| 
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
   | 
The enemies within By
David Pidcock   The 
following letter was sent by David Pidcock to The Sunday Telegraph, contrasting 
the French hysteric phobia of late with Napoleon Bonaparte's admiration for 
Islam.
 An open letter to the Editor and owner Mr. Conrad Black
 
 Gentlemen,
 
 As an English convert to Islam, I feel bound to respond to your Editorial
 Comment, p.27, "The enemies within." (7/8/94).
 
 Your reference to Mr. Charles Pasqua, the French Interior Minister, is clearly 
in ignorance of the debt his Department owes to Islam. With the exception of 
French family law, 95 per cent of French law, i.e., The Code Napoleon is, in its 
entirety Islamic. Unlike
 the United Kingdom ... which only has Courts of Law.... the French have courts 
of Justice.
 
 Having recognized the divine nature of the Qur'an, Napoleon Bonaparte embraced 
the religion of Abraham in the latter half of 1798, taking Ali as his Muslim 
name. And, having further recognized the wisdom and superiority of Islamic 
Jurisprudence, he authorized the translation of the rulings of Imam Malik from 
the Arabic, and the implementation of it throughout the Empire. So The Code 
Napoleon, which is universally
 proclaimed and admired by the likes of Monsieur Pasqua, owes its origins 
entirely to Europe's Islamic past.
 
 The Battle of Waterloo was, in fact, a battle of the usurers (represented by 
Wellington) and the opponents of debt - finance (represented by Napoleon 
Bonaparte). Unfortunately, the usurers won and wrote their account of history. 
On the 9th of February 1807, Napoleon had obtained the support of Rabbi David 
Sinzheim and the Grand Sanhedrin, in issuing a rabbinical Fatwa prohibiting 
usury. Napoleon clearly understood the root cause of Europe's problem. For, upon 
being shown a table of interest charges, he reflected for a while and made the 
following comment:
 
 "The deadly facts herein revealed, lead me to wonder that this monster, 
interest, has not devoured the whole human race. It would have done so long ago 
if bankruptcy and revolutions had not acted as counter poisons." (Lincoln: Money 
Martyred; Omni Publications 1935).
 
 Which makes it clear, why he found the liberating theology of Islam so 
attractive? In one of the most valuable pieces of evidence, attesting to his 
grasp of the subject, he is reported as having given the following reasons for 
his love of the Islamic religion. In a recently acquired copy of Bonaparte etl' 
Islam by Cherfils from the Bibliotheque National De
 France, we find on pages 105 - 125 the following well kept secret:
 
 "Moses", Napoleon says, "has revealed the existence of God to his nation, Jesus 
Christ to the Roman world, Muhammad to the old continent... Arabia was 
idolatrous when, six centuries after Jesus, Muhammad [re]introduced the worship 
of the God of Abraham, of
 Ishmael, of Moses, and of Jesus Christ. The Arians and some other sects had 
disturbed the tranquility of the East by agitating the question of the 'Father 
the Son and the Holy Ghost.' Muhammad declared that there was none but one God, 
who had no father, no son, and that
 the trinity imported the idea of idolatry...
 
 "The Parthians, the Scythians, the Mongols, and the Tartars and the Turks, had 
shown generally themselves to be enemies of science and the arts, but this 
reproach cannot be fastened onto the Arabs, no more than upon Muhammad. The 
first Omayyad Caliph was a
 poet and he granted peace to a Rabbi, because he prayed for grace in four 
beautiful Arabic verses...
 
 "Al Mansour, Harun al Rashid and Al Mamun cultivated Arts and Sciences. They 
were fond of literature, chemistry, and mathematics; they lived with savants, 
caused the Greek and Latin authors, the Iliad, the Odyssey, Euclid, etc., to be 
translated into Arabic,
 and founded schools and colleges for medicine, astronomy, and moral science. 
Ahmed corrected the tables of Ptolemy; Abbas was a distinguished Mathematician; 
Costa, Alicude, Thabit, and Ahmed measured one degree of meridian from Sanaa to 
Kufa.
 Chemistry, alembics, sun - dials, clocks and numerical signs owe their existence 
to Arab invention. Nothing is more elegant than their moral tales; their poetry 
is full of fervour...
 
