Tuesday, April 30, 2013

The Baath regime in Syria is definitely a communist regime

The Baath regime in Syria is definitely a communist regime

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ba'athism (from the Arabic البعث Al-Ba'ath or Ba'ath meaning "renaissance" or "resurrection") is an Arab nationalist ideology that promotes the development and creation of an Arab nation through the leadership of avanguard party over a progressive revolutionary state. The ideology is officially based on the theories of Zaki al-Arsuzi (according to the pro-Syrian Ba'ath movement), Michel Aflaq and Salah al-Din al-Bitar.
A Ba'athist society seeks enlightenment, renaissance and rebirth of Arab culture, values and society. It supports the creation of single-party states, and rejects political pluralism in an unspecified length of time – the Ba'ath party theoretically uses an unspecified amount of time to develop an enlightened Arabic society. Ba'athism is based on principles of Arab nationalism, pan-Arabism, Arab socialism, as well as social progress. It is a secular ideology. A Ba'athist state supports socialist economics to a varying degree, and supports public ownership over the heights of the economy but opposes the confiscation of private property. Socialism in Ba'athist ideology does not mean state socialism or economic equality, but modernisation; Ba'athists believe that socialism is the only way to develop an Arab society which is truly free and united.
The two Ba'athist states which have been in existence (Iraq and Syria), through a policy of authoritarianism, forbid opposition and criticism of their ideology. The existing Ba'athist regimes have been labelled as neo-Ba'athist, because the form of Ba'athism developed in these countries was very different than the Ba'athism of Aflaq and al-Bitar; for example, none of the ruling Ba'ath parties actually pursued or pursues a policy of unifying the Arab world.

Allegations of being fascist

Cyprian Blamires claims that "Ba'athism may have been a Middle Eastern variant of fascism, even though 'Aflaq and other Ba'ath leaders criticised particular fascist ideas and practices."[56] According to him, the Ba'ath movement shared several characteristics with the European fascist movement, such as "the attempt to synthesize radical, illiberal nationalism and non-Marxist socialism, a romantic, mythopoetic, and elitist 'revolutionary' vision, the desire both to create a 'new man' and to restore past greatness, a centralised authoritarian party divided into 'right-wing' and 'left-wing' factions and so forth; several close associates later admitted that 'Aflaq had been directly inspired by certain fascist and Nazi theorists."[56] An argument against Aflaq's fascist credentials is that he was an active member of the Syrian–Lebanese Communist Party, he participated in the activities of the French Communist Party during his stay in France,[57] and that he was influenced by some of the ideas of Karl Marx.[27] Cyprian concludes that Ba'athism, along with the Free Officers Movement in Egypt, can be categorised asneofascist.[56]
The Arab Ba'ath Party established by Zaki al-Arsuzi was according to Sami al-Jundi, one of the co-founders of the party, heavily influenced by fascist and Nazi ideals. The party's emblem was the tiger because it would "excite the imagination of the youth, in the tradition of Nazism and Fascism, but taking into consideration that the Arab is in his nature is distant from pagan symbols [like the swastika]".[58] Arsuzi's Ba'ath Party believed in the virtues of the "one leader", and Arsuzi himself believed personally in the racial superiority of the Arabs. The party members read a lot of Nazi literature, such as The Foundations of the Nineteenth Century for instance, became one of the first to plan the translation of Mein Kampf into Arabic and they were actively looking for a copy of The Myth of the Twentieth Century – the only copy in Damascus was, according to Moshe Maʻoz, owned by Aflaq.[58] Despite his pro-fascist views, Arsuzi did not support the Axis Powers, and refused Italy's advances for party-to-party relations.[59] Arsuzi was also influenced by the racial theories of Houston Stewart Chamberlain and Nazism.[60] Arsuzi claimed that historically Islam and the Prophet Muhammad had reinforced the nobility and purity of Arabs, which degenerated in purity because of the adoption of Islam by other people.[60] He had been associated with theLeague of Nationalist Action, a political party strongly influenced by fascism and Nazism with its paramilitary "Ironshirts", that existed in Syria from 1932 to 1939.[61]
Saddam drew inspiration on how to rule Iraq from both Joseph Stalin, a communist, and Adolf Hitler, a Nazi. According to a British journalist who interviewed Barzan al-Tikriti, the head of the Iraqi intelligence services, Saddam had asked Barzan to procure these books not for racist or anti-Semitic purposes, but instead "as an example of the successful organisation of an entire society by the state for the achievement of national goals."[62]

