News  #  1035
[ Arabic ][ Deutsch ][ Espa˝ol ][ Franšais ][ Italiano ]

Dr Kaukab Siddique | Editor-in-Chief Rabi' al-Thani 19,1427/May 17, 2006 #31

THINKING ABOUT AFRICA: Editor's musings:
It's the richest continent in the world but its people are among the poorest. Why? A young speaker from Sierra Leone whom I met warns about "blood diamonds." The blood of the African people might well be on the diamonds De Beers sells [Jews again?].
Aids is rampant in South Africa. Rape and dishonor of women is rife. Mandela's deal with Europe and America did not pay off. The Eurpean life style is destroying South Africa with AIDS. Like the small pox blankets the White man gave the Red man, the European no-holds barred sexuality, which randomizes fornication, legitimizes adultery, honors homosexuality and opens up the doors to child pornography, is undermining the foundations of South Africa.
By contrast, northern Nigeria is still safe from AIDS because the masses of people there opted for SHAR'IA. Africa is 80% Muslim but the missionaries are hard at work, preaching European ideas while hobnobbing with Israel.
Sierra Leone: What a tragedy! The workers in the diamond mines get 30 cents a day and no Sierra Leonese can own a diamond! BLOOD DIAMONDS > DE BEERS. Think about it.
Bush claimed Saddam Hussain was buying raw uranium from NIGER but poor Niger does not own any of its uranium. It's all owned by FRANCE!
New Trend urges readers to visit Africa, before the missionaries successfully enslave it. Go to Nigeria, Uganda, Ghana, Senegal, Mali, Egypt.
Ah Egypt, the African land from whence came the blind Shaikh, Dr. Omar 'Abdel Rahman, his heartfelt recitation of the Qur'an now buried in an American cell in the Mid-West, his teachings about Jihad [it is Fard 'Ayn, he taught before all the people of modern jihad] now a worldwide phenomenon. We live in times of American terror and British hypocrisy! Strange times, in which a stranger, Islam, is gradually re-emerging from the pages of the Qur'an, and the glorious example of Muhammad of Arabia, peace be on him is becoming a reality for many young people, especially in Africa.
The people of West Africa believed that Bilal, r.a., had moved from Arabia to live among them and they were his descendants. Did you read the epic of Son Jara carefully?

PERSONAL from the Editor of New Trend: It's quite a treat for me to receive a handwritten letter from David Irving who is languishing in a prison in Vienna, in the fake democracy of Austria. Mr. Irving got my letter of March 28 on April 18 owing to censorship. He is allowed to have all kinds of mail but the JUDGE HIMSELF reads the mail sent to him.

The indefatigable Mr. Irving is working even in prison on his book on Heinrich Himmler. Mr. Irving is ever the optimist. He believes, he will be released in December and his new lawyer has lodged an appeal for this purpose. He has sacked his previous lawyer as "incompetent."

Mr. Irving's memory is so good that he remembers me from among the thousands he met in his trips across America. He begins his letter thus: " Dear Kaukab. It seems ages since we last met in DC."

If you would like to donate to the 'David Irving Legal Fighting Fund,' let me know. I have his account number.

See below my introduction to David Irving's stunning book Nuremburg: The Last Battle. It will help you to understand, in terms of World War II history, the pseudo-legal process, the mind-set, the double standards being used AGAINST SADDAM HUSSAIN by the Americans and their allies. It will help you to understand the basics of international law so you won't be fooled by the ongoing propaganda to legalize the occupation of Iraq.

Correction on Nigeria: [Re: New Trend report on clashes in Maiduguri]

I just want to make a little correction on the write up about Nigeria.
Maiduguri is actually inhabited by the kanuri who claimed to have migrated from Yeman. Kanuri was derived from the Arabic Kan Nur.
Maiduguri is not dominated by the Evvera, please.

