Monday, October 1, 2018

Censorship by Twitter

I have held a Twitter account for some years. On 20 September my account was suspended and I was asked to delete one of my tweets. Apparently, someone at Twitter had taken a dislike to that particular tweet, which was promptly declared to be “abusive” though who exactly had been abused was a mystery. It was made clear that the only way for me to continue to use Twitter was to delete my tweet and wait seven days for my account to be unlocked.  Presumably to soften the blow, I was told I could “appeal” against that decision.

Here is Twitter’s demand for me to delete my tweet that fell foul of Twitter’s mysterious “rules”, which are often used as a weapon of censorship :

Delete Tweet.
Tweet 1 of 1
Sakib Ahmad ثاقب 
@ShireenMazari1 @PTIofficial Holohoax is the new religion that has supplanted Christianity in the West. Holohoax is a bigger hoax than 9/11, biggest ever
5:07 PM - 18 Sep 2018

[here, on red background, was emblazoned the word Delete]
If you feel that your account has been locked in error, you can appeal by contacting our support team here.

I submitted my appeal by clicking where Twitter had indicated. I asked Twitter to explain who I had abused in my tweet and what rule exactly had been violated. Two days later, on 22 September, I received a standard email which simply repeated the weasel words relating to “Twitter rules”:


We’re writing to let you know that your account features will remain limited for the allotted time due to violations of the Twitter Rules, specifically our rules against abusive behavior.

To ensure that people feel safe expressing diverse opinions and beliefs on our platform, we do not tolerate behavior that crosses the line into abuse. This includes behavior that harasses, intimidates, or uses fear to silence another person's voice.

Please note that continued abusive behavior may lead to the suspension of your account. To avoid having your account suspended, please only post content that abides by the Twitter Rules:



My reply to this devious email, which was quite meaningless in the context of my tweet, was:


When my account was suspended on 20 September I appealed against the decision. Your email doesn't seem to be a response to my appeal. You are merely repeating the original senseless charge against me. PLEASE LET ME HAVE A FORMAL RESPONSE TO MY APPEAL.

I repeat I have committed NO violation of Twitter rules nor have I abused anyone. Some nameless Twitter employee's high-handed behaviour in this case is quite unacceptable. Do point out to me the alleged abuse in my tweet. The fact is that in this case a Twitter employee is acting as CENSOR. Censorship by your uncontrolled employees is quite intolerable. I would rather leave Twitter than accept censorship of ideas and carefully researched historical facts. PLEASE INVESTIGATE THE BEHAVIOUR OF YOUR EMPLOYEES.

Please let me have a formal response to my appeal, preferably by a named individual at Twitter who holds a position of responsibility.

Sakib Ahmad

My reply was sent out on 24 September. There has been no response since. I doubt if I will hear from Twitter again. This seemingly Zionist-controlled “social media platform” has given a clear instruction to me to delete my tweet which the powers-that-be at Twitter have found offensive. I am not supposed to disobey!

Twitter is quick to take notice when certain issues are put under the spotlight. Among these topics are Israeli government’s war crimes, the conspiracy of 9/11, the legend of “holocaust” (which appears to have originated at least a decade after the end of the Second World War) and the Jewish crimes against the Palestinians. A tool of the Zionists and Neoconservatives, Twitter censors criticism of these issues by absurdly invoking its “rules against abusive behaviour”. Real abuse against Muslims and Islam flourishes on Twitter, shredding its vaunted “rules” to smithereens but that abuse is presumably tolerated in the name of “freedom of expression”.

I know that Twitter is highly addictive and people do cave in to Twitter’s browbeating, deleting their critical tweets about Jewish/Neocon conspiracies. Not me.  If Twitter does not unlock my account without any pre-conditions then that is the end of my Twitter adventure. It is time people woke up and recognized Twitter – and other social media platforms – as offering a false perception of freedom to express their views. The ideas expressed are carefully monitored, invoking the “Twitter rules” to silence dissent. Twitter camouflages its censorship by dishonestly claiming to be upholding the mysterious rules pertaining to abusive behaviour.

Monday, July 3, 2017

The Development of the Christian Creed

This is a continuation of the previous blog dated 19 May. That blog was concerned with how the Christian religion and scripture originated, which you can read here: The Origins

This blog is concerned with the conflicting beliefs espoused by people who eventually emerged victorious over fellow Christians holding different views from their own. What Jesus actually said or preached is now lost in mists of antiquity, the NT having become a repository of the victors' inconsistent views.

The Messiah or a Reforming Prophet?