 "Muhammad extolled everywhere the savants and such men as devoted themselves to 
a speculative life and cultivated letters... In the library of Cairo there were 
6000 volumes on astronomy, and more than 100,000 on other subjects; in the 
library of Cordova there
 were 3,000,000 volumes... Sciences and Arts reigned under the Caliphs and made 
great progress, which was brought to naught by the Mongols...
 
 "I hope that the time is not far off when I shall be able to unite all the wise 
and educated men of all countries and establish a uniform regime based on the 
principles of the Quran which alone are true and which alone can lead men to 
happiness..."
 
 "Christianity preaches only servitude and dependence. A society of true 
Christians would not be a society of men."
 
 This, of course, all went down like a lead balloon in government, theological, 
and banking circles of London, Paris, Frankfurt, Vienna and Rome. Your leading 
article follows the well established tactic of Ricoldo Cydones, who advised all 
those involved in the
 Greco - Roman - Islamic polemic and religious dialogue which originated between 
the Byzantines and Turks during the Ottoman expansion that:
 
 "It is always easier to start by attacking the falseness of the Muslim faith 
than by proving the truth of Christianity ... in controversy with a Muslim. The 
Muslims are curious to hear something about the faith of the Christians, but the 
Christians must avoid supplying them with information."
 
 Your Cecil B. De Millesque reference to "their God", as if "their God" was any 
other than the same one mentioned in the Bible, continues in this reprehensible 
tradition, and is again evidence that:
 
 "Seldom does it occur that the opponents in strife attempt to comprehend or 
succeed in understanding the position of each other."
 
 On this particular occasion however, having been born and raised as a Christian, 
in the West, with a long family tradition in political satire (particularly 
Napoleonic) going back to at least 1769, I have the advantage of comprehending 
and understanding both sides of this particular argument very well indeed. 
Therefore, your mischievous attempt to cast doubt on the fidelity of the Qur'an 
and its compatibility with previous divine scriptures, will fall on stony ground 
along with the hopes of evangelical Christians for are conversion of us back to 
the Church of Rome or the Church of England, and to "hear us abjure the Muslim 
God", once again demonstrates the complete ignorance of Who the God of the 
Muslims actually was and still is.
 
 To the best of our knowledge, the most ancient recorded Name of God is in 
Chaldean cuneiform tablets, and it corresponds with Allah's title: Al Alah, The 
Most High. (Source Scofield Reference Bible). In our prayers as Muslims we 
state, whilst prostrated:
 "Subhana Rabi al Ala" i.e, "Glory to my Lord The Most High".
 
 The Judeo - Christian concept of God, as a Father as opposed to the Creator of 
man, is based on a false, pagan understanding. Likewise the form Jehovah, on its 
own, according to the Rev. T. K. Cheyne of Balliol College Oxford,
 
 "is unhesitatingly to be rejected due to a misunderstanding of comparatively 
modern origin." [Source - Variorum Teachers Bible, London 1880].
 
 But the easiest way to demonstrate the fact that the God of The Children of 
Israel and the Children of Ishmael, and all the Semitic peoples was one and the
 same is to read Exodus 18, verses 1 - 27 in the Old Testament. Which, 
surprisingly, still contains the most damning piece of evidence against the 
Judeo -Christian polemic, that the God of the Arabs and Islam was different to 
the God of Isaac and the Children of Israel?
 
 If the followers of Judeo - Christianity seriously wanted to please God, they 
would take more care in following his Ten Commandments, and the example of His 
Prophets and Messengers. It is very clear indeed, from Exodus, that Moses, the 
law - giver to Israel, was married to Zipporah, the Arab daughter of Metro, the 
Imam and Judge of the Arab Midianites of northern Arabia, who re - taught Moses 
his religion and how to administer justice among the Children of Israel: The 
Qur'anic account is to be found in Surah
 28, Verses 22 - 25. Furthermore, the promise in Deuteronomy to Moses, that a 
prophet like unto him would be raised up amongst his family brethren, like unto 
him, takes on more meaning when you realise that it literally meant his Arab 
family brethren. Medina
 was originally called Yathrib, taking its original name from Sheikh 
Yethro/Jethro. Muhammad was invited and raised up by the people of Yathrib to 
rule over them.
 
 Furthermore, Gershom and Eliezer, the half Arab sons of Moses are listed as 
Levites, the priestly line of the Israelites, regardless of their mother being a 
non- Israelite woman. Which should destroy, once and for all, the myth that 
inheritance and favour was only
 through the mother. The following extracts establish clearly and unequivocally 
that The Lord of the Arabs and Israel always was and always will be - Allah.
 
