Lessons Drawn from the New Zealand Massacre: The Culture of Double Standard Dominant in the Countries of the Muhammadans

Published in March 24, 2019

Translated by: Ahmed Fathy

Firstly: we assert the following points:

  Undoubtedly, the Western colonization is a grave type of injustice; those who support this injustice share the burden of this grave sin. Yet, we assert the following points.     

1- The gravest type of injustice which is worse than Western colonization is the Arab invasion and conquests outside Arabia during the era of caliphs.  

1/1: This Arab invasion created an Arab empire which stretched from the south of France at the Pyrenees to the borders of China; this Arab invasion included the atrocities of stealing, raping, massacring, sabotaging, enslaving, etc., and the victims were millions of people. Those who support and defend these grave injustices share the burden of these grave sins; those polytheists defend the criminal, sinful caliphs and consider criticizing them as blasphemy or an act of disbelief. The atrocities and brutality of the pre-Umayyad caliphs are discussed in our book, in English, titled "The Unspoken-of History of the Pre-Umayyad 'Righteous' Caliphs", found on this link (http://www.ahl-alquran.com/arabic/book_main.php?main_id=83). The information of this book is never quoted from orientalists or historians of the nations conquered by Arabs; rather, such information is quoted from 'Muslim' and Arab historians whose books are known, published sources. The Muhammadans take pride in such Arab conquests (and we took pride in them when we were a Sunnite person before converting to Quranism as the Only True Islam), and yet, they condemn the European colonization which occurred in their countries, despite the fact that it is less unjust than the Arab and Ottoman invasions. This is the culture of double standard which dominates the Arab world. 

1/2: The unjust Arab invasion has become part of the religion of the Muhammadans; the European invasion of the Middle-East is never turned into a religion because the secular Europe has rejected religious wars.

2- What is more unjust than the Western colonization is what the Wahabis have committed in India once the British occupation ended.

2/1: Within his peaceful jihad, Gandhi managed to drive the British from India. Thus, he liberated all Indians of all religious denominations: Hindus, 'Muslims', Buddhists, Sikhs, etc. Gandhi wanted to see a unified, secular Indian State which embraces religious freedom.

2/2: The arrogant, tyrannical Sunnite Muhammadans in India refused this political unity with other non-Muslim Indians; they separated themselves as a new State in the northern west of India: Pakistan; this word literally means the land of the 'pure' ones; it is as if the rest of Indians were 'impure'! Those Muhammadans of Pakistan disregarded the Quranic teachings which include not to recommend oneself as the 'best' or brag with such a claim among other people (see 53:32 and 4:49-50). This arrogant, superior stance is typical of the Sunnite Wahabis and the troubles they have caused to Sufis resulted in the separation of Bangladesh as a new State.     

2/3: Most of Pakistan is located in the Punjab and a smaller part of it is located in the Bengal region. In Punjab, a percentage of Hindus live in peace because most of the Muhammadans there are Sufis; of course, Sufism is a tolerant religion, in contrast to the Sunnite Wahabi religion of non-tolerance. This means that the Wahabi-controlled West Pakistan had a religion which differs from the one in the Sufi-controlled East Pakistan, which separated later on as the State of Bangladesh.    

2/4: At the time, before the emergence of Bangladesh, West Pakistan monopolized power and wealth and it marginalized East Pakistan; hence, the arrogant dwellers of West Pakistan hated and looked down upon the dwellers of East Pakistan; this is because of the fact that the Wahabi Sunnite religion of Satan deems Shiites and Sufis as polytheists and deems as 'infidels' or disbelievers Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, etc.

2/5: When the dwellers of East Pakistan demanded justice and equality, the leaders of West Pakistan committed a massacre there; this resulted in the emergence of Bangladesh; West Pakistan is now named and known as Pakistan (a name chosen by the haughty and arrogant ones; it means: the land of the 'pure' ones!)  

2/6: We quote more details from the Wikipedia in the three points below.