Paul’s writings pre-date the four Gospels. Paul wrote some 40-50 yeas after Jesus’ death while the four Gospels appeared during the succeeding 50 years, written by scribes who relied on oral traditions. Paul’s views are at odds with the accounts in the Gospels as well as in the book of Acts, written by the author of the Gospel of Luke. Paul introduced the splendid idea of Jesus being offered up by God as a sacrifice for the sins committed by others! Apparently, people never questioned the injustice and gullibility inherent in this claim of vicarious sacrifice. People were mesmerised by the idea that a mere belief in Jesus, the crucified Messiah, was enough to "save" them and it also freed them of the need to follow Jewish Law. At a stroke, the Jewish Law became irrelevant: the only way to wash away your sins was through faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus!

The scribe who wrote the Gospel of Matthew some 25-30 years after Paul, flatly contradicted him by asserting that the followers of Jesus needed to keep the Jewish Law!

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have not come to abolish but to fulfil. ……….Therefore whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments ………. Will be called least in the kingdom of heaven …….. For I tell you , unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the Kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:17-20).

Paul, however, was quite clear that whoever followed this alleged exhortation of Jesus was in danger of losing his/her "salvation". What one book of the NT lays down in strong terms is contradicted equally strongly in another book! The fact that both views exist in the same scripture makes a mockery of the NT: if one part of the scripture is correct then another part cannot be. If there is a devout Christian who believes in both Paul and Matthew simultaneously then he/she needs to have his/her sanity tested. 

To the early Christians known as the Ebionites, Paul was the arch-enemy with his convoluted ideas of Jesus’ death and resurrection: "salvation" came only from Jesus’s death. Put simply, Paul transformed the religion of Jesus into a religion about Jesus. The Pauline dogma was also opposed by Jesus' brother James, leader of the Church in Jerusalem, who accepted Jesus as a reforming Prophet sent to regenerate the moribund Jewish religion. Within a century, however, the followers of Jesus had turned Christianity into a distinct anti-Jewish religion.Paul’s anti-Jewish stance was mild compared to the views expressed in various Gospels which did not make it into the canon authorised by Emperor Constantine. Even the canonical Gospel of John has Jesus declare the Jews to be the “children of the Devil” (John 8:42-44). 

The conflicting Gospels

It is thought that Mark was the first Gospel to be written, around 65-70 CE. Both Matthew and Luke, writing 15-20 years later, used Mark as one of their sources, hence these three are referred to as the Synoptic Gospels. This is the reason why almost all of Mark’s parables and stories can be found in Matthew or Luke, though some of them were changed to emphasise certain points that Matthew or Luke thought important. For example, Jesus’ death is described differently in Mark and Luke. In Mark he is a terrified man led to his death (“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me”) but in Luke he is a fearless, benevolent and sagacious man unconcerned about his own impending death (“Father, forgive them, for they know not what they are doing”).

If Mark is to be believed, Jesus had already announced the end of evil times and the onset of Kingdom of God: “The time has been fulfilled; the kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!” (Mark 1:15). Two thousand years later we still await the establishment of that kingdom of truth, peace and justice by the “Son of Man” even though, according to Mark, Jesus blurted out: “Truly I tell you, some of those standing here will not taste death before they see the Kingdom of God having come in power” (Mark 9:1). [Apparently, “Son of Man” is a reference to the second appearance of Jesus on earth after he has died and is resurrected and becomes, in some sense, “Son of God” as well!]

John’s Gospel, written much later than the other three, is quite different from the Synoptic Gospels. There is no mention of the virgin birth or any details of Jesus’s early life. This Gospel wrestles with the theological issues which sharply divided the Christian communities a hundred years after Jesus’s death. It talks about the mystical Word of God, that existed in the very beginning, was itself God and through it God created the universe, and eventually became a human being, namely, Jesus [“And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory” (1:14)]. The miracles Jesus performs in John are referred to as “Signs” of one come down from heaven to give eternal life to those who believe in him. This is reinforced with many “I am” sayings attributed to Jesus: “I am the bread of life”, “I am the light of the world”, “I am the resurrection and the life”, etc. Unlike the parables in Mark, we are assailed with long speeches by Jesus!

The idea of a Kingdom of God on earth is an alien concept in John! To John “Kingdom of God” exists in “heaven”, not on earth, and believers in Jesus will reside there with God for ever; others will be condemned. No mention here of the “Son of Man” to establish God’s Kingdom on earth! John’s Gospel was written towards the end of the first century CE, by which time the entire generation addressed by Jesus had died without witnessing Jesus’ prophecy of Kingdom of God come true! So, what does the anonymous scribe of the Gospel of John does? Easy. He creates a Kingdom of God in heaven, not on earth! Is it possible to retain one’s sanity and still be able to make sense of John’s convoluted theology?

