An in-depth look at Mufid Abdulqader, from D Magazine, with thanks to RSH:
ROOM 305 of the Oak Cliff Municipal Building, an outpost of Dallas City Hall, houses some of the city’s most highly skilled worker bees. They labor largely unknown within a honeycomb of cubicles. They are the civil engineers of the Public Works and Transportation Department, bound together almost tribally by technical language and complicated undertakings most outsiders wouldn’t understand.Mufid Abdulqader was one of the department’s rising stars. He had earned the respect of his colleagues and supervisors in his eight years there, and his employment evaluations were exemplary. As a project manager who mostly designed street and sidewalk projects, Mufid was ambitious, always pushing for the next step up the pay-grade ladder. His leadership on the $4.8 million Bishop Arts District redevelopment in 2001 won him commendations. Even Mayor Laura Miller, who consulted with Mufid on the project, praised his talents.
His fellow engineers also appreciated how Mufid could liven up a roomful of technocrats with backslapping, disarming goofiness. Thickening a bit at the age of 45, Mufid wore his graying black beard heavy on his cheeks, as is customary for many pious Middle Eastern men. The full head of bristly black hair and limber eyebrows, which he flexed sharply upward for comic effect, made him come off as a big, smiling teddy bear of a man. Some colleagues noted a nasty temper that flared up from time to time, but who didn’t get frustrated when dealing with contractors?
Mufid loved the spotlight, relishing any excuse to speak in front of a crowd. A Palestinian who grew up in Kuwait and a proud father of three U.S.-born daughters, he never turned down an invitation to lecture high school students about the struggles he endured as an immigrant searching for a better life in America. Yet he remained proud of his background. Mufid and a couple of other Muslim engineers prayed five times a day, even if that meant breaking up a business meeting. He could often be spotted toting his prayer mat down the hall to an office conference room.
During lunches at Las Ranitas in Oak Cliff, where television sets were tuned to CNN Headline News, Mufid would offer running commentaries on the events in the Middle East. Like many Palestinian Arabs, he saw the Israelis as brutal occupiers of a stolen Palestinian homeland, but his colleagues never sensed that he held extremist views.
What his co-workers didn’t know was that Mufid led a secret life, one that seemed almost impossible to reconcile with the affable person they had all liked. But Mufid’s two worlds collided on the morning of July 27, 2004, when he failed to show up for work. Instead, representatives of the Dallas FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force came to the office to explain why he had been thrown in jail.
Mufid had been named with six other men in a 42-count indictment for helping to fund Hamas, a terrorist organization that has waged a grisly suicide-bombing campaign against Israeli civilians. The FBI set its sights on Mufid after discovering that he was associated with leaders of the Richardson-based Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development. The group’s supporters have always claimed that the Holy Land Foundation, or HLF, was a legitimate charity that helped orphans and widows. But President George W. Bush closed down the organization in 2001, calling it the largest clandestine fundraising arm for Hamas in the United States, a depiction upheld by successive federal court rulings.
His connection to HLF, however, was just the beginning of Mufid’s secrets. For more than a decade, he’d been touring the country with the popular Arabic singing troupe Al-Sakhra. If he had muffled his political views about the Middle East while at City Hall, the Arabic lyrics he sang on weekend gigs all across the country left no doubt about his true feelings. With all the angst of a rock star, he urged on the violent holy war and glorified the martyrdom of suicide bombers. Video of Mufid’s performances was first aired by CBS Channel 11 in November, when the station broke the story. Mufid’s band often appeared at fundraisers for Hamas. In one song, he sang, “We won’t fear a Jew. Oh, Hamas, respond to them with force. ... Death is right for the Jews. It is right!”
But Mufid had yet another secret. His half brother is the notorious Khalid Mishaal, the current leader of Hamas. The federal government believes that Khalid has directly supervised assassinations and bombings to disrupt U.S.-sponsored peace negotiations in the Middle East. His operations have claimed the lives of hundreds of Israelis and 10 Americans, and he is reputed to occupy the top slot on Israel’s assassination hit list of Hamas leaders.
Read it all.
Is this the snow flake on the tip of ice-berg
A step in the centuries-old' tradition of overrunning other cultures by Muslims is Work Your Way Up the Governmental Ladder. This affable gentleman was well respected and asked to give advice. He was on his way up.
Take a look at some of the others steps. Although some of the links don't work, we can find our own examples to demonstrate how Islamization has occurred in Europe and the U.K. We can see chart its progress here in the United States, Canada, and Australia.
This isn't rocket science, folks. The bigger problem is deciding what to do about it.
What's that? A terrorist supporter using the cover of a band to travel around the country, spreading hate and raising funds?
Anyone remember an incident recently in which we've been assured the suspicious-acting people were "just musicians"?
OT
I just want to make a point. Lately several readers have objected to being referred to as "infidels". This is my take on it, anyhow.
Being an "infidel" does NOT mean that you do not believe in the One True God (who is NOT "allah"). It means that you are an "unbeliever" in the demonic moon-"god" "allah" of the satanic blood cult of islam. Therefore, you can wear your "Infidel" label with pride.
I do!
CGW
Given the canonical texts of Islam, given the reasonable belief that a Believer, a Muslim, must subscribe to those beliefs even if he (or she) does not necessarily run off to Waziristan, or obtain the diagrams for the municipal water-supply system, and given further the doctines of taqiyya and kitman, which are based on the Qur'an (16.106 and 3.148), and given the display, world-wide, of Muslim refusal to admit to Infidels what Islam teaches -- and that includes those who claim to be "moderates" but simply cannot bring themselves, or do not wish to bring themselvs -- to face up either to the doctrines, or to the truth about Muhammad, or to the history of Muslim aggression which did not begin either with "colonialism" (the Arab Muslim states, of any non-European area, suffered least, and for the shortest period, from "colonialism") or the Crusades (which ignores centuries of conquest of Christian, Jewish, and Zoroastrian lands, of the destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the preventing of Christian visits to the Holy Land, as well as centuries of raids up and down the European coast, which continued until the 19th century, when the American response to the Barbary Pirates, and then the French seizing of Algeria to put a final end to their depredations, ended the slaving-kidnappiing-looting raids into Europe (and in the Persian Gulf, the British navy stopped, for a while, the Arab slavers who brought black African slaves to Muslim slave markets; there never was, and never could be, a Muslim Wilberforce).
Since we Infidels have no way to detect the "moderate" from the "immoderate" Muslim, and indeed that first category -- the "moderate" -- seems quite fluid in meaning and application -- sometimes it seems to apply to anyone who isn't out rooting publicly for, or joining the forces of, Bin Laden.
No one who believes that Islam should, by whatever insruments that prove most effective, spread until it covers the globe, and that after it has covered the globe, all remaining non-Muslims will be tolerated, at best, as they always have been tolerated in Muslim societies -- as dhimmis, a status that requires permanent humiliation, degradation, and physical inesucrity -- can be considered "moderate." And that includes someone who abjures terrorism, but wants to accomplish the same end by other means.
Nor can the word "moderate" be applied to anyone who, objectively, furthers the Jihad. To lie or dissimulate about the teachings of Islam, and thereby to render the Infidels unwary, is not "moderate."
The presumption must be, given the texts of Islam, that a Believer really believes those texts, as he is supposed to. And therefore, in the eyes of wary Infidels, he should be regarded as \ wanting to spread Islam in the manner that it has been spread, or at least of wanting that spread to be followed by the results -- for non-Muslims -- that can so easily be seen, over 1350 years, and from Spain to East Asia. Anyone who supports such an effort, even by smiling Outreach Programs (or perhaps especially by such efforts, designed to have the Infidels focus on the trivial -- Ramadan, say, or the five canonical prayers and the qibla, as opposed to the essential, the manichean division of the world between Believer and Infidel) has to be regarded not as a "moderate" but as someone who requires constant vigilance.
What professions should be open to Muslims? Would you mind if your pilot were a Muslim? A high officer in the armed services? In the FBI? Your local police-chief, or fire-chief? Engineeers responsible for the local water-supply? Heads of school systems? School principals? Bus drivers? Teachers? Food preparation? Any worries? None? If a Muslim taxi-driver swerves into a crowd, deliberately attempting to kill Infidels, what will that make you think about all those Muslim cab-drivers? Nothing -- because it was just the work of a lone individual, who must have belonged to an "extremist" group? Or will you start to think quite differently?
From the article:
" Like many Palestinian Arabs, he saw the Israelis as brutal occupiers of a stolen Palestinian homeland, but his colleagues never sensed that he held extremist views."
Thanks to the media and to folks and organizations such as Peter Jennings, the New York Times, Chicago Tribune, and others it's now almost normal believe that Israel is home to brutal occupiers who stole Palestinian land.
I hope I'm not hindering discussions, but I'm trying to understand.