Allegations of being racist
In Ba'athist Iraq, Iran, especially during the Iran–Iraq War, was presented as the age-old enemy of the Arabs. The Iraqi Ba'athists, according to Fred Halliday, brought the ideas of Sati al-Husri to their full, official and racist, culmination. For the Ba'athists their pan-Arab ideology was laced with anti-Iranian racism, it rested on the pursuit of anti-Iranian themes, over the decade and a half after coming to power, Baghdad organised the expulsion of Iraqis of Iranian origin, beginning with 40,000 Fayli Kurds, but totalling up to 200,000 or more, by the early years of the war itself. Such racist policies were reinforced by ideology: in 1981, a year after the start of the Iran–Iraq War, Dar al-Hurriya, the government publishing house,[citation needed] issued Three Whom God Should Not Have Created: Persians, Jews, and Flies by the author, Khairallah Talfah, the foster-father and father-in-law of Saddam Hussein. Halliday says that it was the Ba'athists too who, claiming to be the defenders of 'Arabism' on the eastern frontiers, brought to the fore the chauvinist myth of Iranian migrants and communities in the Gulf.[63]
Three Whom God Should Not Have Created: Persians, Jews, and Flies describes Persians (Iranians) as "animals God created in the shape of humans", Jews as a "mixture of dirt and the leftovers of diverse people",[64] andflies as poor misunderstood creatures "whom we do not understand God's purpose in creating".[65] According to Con Coughlin, "This weak Iraqi attempt at imitating Mein Kampf nevertheless had a bearing on Saddam's future policymaking.[65] Mauritanian Regional Branch of the Iraqi-dominated Ba'ath movement was accused of being racist by the Mauritanian Government and certain political groups.[66]
The Iraqi Regional Branch could approve or disapprove of marriages of party members. In a party document, it was ordered that party branches "to check thoroughly the Arabic origin of not the prospective wife but also her family, and no approval should be given to members who plan to marry [someone] from a non-Arab origin."[67] During the war with Iran, the party began to confront members who were of non-Arab, especially Iranian origins. One memo from the party Secretariat sent directly to Saddam read "the party suffers from the existence of members who are not originally Arabs as this might constitute a danger to the party in the future."[68] The Secretariat recommended not giving party membership to people of Iranian origins. In a written reply to the document, Saddam wrote "1) [I] Agree with the opinion of the Party Secretariat; 2) To be discussed in the [Regional] Command meeting."[68] Many of those who were refused, or whose membership had been revoked, were loyal Ba'athists. For instance, one Ba'athist of Iranian origin had been a member of the party since 1958, been a part of the Ramadan Revolution and had been imprisoned by the authorities in the aftermath of the November 1963 Iraqi coup d'état for the Ba'athist cause. Later, the authorities began to specifically look for people of Iraqi origins, and any contact with Iran or Iranian functioned as a good enough reason to not be given party membership.[68]