The early Christians, who had access only to Mark’s Gospel, would have known nothing about the unusual birth of Jesus, being born of a virgin, or that he existed before his appearance on earth. With the appearance of Matthew’s Gospel many years later, the Christian dogma expanded to include the idea of Jesus’ mother being a virgin. Then, with Luke, Jesus also acquired the status of “Son of God”, who is vaguely of divine origin, his mother having been impregnated with The Holy Spirit. (Luke 1:35) explains what Mary learnt from the angel Gabriel: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be holy; he will be called the Son of God”. At this stage in the development of Christian dogma, Jesus was created when he was born. The idea of him having existed before his earthly life came later with John.

The Divinity of Jesus and the dogma of Trinity

While the Old Testament is all about the Jewish Prophets, the New Testament revolves around a single controversial personality. Until you get to the Gospel of John, Jesus is referred to as a “son” in much the same way that the Old Testament prophets are, that is, as someone close to God. I have lost count of the number of “sons”, “begotten sons” and “firstborns” mentioned in the OT.

One of the earliest Christian sects, the Ebionites, were quite clear on the matter of divinity: since there can be only One God, Christ is not God. For Christ to be God, there had to be two gods: Jesus was a human Messiah, adopted by God to be his “son”, but he was a man from first to last, not a divine being.

Then there was another early sect, followers of Marcion, who believed in two Gods, the wrathful God of the OT and the God of Jesus, the God of love and mercy. Still others believed in multiple divine beings and they had no difficulty in accepting Jesus as divine.

Over the succeeding 300 years, Chiristianity evolved, rejecting much of the early dogma as heretical. The essential dilemma was: can Christianity remain a monotheistic religion while accepting Jesus as a deity? Eventually, the dogma of Trinity was invented and all opposing views were declared heretical. Tertullian, a noted heresy hunter, declared some 200 years after Jesus’s death:

“The Father is one, and the Son is one, and the Spirit is one …. they are distinct from one another …. The Father is not the same as the Son, since they differ one from the other in the mode of their being.” Having established that the three are distinct, Tertullian then declares: “they are not different in substance though they are different personalities”. That, in a nutshell, is the dogma of the Unity of the Trinity: All three are God manifested in three different personalities!

Tertullian’s convoluted arguments were debated and refined over the following hundred years as people wrestled with the nature of the relationship between Father and Son. In the fourth century the Roman emperor Constantine converted to Christianity and set about unifying the religion, which could then be used to unify his fractured empire. In 325 CE the famous Council of Nicaea was held, attended by the most important bishops and priests in the empire, where the final form of the Christian religion in the Roman empire was at last established, with its central dogma of Trinity:

All three persons in the Godhead are eternal beings and they had always existed. They are three but they are One because they are of the same substance!

All those mind-bending arguments are now forgotten, pious Christians quietly accept the dogma of Trinity spun by the theologians, some 200-300 years after the death of Jesus.

Does the New Testament support the dogma of Trinity?

There does not seem to be an explicit statement of Trinity in the NT, not even in the Gospel of John where Jesus is clearly referred to as being divine. The later Christians found such exclusion from their scriptures unnerving. Ehrman says that a specific reference to the Trinity was accordingly inserted ( John 5:7-8):

"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these are one.
And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one."

Make of it what you will!

 Ehrman has written a separate book about changes made to the Bible in the first 300 years after Jesus: “Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why”.


Ehrman: “Jesus’s divinity was part of John’s theology, not a part of Jesus’s own teaching".

Although the Christians of Rome won in the end, insisting their beliefs to be ‘orthodox’, it was not the original form of religion conveyed by Jesus and his apostles. The 4th century Nicene Creed claimed Jesus to be “fully God and fully man”, and also that he was “begotten not made, of one substance with the Father”. Neither claim was made by the disciples or apostles of Jesus! Such obtuse theology made its appearance a hundred years or more after the death of Jesus.

There have been numerous archaeological discoveries, comprising ancient scrolls dating back to the first 200 years CE. None of these support the view considered “orthodox” by the established church and accepted without question by a majority of Christians. Those discoveries are simply “heretical” compared to the “orthodox” dogma. Texts in favour of “orthodox” dogma have never been found!

Jesus is supposed to have died, or crucified according to orthodox belief, around 30 CE.

Friday, May 19, 2017

The Origins of the Christian Religion and Scripture

In July 2015 I wrote a blog about the Old Testament of the Bible (OT), which you can read here: The Horrors of the Old Testament

This blog is about the development of the Christian religion and the emergence of the second holy book of Christianity, the New Testament (NT). Both the religion and the scriptures took shape after the death of Jesus, who was born into a Jewish family. As a Jew he is said to have accepted the Jewish scriptures, believed in the Jewish Prophets of the OT and followed the Jewish religious law. At the time of Jesus’ death Christianity was little more than a sect within Judaism. Within a hundred years, however, Christianity had transformed itself into an anti-Jewish religion of gentiles.