Alhaji Asheikh
Maiduguri, Nigeria

Letter: [Re: Question which New Trend published from Br. Shoaib, UK]
Question about Muslim Women who Wear Face Covering [Niqab],Cloaks and Gloves

As-Salam Alaikom
Hope you are well. As always, I feel encouraged by your articles.

I, too, would like the answer to the last letter regarding niqab and black. Our local mosque contains the kind of men who will not speak to, give salam to or acknowledge a woman who is in the mosque. However, at a social pot luck gathering, not within the confines of the prayer area, they will speak to a sister, and if met up with in a private home, will also speak with the sister. None of this makes any logical sense. It appears to be Saudization. In addition, there is a trend of American women who live 24 hours in a "scarf", including when in an inner room with only other women and no possibility of being seen by a man and they usually wear the abaya constantly as well, even when with women. I am very uncomfortable with these kinds of gatherings. This trend seems only to be here in the US. Certainly, in Saudi, it is not done, as I have personally experienced. Is it not a form of bidaa?

May Allah continue to bless your endeavors.

Bilquis [Gaithersburg, Maryland]

Reply by Kaukab Siddique:

I talked to a sister who dresses the way you have described before answering you.
My answer will, hopefully, bring out the complexity of the issue.
i. There is nothing in the Qur'an or the Hadith which makes it obligatory for Muslim women to wear the niqab or face covering. In fact the two verses of the Qur'an about outer-garments do not not contain any word for the "face." [1]
To the contrary, hadith indicate that women companions of the Prophet Muhammad, pbuh, did not cover their faces. [1a]
ii. Many Muslims and their opponents are often confused by verses of the Qur'an which refer to the wives of the Prophet, pbuh, when men were commanded to speak to his wives from in front of a hijab or screen. The ruling became necessary because the Prophet's [pbuh] home was very small and visitors could look right int his private apartments.[2]
These verses do not apply to all Muslims and the distinction of the wives of the Prophet, pbuh, is clearly stated in the Qur'an.[3]
iii. However, in the verses of the Qur'an about outer-garments for women, there is scope for interpretation. If a woman sincerely follows an interpretation which leads to her covering her face and wearing black clothes and gloves, we should respect her for her sincerity. Is she following [sincerely and without pressure] an interpretation of the Qur'an? If so, please don't crticize her. In fact I would honor her because, like the sister I talked to, she is rejecting the "take it off" culture of materialism.
iv. I would urge Muslims to stop making women's dress a topic of discussion. The issue for every Muslim should be: Is he/she supporting or opposing the power structure? Is he/she standing up against kufr [rejection of Allah's guidance], tughyan [authority based on laws other than those of Allah], and nifaq [hypocrisy]? Don't we see men with beards and women all covered up rushing off to White House briefings or talking about the "liberation of Iraq [!]" and "democracy in Afghanistan [!]." If tawheed and honor of the Prophet, pbuh, is not part of a Muslim's life, and the struggle of the Muslims worldwide is not relevant to a person's consciousness, then the dress does not make any difference.
v. Muslims nowadays do not realize that Allah taught men FIRST how to behave towards women. Our men often do not know how to talk to women. Either they don't talk to them at all or they become too familiar, but that's a separate subject....

1. "And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their coverings over their bosoms, and not display their beauty except to their husbands ...." The Qur'an 24:31.

"O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters, and the believing women, that they should cast their outergarments over their persons [when out of doors]: That is most convenient, that they should be known (as such) and not molested. And Allah is oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful." 33:59.
[This verse also indicates that the Prophet, pbuh, had MORE than one daughter, which the Shi'a sect denies.]