 "And Moses went out and to meet his [Arab] father- in- law, and did obeisance 
and kissed him, and they asked each other of their welfare; and they came into 
the tent... And Jethro rejoiced for all the goodness which The Lord had done to 
Israel... And Jethro said,
 blessed be The Lord... Now I know that The Lord is greater than all gods, for in 
the thing they dealt proudly He was above them... And Jethro, Moses' 
[Arab]father - in - law, took a burnt offering and sacrifices for God: and Aaron 
came and all the elders of Israel, to eat bread with Moses' [Arab] father - in- 
law before God." (Exodus 18:7 - 12)
 
 In the Old Testament, the Ten Commandments are mentioned in Exodus 20 and 
Deuteronomy 5. The key commandment is:
 
 "Thou shalt have no other gods before Me."
 
 In Deuteronomy 6, verse 4 we read:" Hear O Israel: The Lord Our God Is One".
 
 The significance of this Oneness of God is of paramount importance. In Hebrew 
and its sister language Arabic, which, by the way, has an unbroken pedigree of 
continuous use: Achad or Ahad signifies an indivisible single entity with no 
possibility of it representing a triune or multiple godhead.
 
 Monotheism, by definition, is entirely incompatible with the ideas of Trinity 
and the Three - ology of the Athanasius creed, which was imposed on the Roman 
Empire by Constantine at the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D. Of course, I hear 
your objections and understand the sense of outrage this iconoclastic view 
generates. But by what scriptural authority did Constantine overturn the 
orthodox - Unitarian - concept of God?
 
 Apart from error, continuing to delighting its followers, I suggest, that in 
order to maintain the status quo, Constantine indulged in what I have come to 
call generic engineering - all he did was change the name of Mythra, the pagan 
son of god, into that of Christ, the son of god, and everything in the pagan 
state remained the same except, of course, the name of
 the crucified Saviour.
 
 When we take a cold hard look at the facts, we find that the concept of an 
atoning death for the sins of man is far older than Christianity, and far older 
than Judaism. For example, we find a curious similarity between all the cults 
and myths of the ancient world. We also find that for every lie to succeed it 
must contain an element of truth within it.
 
 In my book Satanic Voices Ancient & Modern, I have made mention of the glaring 
similarities between all the redeeming sons of god. For example, if we were 
living in York or Chester and the date was March the 1st, 50 B.C., we would be 
preparing for the same
 Easter festival we have today, following the same Christmas festivities of 
December 25th. During which time we would have commemorated his birth to a 
virgin mother in a cave, of one who had 12 disciples; one who was called 
Saviour; one who sometimes figures as a
 lamb; one whose disciples were initiated through baptism; and one in whose 
remembrance sacramental feasts were held. The only difference you would notice, 
if you went back in time, would be his name; for then it was Mythra not Jesus 
Christ.
 
 At the time of the appearance of the real Messiah to the lost sheep of the House 
of Israel: Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, there were temples without end 
dedicated to redeeming gods like Apollo or Dionysus among the Greeks; Hercules 
amongst the Romans; Mythra
 among the Persians - A pre - Christian crucifix was found in County Cork with a 
Persian inscription on it, dedicated to Mythra; In Syria and Phrygia Attas 
&Adonis; in Egypt Osiris, Isis and Horus; in ancient Babylon Bel/Baal and 
Astarte. So you see, my question
 is - By what authority are we to accept these major departures from orthodox 
monotheism.
 
 The recent release of Dead Sea Scroll material confirms the Islamic view of what 
occurred at the time of Christ and after his alleged crucifixion. Eisenman and 
Wise have this to say in The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered. Having made mention of 
Paul's incipient
 theological approach to the alleged crucifixion of Christ, on which stands the 
basis of Christian theological understanding of it thereafter, they state on 
page 10:
 
 "What we have here is a picture of what Christianity actually was in Palestine. 
The reader, however, probably will not be able to recognize it because it will 
seem virtually the opposite of the Christianity with which he or she is 
familiar."
 