The NT came into being decades after Jesus’ death. If a Muslim, with a good understanding of the Qur’an, is introduced to the NT he/she will be struck by its many contradictions and inconsistencies, and by the preponderance of statements which are insulting to human intelligence. This is quite bewildering for one who has been instructed in the Qur’an to use one’s powers of thought when reading the Qur’an and to think deeply when the same subject is illuminated from different angles in different parts of the Quran. Those who do not, are likened to cattle or to one who is simultaneously deaf, blind and mute. Needless to say, for a Muslim the NT is not an easy book to read, especially as wisdom and guidance are scattered through its pages, side by side with the convoluted theology and the confused thinking.

What is one to make of this amazing mix? I needed to understand the origins of Christianity, which I eventually did, thanks to this excellent book : “Jesus, Interrupted” by Bart D. Ehrman. The author started out as a staunch Christian who considered the Bible to be the immutable Word of God. His years of studying the Bible, and the origins of Christian religion, eventually led him to become an agnostic.

I learnt from Ehrman that there are numerous books which were, at one time or another, considered canonical but were later excluded from the Scripture. These books were not written by the followers of Jesus, who were all lower-class Aramaic speakers from Galilee. They would have been unfamiliar with the refined Greek in which the books were actually written. Most of these books were written by anonymous writers decades after Jesus’ death, who relied on oral traditions as their sources. To validate the anonymously written books, and to give them authority, it was decided to link them to established names. Hence the attributions such as “the Gospel according to Matthew”, etc. This explains why the books of the NT are so different from one another, full of contradictions, inconsistencies and discrepancies: the anonymous accounts were written by men who did not know each other and probably lived in different countries in the Roman empire, and they modified the stories in accordance with their own cultural traditions. None of the original copies of those books have survived. What we do have are copies made centuries later, all of which have been altered as the Christian religion took shape after the death of Jesus.

In summary, the NT consists of 27 books, which were written by 16 or 17 authors over a period of some 70 years (compare this with the OT, consisting of 39 books, written by dozens of authors over a period exceeding 600 years). Four of these books are Gospels (Jesus’ sayings, plus a description of events in his life) while the remaining books consist of writings by, or attributed to, Jesus’ disciples or apostles, or their companions. The 4 Gospels are those linked to the names of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Of the remaining books, one is a book of Acts, which describes what happened after Jesus’ death (his “ascension to heaven”). A large part of Acts is concerned with an early convert, Saul of Tarsus, who came to be known as apostle Paul, and who established much of the Christian dogma which later came to be accepted as official canon.  No less than 13 books simply comprise Paul’s letters to the churches he founded. These letters, which establish Christian religion in Paul’s image, are somehow considered as ”inspired”. Biblical scholars think that Paul wrote, perhaps, six of these letters, the remaining letters were written by others but attributed to Paul.

The first certain reference to the four Gospels included in the authorised NT occurred around 180 CE by a church father called Irenaeus. At that time lots of other Gospels were floating around, some claimed to have been written by Jesus’ disciples Peter, Thomas and Philip. These contained too many "heresies" unacceptable to church fathers in the Roman empire, and were excluded from Scripture.

John and Matthew were two of the 12 disciples of Jesus while Mark was said to be a companion of disciple Peter and Luke was a companion of Paul. In fact, the Gospels attributed to Mark, Matthew, Luke and John were not written to be part of the Scripture. These Gospels were written anonymously from oral traditions: none of the writers claimed to be an eyewitness. They simply state what they think Mark, Matthew, Luke and John might have related after the death of Jesus. Hence the attribution: “The Gospel according to ….”. With the passage of time their accounts acquired a mystique and an aura of holiness, eventually becoming a part of the Scripture.

Here is a quotation taken from pages 267,268 and 279 of Ehrman’s book:

“Christianity, as has long been recognised by critical historians, is the religion about Jesus, not the religion of Jesus. The beliefs and perspectives that emerged among Jesus’ later followers were different from the religion of Jesus himself.

There were numerous Christians involved in these transformations, who reinterpreted the traditions of Jesus for their own time. Christianity emerged over a long period of time, through a period of struggles, debates, and conflicts over competing views, doctrines, perspectives, canons, and rules. The ultimate emergence of the Christian religion represents a human invention, arguably the greatest invention in the history of western civilisation.

It would be impossible to argue that the Bible is a unified whole, inspired by God in every way. The Bible is not a unity, it is a massive plurality. God did not write the Bible, people did. “

In the first century CE the Christian beliefs differed widely. These diverse Christian communities bickered among themselves concerning their rival theologies and they competed bitterly to win converts. They all claimed to be the true exponents of Jesus’ religion and they had books to back up their claims. The group that eventually won was the influential one based in Rome, the centre of the empire. It declared this Roman Christianity to be the catholic religion - universal religion – followed by the disciples and apostles of Jesus. Thus was born Roman Catholic Christianity, which re-wrote history to present itself as always having been the largest and truest Christian sect.