Hugh talks about..."the Arab slavers who brought black African slaves to Muslim slave markets..." It strikes me that something like this would be of great importance to black Muslims and people like Louis Farrakhan among others. And, if I understand correctly, Muslims are slaughtering blacks even today in various countries in Africa. It appears to me that black Americans more quickly embrace Islam than most other Americans and I'm wondering why? Especially, since history and current events seem to show that blacks suffer greatly within the Muslim world.
Also, I'm unclear about the doctrines of Islam. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you have the Quran, hadith, suri, sharia law, taqiyya and kitman.
Am I missing anything?
Would someone please provide me a list of recommend books on these doctrines (teachings)? As much as anything is clear in Islam, I'd like to get a clear, sound understanding of it and how these various doctrines are related. Which Quran provides the best translation? I've been told there are good and bad translations.
Thank you.
"His fellow engineers also appreciated how Mufid could liven up a roomful of technocrats with backslapping, disarming goofiness."
Oh to be a fly on the wall when Mufid was chillin' with his homies.
Kudos to the not so apt FBI for reeling this one in. Now maybe with the correct "pressure" he can open up to the Feds.
In regard to Greg's questions about Blacks and Islam (and I'm certainly no expert) It seems that a lot of not only marginalized Black Americans (in prison) and a percentage of other converts are drawn to it by it's "outside society" appeal. If I was an authority hating, American society resenting, thieving/murdering fringe type, Islam would be most appealing. What other religious community zealously welcomes the criminal, antisocial mentality?( Christians do but not without repentance) What other religion encourages and nourishes resentment for the mainstream authority and even incites and condones violence towards it? Hallalujia and I get sent to training camps where the faces on the targets are the "man" whose been keeping me down? Praise Allah!
Hugh,
Being extremely politically unpolite and cherishing it enormously, let me take it to task the bringing of all your premises to its final logical conclusion: What the hell are we all waiting to promote a legal motion that bans the death cult mohammadism is? My prediction is that sooner rather than later all civilized societies will have to do it if they wish to survive avoiding dhimmitude, the other logical conclusion one reaches after reading the tenets and historical precedents of that macabre so-called religion Islam is.
Blacks were/are influenced towards islam as a means of rejecting western society. Because of communist manipulation before and during the cold-war. Which changed Marxist class war into race/gender/minority politics/agitation, because it became clear the "workers" of the West were not going to rise up because they had it so good.
The revised Marxist strategy focused on Western "exploitation" on the people of the "third world"-- white European descent was demonized and all others were given holier-than-thou victim status who were "owed". Its a different angle at the basic concept of "to each according to his needs, from each according to his abilities"-- redistribution of wealth. Without regard for actually earning it.
Its all about power-- the rest is just window dressing.Only fools surrender it.
Greg there are three on-line, side-by-side translations of the Koran at:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/
There is a more user friendly searchable version of the M.H. Shakir translation at:
http://www.hti.umich.edu/k/koran/
There are four collections of ahadith at:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/reference/searchhadith.html
Unfortunately Ibn Ishaq's sira is not on-line but it can be purchased at Amazon. Tabari's "History of Al Tabari" is also not on-line but is very, very expensive at Amazon, so you would most likely have to visit a university library to peruse these collections.
I thought Norman Geisler's "Answering Islam" was a useful introduction to the theology of orthodox Islam because it surveys the writings of contemporary and historic Islamic scholars.
Of course Robert Spencer's books were extremely informative and pursuasively connected traditional Islamic exegesis with contemporary and historical radical jihadist activities, so I highly recommend them. Ergun Canur is another authoratative writer on the subject, so check his books out as well.
Thank you Kemaste, kentim and Dilophos.
On any given day, a good muslim could get a call saying "you will do xxxx in the name of Allah or we will kill your family"! And what would you do then?
The Umma has been infiltrated by "the ruthless gang". More correctly, it is Islam that has seeded these fanatics acting individualy and collectively in a psycopathic world wide power grab!
I would never trust a muslim anywhere at anytime for any reason.
Kentim~ Oh, Very good!
I often wonder how many people are even aware that the communists started a lot of the grief with black Americans back in the 30s and 40s (read 'Native Son.'). Or that many of the radical groups now know as 'Patriot' groups- the kind keithjoy likes to claim are representative of anyone further to his right than Chomsky- were a response to that communist subversion? And an unfortunate one at that, in the majority of cases.
And the really unfortunate part, is that some of these so-called 'patriot' groups (or is it just the neo-nazi, National Alliance types?) are now thinking it might be great to associate themselves with muslims, as a means of obtaining their goals....
OT - Regarding Hugh's Koran references to the doctrine of "taqiyya & kitman" left above in his post(16.106 & 3.148), I used Dilophos' USC link to the online Koran (three translations for each verse) and came up with the following:
016.106
YUSUFALI: Any one who, after accepting faith in Allah, utters Unbelief,- except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in Faith - but such as open their breast to Unbelief, on them is Wrath from Allah, and theirs will be a dreadful Penalty.
PICKTHAL: Whoso disbelieveth in Allah after his belief - save him who is forced thereto and whose heart is still content with the Faith - but whoso findeth ease in disbelief: On them is wrath from Allah. Theirs will be an awful doom.
SHAKIR: He who disbelieves in Allah after his having believed, not he who is compelled while his heart is at rest on account of faith, but he who opens (his) breast to disbelief-- on these is the wrath of Allah, and they shall have a grievous chastisement.
&
003.148
YUSUFALI: And Allah gave them a reward in this world, and the excellent reward of the Hereafter. For Allah Loveth those who do good.
PICKTHAL: So Allah gave them the reward of the world and the good reward of the Hereafter. Allah loveth those whose deeds are good.
SHAKIR: So Allah gave them the reward of this world and better reward of the hereafter and Allah loves those who do good (to others).
Have I researched incorrectly? I am really interested to find out the exact verses in the Koran that support this doctrine of taqiyya/kitman, but what I found above doesn't seem to touch on the subject at all.
Please help.
Thanks!
Michael,
It's not 3:148. It's 3:28, which forbids Muslims to take non-believers as friends, except "by way of precaution, that you may guard yourselves against them."
"Let not the believers take disbelievers for their friends in preference to believers. Whoso doeth that hath no connection with Allah unless (it be) that ye but guard yourselves against them, taking (as it were) security. Allah biddeth you beware (only) of Himself. Unto Allah is the journeying."
Cordially,
Robert Spencer
Here's one reason why I think multiculturalism
proponents are naive and idealists that will get all of us killed.
I have no doubt that there are decent Muslims that would make find employees within the Government,but after hearing a friends comment on terrorism and their loyalty to their roots I really wonder how safe we are among 1st generation citizens.
Here's what was said to me:
While discussing the Airport security measures and how profiling was seen as Racism,I drew a paralell to a kidnapping case at which the families relatives back home may have been the true victims of the crime for extorting money
from the family here in North America after their child was abducted and no demands were made by the hostage takers. When I pointed out that terrorists could kidnap the relatives of a American Muslim and threaten to kill them if the
American Muslim doesn't help in smuggling a bomb part or other materials on a plane or into a
Governemnt building,I casually mentioned that if it happened to them it would be hard to see their relatives sufer while knowing they refused to murder people here for the release of the family
back in the old country.
The person was adamant in the response that they would blow up a plane or whatever the terrorists wanted since his family came first,this display of loyalty to the old country really opened my eyes since all along I thought foreigners were thankful of their new life and all they received in a democracy that gave them Liberty and freedom.
I now believe that the Profiling is valuable
and everyone should be checked since some people
may be threaten to help the terrorists or see a family member be killed or harmed.
The recent suicide bombing in Iraq and the video tape of the murdering shows how reallt sick these people are and how the Quran must have something in it that creates mass murderers that have little
fear of judgement by God since their God approves the killing of Gods children for Allah.
Michael,
I found an interesting discussion of taqiyya/kitman at:
http://www.ci-ce-ct.com/Feature%20articles/02-12-2002.asp
Exactly.
1. Ban Islam is one way, but politically impossible at this time.
2. Expulsion of muslims from the West, followed by no muslim immigration whatsoever. Hugh has advocated this, I believe. Again unlikely to happen and for the same reasons.
3. Exchange of populations, as I have advocated. Politically more possible then expulsion, but again impossible in the current phase of the war.
4. This leaves us with no choice except to pursue what we are doing now. Continue with the war in the ME and any other muslim nation that we can extend it to, while at the same time arresting and deporting jihadis from the West.
This may not seem much, but given the nature of islam, it will have to react with increasing violence, to the war we are waging in dar ul islam and stopping the jihadis in the West. They have no alternative but to respond violently, as their own beliefs give them no other choice. This reaction then gives us the reasons to expand our activities even further in the ME and at home. You know the old 'cycle of violence' theory will actually and hopefully come true. The war will continue to be ratcheted up, till the time comes when options 1,2 and 3 become politically possible.
This is the most optimistic scenario that I can envision, at this moment in time.
What do you think?
Mr. Spencer,
Referencing Michael's post about three versions of the same verse. My concern is that I may end up reading/purchasing a CAIR translation and I wouldn't even know it. For instance, I would not know if Yusufali, Pickthal and Shakir are near perfect translations or completely misleading. May I ask, among translations, which names do you trust?
