CONFESSIONS of A BRITISH SPY and British Enmity Against Islam
At the end of their invasions in the nineteenth century, the Empire took possession of approximately one-fourth of the earths surface, colonizing more than one-fourth of the earths population.
<A name=r16,60904>India was the most significant, the most outstanding of the British colonies. It was Indias tremendous population of over three hundred million [well over seven hundred million as of today] and its inexhaustible natural wealths that earned the British their universal domination. In the First World War alone, Britain utilized one and a half million of Indias population as fighting soldiers and one billion rupees of its treasury as ready money. They used most of these assets in smashing the Ottoman Empire. In peace time as well, it was India that helped Britains stupendous industries to survive and sustained the British economy and finance. There were two reasons for Indias being an incomparably important colony: First, India was a country where Islam, which the British considered to be the greatest hindrance to their exploiting the whole world, was widespread, and Muslims were in the ascendant in this country. Second, Indias natural riches.
<A name=r16,61024>In order to keep India under their domination, the British mounted offensives on all the Muslim countries that had transport links with India, sowed seeds of mischief and instigation, set brothers against one another, took these countries under their domination, and transported all their natural riches and national wealth back to their own country.
<A name=r16,61144>The perfidious character inherent in the nature of the British policy proves itself in that they meticulously followed the movements in the Ottoman Empire, set the Ottomans on a war with the Russians by using all sorts of political stratagems, and thus put them into a position wherefore it would be impossible for them to offer any help to India.
<A name=r16,61264>The European pioneers of India are the Portuguese. Landing in the port city named Calcutta in Indias coastal Malabar region in 904 [A.D. 1498], the Portuguese engaged in trade and took possession of Indias trade business, only to lose it to the Dutch some time later. Those who snatched Indias trade from the Ducth were the French. It was not long after that, however, that these people confronted with the British.
<A name=r16,61384>As it is related in the book As-Sawrat-ul-Hindiyya, (which means the Indian Revolution), written by Allma Muhammad Fadl-i-Haqq Khayr-bd, one of Indias great Islamic scholars, and in its commentary entitled Al-yawkt-ul-mihriyya, it was in the year 1008 [A.D. 1600] when the British first managed to take Akbar Shhs permission to open trade centers in Calcutta, India. The same year Queen Elizabeth I sanctioned the regulations for the East Indian Campaign. In accordance with these regulations, the campaign was granted permission to recruit soldiers in Britain, to arm them for its own use, to establish a fleet of its own, and to organize military and commercial expeditions to India.
<A name=r16,61504>They bought land in Calcutta in the time of Shh-i-lam I.<A href="http://books.hakikatkitabevi.com/cgi-bin/cgi.exe/bksnfo31/query=[jump!3A!27!2814!29!27]/doc/%7B@14276%7D?popup=1">[1] They brought soldiers with the pretext of protecting their land. Akbar Shh was a corrupt person in credal matters. He held all religions equal. In fact, he convened scholars from various religions and attempted to establish a common, universal religion, a mixture of all religions, and made an official announcement of this new religion, which he named Dn-i-ilh (Divine Religion), in 990 [A.D. 1582]. From that time up until his death, respect for Islamic scholars continuously decreased all over India, especially in the palace, and people who tended towards Akbar Shhs religion were esteemed highly. It was during those days when the British entered India. In return for their successful medical treatment of Sultn Farrh Sr Shh in 1126 [A.D. 1714], they were awarded the privilege of buying land anywhere they liked throughout India. After Shh-i-lam II mounted the throne 1174 [A.D. 1760], they extended their domination from Bengal to Central India and Racasthan. They aroused mischief and tumults everywhere in India. In 1218 [A.D. 1803] the British eventually managed to take Shh-i-lam II completely under their authority. The orders which they announced from Delhi were now being issued in the name of the Shh. It did not take them long to equalize the powers of the British governor general with those of Shh-i-lam II. They deleted the names of the Muslim Indian emperors from the Indian monetary coins. In 1253 [C.E. 1837] Bahdir Shh II became the emperor. He could not stand the British oppressions long and, encouraged by the army and the people, commenced a great insurrection against the British in 1274 [A.D. 1857]. Thus, he managed to have money coined bearing his name and to have the khutba given with his name mentioned in it, yet the British reaction to this was extremely vehement and cruel. Entering Delhi, the British soldiers made havoc of the city, ransacked houses and shops, and pillaged whatever they found in the name of property and money. They put all Muslims to the sword, regardless of whether they were young or old, male or female, adult or infant. It was such a massive destruction that the people could not even find any water to drink.