2/6/1: (... The situation reached a climax in 1970, when...the largest East Pakistani political party, led by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, won a landslide victory in the national elections ... The 1970 Bhola cyclone made landfall on the East Pakistan coastline during the evening of 12 November, around the same time as a local high tide, killing an estimated 300,000 to 500,000 people. Though the exact death toll is not known, it is considered the deadliest tropical cyclone on record. A week after the landfall, President Khan conceded that his government had made "slips" and "mistakes" in its handling of the relief efforts due to a lack of understanding of the magnitude of the disaster.A statement released by eleven political leaders in East Pakistan ten days after the cyclone hit charged the government with "gross neglect, callous and utter indifference". They also accused the president of playing down the magnitude of the problem in news coverage ... The conflict between East and West Pakistan developed in March ... With this increase in tension, foreign personnel were evacuated over fears of violence ... This conflict widened into the Bangladesh Liberation War in December and concluded with the creation of Bangladesh. This was one of the first times that a natural event helped trigger a civil war ...A planned military pacification carried out by the Pakistan Army – codenamed Operation Searchlight – started on 25 March 1971 to curb the Bengali independence movement by taking control of the major cities, and then eliminating all opposition, political or military, within one month ... The operation also began the 1971 Bangladesh genocide. These systematic killings served only to enrage the Bengalis, which ultimately resulted in the secession of East Pakistan later in the same year ...).

2/6/2: This is mentioned about the genocide committed by the army of West Pakistan in Bangladesh Liberation War in 1979: (... An estimated 10 million Bengali refugees fled to neighboring India, while 30 million were internally displaced ... Bangladeshi media and reference books in English have published casualty figures which vary greatly, from 200,000 to 3,000,000 for Bangladesh as a whole ...).

2/6/3: This is about the genocide in Bangladesh in 1971 committed by West Pakistan against East Pakistan whose dwellers demanded their right of self-determination; India received most of Bengali refugees; many Hindus were forced to convert to 'Islam' by the Pakistani army: (... Members of the Pakistani military and supporting militias engaged in mass murder, deportation and genocidal rape ... During the war there were widespread killings and other atrocities – including the displacement of civilians in Bangladesh (East Pakistan at the time) and widespread violations of human rights ... Members of the Pakistani military and supporting Islamist militias from Jamaat e Islami killed an estimated 300,000 to 3,000,000 people and raped between 200,000 and 400,000 Bangladeshi women in a systematic campaign of genocidal rape ... Hindu areas suffered particularly heavy blows ... The Hindus, who account for three-fourths of the refugees and a majority of the dead, have borne the brunt of the Pakistani military hatred ...).

2/6/4: East Pakistan separated as the new State of Bangladesh after the defeat of West Pakistan by India. After its defeat, the Pakistani army has controlled the Pakistani nation in Pakistan (no longer named as West Pakistan) while spreading corruption and tyranny; of course, Wahabi terrorism spread now in Pakistan. In fact, the Wahabi Pakistan is the main factor which has caused the emergence of the terrorist Taliban movement and the destruction of Afghanistan. We assert here briefly that among the major faults of the twentieth century is the establishment of the two Wahabi countries, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, as Wahabi terrorism poses now as a veritable threat worldwide.     

2/6/5: India has suffered from Wahabis in the worst way more than its suffering from the British occupation. Gandhi is a great man, whereas the general Yahya Khan is a totally different man. Even if the Wahabi Muhammadans would admit to the above facts about Bangladesh, they will do their best to defend and 'justify' the criminals of Pakistan because of the Wahabi culture of double standard. They will say, for instance, that the atrocities committed by the criminal Yahya Khan is part of 'Islamic' jihad and a 'religious' duty! In contrast, the Wahabis readily condemn the British occupation as deplorable injustice. 

2/6/6: Of course, we are against any type of occupation: the Arab and Ottoman invasion and the Western colonization; we are against war criminals, east and west. In addition, we know quite well the clear differences between the grave injustices committed by the West and the gravest types of injustices committed by the Muhammadans whose enthroned tyrants ascribed their deeds falsely to the name of the great religion of Islam, thus distorting its image and tarnishing its reputation. Hence, they have committed a grave injustice against the Lord God besides their violating human rights. This makes their injustices worse than those committed by the Western colonization. By showing this, a Quranist thinker like ourselves is defending Islam and siding with justice and with the Lord God.    