With the exception of Paul’s letters, the NT is essentially a collection of forged documents, written anonymously but attributed to Jesus’ disciples or apostles or their companions. Ehrman, again:

“A large number of books in the early church were written by authors who falsely claimed to be apostles in order to deceive their readers into accepting their books and the views they represented”.

This blog has dealt with the background to the established Christian religion and the authorised Scripture (NT). In the next blog I intend to comment on the contents of the NT and the fundamental Christian beliefs.

Friday, December 30, 2016

Christmas is a dangerous time for Muslim school children in the West

Now that Christmas festivities are behind us it is a good time to reflect on the effect they may have had on the next generation of Muslims growing up in the West.

Christmas is a well established religious and cultural event in the West. Though a majority of the population has rejected Christianity as a belief system, the Christian religion has had a profound effect on western culture. In the run-up to Christmas it is usual to enact the mythical stories relating to the birth of Christ and to venerate him as “son of God” by singing hymns and carols. 

For nominally Christian families it is all good fun as they participate in the playacting and singing of hymns and carols.  They simply do not let their absence of belief affect their enjoyment of the music and the playacting, which are treated merely as cultural phenomena. This may, at best, be considered mildly hypocritical for people who have lost faith in Christianity and pass themselves off as agnostics or atheists.

What about Muslim children though? That is, children from families who are staunchly Muslim and the concepts of
Tawheed [توحید : Oneness، divinity belonging to a single God, the One – الواحد ] and
Shirk [ شرک  -  attributing divinity to a created being]
are absolutely fundamental to their Islamic faith. 

In the Quran, Shirk is referred to as unpardonable. For a Muslim child to engage in the “celebrations” in the traditional Christmassy manner would be not just hypocritical but sacrilegious and blasphemous. Playing fast and loose with Quranic injunctions makes a mockery of God’s Guidance for mankind, which is what the Quran is.

This is a growing problem as an increasing number of Muslim families fail to get across to their children the essential meaning of Kalimah Tayyeba [کلمہ طیبہ ] and Surah Ikhlaas [سورہٴ اخلاص ]. The concept of a God who is beyond their senses but can be perceived through the many Attributes or Beautiful Names [ اسماء الحسنیٰ  ] appears to be alien for most Muslim children. Influenced by the prevailing atmosphere around them, more and more Muslim parents seem to be taking a relaxed view as their children cavort around on the school stage in much the same way as non-Muslim children do. At home, a glowing Christmas tree holds out the promise of presents from Santa Claus on Christmas Day!

Is Islam dying in the West, knocked out by the double whammy of modernist parents and mullah-worship of ignorant Muslims?


Below are some of the “Beautiful Names” ( اسماء الحسنیٰ ), Attributes of God, which are mentioned in the Quran. There are many more. These help Muslims to understand the Majesty, Power, Mercy and Justice of the One God, the Creator of all that exists.

Ar-Rahmaan   The Exceedingly Merciful/Compassionate   الرحمان 
Al-Khaaliq      The Creator                                             الخالق 
Al-Vaahid       The One/Unique                                       الواحد 
As-Salaam     The Peace                                               السلام 
Ar-Razzaaq     The Provider/Sustainer                             الرزاق 
Al-Jaleel         The Majestic                                           الجلیل 
Al-Hakeem      The Wise                                                الحکیم 
Al-Vadood       The Loving                                              الودود                                       
Al-Haadi         The Guide                                              الهادی 
Al-Muhyi         The Giver of Life                                     المحیی 
An-Noor          The Light                                                 النور 
Al-Haqq           The Truth/The Reality                               الحق 
Al-Hakam         The Judge/Arbiter                                    الحکم 
As-Samad        The Eternal/ Everlasting                          الصمد 
Al-Hafeez         The Protector                                         الحفیظ 
Al-Kareem        The Bountiful/Generous                           الکریم 
Al-Aziz              The Powerful/ Irresistible                         العزیز    
Ar-Raheem       The Merciful/ Compassionate                   الرحیم   
Al-Avval            The First                                                 الاول 
Al-Aakhir           The Last                                                  الآخر 
Az-Zaahir          The Outermost/ The Evident                     الظاھر 
Al-Baatin           The Innermost/ Hidden                            الباطن 
Al-Ghafoor         The One who Forgives                              الغفور 
Al-Aleem            The Possessor of Knowledge                      العلیم 
As-Samee           The One who Hears                                 السميع 
Al-Hameed          The Praiseworthy                                     الحمید 
Al-Vaase              The Vast/All-Embracing/The Omnipresent  الواسع 
Al-Valee               The Friend/Helper                                     الولی 
Al-Qaadir             The All-Powerful                                       القادر 
Al-Mutakabbir       The Supreme                                          المتکبر 