Thank you.
In response to Q&A on why more blacks convert to to muslim is because of the muslims deep hatred of the western white man,you will find the likes of Louis Farrakhan, Tremmel and all the others are indeed divided by race and greed, they cease to bring an end to a cause and reach out at any vantage point to wreak havoc against whitey.
Now this does not mean that people of color are prejudiced but that a percentage have chosen to sell their soul to the devil for a chance to bring some sort of sick closure to their demented mind.And before you think this is racist; a percentage of white people continue to feed the fire.
This would be a tactic that laurence aster? writes about in regerds to "The far enemy near",so the 2-4% of Muslims in the Good Ol' U.S. Of A just do not stand a chance and being the decent Human being that I am please let me offer all mussies my most humble apologies for the things that will be coming your way (BOOS TEEZEE)
IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE.
AM YISRAEL CHAI
December 26, 2004
Seams that a Russian truck crashes with dolphins and a baby walrus? The truckers both killed and the baby had a broken flipper?? What a Christmas day??
Having salmon quiche with a hint of spinach, and salad with rugala and cherry tomatoes with parmesagno rigino and proscuitto!!
Brother thing?? Seams that ubl[YELLOW COWARD WHO RUNS AWAY]is in the mix too!! he is sending money from France so the French say??
UN=League of nations say they have plans for a really big nuke??
movie with Nik Cage was great got away this afternoon!!
the ending sucked by them giving it to the world don't think our founding faters ment for that??
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041225/ap_on_re_us/muslim_cemeteries
Tenn. Muslims Face Resistance to Plans
Sat Dec 25, 1:46 PM ET
By WOODY BAIRD, Associated Press Writer
SOMERVILLE, Tenn. - Muslims planned to turn an old sod farm near Memphis into a cemetery, but angry neighbors protested, complaining the burial ground could become a staging ground for terrorists or spread disease from unembalmed bodies.
It was not the first time a group faced opposition when trying to build a cemetery or a mosque, but the dispute stood out for the clarity of its anti-Muslim rhetoric.
"We know for a fact that Muslim mosques have been used as terrorist hideouts and centers for terrorist activities," farmer John Wilson told members of a planning commission last month.
Similar disputes have arisen elsewhere when Muslim groups sought to develop mosques or cemeteries, which are often the first Islamic institutions in some communities.
Opponents of a proposal to open a mosque in Voorhees, N.J., distributed an anonymous flier warning that Islamic worshippers might include "extremists and radicals." Arguments over a proposed Muslim cemetery near Atlanta persisted for more then a year before officials approved preliminary plans.
Critics of the projects generally complain about potential damage to the environment, reduced property values and traffic congestion, but many also associate Islam with terrorism.
Rabiah Ahmed of the Council on American-Islamic Relations said she noticed more protests of Muslim building proposals after the 2001 terrorist attacks, so she was not surprised by the cemetery critics near Memphis.
"It's not shocking, but it is discouraging," Ahmed said from the council's headquarters in Washington.
Opponents told the Fayette County planning commission in November that power lines would be prime targets for terrorists in the region about 20 miles east of Memphis.
"Ladies and gentlemen, you may think this is farfetched, but that is what the Jewish people thought when the Nazis started taking a small foothold, a little at a time, in their community," Wilson said.
In a telephone interview later, Wilson said he and his neighbors are primarily worried about their property values, but, he added, news reports cannot be ignored.
"I don't think anyone who has read the newspaper or seen what investigations have gone on about other mosques would not have those kinds of concerns," he said.
Belinda Ghosheh, owner of the five-acre plot being considered for the cemetery, said a meeting of planning officials drew such a hostile crowd she feared for her safety. One woman yelled, "We don't need bin Laden's cousins in our neighborhood."
Ghosheh and her husband, a native of the Middle East who has been a U.S. citizen for more than 20 years, live in neighboring Shelby County.
"These people would possibly have been our neighbors if we had decided to build on that property," she said. "If this doesn't go through, we're still getting rid of it. I would never live out there now."
Annette Cutliff, a planning commission member who voted for the cemetery, was also at the meeting. "When I walked to my car, I looked over my shoulder," Cutliff said. "I was concerned because emotions were running high."
Critics also complained that the cemetery could be a health hazard because Muslims traditionally do not embalm their dead.
But Muhammad Zaman, a physician and associate professor of medicine at the University of Tennessee, said the practice is safe. "The decomposition of the human body does not add anything different than what it is," Zaman said.
One neighbor, Herbert Howell, said a cemetery should not be allowed regardless of who would be buried there.
"We are not at war with all the Islamics," Howell said. "I have no problem with who they are or what they are. If it was a filling station, I wouldn't want that either."
The Muslim Society of Memphis received a "special use" zoning exemption from the planning commission, which is appointed. But a committee of the elected county commission disapproved.
"They were very concerned about votes," Cutliff said.
The application was withdrawn before a vote by the full commission.
Memphis businessman Mohammad Halimah said the group is considering several options, including refiling the request.
Halimah, a U.S. citizen with four children born in the United States, said more than 15,000 Muslims live in the Memphis area, and their small private cemetery is running out of burial space.
In the meantime, he and several colleagues are trying to meet with residents individually to discuss their concerns. No zoning change is needed for a cemetery on church grounds, so building a mosque on the site is also a possibility.
Complaints about the proposal, he said, are often based on ignorance. Some residents do not understand that Islam teaches peace.
"Our religion stresses acceptance by our neighbors," Halimah said. "Even if the law is on our side, religiously we have to be careful."
I WOULD SAY THE PEOPLE DO GET IT!!!
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
GOD BLESS THE USA AND HER FIGHTING FORCES AND ALL WHO FIGHT WITH HER GIVE THEM STRENGTH,WISDOM,SIGHT AND COURAGE TO DEFEAT ALL ISLAMIC TERRORIST AND ALL WHO SUPPORT THEM AMEN
PS
THANKS FOR THE LINK!
Gary,
N. J. Dawood's is the most readable in English. However, most versions do not mark the verse numbers precisely. Some non-Muslims don't like it because he uses "God" for Allah, although since Arabic speaking Christians use "Allah" for the God of the Bible, and have for over a milennium, this is a problem for poseurs and pseudo-scholars but is not really a serious objection to anyone who knows both languages.
Many Muslims don't like this translation because Dawood was not a Muslim, and doesn't sugarcoat any of the passages. I used it in "Islam Unveiled," which was directed to non-Muslims who knew little or nothing of Islam, but I did not use it in "Onward Muslim Soldiers," because in that book I attempted to construct an argument that Muslims themselves would not be able to refute (and none have). So in "Onward" I used Ali and Pickthall: both were Muslims, and were writing their translations for Muslims.
As for "Yusufali, Pickthall, and Shakir": The translations by Abdullah Yusuf Ali and Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall both share the same defect: they write in a stilted, practically unreadable pseudo-King James Bible English. That makes their translations virtually useless for anyone who wants to know what the book really says. But they are valuable because it is hard for Muslim apologists to say that they are inaccurate, since both were Muslims and both translations are popular among English-speaking Muslims. Of the two, Ali's contains more liberties with the text -- such as adding "(lightly)" to Sura 4:34 after the directive to husbands to beat their disobedient wives. The Arabic doesn't say to beat them lightly, it just says to beat them. Pickthall's is generally accurate.
Shakir was also a Muslim, but his translation is less accurate and less popular among Muslims.
There are other good translations. For years I have liked Arberry's for its audacious literalism and often poetic English. Compare, for example, 81:15-18 in Pickthall and Arberry:
Pickthall: "Oh, but I call to witness the planets, the stars which rise and set, and the close of night, And the breath of morning..."
Arberry: "No! I swear by the slinkers, the runners, the sinkers, by the night swarming, by the dawn sighing..."
Shades of the Symbolists, or Gertrude Stein writing of a carafe that is a blind glass. Arberry gives a hint of how it sounds in Arabic, in which it is full of beguiling rhymes and rhythms. Muslims have constructed an entire apologetic edifice around this poetic character of the Qur'an that is rather forced and often silly (it is sublime poetry, therefore it is God-inspired, as if men can't write sublime poetry -- and anyway it is also full of grammatical and other errors), but there is no denying that this element of the book exists.
Anyway I see that on this Sunday night I have wandered off the topic. I hope you find the information about translations helpful.
Best regards
Robert Spencer
Posted by: Santiago Matamoros at December 26, 2004 06:05 PM
You get a Gold Star!!
http://www.ci-ce-ct.com/Feature%20articles/02-12-2002.asp
Taqiyya and kitman: The role of Deception in Islamic terrorism
Tradecraft. Persona. Deception. Disinformation. Cover: Western operational terms and techniques. But, Islamic terrorists have their own terms: taqiyya (pronounced tark-e-ya) : precautionary dissimulation or deception and keeping one’s convictions secret and a synonymous term, kitman: mental reservation and dissimulation or concealment of malevolent intentions...