Michel Aflaq
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

DamascusOttoman Syria
Died23 June 1989 (age 78-79)
Paris, France
Political partyArab Ba'ath Movement (1940–1947)
Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party(1947–1966)
Iraq-based Ba'ath Party (1968–1989)
ReligionGreek Orthodox Christianity
Michel Aflaq (Arabic: ميشيل عفلق‎‎, 1910 – 23 June 1989) was a Syrian philosopher, sociologist and Arab nationalist. His ideas played a significant role in the development of Ba'athism and its political movement; he is considered by several Ba'athists to be the principal founder of Ba'athist thought. He published various books during his lifetime, the most notable being The Battle for One Destiny (1958) and The Struggle Against Distorting the Movement of Arab Revolution (1975).
Born into a middle-class family in Damascus, Syria, Aflaq studied at the Sorbonne, where he met his future political companion Salah al-Din al-Bitar. He returned to Syria in 1932, and began his political career incommunist politics. Aflaq became a communist activist, but broke his ties with the communist movement when the Syrian–Lebanese Communist Party supported France's colonial policies. Later in 1940 Aflaq and al-Bitar established the Arab Ihya Movement (later renaming itself the Arab Ba'ath Movement, taking the name from Zaki al-Arsuzi's group by the same name). The movement proved successful, and in 1947 the Arab Ba'ath Movement merged with al-Arsuzi's Arab Ba'ath organisation to establish the Arab Ba'ath Party. Aflaq was elected to the party's executive committee and was elected "'Amid" (meaning the party's leader).
The Arab Ba'ath Party merged with Akram al-Hawrani's Arab Socialist Party to establish the Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party in 1952; Aflaq was elected the party's leader in 1954. During the mid-to-late 1950s the party began developing relations with Gamal Abdel Nasser, the President of Egypt, which eventually led to the establishment of the United Arab Republic (UAR). Nasser forced Aflaq to dissolve the party, which he did, but without consulting with party members. Shortly after the UAR's dissolution, Aflaq was reelected as Secretary General of the National Command of the Ba'ath Party. Following the 8th of March Revolution, Aflaq's position within the party was weakened to such an extent that he was forced to resign as the party's leader in 1965. Aflaq was ousted during the 1966 Syrian coup d'état, which led to a schism within the Ba'ath Party. He escaped toLebanon, but later went to Iraq. In 1968 Aflaq was elected Secretary General of the Iraqi-led Ba'ath Party; during his tenure he held no de facto power. He held the post until his death on 23 June 1989.
Aflaq's theories about society, economics and politics, which are collectively known as Ba'athism, hold that the Arab world needs to be unified into one Arab Nation in order to achieve an advanced state of development. He was critical of both capitalism and communism, and critical of Karl Marx's view of dialectical materialism as the only truth. Ba'athist thought placed much emphasis on liberty and Arab socialism – a socialism with Arab characteristics, which was not part of the international socialist movement as defined by the West. Aflaq believed in the separation of state and religion, and was a strong believer in secularisation, but was againstatheism. Although a Christian, he believed Islam to be proof of "Arab genius". In the aftermath of the 1966 Ba'ath Party split, the Syrian-led Ba'ath Party accused Aflaq of stealing al-Arsuzi's ideas, and called him a "thief". The Iraqi-led Ba'ath Party rejects this, and does not believe that al-Arsuzi contributed to Ba'athist thought.

Monday, April 29, 2013

Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol

Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol

Film Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol (2011) exposed real source of Terrorism which is Darwinism:

In a video of a speech delivered by Hendricks, the psychotic nuclear extremist preached nuclear annihilation, vowing that it would initiate a new stage of human evolution:

Kurt Hendricks: "How will the world finally end? It is my job to predict the unthinkable. To treat the deaths of billions as a game. After 20 years of this, I was numb. Until a new question crossed my mind. What happens after the end of the world? Every two or three million years, some natural catastrophe devastates all life on Earth. But life goes on. And what little remains is made stronger. Put simply, world destruction is an unpleasant but necessary part of evolution. What happens then, I wondered, when mankind faces the next end of the world. I looked to Hiroshima, Nagasaki... thriving cities rebuilt from the ashes, monuments to the unimaginable, dedicated to the concept of peace. It occurred to me here that nuclear war might have a place in the natural order. But only if it could be controlled. Only if it touched every living soul equally".