One of the commanders of Bahdir Shh II, a general named Baht Khn, persuaded the Sultan to withdraw his army. However, another commander named Mirz Ilh Bakhsh, in an effort to ingratiate himself with the British, misled Bahdir Shh, saying that if he left his army and surrendered he would be able to convince the British that he was innocent and had been forced to preside over the insurrection and thus would be forgiven by the British. So Bahdir Shh left the main body of his retreating army and took asylum in Humyn Shhs mausoleum, ten kilometres from a place called Qala-i-Muall within Delhi.
<A name=r16,61744>A traitor named Rajab Al betrayed the Emperor to a British priest named Hudson, who was notorious for immoral and maladroit acts and was serving as an intelligence officer in the British army. This man, in his turn, reported the situation to General Wilson, the then Army Commander, and asked for his help to arrest the Emperor. When Wilson answered that he did not have any mercenaries to lend him, Hudson suggested that he could do this job with a few men, advising that the Emperor must be given the guarantee that he and his family would not be harmed if he surrendered. At first Wilson refused this suggestion, but after a while he agreed. Upon this Hudson, taking ninety men with him, went to Humyn Shhs mausoleum and assured the Emperor that no harm would be inflicted on him, his sons and wife. Falling for the prietss promise, Bahdir Shh surrendered. The Emperor had two sons and a grandson who had not surrendered yet. So Hudson set about to arrest them. Yet they had so many guards that it was impossible to arrest them. Therefore he took General Wilsons permission to give them the guarantee that they would not be harmed if they surrendered. Sending various messengers to the Emperors two sons and grandson, Hudson, the villain, assured them that they would not be harmed. These people also were taken in by the priests lies and surrendered. As soon as Hudson arrested the Emperors two sons and grandson, by having recourse to a policy and stratagem peculiar to the British, he cast them into chains.
<A name=r16,61864>As the Shhs two sons and grandson were being taken to Delhi with their hands tied, Hudson had the young princes stripped of their clothes and he martyred them himself by firing bullets into their chests. He drank from their blood. He had the corpses of these young martyrs hung by the fortress gate in order to intimidate the people. The following day he sent their heads to the British governor general Henry Bernard. Then, he had a bowl of soup made from the martyrs flesh and sent it to the Shh and his spouse. Being very hungry, they hastily put some into their mouths. Yet, although they did not know what kind of meat it was, they could not chew it or swallow it. Instead, they vomited and put the soup dishes on the floor. The villian named Hudson said, Why dont you eat it. It is delicious soup. I had it cooked from your sons flesh.
In 1275 [A.D. 1858] Bahdir Shh II was dethroned and was subjected to a judicial trial for the crime of causing rebellion and massacre of Europeans. On March 29, he was sentenced to life imprisonment and was banished to Indo-China [Rangoon]. It was during November of 1279 [A.D. 1862] that this last Sultan of the Islamic Ghurghn Empire, Bahdir Shh, passed away in a dungeon far from his country. On the other hand, Allma (Muhammad) Fadl-i-Haqq was martyred by the British in a dungeon on the Andaman Islands in 1278 [C.E. 1861].
<A name=r16,62104>During the Ottoman-Russian War, in 1294 [C.E. 1877], the British declared India a British dependency. By submerging the Ottoman Empire into this war, Midhat Psha, a registered member of the notorious Scotch Masonic Lodge, orchestrated the worst of the damage he had inflicted on the Islamic religion. His having martyred Sultn Abd-ul-Azz Khn was another favour he did for the British. The British had trained special agents and had them appointed to high ranking positions in the Ottoman government. These statesmen were Ottoman in name but British in mind and speech. Mustafa Rashd Psha, the most infamous of these men, had been in office as the last Grand Vizier only six days when he congratulated the British for the Delhi massacre they perpetrated on the Muslims of India on 28 Oct. 1857. Earlier than that, the British had asked permission from the Ottomans to use the Egyptian route for the dispatch of the British soldiers coming from Britain to suppress the Muslims who had revolted against the British cruelty in India. The permission had been provided by the masonic agents.
<A name=r16,62224>The British not only prevented the opening of new schools in India, but they also closed all the madrasas and the primary schools which were the foundations and the most salient symbols of the Islamic Sharat, and they martyred all the scholars and religious authorities who could have led the people. At this point we consider it appropriate to relate a real story that a friend of ours told us when he was back from his travels to India and Pakistan in 1391 [A.D. 1971].