Taqiyya and kitman or ‘holy hypocrisy’ has been diffused throughout Arabic culture for over fourteen hundred years since it was developed by Shiites as a means of defence and concealment of beliefs against Sunni unbelievers. As the Prophet said: 'he who keeps secrets shall soon attain his objectives.’
The skilful use of taqiyya and kitman was often a matter of life and death against enemies; it is also a matter of life and death to many contemporary Islamic terrorists. As so often in the history of Islam, a theological doctrine became operational.
During the Spanish inquisition, Sunni Moriscos attended mass and returned home to wash their hands of the ‘holy water’. In operational terms, taqiyya and kitman allowed the ‘mujahadeen ’ to assume whatever identity was necessary to fulfill their mission; they had doctrinal and theological and later jurisprudential sanction to pretend to be Jews or Christians to gain access to Christian and Jewish targets: ‘the mujahadeen can take the shape of the enemy’.
Taqiyya is common to both Shiite and Sunni Muslim discourse and has significant implications for understanding Islamic fundamentalism and terrorist operations. The theory and practice of counter terrorism would be counter productive, indeed pointless, and even harmful, without reference to taqiyya and kitman and the crucial role of deception ranging from Islamic jurisprudence to Al Qaeda training manuals, which carry detailed instructions on the use of deception by terrorists in Western target countries.
According to Christian ethics lying is a sin; In Islamic jurisprudence and theology, the use of taqiyya against the unbelievers is regarded as a virtue and a religious duty
"Verily the most honourable of you in the sight of God is the most pious among you; verily, God is knowing, aware!" 49:13
Shi'a interpret the phrase above as "he among you "
Like many Islamic concepts taqiyya and kitman were formed within the context of the Arab-Islamic matrix of tribalism, expansionary warfare and conflict. Taqiyya has been used by Muslims since the 7th century to confuse and split 'the enemy’. A favored tactic was ‘deceptive triangulation’; to persuade the enemy that jihad was not aimed at them but at another enemy. Another tactic was to deny that there was jihad at all. The fate for such faulty assessments by the target was death.
Sydney NSW Australia: 2 November 2002Sheik
Sheik Taj el-Din al Hilaly, the controversial Grand Mufti of Australia, is enjoying lunch with his trusted assistant Keysar Trad. The journalist writing of the meeting with the Sheik noted:
'Several times, when direct responses to questions about passages in the Koran begged a simple yes or no, both men preferred to avoid the issues by talking about the difficulties of translating passages from Arabic to English.’
Referring to the Sheikhs blithe dismissal of his virulent anti-Semitic remarks in 1998, the journalist reflected:
'I can only muse at the facility of my guest, who has also praised suicide bombers in more recent times, to dismiss his notorious and abominable remarks with such ease and without actual apology. It seems clear that he is considering the way his remarks will be construed by the Sunday Telegraph’s huge and influential audience when they are translated into Arabic for Muslims to debate. He’s walking a tightrope.'
The skilled journalist should not be puzzled as the Sheik's target audiences were Australians and not Arab readers. Taqiyya, or dissimulation, is a key feature in Islamic public discourse and confuses Western audiences. It is meant to, according to the Koran:
'Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers; if any do that; they shall have no relation left with Allah except by way of precaution….that ye may guard yourselves’. 3:28
Al Taqiyya is with tongue only; not the heart. A believer can make any statement as long as the ‘heart is comfortable'. The 9/11 terrorists lived and visited in the United States for two years before the 9/11 attacks. How did they acculturate? By the use of taqiyya. Meaning: I hate you but I smile at you-in public.
Taqiyya and ‘Outwitting’ in contemporary political discourse and debates
Outwitting: Islamic spokesmen commonly use taqiyya as a form of ‘outwitting’. The matter under discussion is not to be debated or discussed; rather the opponent is to ‘outwitted’ through taqiyya, by diversion of the subject and obfuscation aided at times with a mystical reference to God or Allah.
The claim that difficulties in translating from Arabic to English make communication with non-Arab speakers difficult or impossible, is another form of outwitting. The tactical use of a translator offers considerable advantage
Role playing as victim: Claiming to be 'the victim’ of religious discrimination and intolerance during debate or discussion is another form of distraction and ‘outwitting’.
Manipulating ambiguity: Sheik Hilaly of Sydney, Australia is on public record as (a) ’condemning’ the 9/11 attacks in ambiguous terms and (b) praising suicide and martyr operations However, Islamic spokesmen will rarely condemn a specific act of terrorism and direct questions will be skillfully evaded.
Diversion: For example, questions relating to the 9/11 terrorists attacks will be diverted by a causally irrelevant counter reference to the plight of the Palestinians, the nefarious role of Israel and US foreign policy and support for Israel as ‘causes’ of terrorism.
Anti-Semitism, a core belief of Islamic fundamentalism is also skillfully diverted by misleading and exaggerated historical references to the alleged status enjoyed by Jews and non-believers under Islamic rule, thereby deflecting critical examination of the virulent contemporary Islamic anti-Semitism.
Demanding ’evidence’: Islamic spokesmen practice a form of taqiyya defined in psychology as ‘cognitive denial’ by repetitive and extreme requests for ‘evidence’ and ‘proof’ of alleged terrorist acts, which they know cannot be disclosed.
Tactical denial: Rather than admitting that a proposition concerning a state of affairs can be partly true, an Islamic spokesman will deny a claim or proposition in absolute terms. For example, “It is impossible to be a Muslim and a terrorist’ , which is false and ‘Islam forbids suicide’, which is true, but irrelevant as suicide or martyrdom attacks are not forbidden in the Koran.
Exploiting cognitive dissonance: Islamic spokesman tend to be baffle television interviewers and puzzle viewers as they resort to double talk ‘clichés and platitudes’ concerning Islam. A state of cognitive dissonance-holding two contradictory beliefs and attempting to resolve them- is induced in viewers as they attempt to process the claim that Islam is a peaceful religion with the dissonant facts of Islamic terrorist acts and operations.
The Islamic ’defence’ script: Islamic spokesmen repeat the same predictable platitudes concerning Islam in London as do Islamic spokesmen in Seattle and often appear to follow a prepared script from “Islam is tolerant and peace loving’ to the claim by Islamic spokeswomen invariably claiming that wearing the veil offers them more freedom (women in Muslim countries are therefore ‘freer’ than women in western countries), thereby precluding further examination into the real status of women under Islamic rule
Islamic platitudes are also echoed uncritically by Western politicians, for example ”A small group of fundamentalists have hijacked a great religion’. The timely, skilful, misleading and diversionary theme of the ‘hijacking’ of Islam was introduced into public, political and media discourse by an Islamic ‘spokesmen’ in the United States shortly after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
The “Islam has been hijacked’ diversionary theme is now a conventional media and political reference deflecting attention from empirical and historical examination of the doctrinal, political and religious continuity of Islamic terrorism. A related theme that a small minority of Muslims are engaged in terrorism is utterly irrelevant as Islamic terrorism is always perpetrated by ‘small minorities’ or more accurately’ small groups’.
Taqiyya as impressions and perceptions management
The tactical use of children: Australia television viewers noted that interviews with terrorist suspects raided by security authorities invariably featured veiled women holding small children or a baby as they protested their husband’s innocence and attested to his innate goodness. Trembling fingers pointed to ‘damage’ to the family residence. In some interviews the suspect / father holds the child, whilst denying involvement or knowledge of terrorism in any sense of the word: an example of taqiyya in the age of impressions and perception management.
Taqiyya and the Deceptive use of Jihad: The contemporary political meaning of jihad is clear: it is Jihad of the sword. Egyptian-based Islamic fundamentalists, from whom Bin Laden recruited his key operatives, believe jihad is the fourth pillar of Islam and is a binding belief and integral to the faith. Claiming that Jihad is a subjective and psychological state of personal struggle is taqiyya. In contemporary terms, Jihad means - holy war - against unbelievers and it in this context that Al Qaeda training manuals refer to Jihad as ‘Holy War’.
The study of taqiyya and kitman is crucial to an understanding of Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism ranging from the issuing of false terrorist threats, operational and strategic disinformation issued by Al Qaeda in the form of ‘intelligence chatter’ to the use of taqiyya and kitman by terrorists during interrogation and the use of systematically misleading expressions concerning Islam and terrorism by Muslim ‘spokesmen’
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strength,Sight,Wisdom, and Courage to Defeat ALL Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Open the Worlds Eyes to their Threat and give the World the Courage to Stand and and Fight them Amen
I apologize for listing the wrong Qur'anic verses for taqiyya and kitman in a posting above; I relied on memory, and clearly, I was wrong -- fortunately a certain Robert Spencer was on hand, even today, to correct the error. Next time I mention them, I promise to look them up first. Typos of the mind. No sense in leading anyone else, as a result, on a wildgoose or wayzgoose chase.
Mr. Spencer,
Your information on translations is very helpful. Thank you.