 On page 234:
 
 "Paul they considered an apostate from the Law... they are certainly the 
community that held the memory of James in the highest regard, whereas Paul they 
considered 'the Enemy', or Anti Christ... Such a stance is not unparalleled in 
crucial passages from the letter in James' name in the New Testament. We have 
already shown that this letter, in responding to some adversary who believes 
that Abraham was justified by faith alone, states that by making himself 'a 
friend of man', this adversary has turned himself into
 'the Enemy of God'. This 'Enemy' terminology is also known in Matt. 13:25 - 40 
'parable of the tares', perhaps the only anti - Pauline parable in the Gospels, 
where an 'Enemy' sows the 'tares' among the good seed...."
 
 The Gospel of Barnabas opens with a warning that Paul is preaching a most 
impious doctrine; repudiating the circumcision and other portions of the 
Covenant
 between God and Abraham, which Moses came to renew and Christ came to fulfil and 
announce the coming of the desired prophet, the "Himdah" or "Ahmed" of all 
nations - Mahmad, Mahamod, and Machammad in Hebrew and Muhammad, i.e. Muhammad, 
in Arabic; the one imbued with the Spirit of Truth; the Comforter - The 
Periqlyte, or Paraclete. The Old Testament mentions him in the following terms.
 
 "And the Ahmed of all nations will come" (Haggai,) "And I will shake all 
nations, and the Himada / Ahmed/
 Paraclete of all the nations will come; and I will fill this house with glory, 
says the Lord of hosts. Mine is the silver, Mine is the gold, says the Lord of 
hosts, the glory of My last house shall be greater than of the first one says 
the Lord of hosts; and in this place I will give Shalom, says the Lord of hosts" 
(Haggai, ii.7 - 9).
 
 The Holy Prophet King Solomon names this bringer of Peace / Shalom, as 
Muhammadim" the suffix "im" issued to express absolute respect as with the "im"
 added to "Eloah" to make "Elohim" (Allahumma) which denotes absolute respect for 
God.
 
 Muhammadim is usually translated, intentionally or otherwise, as "altogether 
lovely", in itself not an unfitting tribute to the one who would come and renew 
Abraham's religion of Peace i.e., Salaam. The Hebrew, transliteration in Roman 
script from the Song of
 Solomon is as follows:
 
 "Hikko Mamittaqim Vikullo MAHAMMADIM
 Zeh Dudi Vezew Raai Benute Yarushalam"
 
 Meaning:
 
 "His mouth is most sweet; yet, he is Mohamad, altogether lovely. This is my 
beloved and this is My friend, o daughter of Jerusalem!"
 
 As with the rest of Islam's civilizing influence on Europe, which, in its pride, 
Europe finds hard to admit, even grudgingly, Western gratitude, as usual, has a 
very short shelf - life.
 
 On the questions of who the real 'terrorists' and' subversives' are, violent 
revolution has not only been the opium of 'intellectuals' but of 'bankers' also. 
Take for example, Montagu Norman, the overt Nazi Governor of the Bank of 
England, and step - father of Peregrine Worst Horne of Daily Telegraph fame, who 
went to the elected British Government and instructed them to lend Germany £90 
million pounds. He is reported to have said:
 
 "We may never be paid back, but it will be less loss than the fall of Nazism".
 
 Many of those who opposed him were locked up under Regulation 18B, The Defence 
of the Realm Act, if I maybe permitted to say so, a highly illiberal act, worthy 
of any fundamentalist terrorist state. ... The subversive Nazi Union Banking 
Corporation was co -
 founded and sponsored by Prescott Bush's father in-law, George Walker in 1924, 
following a personal agreement between Skull & Bones member Avrell Harriman
 and Fritz Thyssen in 1922.
 
 In seizing the property of Prescott Bush, the authorities were, in fact, seizing 
the property of Fritz Thyssen, the man who boasted in his 1941 book' I Paid 
Hitler', that his contributions to Adolph Hitler had begun in October 1923, with 
the payment of 100,000 marks for his attempted "putsch". One wonders, if French 
Interior Minister Pasqua is aware of the sinister, enemy within, background of 
the late husband of America's current Ambassador to France, Mrs. Pamela Digby 
Avrell Harriman?
 
 Having become the tools and vassals of rich men, it is evident that the job of 
today's journalist is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to 
vilify, and to fawn at the foot of Mammon, and sell himself, his country, and 
his race for his daily bread to those who lend money to the state at interest.
 
 Yours sincerely,
 
 Author: David Pidcock
 Date Published: Jan 1995
 
 
 some thought provoking quotes:
 *Seven days without prayer, makes one weak.*
 *Life is fragile, handle with prayer.*
 
 
 
    |