<A name=r16,62344>After visiting the graves of the Awliy, such as Imm-i-Rabbn and others qaddas-Allhu sirrah in Serhend city, I went to Pniput city, and thence to Delhi. Performing the Friday prayer in the biggest mosque in Pniput. I went to the imms house upon his invitation. On the way I saw a huge door locked with a chain with thick rings. The inscription on the door said it had been a primary school. I asked the imm why it was locked. The imm said, It has been closed since 1367 [A.D. 1947]. The British provoked the Hindus against the Muslims and caused a massacre of all the Muslims, women, men, children and old people, all of them. This school has been closed since that day. This chain and the lock remind us of the British cruelty. We are emigrants who came and settled here afterwards.
<A name=r16,62464>The British did away with all the Islamic scholars, Islamic books, and Islamic schools, a practice which they applied to all the Islamic countries. Thus they brought up young generations totally unaware of the religion.
<A name=r16,62584>The notorious British Lord Macauley, as soon as he arrived in Calcutta in 1834, prohibited all sorts of Arabic and Persian publications and ordered that the ones that were already in the process of printing should be stopped, and this attitude of his earned him a great deal of acclamation from his British colleagues. This oppression was assiduously carried on in places with a Muslim majority, especially in Bengal.
<A name=r16,62704>While closing the Islamic madrasas in India on the one hand, the British opened one hundred and sixty-five colleges, eight of which were for girls, on the other hand. The students educated in these colleges were brainwashed and were made hostile towards their fathers religion, towards their own ancestors. Two-thirds of the British army that perpetrated the aforesaid cruelties and savageries in India was made up of the native people who had been brainwashed, made hostile against their own nation, Christianized, or hired.
<A name=r16,62824>The laws that were enacted in 1249 [C.E. 1833] served the expansion of the missionary activities and the consolidation of the Protestant organization in India. Before this spreading of missionary activities and Indias being fully under British domination, the British were respectful of the Muslims religious belief; they would have cannons fired to celebrate the Muslims holy days, offer them help for the restoration of their mosques and other places of worship, and even join services in the pious foundations pertaining to mosques, convents, shrines and madrasas. The imperative messages arriving from Britain in 1833 and 1838 prohibited the British from activities of this sort. As these facts show clearly, the policy employed by the British in their attacks on the Islamic religion is based on deceiving the worlds Muslims by first pretending to be friendly and helpful and by spreading the impression far and wide that they love Muslims and serve Islam, and then, after attaining this subsidiary goal, annihilating gradually and insidiously all the Islamic essentials, books, schools, and scholars. This double-faced policy of theirs has done the worst harm to Muslims and all but exterminated Islam. Later on, they increased their efforts to have English adopted as the official language and bring up Christianized new generations from the native people. To this end they opened schools thoroughly under the control of the missionaries. In fact, the British Prime Minister Lord Palmerston and many other British Lords said that God hath given India to the British so that the Indian people might enjoy the blessings of Christianity.
<A name=r16,62944>Lord Macauley spent his utmost energy and support for constituting in India a British nation who were Indian in blood and colour and British in inclinations, thoughts, belief, moral values, and mental capacity. Therefore, the schools opened by the missionaries allotted very much importance and time in their curricula to the teaching of the English language and literature and Christianity. Scientific knowledge, (such as mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc.), was totally disignored. Thus a number of Christianized people who knew nothing but the English language and literature were educated and produced. Then these people were employed in the civil service.
<A name=r16,63064>It being an Islamic rule that a Muslim who abandons his faith will become an apostate, while Hindus considered those who turn away from Hinduism irreligious, people who were Christianized could not inherit property from their parents. In order to eliminate this rule, the missionaries passed a law, which was first enacted in Bengal, in 1832, and then promulgated all over India, in 1850, thus making it possible for the Christianized native apostates and renegades to have a share from their parents inheritance. For this reason, Indians called the British schools in India Satanic Registers. [In India and in the Ottoman Empire official bureaus and institutions were called Defter (Register).] French writer Marcelle Permeau visited India in 1344 [A.D. 1925] and published a book when he returned. He says in this book of his, Calcutta, Indias primary city, was in such a miserable state that the poverty-stricken purlieus around Paris and London would fall far short of exemplifying. People and animals living together in cottages, children crying, ill people moaning. Beside them you see people utterly enervated from continuous use of alcohol and drugs, sprawling on the ground in a manner no different from dead people. Watching these exceedingly hungry, miserable, weak and exhausted people, one cannot help asking oneself what on earth these people could do.