Saturday, November 12, 2016

Lesser Evilism in the US Oligarchy

In my family there was a widespread acceptance that the presidential election in the US Oligarchy was being contested by two “evil” personalities. The disagreement arose on which of the two was the Lesser Evil. In the morning of November 9, with Donald Trump’s triumphant face dominating TV screens, a member of my family announced that the Lesser Evil had won, which seemed quite obvious to me. However, that announcement was immediately contradicted. I came to realise that the general feeling in my family was to regard him as the Greater Evil.

In the run-up to the presidential election, Julian Assange’s WikiLeaks released thousands of emails hacked from the email account of John Podesta, chairman of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. The mainstream media (MSM), owned and controlled by the oligarchs, did its best to suppress the startling revelations in these emails and keep the public in the dark. The true face of Hillary Clinton was shielded behind a veil spun from MSM lies and disinformation. People who are content to get their news from the MSM tend to form a view of Clinton which bears little resemblance to reality. By contrast, Trump was hammered mercilessly, his shameful misdeeds shouted from the rooftops for all to hear. In any case, this supremely narcissistic man appeared to be his own worst enemy, judging by the filthy things he said in pursuit of votes.

The post-election commentaries in the MSM by so-called “liberals” and “progressives”, shameless touts of the US Oligarchy, show that these pen-pushers are blind and deaf to the revolt against the Established Order, which is spreading rapidly. Its first manifestation occurred with the Brexit vote in the UK and, as Trump made clear, it has spread to the US as Brexit Plus, Plus, Plus. Western media, firmly under the control of oligarchs, have become vehicles for disseminating disinformation and for perpetuating the rule of the oligarchs in the post-Orwellian unreal world in which we are forced to live today.

I had entertained hopes of finding realistic reporting in the Urdu language media of Pakistan. Only for those hopes to be cruelly dashed! Most commentators appeared to be regurgitating the propaganda being peddled in the western MSM. A journalist I hold in high regard was contrasting the “uncouth and uncivilised” Trump with the “dignified, smiling lady with great experience of statecraft”! As for Pakistan’s English language media, the presstitutes bought out by the US oligarchs obediently toed the official line, lamenting Clinton’s loss and making fun of Trump.

So, why was woman Clinton the Greater Evil? Below I have itemised some pointers. A fuller list would make the blog very long. Thanks to the existence of independent media which publicised the Podesta Emails, the Machiavellian intrigues that go on within the Democratic Party are now well understood.

1. Clinton was the agent of the neoliberal oligarchy that rules the West. If Trump is the price we have to pay to defeat neoliberalism then that price is worth paying. While the globalist oligarchs have grown immeasurably rich, the working class and the middle classes in USA have suffered terribly.
[neoliberalism: economic policies such as privatization, fiscal austerity, deregulation, “free trade”, reduction in government spending so as to increase the role of the private sector in economy and society]

2. Clinton openly talked about a nuclear war with Russia and China, and she had no qualms about the US being the first to use nuclear weapons in any conflict with these countries. Her insistence on a no-fly zone over sovereign Syria would have meant a head-on clash with Russia, leading to World War III and a possible annihilation of humanity on earth.

    3.  With the help of the criminal governments of France and the UK, Secretary of State “Hitlery” Clinton destroyed the most prosperous state in Africa, the welfare state of Libya, which planned to ditch the dollar in favour of a gold-backed dinar (“we came, we saw, he died”, Killary cackled over the tragic death of President Gaddafi). Not for nothing is she referred to as “Hitlery” and “Killary”.

    4.  This scheming woman then turned her attention to sovereign Syria which had not only abandoned the dollar but also refused to allow an oil pipeline from Qatar to pass through its territory on its way to Turkey and Europe. She let loose the mad dogs of CIA, the terrorists ISIS/Al-Qaeda/Jabhat al-Nusra etc, on Syria. Syria fought back bravely, eventually appealing to Russia for help. The arrival of Russians on the scene, at the end of September 2015, was a game changer. The Syrian army began to win back the territory it had lost to the evil alliance of US, Nato, Israel and the Gulf states. The cost to Syrian people is incalculable: half the population was uprooted as infrastructure was deliberately destroyed and people lost the means to survive. Some half-million died while millions more were maimed or wandered about as refugees.

    5.  The money laundering machine, The Clinton Foundation, was a fake charity. Millions of dollars came pouring in from donors in return for various favours, referred to as “pay-to-play”.

