The following letter was sent by Islamic Party leader 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 recognised 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 recognised the wisdom and superiority of Islamic Jurisprudence, he authorised 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 et l'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 tranquillity 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 Omayad 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 Illiad, 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 Saana 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 baloon 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 a reconversion 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 were seriously wanting 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 Jethro, 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 Triunity and the Three - ology of the Athanasian 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 Appolo or Dionysus among the Greeks; Herculese 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 Attis & 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 recognise 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, ii.7).

"And I will shake all nations, and the Himada / Ahmed/ Paraclete of all the nations will come; and I will fill this house with 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" is used 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 civilising 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 Worsthorne 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 may be 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