1a. From Zainab, r.a., the wife of Abdullah, r.a., "I was in the masjid [mosque] when the messenger of Allah saw me and said .... "[Hadith Sahih Muslim, kitabuz-zakat]

Same Hadith in a slightly different narration goes on to say: "Bilal, r.a., came out and we asked him: Go to the messenger of Allah and say that there are two women at the door....the messenger of Allah asked: Who are they? Bilal, r.a., replied: A woman of the Ansar and Zainab. The messenger of Allah asked: which Zainab? Bilal, r.a., replied: The wife of Abdullah." [Hadith, Sahih Muslim]

2. "... Such behavior annoys the Prophet: he is too shy to dismiss you....And when ye ask [his wives] for anything ye want, ask them from before a screen [hijab]..." The Qur'an 33:53.

3. "O wives of the Prophet! Ye are not like any other women..." 33:32 [This is another verse which shows the superiority of 'Ayesha, r.a., and other Mothers of the believers over all other Muslim women, including the daughters of the Prophet, pbuh, one of whom the Shia sect tries to extol beyond the limits acceptable in Islam.]

Book Review

Nuremburg: Anatomy of Injustice Posing as Rule of Law. World War II Drama helps Explain the Show Trial of President Saddam Hussain.

by Kaukab Siddique

Nuremburg. The Last Battle by David Irving, 377 pages plus 32 pages of photographs, hardback, 1996, Focal Point, $25. [A few copies are available from New Trend, P.O. Box 356, Kingsville, MD 21087.]

Most people today take for granted that Hitler violated international law while the victorious allies adhered to the rule of law and built a postwar world based on justice. Hitler was the devil incarnate and committted the most heinous acts imaginable against the people of Europe, yet, we are told even Nazi criminals were given full benefit of due process, with defense attorneys, documentary evidence and witnesses.

Similar stories are being told today about Iraq's President Saddam Hussain and the "justice" being meted out to him and his cronies. Few people know that this pattern of justice has been borrowed almost wholesale from the Nuremburg trial of German leaders.

Irving's book, Nuremburg, can be a shattering experience for those who believe that the victors of World War II meted out even-handed justice to the alleged German warmongers and the perpetrators of the Jewish "Holocaust."

With telling brevity, Irving sums up the objective of the conferences, starting June 1945, the victorious powers held before the trials: "...their purpose was to choose the defendants, and to draft the new laws they were to be accused of having broken, and the rules of the court which was RETROACTIVELY to apply those laws." [p. 69, emphasis added.] Thus the allies were preparing the entire format into which the defendants they selected would be trapped. Incredibly, after it was all over, the United Nations declared on December 10, 1948 that RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION of criminal law is a VIOLATION of HUMAN RIGHTS!
[Families of Muslim prisoners in the U.S. should check this out.]

Yet the Allies were concerned that the German leaders would escape the clutches of of the show trial by invoking two major principles of defense strategy: That as soldiers they were simply following the orders of their superiors and could not do otherwise under a dictator like Hitler, and secondly that under the rule of tu quoque ["you did it too"] the Germans could not be prosecuted for crimes similar to which the Allies themselves had committed. [P. 109] So the Allies put together a ruling called the London Statute under which such defense was inadmissable.


In his typical low key style, Irving patiently but systematically points out from the Archives of the Allies themselves that they had committed crimes against the Germans very similar to those which they accused the Germans of having committed. The book has an astounding photograph of an American soldier machinegunning ordinary German soldiers who had been taken prisoner at Dachau while other U.S. troops look on. Five hundred and forty of the German POWs, including "a doctor carrying a Red Cross flag" were thus summarily executed.
[Irving found the photo in the U.S. Army Signal Corp documents deposited in the National Archives in Washington, DC.]

One of America's most famous heroes, General George S. Patton, has entries in his private diaries about the executions of German prisoners of war. One rather quaint one reads: "There were also some unfortunate incidents in the shooting of prisoners. I hope we can conceal this." [p.45]

No senior American or allied officer was put on trial for the execution of prisoners.