Greg-
Regarding your inquiry as to African-Americans and Islam:
Most of what my fellow posters have said here is right on the mark, concerning 20th century rejections of "European" values, etc. However, it must not be ignored that that 1700s (the historical era where many Africans were brought against their will to the Americas) were an important time in central Africa, since at that time many central Africans were abandoning traditional animist beliefs in favor of Islamic ones, due to what we might call "forced evangelization." (Christian missionaries would arrive on the scene only a few dozen years later, and make the battle one of animist vs. Christian or Muslim vs. animist)
Many African-Americans give credence to Islam since it is the last religion that their most latter,immediate ancestors held. Recall Kunte Kinte, in Alex Haley's "Roots," who would not eat pork.
All in all, I say "Screw it." The Igbo (the tribe from which many African-Americans are descended) never fully adopted Islam and have little or no collective memory of distant ancestors being lured to distant, hostile shores.
But the musical rhythms and drumbeats which eventually gave way to jazz, blues and rock-and-roll, are strictly based in African animism. Americans of African ancestry don't owe anything at all to Islam.
Dear Mr. Spencer,
Thank you for helping me with my question regarding taqiyya/kitman. I've purchased "Onward Muslim Soldiers" and I look forward to reading it and passing it on to my family members in hopes of opening their eyes regarding the real Islam. Also, thank you for this important website!
Dear Hugh,
Thank you for your most enlightening posts! I often find myself using them as a springboard for further inquiry and they are quite fascinating ~ especially your knowledge of Islamic history and how its spread has affected other cultures throughout history.
Thank you also Santiago for the information link regarding taqiyya/kitman.
Have a Happy New Year all!
Do the mulsums really think we are so stupid??
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=15201
John Quincy Adams Knew Jihad
By Andrew G. Bostom
FrontPageMagazine.com | September 29, 2004
Professor John Lewis Gaddis’ recent provocative analysis of the origins of “unilateralism” in American foreign policy highlights the pivotal role of John Quincy Adams. With candor and humility, Gaddis further reveals that his own contemporary assessment, “…is not a new interpretation. If you go back and read the famous Samuel Flagg Bemis, the very distinguished Yale diplomatic historian from half a century ago, Bemis was certainly making this argument about the importance of John Quincy Adams.
But I think this has been lost somewhat in intervening years. So, to an extent, I am trying to rediscover John Quincy Adams, in that sense.” Bemis extolled Adams’ seminal contribution to the formulation of U.S. foreign policy:
“Adams grasped the essentials of American policy and the position of the United States in the world more surely than any other man of his time. He availed himself of matchless opportunities to advance the continental future of his country and the fundamental principles for which it stood in the world. Nothing is clearer than that the fourteen fundamentals (above reviewed) remained the main tenets of American foreign policy during the century following…we may surmise that he and the fathers of American Independence as well, had they lived to share the troublous times beyond the British Century in the science-shrunken smallness of the globe, and to experience the extraordinary vicissitudes, combinations, and wars of global politics would have joined the diplomatic revolution rejecting Isolation, and that he [Adams] would say, as he did say at the time of the Congress of Panama: ‘I do not recollect any change in policy; but there has been a great change in circumstances.’…Even if John Quincy Adams was not to have another great career, as a crusader against the expansion of slavery, this first and mighty achievement, of no less than continental proportions, in laying the foundations of American foreign policy, would have been great enough for one lifetime.” 1
Bemis’ landmark 1949 review also included a vague footnote referring to a work which I located formally in a comprehensive annotated bibliography of John Quincy Adams’ writings, compiled by Lynn H. Parsons 2:
“Unsigned essays dealing with the Russo-Turkish War, and on Greece, written while JQA was in retirement, before his election to Congress in 1830” [Chapters X-XIV (pp. 267-402) in The American Annual Register for 1827-28-29. New York, 1830.]
A brief contribution appeared in the Claremont Review in December, 2002, purporting to summarize the contents of John Quincy Adams’ 136 pages of analysis (although, curiously, never providing the citation, above, for the original essays). Upon reading Adams’ full set of essays, however, it is apparent that this rather uninformed, sanitized Claremont Review piece missed the mark widely.
John Quincy Adams possessed a remarkably clear, uncompromised understanding of the permanent Islamic institutions of jihad war and dhimmitude. Regarding jihad, Adams states in his essay series,
“…he [Muhammad] declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind…The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God.”
Confirming Adams’ assessment, the late Muslim scholar, Professor Majid Khadduri, wrote the following in his authoritative 1955 treatise on jihad, War and Peace in the Law of Islam :
“Thus the jihad may be regarded as Islam’s instrument for carrying out its ultimate objective by turning all people into believers, if not in the prophethood of Muhammad (as in the case of the dhimmis), at least in the belief of God. The Prophet Muhammad is reported to have declared ‘some of my people will continue to fight victoriously for the sake of the truth until the last one of them will combat the anti-Christ’. Until that moment is reached the jihad, in one form or another will remain as a permanent obligation upon the entire Muslim community. It follows that the existence of a dar al-harb is ultimately outlawed under the Islamic jural order; that the dar al-Islam permanently under jihad obligation until the dar al-harb is reduced to non-existence; and that any community accepting certain disabilities- must submit to Islamic rule and reside in the dar al-Islam or be bound as clients to the Muslim community. The universality of Islam, in its all embracing creed, is imposed on the believers as a continuous process of warfare, psychological and political if not strictly military.”3
And Adams captured the essential condition imposed upon the non-Muslim dhimmi “tributaries” subjugated by jihad, with this laconic statement,
“The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute.”
Indeed, the famous Shafi’i jurist of Baghdad, al-Mawardi (d. 1058), highlights the most salient aspect of the consensus view of classical Islamic jurisprudence regarding the vanquished non-Muslims “tribute”, i.e., the jizya: the critical connection between jihad and payment of the jizya. He notes that “The enemy makes a payment in return for peace and reconciliation.” Al-Mawardi then distinguishes two cases: (I) Payment is made immediately and is treated like booty, however “it does, however, not prevent a jihad being carried out against them in the future.”. (II). Payment is made yearly and will “constitute an ongoing tribute by which their security is established.” Reconciliation and security last as long as the payment is made. If the payment ceases, then the jihad resumes. A treaty of reconciliation may be renewable, but must not exceed 10 years.4 The nature of such “protection”, i.e., a blood ransom, is reinforced in this definition of jizya written by E.W. Lane, based on a careful analysis of the etymology of the term:
“The tax that is taken from the free non-Muslim subjects of a Muslim government whereby they ratify the compact that assures them protection, as though it were compensation for not being slain” 5
Adams’ staunch anti-imperialism, one of the “fourteen fundamentals” of U.S. foreign policy which Samuel Flagg Bemis states, “…we may connect with the name of John Quincy Adams more than with that of any other man” 6, is consistent with Old Man Eloquent’s support for the struggle of the Greeks 7 to liberate themselves from the yoke of centuries of dhimmitude, imposed by the imperialism of Ottoman jihad 8. At minimum, in light of the global war on jihad terrorism, John Quincy Adams’ candid, timeless ruminations should be required reading for all contemporary U.S. diplomats and politicians.
Key annotated excerpts from John Quincy Adams’ remarkable series of essays, are provided below.
Adams on Jesus Christ and Christianity, Relative to Muhammad and Islam
"And he [Jesus] declared, that the enjoyment of felicity in the world hereafter, would be reward of the practice of benevolence here. His whole law was resolvable into the precept of love; peace on earth – good will toward man, was the early object of his mission; and the authoritative demonstration of the immortality of man, was that, which constituted the more than earthly tribute of glory to God in the highest… The first conquest of the religion of Jesus, was over the unsocial passions of his disciples. It elevated the standard of the human character in the scale of existence…On the Christian system of morals, man is an immortal spirit, confined for a short space of time, in an earthly tabernacle. Kindness to his fellow mortals embraces the whole compass of his duties upon earth, and the whole promise of happiness to his spirit hereafter. THE ESSENCE OF THIS DOCTRINE IS, TO EXALT THE SPIRITUAL OVER THE BRUTAL PART OF HIS NATURE." (Adam's capital letters)….[pp. 267-268]
“In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar [i.e., Muhammad], the Egyptian, combining the powers of transcendent genius, with the preternatural energy of a fanatic, and the fraudulent spirit of an impostor, proclaimed himself as a messenger from Heaven, and spread desolation and delusion over an extensive portion of the earth. Adopting from the sublime conception of the Mosaic law, the doctrine of one omnipotent God; he connected indissolubly with it, the audacious falsehood, that he was himself his prophet and apostle. Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST: TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE (Adam's capital letters)….Between these two religions, thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant…While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men.” [p. 269]
Adams on Jihad War, Dhimmitude, and the Muslim View of Non-Muslims; Examples of the Perfidy of Muslim States, Including the Ottoman Turkish State
“As the essential principle of his faith is the subjugation of others by the sword; it is only by force, that his false doctrines can be dispelled, and his power annihilated.