Film Quotes:

Film Plot Summary:

Time line:
00:47:15,244 -> 00:48:40,446


The Real Ideological Root of Terrorism



Darwin legitimized violence by claiming that humans are, in essence, animals struggling for life.
Most people think the theory of evolution was first proposed by Charles Darwin, and rests on scientific evidence, observations and experiments. However, in the same way that Darwin was not its originator neither does the theory rest on scientific proof. The theory consists of an adaptation to nature of an ancient dogma called materialist philosophy. Although it is backed up by no scientific evidence, the theory is blindly supported in the name of materialist philosophy.
This fanaticism has resulted in many of disasters. That is because together with the spread of Darwinism and the materialist philosophy it supports, the answer to the question 'What is a human being?' has changed. People who used to answer: 'Human beings were created by God and have to live according to the morality He teaches' have now begun to think that 'Man came into being by chance, and is an animal who developed with the fight for survival.' There is a heavy price to pay for this great deception. Violent ideologies such as racism, fascism and communism, and many other cruel world views based on conflict have all drawn strength from this deception.
This article will examine this disaster Darwinism has brought to the world and reveal its connection with terrorism, one of the most important global problems of our time.

Darwin set out with one basic premise when developing his theory: 'The development of living things depends on the fight for survival. The strong win the struggle. The weak are condemned to defeat and oblivion.'
According to Darwin, there was a ruthless struggle for survival and eternal conflict in nature. The strong always overcome the weak, and this enables development to take place. The subtitle he gave to his book The Origin of Species, "The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life", encapsulates that view.
Furthermore, Darwin proposed that the 'fight for survival' also applied between human races. According to that claim, 'favored races' were victorious in the struggle. Favored races, in Darwin's view, were white Europeans. African or Asian races had lagged behind in the struggle for survival. Darwin went further, and suggested that these races would soon lose the 'struggle for survival' entirely, and thus disappear:
At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes … will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla. [1]
The Indian anthropologist Lalita Vidyarthi explains how Darwin's theory of evolution imposed racism on the social sciences:
His (Darwin's) theory of the survival of the fittest was warmly welcomed by the social scientists of the day, and they believed mankind had achieved various levels of evolution culminating in the white man's civilization. By the second half of the nineteenth century racism was accepted as fact by the vast majority of Western scientists. [2]


Darwin was influenced by the social theories of Malthus, who defined ruthlessness as a law of nature.
Darwin's source of inspiration on this subject was the British economist Thomas Malthus's book An Essay on the Principle of Population. Left to their own devices, Malthus calculated that the human population increased rapidly. In his view, the main influences that kept populations under control were disasters such as war, famine and disease. In short, according to this brutal claim, some people had to die for others to live. Existence came to mean 'permanent war.'
In the 19th century, Malthus's ideas were widely accepted. European upper class intellectuals in particular supported his cruel ideas. In an article titled 'The Nazis' Secret Scientific Agenda', the importance 19th century attached Europe attached to Malthus's views on population is described in this way:
In the opening half of the nineteenth century, throughout Europe, members of the ruling classes gathered to discuss the newly discovered "Population problem" and to devise ways of implementing the Malthusian mandate, to increase the mortality rate of the poor: "Instead of recommending cleanliness to the poor, we should encourage contrary habits. In our towns we should make the streets narrower, crowd more people into the houses, and court the return of the plague. In the country we should build our villages near stagnant pools, and particularly encourage settlements in all marshy and unwholesome situations," and so forth and so on. [3]
As a result of this cruel policy, the weak, and those who lost the struggle for survival would be eliminated, and as a result the rapid rise in population would be balanced out. This so-called 'oppression of the poor' policy was actually carried out in 19th century Britain. An industrial order was set up in which children of eight and nine were made to work sixteen hours a day in the coal mines and thousands died from the terrible conditions. The 'struggle for survival' demanded by Malthus's theory led to millions of Britons leading lives full of suffering.
Influenced by these ideas, Darwin applied this concept of conflict to all of nature, and proposed that the strong and the fittest emerged victorious from this war of existence. Moreover, he claimed that the so-called struggle for survival was a justified an unchangeable law of nature. On the other hand, he invited people to abandon their religious beliefs by denying creation, and thus aimed at all ethical values that could prove an obstacle to the ruthlessness of the 'struggle for survival.'
The dissemination of these untrue ideas that led individuals to ruthlessness and cruelty, cost humanity a heavy price in the 20thcentury.

