saudi Arabia’. I see logic is not your strong point.
Monitoring this site and challenging racist comments made here will I hope change some attitudes.
That is what you said, yes – but have you ever actually worried aloud in public about Somali men beheaded for theft in Saudi Arabia?
Lots of luck with dedicating your time to ‘monitoring this site’ and finding ‘racist comments’ to challenge. But as for changing attitudes – anonymity puts a very serious crimp in that project. With anonymous people one never knows what the agenda is, you see. Perhaps you’re a mole, or a troll, or an imam, or an agent provocateur for the BNP, or twelve years old.