<A name=r16,63184>Clouds of people are scudding towards factories, and how much of their profits are these factories paying these people? Needs, difficulties, infectious diseases, alcohol and drugs are destroying, annihilating the already enervated, defenceless people. Nowhere else on earth has human life been treated with such shameless indifference as it is here. No work, no toil is considered to be hard or unhealthy here. It is not a problem if a worker dies. Another one will take his place. The only concern for the British here is how to increase the production rates and how to earn more and more money.
<A name=r16,63304>Williams Jennings Bryan, a former U.S. Foreign Secretary, confirms with evidences that the British government is more cruel and baser than Russia; the statements he makes in his book British Domination in India can be paraphrased as follows: The British, who claim to have bestowed welfare and happiness on the living of the Indian people, sent millions of Indians to their graves. This nation (the British), who boast everywhere that they instituted law courts and disciplinary forces, robbed India to the core through a political embezzlement. Robbery may sound somewhat too tough a term, yet no other word could depict the British atrocity more explicitly.
<A name=r16,63424>The conscience of the British people, who claim to be Christians, is not willing to hear the Indian Muslims call for help.
<A name=r16,63544>Mister Hodbert Keombtun says in his book Life of the Indian, The Indian is tormented by his master [the British], yet he continues to work and serve till he loses everything he has, till he dies.
<A name=r16,63664>The Indian Muslim workers being employed in the other British colonies were even under worse conditions. In 1834 the British industrialists began to employ Indian workers instead of African natives. Thousands of Muslims were transported from India to South African colonies. The position of these workers, who were called coolies, was worse than that of slaves. They were bound by a contract called indentured labour. According to this contract, the coolie would be indentured for five years. During this period he could not leave his work or get married; he would have to work day and night under continuous whipping. In addition, he was liable to a taxation of three British gold coins yearly. These facts were announced all over the world through publications such as Labour in India, Post-Lecturer in the University of New York.
<A name=r16,63784>Ghandi, a widely known Indian Ruler, received his education in Britain and returned to India. He was the son of a Christianized Indian. In fact, his father was the Archbishop of Porbandar city. When in 1311 [A.D. 1893] he was sent by a British company in India to South Africa and witnessed the heavy conditions the Indians were being employed under and the barbarous treatment they were being subjected to, he put up a struggle against the British. Although he was the son of a person brought up and even Christianized by the British, he could not bear the sight of this British cruelty and savagery. This was his first step towards the movement that would later earn him his renown.
<A name=r16,63904>The basis of the policy which the British have followed throughout the Muslim world consists of this three-word slogan: Break, dominate, and destroy their faith.
<A name=r16,64024>They have not hesitated to fulfil all the requirements of this policy, whatsoever.
<A name=r16,64144>The first thing they did in India was to find the people who would serve them. Using these people, they slowly lit the fire of mischief. The people most suitable for this purpose were the Hindus living under Muslims domination; so they used these people. The Hindus were leading a peaceful life under the equitable ruling of the Muslims, when the British approached them and gradually imbued them with the thought that Hindus were the real owners of India, that Muslims had been killing the Hindu gods in the name of religious sacrifice, and that this practice should soon be put an end to. The Hindus were on the British side now. They employed some of them as mercenaries. Thus the Hindu nescience and the British hostility against Islam and avarice for money were brought together to carry out Queen Elizabeths advice for the formation of an army. Discord was sown between the Muslim governors and the Hindu maharajahs. In the meantime, from amongst the Muslims, people slack in their faith were hired.
<A name=r16,64264>The British Sir Lord Strachey, who served as the regent on several occasions and who was a member of the (Indian Organization), states about the Muslim-Hindu enmity, Anything that will be done in order to dominate or sow discord is compatible with our governments policy. The greater support for our policy in India is the co-existence of two autonomous societies who are hostile to each other. Aggravating this hostility, the British supported the Hindus continuously from 1164 [A.D. 1750] until 1287 [A.D. 1870], and joined them in all the massacres of Muslims they perpetrated
Commencing in 1858, the Muslim-Hindu conflicts grew wider and wider. The British would provoke the Hindus against the Muslims and then sit and enjoy the fights as the Hindus attacked. Not a single year passed without bloody events and mischievous tumults that broke out upon the killing of a cow as a religious sacrifice and which resulted in the massacre of hundreds, nay, thousands of Muslims. In order to kindle the mischief from both ends, they, on the one hand, spread among the Muslims the belief that killing one cow as a sacrifice would be more pious than killing seven sheep, and, on the other hand, they rumoured among the Hindus that rescuing their bovine gods from death would earn them a lot of rewards in the next world. This mischief of theirs continued after their withdrawal from India. We would like to exemplify this fact by relating an event written in a magazine entitled Ittilat, which was published in Iran in the time of its Prime Minister Musaddiq.