3- Thus, worse and more unjust than the Western colonization are the crimes perpetuated by enthroned tyrants in the Middle-East after the Western occupiers left the occupied countries. This is shown clearly when we compare the Denshawai incident in Egypt (in June, 1906) committed by the British occupation and the crimes of the military tyrants in Egypt from 1952 until now. The Denshawai incident marked a turning point in the British presence in Egypt. Though the incident itself was fairly small in terms of the number of casualties and injuries, the British officers' response to the incident, and its grave consequences, were what led to its lasting impact. A group of British officers upset the residents of the village of Denshawai by hunting pigeons for sport. The villagers sought to protect their property and attacked the soldiers and a scuffle broke out. Some Egyptian peasants were killed and one British officer was killed. The British occupiers did not send an army to destroy the village; they merely held a trial for the peasants; four peasants were condemned to death, some were imprisoned and some were ordered to be flogged. Undoubtedly, this trial was unjust; yet, we should to remember the following facts.

3/1: This trial was inside an Egyptian court; the head-judge was a Copt, Boutros Ghali, and the set of judges involved other two 'Muslim' Egyptians, one of them was the brother of the political leader Saad Zaghloul. 

3/2: The freedom allowed by the British occupiers in Egypt helped the young political leader Mustapha Kamel (who died in 1908) to denounce the Denshawai incident while deeming it as a massacre while he visited Britain and France to condemn the British occupation and to call for the independence of Egypt. Fury reigned all over Egypt and this incident gave rise to sentiments of nationalism; Britain had to remove Lord Cromer from his post as the controller-general in Egypt (from 1882 to 1907), and he was succeeded byEldon Gorst who received orders to allow more freedoms in Egypt.   

3/3: The Denshawai incident is now mere lines of history; we cannot possibly say the same thing – yet – regarding the massacres committed by the Egyptian military regime (ruling since 1952) against several Egyptians.  

4- The crimes of the French colonization of Syria are less than the atrocities perpetrated by tyrants who ruled Syria from Husni Al-Za'im to Hafiz Al-Assad and his son Bashar Al-Assad.

5- The crimes of the British colonization of Iraq are less than the atrocities perpetrated by Al-Baath party and Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

6- The crimes of the British colonization of Sudan are less than the atrocities perpetrated by the president and war criminal Omar Al-Bashir in Sudan.

7- The French committed a massacre in Algeria as a response to some suicide bombings; yet, the Algerian victims of the French colonization is less than the victims of Algerian civil war (1991 - 2002).

8- We repeat here that we are against the grave injustices committed by the West people within the Western colonization of the third-world countries; yet, we insist that such injustices are less severe than the atrocities perpetrated by the enthroned Middle-Eastern tyrants against their nations; they massacred many people and stole and smuggled billions of US$. The Western colonization allowed the freedom of speech and demonstration (e.g., the 1919 revolution in Egypt against the British occupation); in contrast, Middle-Eastern tyrants never allow freedom of expression at all; we tend to think that if the revolutionaries of 1919 in Egypt were to be raised from the dead to live in today's Egypt, they will undoubtedly prefer to die again to preserve their dignity.  

9- Yet, the Muhammadans insist on adhering to the culture of double standard; they condemn the Western colonization, and at the same time, they defend, justify, and excuse enthroned Middle-Eastern tyrants and they also deify the sinful caliphs of the Arab conquests.