As Darwinism dominated European culture, the effects of the 'struggle for survival' began to emerge. Colonialist European nations in particular began to portray the nations they colonized as 'evolutionary backward nations' and looked to Darwinism for justification.
The bloodiest political effect of Darwinism was the outbreak of World War I in 1914.
In his book Europe Since 1870, the well-known British professor of history James Joll explains that one of the factors that prepared the ground for World War I was the belief in Darwinism of European rulers at the time. For instance, the Austro-Hungarian chief of staff, Franz Baron Conrad von Hoetzendorff, wrote in his post-war memoirs:
Philanthropic religions, moral teachings and philosophical doctrines may certainly sometimes serve to weaken mankind's struggle for existence in its crudest form, but they will never succeed in removing it as a driving motive of the world… It is in accordance with this great principle that the catastrophe of the world war came about as the result of the motive forces in the lives of states and peoples, like a thunderstorm which must by its nature discharge itself. [4]

The leaders of Europe on the eve of World War I were mislead by the Social Darwinist dogma. They thought that war was a biological necessity.
It is not hard to understand why Conrad, with that ideological foundation, should have encouraged the Austro-Hungarian Empire to declare war. Such ideas at the time were not limited to the military. Kurt Riezler, the personal assistant and confidant of the German chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg, wrote in 1914: 'Eternal and absolute enmity is fundamentally inherent in relations between peoples; and the hostility which we observe everywhere… is not the result of a perversion of human nature but is the essence of the world and the source of life itself.' [5]
Friedrich von Bernardi, a World War I general, made a similar connection between war and the laws of war in nature. "War" declared Bernhardi "is a biological necessity"; it "is as necessary as the struggle of the elements of nature"; it "gives a biologically just decision, since its decisions rest on the very nature of things." [6]
As we have seen, World War I broke out because of European thinkers, generals and administrators who saw warfare, bloodshed and suffering as a kind of 'development', and thought they were an unchanging 'law of nature', The ideological root that dragged all of that generation to destruction was nothing else than Darwin's concepts of the 'struggle for survival' and 'favored races'.
World War I left behind it 8 million dead, hundreds of ruined cities, and millions of wounded, crippled, homeless and unemployed.
The basic cause of World War II, which broke out 21 years later and left 55 million dead behind it, was also based on Darwinism.

As Darwinism fed racism in the 19th century, it formed the basis of an ideology that would develop and drown the world in blood in the 20thcentury: Nazism.

Both the race theory and the war hysteria of the Nazis were inspired from Darwinism.
A strong Darwinist influence can be seen in Nazi ideologues. When one examines this theory, which was given shape by Adolf Hitler and Alfred Rosenberg, one comes across such concepts as 'natural selection', 'selected mating', and 'the struggle for survival between the races', which are repeated dozens of time in The Origin of Species. When calling his book Mein Kampf (My Struggle), Hitler was inspired by the Darwinist struggle for survival and the principle that victory went to the fittest. He particularly talks about the struggle between the races:
'History would culminate in a new millennial empire of unparalleled splendor, based on a new racial hierarchy ordained by nature herself.'[7]
In the 1933 Nuremberg party rally, Hitler proclaimed that "a higher race subjects to itself a lower race… a right which we see in nature and which can be regarded as the sole conceivable right."
That the Nazis were influenced by Darwinism is a fact that many historians accept. The historian Hickman describes Darwinism's influence on Hitler as follows:
(Hitler) was a firm believer and preacher of evolution. Whatever the deeper, profound, complexities of his psychosis, it is certain that [the concept of struggle was important because] … his book, Mein Kampf, clearly set forth a number of evolutionary ideas, particularly those emphasizing struggle, survival of the fittest and the extermination of the weak to produce a better society. [8]
Hitler, who emerged with these views, dragged the world to violence that had never before been seen. Many ethnic and political groups, and especially the Jews, were exposed to terrible cruelty and slaughter in the Nazi concentration camps. World War II, which began with the Nazi invasion, cost 55 million lives. What lay behind the greatest tragedy in world history was Darwinism's concept of the 'struggle for survival'.