    6.   “Crooked Hillary” became Democratic presidential candidate as a result of widespread rigging of primaries against her opponent Bernie Sanders.

    7.   Physically and mentally sick Clinton would have been a worse puppet than Obama in the hands of The Oligarchy. Most of Obama’s cabinet had been chosen for him long before he won the election in 2008 (see this). Probably a worse fate awaited the sick Clinton.

     8.  The Podesta Emails are said to contain references to the Clintons’ frequent travels in the “Lolita Express”, which flew them to a holiday island where the morally corrupt, utterly depraved oligarchs gathered to indulge in their vile practices.


The 2016 US presidential election was atypical in that one of the two principal presidential candidates, Trump, was outside the control of the Oligarchy and the Military-Security complex (collectively, the Deep State). The non-stop propaganda about “democracy” is so much eyewash to deceive the public. Two of my earlier blogs deal with this subject, here and here.

What of the future? My guess is that, within a year Trump will have been tamed sufficiently for the Deep State to carry on much as before. If Trump proves too obstinate and tries to bring the Deep State under his control he faces possible assassination. According to Paul Craig Roberts: “If Trump is actually successful in curbing the power and budget of the military/security complex and in holding Wall Street politically accountable, he could be assassinated.”

As for the depravity and satan-worship of the ruling class, revealed by the Podesta emails, you can learn more by clicking this link:
What Podesta emails reveal

Saturday, May 28, 2016

بحریہ ٹاؤن لاہور: ایک بے روح بستی

لاہور تیزی سےبدل رہا ہے- مالدار لوگوں کو بسانے کے لئے نئی بستیاں ابھر رہی ہیں- عام لوگوں سے الگ تھلگ، بڑے بڑے پھاٹکوں اور فصیلوں کے پیچھے یہ "محفوظ" اور بے روح بستیاں یورپ اور امریکہ کے شہروں کی بھونڈی شکل اختیار کئے ہوۓ ہیں- انہی بستیوں میں غالباً سب سے بڑی "بحریہ ٹاؤن" ہے جسے بنانے والا ملک ریاض حسین وہی شخص ہے جس نے زرداری کو اس کے دور صدارت میں ایک عالیشان رہائش گاہ بنا کر تحفتاً دی تھی- بحریہ ٹاؤن ایک ایسا آئنہ ہے جس میں پاکستان کے براؤن صاحبان اپنی غلامانہ ذہنیت کا عکس بڑی وضاحت سے دیکھ سکتے ہیں-

شہر آباد کر کے شہر کے لوگ 
اپنے اندر بکھرتے جاتے ہیں            
                         [جون ایلیا ]

ملک ریاض نے مغرب کی اندھا دھند نقالی کو اپنی اولین ترجیح بنایا ہے- اس کا اچھا پہلو یہ ہے کہ سڑکیں کشادہ اور صاف ستھری ہیں اور لوگوں کی جان و مال کی حفاظت کا معقول انتظام ہے- اگر ان اچھی باتوں کو اختیار کر کے ملک ریاض پاکستانیت کا عنصر اس نو آباد شہر میں داخل کر دیتا تو "بحریہ" لاھور کی ایک حسین بستی بن سکتی تھی- لیکن "ترقی" کا نعرہ لگانے والوں کے لئے ترقی کا مفہوم یہ ہے کہ اپنی شناخت اور روایات کو مٹا کر امریکیوں کی زبان، تہذیب اور قدروں کو گلے لگایا جائے- سڑکوں، دوکانوں، مسجدوں اور دل بہلانے کی جگہوں کے نام سب انگریزی میں ہیں- کہیں کہیں انگریزی کے ساتھ اردو کی تحریر بھی نظر آ جاتی ہے ورنہ بھاری اکثریت انگریزی میں ہی ہے- جامعہ مسجد کے باہر آپ کو صرف Jamia Mosque نظر آے گا اور عمر مسجد کے اوپر Omer Mosque کے بڑے بڑے حروف آپ کا منہ چڑا رہے ہوں گے-
تھا جو ناخوب بتدریج وہی خوب ہوا 
کہ غلامی میں بدل جاتا ہے قوموں کا ضمیر

ملک ریاض سے درخواست ہے کہ ہر انگریزی کی عبارت کے ساتھ اردو کی تحریر ضرور لگانی چاہئیے- اس ضمن میں لاہور چھاؤنی اور"ڈیفنس" کے علاقے میں ہمارے فوجیوں نے بدترین ذہنی غلامی کی مثال  پیش کی ہے، جس کی تقلید کی ضرورت نہیں تھی- لاہور کے مغرب پرست طبقے کے لئے امریکی برگروں، پیزوں اور کوک کا معقول انتظام ہے- ایسی خوراک لوگوں کی صیحت پہ اثرانداز ہونے کے علاوہ زرمبادلہ امریکہ کو منتقل کرنے کا باعث بنتی ہے- غیر ملکی قرضوں میں جکڑا ہوا پاکستان اس کا متحمّل نہیں ہو سکتا-
یورپ کی غلامی پہ رضا مند ہوا تو 
مجھ کو گلہ تجھ سے ہے یورپ سے نہیں ہے 