They [The Russians] have been from time immemorial, in a state of almost perpetual war with the Tatars, and with their successors, the Ottoman conquerors of Constantinople. It were an idle waste of time to trace the causes of each renewal of hostilities, during a succession of several centuries. The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force. Of Mahometan good faith, we have had memorable examples ourselves. When our gallant [Stephen] Decatur ref had chastised the pirate of Algiers, till he was ready to renounce his claim of tribute from the United States, he signed a treaty to that effect: but the treaty was drawn up in the Arabic language, as well as in our own; and our negotiators, unacquainted with the language of the Koran, signed the copies of the treaty, in both languages, not imagining that there was any difference between them. Within a year the Dey demands, under penalty of the renewal of the war, an indemnity in money for the frigate taken by Decatur; our Consul demands the foundation of this pretension; and the Arabic copy of the treaty, signed by himself is produced, with an article stipulating the indemnity, foisted into it, in direct opposition to the treaty as it had been concluded. The arrival of Chauncey, with a squadron before Algiers, silenced the fraudulent claim of the Dey, and he signed a new treaty in which it was abandoned; but he disdained to conceal his intentions; my power, said he, has been wrested from my hands; draw ye the treaty at your pleasure, and I will sign it; but beware of the moment, when I shall recover my power, for with that moment, your treaty shall be waste paper. He avowed what they always practised, and would without scruple have practised himself. Such is the spirit, which governs the hearts of men, to whom treachery and violence are taught as principles of religion.” [p. 274-275]
“Had it been possible for a sincere and honest peace to be maintained between the Osmanli and his christian neighbors, then would have been the time to establish it in good faith. But the treaty was no sooner made than broken. It never was carried into effect by the Turkish government.” [p. 276]
“From the time when the disaster of Navarino ref had been made known to him, the Reis Effendi [Ottoman diplomat assigned to Russia] had assumed the tone of the aggrieved party, and made formal demands of indemnity, and the punishment of the offending admirals. He still manifested however, a solicitude to prevent the rupture of the negotiations by the departure of the ambassadors…” [p. 298]
“Upon the departure of the ambassadors, the Sultan, who must have been, however, unwillingly preparing his mind for that event, immediately determined upon two things; a war with Russia alone – and a dallying attempt to protract the negotiation, and gain time of preparation for the conflict.” [p. 298]
[From the Ottoman Reis Effendi, to his Russian counterparts] ‘The present friendly letter has been composed and sent, to acquaint your excellency. with the circumstance; when you shall learn, on receipt of it, that the Sublime Porte has at all times; no other desire or wish than to preserve peace, and good understanding ; and that the event in question has been brought about, entirely by the act of the said minister, we hope that you will endeavor, do every occasion, to fulfil the duties of friendship.’ But precisely at the time when this mild, and candid, and gently expostulary epistle was despatched for St. Petersburg, another state paper was issued, addressed by the Sultan to his own subjects-this was the Hatti Sheriff of the 20th of December, sent to the Pashas of all the provinces, calling on all the faithful Mussulmen of the empire to come forth and 'fight for their religion, and their country, against the infidel despisers of the Prophet. The comparison of these two documents with each other, will afford the most perfect illustration of the Ottoman faith, as well as of their temper towards Russia.
The Hatti Sheriff commenced with the following admirable commentary upon the friendly profession, which introduced the letter to count Nesselrode. ‘It is well known (said the Sultan) to almost every person, that if the Mussulmen naturally hate the infidels, the infidels, on then part, are the enemies of the Mussulmen : that Russia, more especially, bears a particular hatred to Islamism, and that she is the principal enemy of the Sublime Porte.’
This appeal to the natural hatred of the Mussulmen towards the infidels, is in just accordance with the precepts of the Koran. The document does not attempt to disguise it, nor even pretend that the enmity of those whom it styles the infidels, is any other than the necessary consequence of the hatred borne by the Mussulmen to them—the paragraph itself, is a forcible example of the contrasted character of the two religions. The fundamental doctrine of the christian religion, is the extirpation of hatred from the human heart. It forbids the exercise of it, even towards enemies. There is no denomination of christians, which denies or misunderstands this doctrine. All understand it alike—all acknowledge its obligations ; and however imperfectly, in the purposes of Divine Providence, its efficacy has been shown in the practice of christians, it has not been wholly inoperative upon them. Its effect has been upon the manners of nations. It has mitigated the horrors of war – it has softened the features of slavery – it has humanized the intercourse of social life. The unqualified acknowledgement of a duty does not, indeed, suffice to insure its performance. Hatred is yet a passion, but too powerful upon the hearts of christians. Yet they cannot indulge it, except by the sacrifice of their principles, and the conscious violation of their duties. No state paper from a Christian hand, could, without trampling the precepts of its Lord and Master, have commenced by an open proclamation of hatred to any portion of the human race. The Ottoman lays it down as the foundation of his discourse. [p. 299-300]
“The last appeal of the Sultan to the fanaticism of his people, and to the protection of his prophet, has been vain. He told them, that since the happy time of their great prophet, the faithful Mussulmen had never taken into consideration the numbers of the infidels. He reminded them, too truly reminded them, how often they had put millions of Christians to the sword; how many states and provinces they had thus conquered, sword in hand.” 9 [p. 302]
“[More from the Ottoman Sultan’s pronouncement to his subjects]...‘all infidels are but one nation…This war must be considered purely a religious and national war. Let all the faithful, rich or poor, great or little, know, that to fight is a duty with us; let them then refrain from thinking of arrears, or of pay of any kind; far from such considerations, let us sacrifice our property and our persons; let us execute zealously the duties which the honor of Islamism imposes on us – let us unite our efforts, and labor, body and soul, for the support of religion, until the day of judgement. Mussulmen have no other means of working out salvation in this world and the next.’”
Those provinces are the abode of ten millions of human beings, two thirds of whom are Christians, groaning under the intolerable oppression of less than three millions of Turks. Those provinces are in some of the fairest regions of the earth. They were Christian countries, subdued during the conquering period of the Mahometan imposture, by the ruthless scymetar of the Ottoman race; and under their iron yoke, have been gradually dwindling in population, and sinking into barbarism. The time of their redemption is at hand.” [p. 303]
“With regard to the Hatti Sheriff of the 20th of December, summoning the whole Ottoman nation to arms against Russia, the sultan now thinks proper to say, that it was only a proclamation which the Sublime Porte, for certain reasons, circulated in its states; an internal transaction, of which the Sublime Porte alone knows the motives, and that the language held by a government to its own subjects cannot b a ground for another government to pick a quarrel with it – especially, as the Grand Vizier had, immediately after the departure of the Russian envoy, written a letter to the prime minister of Russia, declaring the desire of the Sublime Porte till to maintain peace. That if Russia had conceived suspicions, from the Sultan’s address to his subjects, she might have applied amicably to the Porte to ascertain the truth and clear up her doubts.” [p. 311]
Remonstrating Against the Moral Equivalence of Britain and the European Powers
“In the kings [British King, George IV] speech, at the opening of the session of Parliament, on the 29th of January, he said that, ‘for several years a contest had been carried on between the Ottoman Porte, and the inhabitants of the Greek provinces and islands, which had been marked on each side, by excesses revolting to humanity’.” [p. 304]
“Still more extraordinary was it to the ears of Christendom to hear a British king, in a speech to his parliament, style the execrable and sanguinary head of the Ottoman race, his ancient ally; and denominate a splendid victory, achieved under the command of a British admiral, in the strict and faithful execution of his instructions, and untoward event. But the last member of the paragraph from his majesty’s speech, which we have quoted, to those accustomed to the mystifications of royal speeches and diplomatic defiances, explained these apparent disparates. He declares the great objects to which all his efforts have been directed, and of which, while adhering to his arrangements, he will never lose sight, are the termination of the contest between the hostile parties; the permanent settlement of their future relations to each other, and maintenance of the repose of Europe, upon the basis on which it has rested since the last general peace.” [p. 305]
“And where is the protection to the commerce of his majesty’s subjects! And where is the determination to launch all the thunders of Britain at half a dozen skulking piratical cockboats, driven by the desperation of famine to seek the subsistence of plunder, assigned in the protocols, the treaty and the communications to the Ottoman Porte, as the great objects of his majesty’s interference between a legitimate sovereign and his revolted rayahs?...In all these documents, issuing from the profound and magnanimous policy of the British warrior statesman, nothing is more remarkable, than the more than stoical apathy with which they regard the cause, for which the Greeks are contending; the more than epicurean indifference with which they witness the martyrdom of a whole people, perishing in the recovery of their religion and liberty…The royal speech of January, 1828 indicates that in the protocol and in the treaty, the government of George IV, had outwitted themselves, and were the dupes of their own policy. It presents the singular spectacle of a sovereign, wincing at the success of his own measures, and repining at the triumph of his own arms. From that time the partialities of England in favor of he ancient ally, have been little disguised; and the disposition to take side with the Porte has only been controlled, by the unwelcome necessity of adhering to the faith of treaties.” [pp. 306-307]
“Far from being like the Hatti Sheriff of the 20th December, an appeal to the Ottoman people, a bold and candid avowal of the precepts of the Koran; it is an utter departure from them, and an assumption, equally shameless and hypocritical, of argument on Christian grounds.” [pp. 308-309]
Justice of the Greek Revolution
“If ever insurrection was holy in the eyes of God, such was that of the Greeks against their Mahometan oppressors. Yet for six long years, they were suffered to be overwhelmed by the whole mass of the Ottoman power; cheered only by the sympathies of all the civilized world, but without a finger raised to sustain or relieve them by the Christian governments of Europe; while the sword of extermination, instinct with the spirit of the Koran, was passing in merciless horror over the classical regions of Greece, the birth-place of philosophy, of poetry, of eloquence, of all the arts that embellish, and all the sciences that dignify the human character. The monarchs of Austria, of France, and England, inflexibly persisted in seeing in the Greeks, only revolted subjects against a lawful sovereign. The ferocious Turk eagerly seized upon this absurd concession, and while sweeping with his besom of destruction over the Grecian provinces, answered every insinuation of interest in behalf of that suffering people, by assertions of the unqualified rights of sovereignty, and by triumphantly retorting upon the legitimates of Europe, the consequences naturally flowing from their own perverted maxims.” [p. 278]
“This pretended discovery of a plot between Russia and the Greeks, is introduced, to preface an exulting reference to the unhallowed butchery of the Greek Patriarch and Priests, on Easter day of 1822, at Constantinople, and to the merciless desolation of Greece, which it calls ‘doing justice by the sword’ to a great number of rebels of the Morea, of Negropont, of Acarnania, Missolonghi, Athens, and other parts 10 of the continent.The document acknowledges, that although during several years, considerable forces, both naval and military, had been sent against the Greeks, they had not succeeded in suppressing the insurrection.” [p. 301]