The dialectical materialism of Marx defined violence as a constructive force that helped human progress.
While fascists are found on the right wing of Social Darwinism, the left wing is occupied by communists. Communists have always been among the fiercest defenders of Darwin's theory.
This relationship between Darwinism and communism goes right back to the founders of both these 'isms.' Marx and Engels, the founders of communism, read Darwin's The Origin of Species as soon as it came out, and were amazed at is 'dialectical materialist' attitude. The correspondence between Marx and Engels showed that they saw Darwin's theory as 'containing the basis in natural history for communism'. In his book The Dialectics of Nature, which he wrote under the influence of Darwin, Engels was full of praise for Darwin, and tried to make his own contribution to the theory in the chapter 'The Part Played by Labor in the Transition from Ape to Man.'
Russian communists who followed in the footsteps of Marx and Engels, such as Plekhanov, Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin, all agreed with Darwin's theory of evolution. Plekhanov, who is considered as the founder of Russian communism, regarded marxism as 'Darwinism in its application to social science'. [9]
Trotsky said, 'Darwin's discovery is the highest triumph of the dialectic in the whole field of organic matter.' [10]
'Darwinist education' had a major role in the formation of communist cadres. For instance, historians note the fact that Stalin was religious in his youth, but became an atheist because of Darwin's books. [11]
Mao, who established communist rule in China and killed millions of people, openly stated that 'Chinese socialism is founded upon Darwin and the theory of evolution.' [12]
The Harvard University historian James Reeve Pusey goes into great detail regarding Darwinism's effect on Mao and Chinese communism in his research book China and Charles Darwin. [13]
In short, there is an unbreakable link between the theory of evolution and communism. The theory claims that living things are the product of blind chance, and provides a so-called scientific support for atheism. Communism, an atheist ideology, is for that reason firmly tied to Darwinism. Moreover, the theory of evolution proposes that development in nature is possible thanks to conflict (in other words 'the struggle for survival') and supports the concept of 'dialectics' which is fundamental to communism.
If we think of the communist concept of 'dialectical conflict', which killed some 120 million people throughout the 20thcentury, as a 'killing machine' then we can better understand the dimension of the disaster that Darwinism visited on our planet.

As we have so far seen, Darwinism is at the root of various ideologies of violence that spelled disaster to mankind in the 20thcentury. However, as well as these ideologies, Darwinism also defines an 'ethical understanding' and 'method' that could influence various world views. The fundamental concept behind this understanding and method is 'fighting those who are not one of us'.
We can explain this in the following way: There are different beliefs, worldviews and philosophies in the world. These can look at each other in one of two ways:
1) They can respect the existence of those who are not one of them and try to establish dialogue with them, employing a humane method.
2) They can choose to fight others, and to try to secure an advantage by damaging them, in other words, behave like a wild animal.
The horror we call terrorism is nothing other than a statement of the second view.

The faith in the legitimacy of terror comes from materialist ideologies, not Theistic faiths.
When we consider the difference between these two approaches, we can see that the idea of "man as a fighting animal" which Darwinism has subconsciously imposed on people is particularly influential. Individuals and groups who choose the way of conflict may never have heard of Darwinism and the principles of that ideology. But in the final analysis, they agree with a view whose philosophical basis rests on Darwinism. What leads them to believe in the rightness of violence is such Darwinism-based slogans as;
'In this world, only the strong survive',
'Big fish swallow the little ones',
'War is a virtue',
and 'Man advances by waging war'.
Take Darwinism away, and these are nothing but empty slogans.
Actually, when Darwinism is taken away, no philosophy of 'conflict' remains. The three monotheistic religions that most people in the world believe in, Islam, Christianity and Judaism, all oppose violence. All three religions wish to bring peace and harmony to the world, and oppose innocent people being killed and suffering cruelty and torture. Conflict and violence violate the morality that God has set out for man, and are abnormal and undesired concepts. However, Darwinism sees and portrays conflict and violence as natural, justified and correct concepts that have to exist.
For this reason, if some people commit terrorism using the concepts and symbols of Islam, Christianity and Judaism in the name of those religions, you can be sure that those people are not Muslims, Christians or Jews. They are in fact Social Darwinists. They hide under a cloak of religion, but they are not genuine believers. Even if they claim to be serving religion, they are actually enemies of religion and believers. That is because they are ruthlessly committing a crime that religion forbids, and in such a way as to blacken religion in peoples' eyes.
For this reason, the root of the terrorism that plagues our world is not in any of the monotheistic religions, but is in atheism, and the expression of atheism in our times: 'Darwinism' and 'materialism'.

