NATIONAL-ANARCHISTS are well known for lending their critical support to various Muslim causes and we have made no secret of our praise for the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), Libyan Jamahiriya, Islamic Jihad and various other manifestations of militant anti-Zionism. However, it must be understood that we revolutionaries are primarily concerned with the political nature of such organisations, and the fact that so many anti-Zionist groups happen to be influenced by Islam is neither here nor there. If the cause is just then we will support it in accordance with our determination to think globally and act locally. Indeed, we are more than happy to work with Muslims on a global basis if they are prepared to confine their struggle to traditionally Islamic areas of the world.
Unfortunately, however, the fact that we ourselves are committed to the wider struggle against Zionism on an international footing has presented National-Anarchists in Europe with something of a dilemma. Whilst we have consistently attempted to highlight the gross injustices currently being perpetrated against the likes of the Palestinians, for example, Islamic fundamentalists are making a conscious effort to both colonise and take over our own native soil. At this point some readers will argue, perhaps, that we should have woken up to the threat of Islam a long time ago. However, as I have already made clear on numerous occasions, if the struggle is legitimate then National-Anarchists will always side with those engaged in struggle against the forces of imperialist aggression.
We feel that our decision to 'overlook' the Islamic beliefs of those involved in such organisations is essentially correct. On the other hand, we are fully aware of the immense problems that an internationalist creed such as Islam can pose in the long-term. Islam, just like its Capitalist and Marxist counterparts, seeks to extinguish all racial and national boundaries by establishing a global caliphate: the Islamic equivalent of one-world government. Our support for Muslim fundamentalists, therefore, is a purely tactical affair. Indeed, whilst we are genuinely sincere with regard to the way in which we have offered the hand of friendship to such groups, we also realise that - potentially, at least - National-Anarchists in Europe may have to struggle against the Muslim presence in order to liberate our people from the consequences of mass immigration. This article is intended to deal with these problems as they apply to the British Isles.
One of the most notorious fundamentalist Muslim groups in England is the Hizb-ut Tahrir (HUT), or 'party of liberation'. The HUT was originally formed by Sheikh Taquiddin an-Nabhani, a Palestinian exile who was educated in Syria, Jordan and the Lebanon. Soon after returning to his native Palestine during the bloody upheavals which preceded the establishment of the Israeli State in 1948, Sheikh Taqiuddin began to concentrate seriously on developing an Islamic party structure and published several key texts, among them 'Saving Palestine' (1950) and 'The Message of the Arabs' (1950). Eventually, the growing popularity of Sheikh Taquiddin's radical ideas led to the formation of the HUT at al-Quds in 1953. Consequently, however, the party was banned by the Jordanian government and, mainly through the ruthless intervention of Glubb Pasha - Chief of Staff of the Jordanian Army - many of its activists were either beaten, imprisoned or murdered. In 1954 the HUT was prevented from speaking in mosques and various other Islamic centres. But what has all this to do with the British Isles? Allow me to explain.
Since those heady days in Jordan the HUT has come a very long way indeed, and the party has both financed and participated in a number of Islamic uprisings around the world - most notably in Syria, Jordan, Iraq and Tunisia - and its present leader, Abdul-Qadim Zallum, is rumoured to be in hiding somewhere in the Middle East. In 1994, however, the HUT organised an 'International Muslim Khalafah Conference' in Ilford, Essex, where hordes of Asian teenagers - many of them dressed in Afghan caps and camouflage uniforms - gathered to listen to Farid Qassim, the party's deputy leader. Soon afterwards, in one of his more animated speeches Qassim described the Jews as the most powerful force in the world and identified them as being the traditional 'enemies' of Islam. In his own words: 'Who signed the GATT agreement for Britain? Leon Brittan, a Jew. Who signed for the Americans? Another Jew.' Like those advocated by National-Anarchists, the HUT is organised in an underground cell-structure and is presently active in Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia and Turkey. The party has already been banned from over 100 colleges in England, and is vigorously opposed to Capitalism, Marxism and all laws (kufr) which contravene Natural Order. So far so good, perhaps, but whilst National-Anarchists wholeheartedly agree with many of the ideological and organisational tenets of the group, Farid Qassim and the HUT take things one step further by encouraging their supporters in this country to launch a Holy Way (Jihad) against all non-Muslims. In other words, Islamic militants have no time for the traditional culture and heritage of the British Isles and clearly intend to exert their own alien rule (al-Khilafah) over the country as a whole. As another party representative said on a Talk Sport phone-in several years ago, the HUT 'will not rest until the green flag of Islam is fluttering over every town hall in England'.
If these words don't make every full-blooded Englishman, Irishman, Scotsman and Welshman sit up and take notice then what possible hope is there of ever preventing these fanatics from stealing our country beneath our very noses? On the other hand, perhaps you are one of those people who reject the threat of Islam and regard it as being purely negligible, or that such elements have no realistic hope of ever gaining power in this country? If so, you would do well to think again. In Bradford, for example, Muslims have already managed to heavily infiltrate the local council, oversee the construction of yet more mosques and facilitate the banning of Christmas decorations in the city centre lest they offend Bradford's 70,000-strong Asian community. In the meantime, however, whilst the Muslims in the area have become highly politicised and remain a force to be reckoned with - something clearly demonstrated by the way the Yorkshire Constabulary capitulated to the demands of Asian rioters after they surrounded a police station in 1995 - the residents of Bradford's apathetic White community spend their time buying lottery tickets and watching meaningless soap operas.