NOTES
1. Bemis, Samuel Flagg. John Quincy Adams and the Foundations of American Foreign Policy, New York, 1949. pp. 571-572.
2. Parsons, Lynn H. John Quincy Adams- A Bibliography, Westport, CT, 1993, p. 41, entry # 194.
3. Khadduri, Majid. War and Peace in the Law of Islam, 1955, Richmond, VA and London, England, pp. 63-64.
4. Al- Mawardi, The Laws of Islamic Governance [al-Ahkam as-Sultaniyyah], London, United Kingdom, 1996, pp. 77-78.
5. E. W. Lane, An Arabic-English Lexicon (London, 1865), Book I Part II, Jizya, p. 422.
6. Bemis, S. F. John Quincy Adams and the Foundations of American Foreign Policy, p. 570.
7. Ackowledging his earlier position of strict neutrality, while Secretary of State, Pappas makes clear how as President (perhaps under the influence of Lafayette), Adams came to support the Greek cause (Pappas, Paul C. The United States and the Greek War for Independence, 1821-1828, New York, 1985, pp. 125-126.):
“The case of the Greek frigates demonstrated once again America’s benevolent neutrality toward Greece. Motivated no doubt by philhellenic zeal, the United States government came to the Greek’s rescue in violation of the nation’s law and the international laws of neutrality. President Adams and members of the cabinet and of Congress enthusiastically helped Contostavlos [the Greek national seeking warships for his country] and cooperated in passing swiftly and discreetly a bill authorizing the government to purchase one of the Greek frigates. The American government also cooperated in postponing the purchase of the frigate so that Contostavlos could deal with the houses, which refused to compromise on their high demands. And finally, when Contostavlos was ready to sail with the frigate Hope to Greece, President Adams temporarily put aside neutrality to allow an armed ship to sail out of New York with American officers and sailors…”
8. Vacalopoulos describes how jihad imposed dhimmitude under Ottoman rule provided critical motivation for the Greek Revolution (Vacalopoulos, A.E. Background and Causes of the Greek Revolution, Neo-Hellenika, Vol. 2, 1975, pp.54-55):
“The Revolution of 1821 is no more than the last great phase of the resistance of the Greeks to Ottoman domination; it was a relentless, undeclared war, which had begun already in the first years of servitude. The brutality of an autocratic regime, which was characterized by economic spoliation, intellectual decay and cultural retrogression, was sure to provoke opposition. Restrictions of all kinds, unlawful taxation, forced labor, persecutions, violence, imprisonment, death, abductions of girls and boys and their confinement to Turkish harems, and various deeds of wantonness and lust, along with numerous less offensive excesses – all these were a constant challenge to the instinct of survival and they defied every sense of human decency. The Greeks bitterly resented all insults and humiliations, and their anguish and frustration pushed them into the arms of rebellion. There was no exaggeration in the statement made by one of the beys if Arta, when he sought to explain the ferocity of the struggle. He said: ‘We have wronged the rayas [dhimmis] (i.e. our Christian subjects) and destroyed both their wealth and honor; they became desperate and took up arms. This is just the beginning and will finally lead to the destruction of our empire.’ The sufferings of the Greeks under Ottoman rule were therefore the basic cause of the insurrection; a psychological incentive was provided by the very nature of the circumstances.”
9. Bat Ye'or summarized the impact of the first two centuries of Arab Muslim conquests on indigenous Jews and Christians of the Middle East, as follows (The Jerusalem Quarterly 1987; Vol. 42, Pp. 84-85):
“Muslim chroniclers described the ongoing jihad (holy war), involving the destruction of whole towns, the massacre of large numbers of their populations, the enslavement of women and children, and the confiscation of vast regions. This picture of catastrophe and destruction corresponds to the period of gradual erosion of Palestinian Jewry. According to [the Muslim chronicler] Baladhuri (d. 892 C.E.), 40,000 Jews lived in Caesarea alone at the Arab conquest, after which all trace of them is lost…".
The six centuries between 640 and 1240 C.E., she further observes:
“. witnessed the total and definitive destruction of Judaism and Christianity in the Hijaz (modern Saudi Arabia), and the decline of once flourishing Christian and Jewish communities in Palestine (particularly in Galilee for the Jews), Egypt, Syria, Mesopotamia, and Persia. In North Africa, the Christians had been virtually eliminated by 1240 C.E., and the Jews decimated by Almohad persecutions… notwithstanding some brighter intervals, these six centuries witnessed a dramatic demographic reversal whereby the Arab-Muslim minority developed into a dominant majority, resorting to oppression in order to reduce the indigenous populations to tolerated religious minorities…”
Professor H.Z. Hirschberg includes this summary of a contemporary Judeo-Arabic account by Solomon Cohen (which comports with Arab historian Ibn Baydhaq’s sequence of events), from January 1148 C.E, describing the Muslim Almohad conquests in North Africa, and Spain (Hirschberg, H.Z., The Jews of North Africa, Leiden, Vol. 1, 1974, pp. 127-128):
“Abd al-Mumin…the leader of the Almohads after the death of Muhammad Ibn Tumart the Mahdi [note: Ibn Tumart was a cleric whose writings bear a striking resemblance to Khomeini’s rhetoric eight centuries later] …captured Tlemcen [in the Maghreb] and killed all those who were in it, including the Jews, except those who embraced Islam…All the cities in the Almoravid [dynastic rulers of North Africa and Spain prior to the Almohads] state were conquered by the Almohads. One hundred thousand persons were killed in Fez on that occasion, and 120,000 in Marrakesh….Large areas between Seville and Tortosa [in Spain] had likewise [emphasis added] fallen into Almohad hands.”
Speros Vryonis provides a contemporary Georgian chroniclers account of the Seljuk jihad in Asia Minor and Georgia during the late 11th and early 12th centuries (Vryonis, Speros Jr. “Nomadization and Islamization in Asia Minor”, Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 29, 1975, pp. 50-51):
“The process itself is described in its essential details by the Georgian chronicle for northeast Asia Minor and the adjoining Georgian regions. The process which it describes was not unique to the northeast, for we see it in the west and the south of Asia Minor as well..
‘The emirs spread out, like locusts, over the face of the land…The countries of Asis-Phorni, Clardjeth, up to the shores of the sea, Chawcheth, Adchara, Samtzkhe, Karthli, Argoueth, Samokalako, and Dchqondid were filled with Turks who pillaged and enslaved all the inhabitants. In a single day they burned Kouthathis, Artanoudj, and hermitages of Clardjeth, and they remained in these lands until the first snows, devouring the land, massacring all those who had fled to the forests to the rocks, to the caves…The calamities of Christianity did not come to an end soon thereafter, for at the approach of spring, the Turks returned to carry out the same ravages and left [again] in the winter. The [inhabitants] however were unable to plant or to harvest. The land, [thus] delivered to slavery, had only animals of the forests and wild beasts for inhabitants. Karthli was in the grip of intolerable calamities such as one cannot compare to a single devastation or combination of evils of past times. The holy churches served as stables for their horses, the sanctuaries of the Lord served as repairs for the abominations [Islam]. Some of the priests were immolated during the Holy communion itself, and others were carried off into harsh slavery without regard to their old age. The virgins were defiled, the youths circumcised, and the infants taken away. The conflagration, extending its ravages, consumed all the inhabited sites, the rivers, instead of water, flowed blood. I shall apply the sad words of Jeremiah, which he applied so well to such situations: “the honorable children of Zion, never put to the rest by misfortunes, now voyaged as slaves on foreign roads. The streets of Zion now wept because there was no one [left] to celebrate the feasts. The tender mothers, in place of preparing with their hands the nourishment of the sons, were themselves nourished from the corpses of these dearly loved. Such and worse was the situation at the time.’…
By the time [of the late 11th and early 12th centuries, i.e. (1083-1125)]…the nomads had effected permanent settlement in these regions, moving into the abandoned and devastated areas with their tents, families, and flocks of livestock.”