Most unfit to sit in judgement at Nuremburg was the Soviet Union [today's Russia] which had perpetrated mass murder and rape on a scale almost unknown in human history as its armies advanced into Germany [comparable only to the slaughter of American "Indians" and the 400 years of slavery in America but in a much shorter time]. The most sickening aspect of the Soviet Russian behavior was that while judging Germany, the Russians knew full well that they had wiped out the ENTIRE officer corp of the Polish army and buried the executed officers in the forest of Katyn. The Russians claimed that the Germans had murdered the Polish officers. The Russians went to the extent of of publicly hanging in Leningrad "several German officers whom their judges found guilty of the murders in the Katyn forest." [Only after the fall of Stalin were the mass murders in Katyn admitted by the USSR and the gory details were given out much later.]

The book provides a wealth of information which shows that the victors who judged Germany at Nuremburg were devils themselves and had absolutely no high moral ground from which to judge the Germans however evil they might have been. Be it in waging war or in violation of neutrality rights or the destruction of civilian populations, the Allies had outdone the Germans. The city of Nuremburg, where the trial was held, itself had been subjected to genocide by the occupation forces. Irving has a memorable photo of American tanks rolling through the streets of the devastated city of Nuremburg where thousands of German civilians lay dead under the ruins [not unlike Iraq and Afghanistan where "democracy" is being installed on the uncounted piles of the Muslim dead.]


A coalition of Jewish organizations sent their lawyers to meet the chief American prosecutor at Nuremburg, Judge Jackson, and gave him the now famous figure of SIX MILLION JEWS killed by Hitler. This meeting was on June 11, 1945! The war had ended hardly a month back and there was no way this figure of Jewish losses could have been counted in a scientifically acceptable way. Jackson was skeptical. He wanted to know how the figure was computed? [Jackson noted in his diary that he had no "authentic data" on the Jewish losses. Jackson had more information available to him at that time than any other American]

The Jewish attorney, Dr. Jacob "Robinson said that he had arrived at his figure by extrapolation from the known statistics for the Jewish population in 1929 and those believed to be surviving now." [p.62] With his wry sense of humor, Irving comments:"his figure was somewhere between a hopeful estimate and an educated guess." Incredibly this SIX MILLION figure, drawn out of thin air, has become the bedrock of Jewish propaganda about World War II.

How a "Confession" Was Extracted from the Commandant of Auschwitz:

After the war, Rudolf Hoss, the first commandant of Auschwitz, where it is claimed that 4 millions Jews were "gassed," went into hiding. On March 11, 1946, British military police forced his wife to reveal his place of hiding. He was captured and handcuffed for three weeks. He was stripped naked and beaten repeatedly till a medical officer warned the British soldiers: "Call them off unless you want to take back a corpse." He was marched naked through a blizzard to his cell where he was "kept awake" and repeatedly interrogated. Three British soldiers jabbed him with pick axes every time he fell asleep. [Forty years later, one of the soldiers gave these details in an interview with the Wrexham Leader of October 17, 1986.]

Thus Hoss signed a "confession" which was submitted to the Nuremburg Tribunal as document No-1210 and went on to become the basis of the Jewish propaganda about Auschwitz. Later Hoss was so much broken down that he signed a "confession" written in English of which he could not understand a word. His "confession" was explained to him and he then had to support in court everything he had allegedly done, including a claim that he had "gassed" 2.5 million Jews. He hoped that he would escape execution but after every kind of atrocity story had been extracted from him, he was handed over to Poland and executed on April 2, 1947.

LOOK AT PARALLELS in the ONGOING DRAMA of SADDAM HUSSAIN: After the destruction of Iraq's infrastructure in 42 days of bombing and the decade of sanctions which left a million Iraqis dead, Saddam Hussain is on trial. Five Iraqi cities have been destroyed. Fallujah went down house by house mosque by mosque. On the ruins of Iraq, not unlike the shattered city of Nuremburg, Saddam is being tried for crimes not very different from those of his tormentors

2006-05-17 Wed 19:48:24 cdt