Notes 1- Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man, 2nd edition, New York, A L. Burt Co., 1874, p. 178 
2- Lalita Prasad Vidyarthi, Racism, Science and Pseudo-Science, Unesco, France, Vendôme, 1983. s. 54 
3- Theodore D. Hall, The Scientific Background of the Nazi Race Purification Program, http://www.trufax.org/avoid/nazi.html 4- James Joll, Europe Since 1870: An International History, Penguin Books, Middlesex, 1990, s. 164 
5- James Joll, Europe Since 1870: An International History, Penguin Books, Middlesex, 1990, s. 164 
6- M.F. Ashley-Montagu, Man in Process (New York: World. Pub. Co. 1961) pp. 76, 77 cited in Bolton Davidheiser, W E Lammers (ed) Scientific Studies in Special Creationism, 1971, p. 338-339 
7- L.H. Gann, "Adolf Hitler, The Complete Totalitarian", The Intercollegiate Review, Fall 1985, p. 24; cited in Henry M. Morris, The Long war Against God, Baker Book House, 1989, p. 78 
8- Hickman, R., Biocreation, Science Press, Worthington, OH, pp. 51-52, 1983; Jerry Bergman, "Darwinism and the Nazi Race Holocaust", Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal 13 (2): 101-111, 1999 
9- Robert M. Young DARWINIAN EVOLUTION AND HUMAN HISTORY, Historical Studies on Science and Belief, 1980 
10- Alan Woods and Ted Grant. "Marxism and Darwinism", Reason in Revolt: Marxism and Modern Science, London, 1993 
11- Alex de Jonge, Stalin and The Shaping of the Soviet Uninon, William Collins Sons & Limited Co., Glasgow, 1987, s. 22 
12- Mehnert, Kampf um Mao's Erbe, Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 1977 
13- James Reeve Pusey, China and Charles Darwin, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1983 



Friday, April 26, 2013

Christians who accept our Prophet (saas) will be Christians who follow Muhammad

Christians who accept our Prophet (saas) will be Christians who follow Muhammad

Christians who accept our Prophet (saas) will be Christians who follow Muhammad
Excerpt from Mr. Adnan Oktar's Live Conversation on A9TV dated April 11th, 2013  
‘Dear Master, I address you in that way because someone who teaches virtue is a master. I and other Christians living in Kayseri call ourselves Turkish Christians. Could you tell us what to do in this time? Your words are most virtuous and comforting to me. We are Christians who want to remain the descendants of the Ottomans and are against becoming European.’

You are very dear.

‘Our Muslim brothers almost regard us as if we were Americans. But we are Anatolian Turks, to whom this land belongs. Those who separated us built a wall up, but you can bring it down, insha’Allah. You can bring about union in Anatolia and the Middle East. I feel a profound love and respect for you. Respectfully….