Another Muslim faction with the sole intention of imposing Islamic rule on this country is Al-Muhajiroun, also known as 'the Emigrants'. Led by the inimitable Omar Bakri, the subject of various media investigations, Al-Muhajiroun achieved notoriety after the prospective 'Rally for Islamic Revival' at the London Arena in the late-1990s was threatened by Zionist militants and eventually cancelled once it became clear that Bakri himself would have to pick up the tab for the venue's security arrangements. According to Al-Muhajiroun, the meeting was due to attract between 7,000 and 14,000 activists and include representatives from the Algerian Islamic Salvation Front (FIS), Muslim Brotherhood, Tunisian al-Nahdha, Hizbollah and Hamas. Another meeting took place soon afterwards in London's Hyde Park where Peter Tatchell and the homosexual lobby, Outrage, presented the group with a mock fatwa in which Bakri was sentenced to 'two thousand years of sodomitical torment'. But the fact that the leaders of Al-Muhajiroun were made a laughing stock by the denizens of the ruling class and its media wing, however, should not in any way diminish the fact that such people are openly seeking to establish a Muslim parliament on British soil. According to a study carried out by the University of Derby, there are some 1,400 Muslim organisations currently operating in this country and, in addition, our shores play host to an estimated 1,000 mosques with a further 100 such centres due to be constructed over the next few years. Five years ago, an article in 'The Times' newspaper ['Muslims Set To Outnumber Anglicans' by Rajeev Syal & Christopher Morgan] claimed that 'there will be 4,000 more regular worshippers of Islam than there are Christians attending Church of England services by the year 2002.' In fact the figures also revealed that, in 1995, there were 536,000 practising Muslims in England compared with 854,000 churchgoers within the Anglican Church. Also, 32,000 new Muslims attended their local mosque in one year alone, whilst congregations in the Church of England decreased by 14,000. By taking modern trends into consideration, therefore, it was possible to predict that, by 2002, there were 760,000 worshipping Muslims and only 756,000 church-going Anglicans.
In a more practical sense, there is little doubt that the continuing process of Asian colonisation will help to fuel the fires of racial tension. Despite the fact that less extreme forms of Islam contain many worthy and admirable tenets, most people in the West already find it repugnant and any future conflict between Whites and Asians is liable to take place within a predominantly racial context. According to a 1994 report in the 'Guardian' newspaper, one young Asian member of the HUT was quoted as saying: 'No matter how much I want to be British, I never will because of my brown skin. I used to see everything as Blacks versus Whites, but now I see the struggle as Muslims against non-Muslims.' Don't be deceived. The fact that increasing numbers of young Asians are reverting to the traditions of their Eastern forefathers is a clear indication that people are naturally attracted to their own racial and cultural roots. It may come as something of a surprise to learn that two of the most prominent critics of Islamic fundamentalism are Jews. One, Alfred Sherman - arch-Capitalist and Thatcherite guru - has written of the 'Muslim threat to Christian Europe' and its 'gradual colonisation' by Asian immigrants. Another, leading Holocaust salesman and 'Times' columnist, Bernard Levin, has warned that 'in perhaps half a century, not more, and perhaps a good deal less, there will be wars in which fanatical Muslims will be winning. As for Oklahoma, it will be called Khartoum-on-the-Mississippi, and woe betide anyone who calls it anything else'. These individuals are pro-Zionist and therefore have their own reasons for opposing Islam, but the warning remains. According to the Runnymede Trust, a notorious multi-racial quango, such comments are examples of 'Islamophobia'. In the December 29th, 1996, edition of the 'Observer' newspaper, however, Barry Hugill and Martin Bright contend: 'For the zealots of Al-Muhajiroun, Islamophobia is a gift from God. Talk of rag-heads, mad mullahs and urban-turbans makes it so much easier for them to convince young British [sic] Muslims that 'global reawakening of the Muslim Ummah [world Islamic goverment]' is imminent and with it the rightful slaughter of Jews and homosexuals. As history shows, intolerance breeds intolerance.' It certainly does, and whilst those who form this country's draconian Race Laws remain intolerant to the demands and aspirations of a growing number of disaffected young Whites who have had more than their fair share of Asian audacity, the racial climate in this land of ours will continue to play into our hands. By becoming an embarrassment to the melting-pot architects of the liberal Establishment, therefore, the likes of Hizb-ut Tahrir and Al-Muhajiroun may have inadvertently presented National-anarchists with the means to achieve that long-awaited victory. We do not believe that it is any longer possible to repatriate Black and Asian immigrants to their lands of ethnic origin, but Islamic militancy will light the touchpaper that will enable White communities to unite in a quest for their own survival.