<A name=r16,64504>On a day of Qurbn<A href="http://books.hakikatkitabevi.com/cgi-bin/cgi.exe/bksnfo31/query=[jump!3A!27!2814!29!27]/doc/%7B@14301%7D?popup=1">[1] two bearded Muslims wearing turbans and long robes bought a cow to kill as a sacrifice. As they were passing a Hindu quarter on their way home, a Hindu stopped them to ask them what they were going to do with the cow. When they said they were going to kill it as a sacrifice, the Hindu began to shout, Hey, people! Help! These men are going to sacrifice our god. And the two Muslims also shouted, O Muslims! Help! These men are going to seize our sacrifice. Hindus and Muslims gathered around the place and began to fight by using sticks and knives. Hundreds of Muslims were killed. Later, however, the two people who had been taking the cow through the Hindu quarter were seen disappearing into the British embassy. This comes to mean that this event was provoked by the British. The correspondent who relates this event adds, We know how you spoiled Muslims day of Qurbn. With tricks of this sort and innumerable other types of cruelty they tried to destroy Muslims.
Later on, when they saw that the Hindus were gradually rising against them, they began, by 1287 [A.D. 1870], to support the Muslims against the Hindus.
<A name=r16,64744>There appeared strange people who bore Muslim names yet who were hostile against the Ahl as-sunna, said that it was not fard to make Jihd with the sword, said hall about what Islam has prescribed to be harm, and attempted to change Islams principles of belief. Sir Sayyed Ahmad, Ghulm Ahmad Qdiyn, Abdullah Ghaznaw, Isml-i-Dahlaw, Nazr Huseyn Dahlaw, Siddiq Hasan Khn Pehpl, Rashd Ahmad Kenkuh, Wahd uz-zamn Haydar bd, Ashraf Al Tahnaw, and Muhammad Is-haq, who was Shh Abd-ul-azzs grandson, were only a few of these people. Supporting these people, the British caused the appearance of other new sects. They strove to make Muslims follow these sects.
<A name=r16,64864>The most notorious of these sects was the Qdiyn, which appeared in 1296 [A.D. 1879]. Its founder, Ghulm Ahmad, said it was not fard (Islams commandment) to make Jihd (Holy War) by means of weaponry and that Jihd which was fard was advice. So did the British spy Hempher say to Muhammad of Najd.
<A name=r16,64984>Ghulm Ahmad was a heretic belonging to the Isml group. He died in 1326 [C.E. 1908]. The British hired him for a considerable sum of money. Formerly he claimed to be a Mujaddd; then he promoted his claim to being the promised Mahd; his next step was to assert that he was Jesus the Messiah. Finally, he announced that he was a Prophet and had been revealed a new religion. He called the people he had managed to deceive his ummat, asserted that many yats had foretold of him and that he displayed more miracles than had any other Prophet. He alleged that those who would not believe him were unbelievers. His sect spread among the ignorant people in Punjab and Bombay. The Qdiyn sect is still spreading under the name Ahmadiyya movement in Europe and America.
<A name=r16,65104>The Sunn Muslims said that it was fard to perform Jihd through arms and that it was heresy to serve the British. Muslims who preached or advised this were punished vehemently and mostly killed. The Sunnite books were gathered and destroyed.
<A name=r16,65224>Islamic scholars who could not be hired or would not serve the British purposes would be isolated from the Muslim community. They would not be executed lest they should become famous, but they would be given life imprisonment in the notorious dungeons on the Andaman Islands. All the Islamic scholars arrested throughout India on the pretext that they had been collaborating with the rebels during the revolution were sent to the same dungeons. [Likewise, when they invaded Istanbul after World War I, they banished the Ottoman Pshas and scholars to Malta Island.]
<A name=r16,65344>In order that the Muslims should not notice their grudge against Islam, they received fatws defining India as a Dr-ul-islm and not as a Dr-ul-harb, and spread these fatws everywhere.
<A name=r16,65464>The hypocrites whom they had trained and named scholars propagated the impression that the Ottoman Sultans were not Khalfas, that caliphate belonged to the Qoureishis by right, that the Ottoman Sultans had taken possession of caliphate by force and therefore should not be obeyed.