Fine people, fine followers of the Prophet Jesus, may Allah grant you long lives. I congratulate you and all Muslims on the presence of Jesus the Messiah in the world. The Prophet Jesus will rule you with love. Jesus the Messiah will embrace you. You are very dear to us, and entrusted to us. You are a blessing on us from Allah. May Allah grant you long lives, and may Allah grant you happiness. Let your hearts be at ease. May Almighty Allah fill your hearts with love of country, land and flag. May He fill them with the love of faith. But our Prophet (saas) is a true prophet. Love him, too. Love him and be real Christians. Just this, ‘la ilaha illAllah Muhammad rasulullah,’ meaning Allah is one and Muhammad is His messenger. But continue to love Jesus (pbuh) in the same way. Love him even more. Do not fear abandoning your faith. Nothing like that will happen. It is all right once you are a follower of Muhammad. It will all be fine once you say ‘Allah is one and Muhammad is His messenger.’ Love Jesus the Messiah with the deepest love. Memorize those words of love in the Gospel. Be forgiving and compassionate. Know all those lovely words in the Gospel. Obey them. They are identical to the Qur’an. There is no difference between them and the Qur’an. Accepting this will not damage your religious devotion in any way. Have no such fear. The Messenger of Allah [Muhammad] is loveliest person in the world. He is a prophet admired by Jesus the Messiah. Our Prophet is polite and honest and lovely. We regard Abraham (pbuh) as a prophet, and so do Christians, don’t they? If we can also regard the Prophet Jesus (pbuh) as a prophet… We must recognize all the prophets. There is no difference between past and present in the Sight of Allah. Past and future. You recognize the prophets of the past. So recognize the prophet of the future, too. There is no difference between the Prophets Abraham (pbuh) and Muhammad (pbuh). If you accept one, you must accept the other. Loving the prophet Abraham (pbuh) does not stop you being Christians. Does it? And loving our prophet will not stop you being a Christian. Have no fear. Love Muhammad and be at peace, insha’Allah.

You just need to say, ‘Allah is one and Muhammad is His messenger.’ That is all. We all know that Allah is one. Neither you nor we deny it. Everyone knows it. You cannot have three Allahs. How can Jesus the Messiah be Allah? He eats and sleeps. The Gospel says that he slept and ate. Does Allah eat? The Gospel says that Jesus the Messiah prayed to Allah. Can Allah pray to Allah? To have true faith, say, ‘Allah is one and Muhammad is His messenger.’ There is no denial of Jesus the Messiah in Islam. May love for Jesus the Messiah be multiplied a million times over. Be more scrupulous in your Christianity. Turn the left cheek if someone strikes you on the right. May there be affection, love, compassion and warmth everywhere. But we must absolutely love our luminous prophet. Otherwise, may Allah forbid, the conscience will be wounded. That is a terrible thing. It would be very wrong to deny such a fine prophet when it is so clear that is what he is. You recognize Noah, Adam, John and all the rest. But there is one prophet you have forgotten. That is the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). One you accept him, too, everything will be fine. You will be Christians who follow Muhammad. And you will be radiant Muslims.

Other Formats

What form will the death of a believer take?

What form will the death of a believer take?

What form will the death of a believer take?
Excerpt from Mr. Adnan Oktar's Live Conversation on A9TV dated April 11th, 2013

If a person dies as a believer, he will be greeted with great joy and love, as if going to a wedding. He will be greeted by Azrael (pbuh), the angels with him, his loved ones, his friends and with love. His soul will be taken with love, in a joyous, happy and scented atmosphere. He will be congratulated and embraced. They will say masha’Allah and take him away.

But may Allah help him if he is an unbeliever. Then his soul will be taken with harsh blows. He will be badly beaten. Allah says in a verse that they will be hit on the back as their souls are taken. He says we should see it, but we cannot, because they are taken into a different dimension. They are taken into a second dimension. Nobody can be seen there.

Is there punishment in the grave? Those without faith are punished directly. They are asked how long they remained in this world. They will say a day, or about a day. This life seems like a day. They are amazed when they rise. They wonder who caused them to rise. They get up in amazement. Then they realize the essence of the punishment of hell. This is according to what the Qur’an says. But believers go at once to paradise. Believers are not kept waiting, insha’Allah.

Other Formats

When their Messenger comes

  Adnan Oktar: Abjad calculation of the part of verse 47 of Surah Yunus "Every nation has a  Messenger, and when their Messenger comes...