10- Within corrupt curricula in the countries of the Muhammadans, historical facts are disregarded, distorted, and falsified so that truths are made to appear as lies and lies are made to appear as 'truths'. For instance, history textbooks rarely mention the Arab civil wars of the so-called 'companions' of Muhammad. On the rare occasions when such Arab civil wars (which broke out after the death of Muhammad) are mentioned by Arab writers, they are mentioned within heaping praise/honorifics on those deified 'companions': [... our master the companion so-and-so, may God be pleased with him, killed our master the companion so-and-so, may God be pleased with him ...]. This means that the so-called companions are assumed to be holy, infallible deities despite the fact that they were murderers who engaged in civil strife! Yet, outside this circle of deified 'companions', other murderers and assassins are condemned by Arab historians and deemed as misguided devils who deserve the wrath of the Lord God. This is the culture of double standard par excellence; there is no other appellation to be employed to name such a culture.  

11- When we have read the history textbook of the American high-school curricula, we were surprised by a high degree of objectivity within tackling the history of the West and of 'Muslims'; we could not help but notice the tendency of self-criticism regarding, for example, the unjust treatment of the African-Americans and the Red Indians. This self-criticism and objective/critical approach to history is part of the reason behind the progress of the USA and the West countries in general. In contrast, the Muhammadans deify and worship tyrants of history and of modern times! Hence, within the framework of our Quranist peaceful call for reform, we urge the introduction of immediate legislative and educational reforms which will lead to religious freedom and freedom of speech. This is the basis of propagating the culture of democracy; it cannot exist alongside with the culture of double standard. American kids chant this slogan in school: (and justice for all); this is the culture that should, hopefully, dominate the societies of the Muhammadans one day.

Secondly: in the aftermath of the New Zealand massacre:

1- The biggest condemnation of the New Zealand massacre came from New Zealand itself by actions and words of the great Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, and other figures, and even from groups of organized crime there. Other condemnations of the New Zealand massacre came from the West countries and from Israel from high-rank and low-rank people of all levels in each of these countries. The UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, visited the oldest mosque in New York City to express his sympathy with all Muslims after the New Zealand massacre. The Catholic Pope Francis delivered a speech to mourn the victims of the New Zealand massacre; he expressed his solidarity in his speech: (Dear brothers and sisters, in these days, the pain caused by wars and conflicts that ceaselessly afflict humanity, includes pain for the victims of the horrible attack against two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand. I pray for the dead and the wounded and their families. I am close to our Muslim brothers and to that whole community, and I renew the invitation to unite with prayer and gestures of peace to oppose hatred and violence. Let us pray together, in silence, for our Muslim brothers who have been killed.).  

2- The head-sheikh of Al-Azhar did not issue any statement to condemn the terrorist crimes of ISIS in the West or in the Middle-East; besides, he flatly refused to declare ISIS terrorists as infidels/disbelievers since they 'pray' in the direction of Mecca! The head-sheikh of Al-Azhar did not issue any statement to condemn the Salafist sheikh Ahmad Abdullah who burned a copy of the Bible near the American embassy in Cairo before the cameras of the Arab and West media. In contrast, the Cairo-based Azharite Dar Al-Ifta (Center of Issuing Fatwas) condemned in a statement the burning of a copy of the Quran by Rasmus Paludan, a leader of the far-right Danish political party, Stram Kurs, within a demonstration organized before a group of Muslims who were praying.

3- The underway Ottoman 'sultan' Erdoğan seized the chance of the New Zealand massacre to gain some political advantages by exploiting the blood of the victims; his statement seems to usher a new type of war: a religious world war whose bleak prospects are covered in our coming articles. On the 22^nd of March, 2019, the Turkish president held the so-called 'Islamic cooperation' meeting in Istanbul to assert the necessity of facing the rising sentiments of hatred against Muslims. This is strange because he never mentioned the religious deep-seated hatred inside the Sunnite Wahabi Muhammadans against the West; everyone seems to forget the fact that the Sunnite Wahabis are the ones who initiated their violence and aggression in the West, as their Wahabi religion of Satan allows massacring civilians, east and west, as a kind of religious duty; as per their religion of terrorism, Wahabi murderers are not going to enter into Hell but are going to enter into Paradise to have sex with houris forever.      

4- The Muhammadans will remain backward and regressive as long as they adhere to the culture of double standard.