مذاق  اپنا اپنا   

اپنے اپنے ذوق کی بات ہے- اگر آپ کو بحریہ میں پیرس کا آیفل ٹاور نظر آ جائے یا قدیم مصر کے نوادرات تو آپ کو کیسا لگے گا؟ 

Wednesday, March 23, 2016

The rise and rise of Islamophobia

The devilish campaign of demeaning Islam and humiliating Muslims continues unabated. My last two blogs, HERE and HERE , dealt in detail with how western governments and the mainstream media owned by transnational corporations are colluding in this evil undertaking. The latest act was played out in Brussels on 22 April, where bombs went off at the airport and a metro station, killing 34 people and wounding some 280 more.

The mainstream newspapers and TV networks are going full blast with tales of terrorists whom the formidable intelligence and police forces, enjoying unprecedented powers, could not stop. After the event, pictures are shown of two men, said to be brothers, wheeling trolleys through the airport with a gloved hand while the other hand is bare.  We are asked to believe – without being presented any evidence whatsoever - that the gloves hide the detonators! Does it not occur to the security agencies that this claim amounts to an admittance of gross negligence for failing to have the gloves removed? We are told further that the brothers are suicide bombers who died in the aftermath of the explosions! Very convenient. Those accused in the Paris and San Bernardino massacres also laid down their lives to allow the authorities’ lies and smears to go unchallenged. As in Paris, the alleged perpetrators have criminal backgrounds and had spent time in prisons. They were under surveillance by the security agencies, who were also fully aware of their trips to Syria and back.

The terrified citizens of western Europe have now got to a point where they will believe anything that the authorities tell them and they will readily barter away their civic rights and freedoms for the illusory security of a post-Orwellian state. To strike more terror into their hearts it is being said that the terrorists belonged to ISIS. Since they were allowed to travel freely to Syria and back while under surveillance, this claim is actually an admission that ISIS is being controlled by the West. But the frightened Europeans, fed on a diet of lies and disinformation, are too befuddled to see that the finger of suspicion is pointing towards their own governments who finance, train and arm these terrorists and mercenaries with criminal backgrounds. Invariably, the terrorists are irreligious people with a Muslim background whose sentimental attachment to Islam can be easily exploited by drilling into them a hideously distorted version of Islam. 

The cowed and terrified populations of western Europe and North America have been dehumanised to such an extent that they barely protest when USA and NATO invade Muslim countries, mercilessly murdering millions of Muslims and rendering millions more refugees. Their wrath is reserved for the victims while the murderous war criminals escape censure. One country that benefits enormously from the carnage visited upon the western populations is Israel, which loses no opportunity to whip up Islamophobia. The day after the Brussels atrocity, Israel’s Minister of Transport and Intelligence, Yisrael Katz, said: “If in Belgium they continue eating chocolate and enjoying life, and continue to appear as great democrats and liberals, and not decided that some Muslims in their country are [organising] terror, they won’t be able to fight them.” Here is the newspaper report: Israeli minister lectures Belgians

The role of the USA, NATO, Israel, Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states in the creation and financing of terrorist organisations has been largely suppressed in the mainstream media. Most people are lazy and they accept what the mainstream media tell them. To know the truth one has to make an effort to seek it out from the independent media on the internet. Here is one example of what the independent media can tell you about the reality of "terrorism": Terrorism merges into counter-terrorism

The reality of the mainstream media, owned and controlled by multi-billionaires, who also sponsor politicians to protect their interests in legislative assemblies, can be gleaned from this report: Illusion of free media

TAILPIECE 24 March, 2016

I learnt today that the security at Brussels airport is in the hands of ICTS, a firm which is run by former members of Israeli internal security agency. This firm is responsible for airport security at several American and European airports. It has been involved in several "security lapses" involving "Muslim terrorists", including the 2001 Triple Towers outrage of 9/11 in New  York and the 7/7/2005 bloodbath in London. The full report is below:

An unbelievable tale of Israeli Intelligence Operatives 

Second TAILPIECE : 25 March 2016

It is getting weirder and weirder. It seems the images that have been issued to the public are fake. Those who planned the massacres and killed the patsies who allegedly exploded the bombs have gone to a lot of trouble to hide their identity. A classic false flag operation! Click on link below:

What is true what is fake?

Search This Blog