A. E. Vacalopoulos summarized the devastating impact of five centuries of Seljuk and Ottoman jihad campaigns in Asian Minor and the Balkans (Vacalopoulos, A.E. Origins of the Greek Nation-The Byzantine Period, 1204-1461, New Brunswick, N.J., 1970, pp. 61, 68; 72-73):
“At the beginning of the eleventh century, the Seljuk Turks forced their way into Armenia and there crushed the armies of several petty Armenian states. No fewer than forty thousand souls fled before the organized pillage of the Seljuk host to the western part of Asia Minor. From the middle of the eleventh century, and especially after the battle of Malazgirt [Manzikurt] (1071), the Seljuks spread throughout the whole Asia Minor peninsula, leaving error, panic and destruction in their wake. Byzantine, Turkish and other contemporary sources are unanimous in their agreement on the extent of havoc wrought an the protracted anguish of the local population…[The Greek chronicler] Kydones described the fate of the Christian peoples of Asia Minor thus:
‘The entire region which sustained us, from the Hellespont eastwards to the mountains of Armenia, has been snatched away. They [the Turks] have razed cities, pillaged churches, opened graves, and filled everything with blood and corpses…Alas, too, they have even abused Christian bodies. And having taken away their entire wealth they have now taken away their freedom, reducing them to the merest shadows of slaves. And with such dregs of energy as remain in these unfortunate people, they are forced to be the servitors of the Turk’s personal comforts.’
“From the time the Ottoman Turks first set foot in Thrace under Suleiman, son of Orchan, the Empire rapidly disintegrated….From the very beginning of the Turkish onslaught under Suleiman, the Turks tried to consolidate their position by the forcible imposition of Islam. [The Ottoman historian] Sukrullah [maintained] those who refused to accept the Moslem faith were slaughtered and their families enslaved. ‘Where there were bells’, writes the same author, ‘Suleiman broke them up and cast them onto fires. Where there are churches he destroyed them or converted them into mosques. Thus, in place of bells there were now muezzins. Wherever Christian infidels were still found, vassalage was imposed upon their rulers. At least in public they could no longer say ‘kyrie eleison’ but rather “There is no God but Allah; and where once their prayers had been addressed to Christ, they were now to ‘Mohammed, the prophet of Allah.’ ”
E.G. Browne (A Literary History of Persia, Vol. III, 1928, p. 196) describes the jihad depredations of Timur [Tamerlane] against the Christian populations of Georgia and Asia Minor, at the outset of the 15th century (A Literary History of Persia, Vol. III, Cambridge, 1928, p. 196):
“The winter of A.D. 1399-1400 was spent by Timur in Qarabagh near the Araxes, and ere spring had melted the snows he once more invaded [Christian] Georgia, devastated the country, destroyed the churches and monasteries, and slew great numbers of the inhabitants. In August, 1400, he began his march into Asia Minor by way of Avnik, Erzeroum, Erzinjan, and Sivas. The latter place offered stubborn resistance, and when it finally capitulated Timur caused all the Armenian and Christian soldiers to the number of four thousand to be buried alive; but the Muhammadans he spared.”
10. John Cartwright, British Consul-General in Constantinople, filed the following report from Constantinople May 25, 1822 (in, Argenti, Philip. The Massacres of Chios, Described in Contemporary Diplomatic Reports, London, 1932, pp. 39-40.)
“Scio [Chios], with the exception of twenty five of the Mastic Villages, was a complete scene of desolation – the air corrupted by the stench of dead bodies had produced an infectious disorder on board the Turkish Fleet which was daily carrying off its’ victims. The fate of the unhappy survivors in the Sciote tragedy is miserable indeed – the females and children doomed to slavery from which there will be but little chance of redemption, as all possible means are taken to prevent the sale of them to Christians. The hostages who were confined in the Castle of Scio as well as those who were here have been put to death
This Man gets 5 Gold Stars!!!
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strength,Wisdom,Sight and Courage to Crush ALL Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Open the Worlds Eyes to their Threat Amen
PS
Seams that in Germany they had a mulsum womans fashion show??
catherine
Do the mulsums really think we are so stupid??
Stupidly enough YES
I am surprised that not many people have not mentioned John Quincy Adams before,
Above posting had a lot of good references.great to be able to read your posting,I like your humuor,and you make some very accurate comments,
I have not lost sight that our goal is the same
but our approach is different
Thanks
I trust John Quincy Adams.
They all knew--- everybody knew-----------------
Before we were infiltrated by that vile, ALIEN! leftism.
Is this the snow flake on the tip of ice-berg
Posted by: shiva at December 26, 2004 09:50 AM
Yes. A big yellow snow flake.
Greg,buy Robert Spencer`s books,Daniel Pipes and keep on visiting this website,as well as Faithfreedom,Memri,Apostatesofislam,etc.
OT:
Today Germany hosted a fachion show that was a little different from any others of this kind... a fashion show for muslim women.
All that was revealed was the face and the hands,everything elsse was completely covered.
The comments in the german newspapers were encouraging women of other orientations than muslim to try these wonderful outfits...
Also at the Figure Skating Championship in Canada,last week,the top canadian skater,performed on arabic instrumental music....
it looks like the arab-muslim culture is insidiously infiltrating itself in the local culture in Europe as well as Canada,while here in the US,muslims are targeting political and other strategic positions,such as zelous ACLU members.
Kentim
do you have two right hands?
There would be no right without a left.The problems arise once you go to the extremes,and the more extreme a group becomes the more alike they become.
Hugh makes an excellent point. Does not all recall the Egyptian pilot that dove the Egyptian airliner into the sea a couple of years ago praising Allah all the way down.How many more Mufid's might there be among us with motive to do evil deeds?
Hugh makes an excellent point. Does not all recall the Egyptian pilot that dove the Egyptian airliner into the sea a couple of years ago praising Allah all the way down.How many more Mufid's might there be among us with motive to do evil deeds?
Hugh makes an excellent point. Does not all recall the Egyptian pilot that dove the Egyptian airliner into the sea a couple of years ago praising Allah all the way down.How many more Mufid's might there be among us with motive to do evil deeds?
Sorry for the repeated posts, my unit seems to be misbehaving this evening.
In light of all of the above volumnous information, I agree that muslim immigration to the U.S. must cease immediately.
I agree with Hugh's post. Remember the muslims in positions of high power in this country also....Port of Miami, Air traffic Controllers in California, Education Dept. City Councils...pilots, lawyers, doctors....in light of what Islam teaches and what we now know....
Gary, Kentim, and a few others. I have a great dislike for the likes of Louis Farrakhan and the death of Malcolm X frankly leaves me cold. I also think that the willful ignorance of the Islamic record on the part of a lot of Black leaders in all but criminal. Further, having seen Marxists in power in certain Asian countries and American college campuses, I'm not absolutely sure that ALL Muslims would be worse.
But Black Americans did have real grievances about the way things worked in America. My father, as a young man in Chicago in the 1930's, got accused of being a Communist and "Mulatto" (he was a swarthy type) because he stood up for Blacks--and he was actually a business-oriented Republican for his entire voting life. I had a slightly older friend who, as a boy in rural Texas, remembers being absolutely forbidden to directly hand a "colored" bean-picker his pay (he had to leave it in a bucket which the laborer had to bend to pick up). I myself remember seeing, as a small boy, in the late 1950's and early 1960's, segregated drinking fountains and places where "colored" people weren't allowed. A Chinese-origin friend in the States, who started his career teaching chemistry in segregated [and highly unequal] High Schools in a certain southern state, remembered his utter bewilderment at the "one drop" rule that put kids who looked "white" to his foreign-born nonwhite eye in "black" schools (this friend, by the way, thought Mao and the whole Chinese Communist movement no more than successful bandits).
If the Communists stirred the pot a bit in the 1960's, there was a large history of humiliations large and small that could be exploited. Maybe today Black Americans are wasting too many opportunities wallowing in self-pity and alienation; but time was when they were to America what Armenians and Assyrians were to the Ottoman Empire.
Kepha~ Oh, please don't misunderstand. I know Very well all that occurred before the communists came along, studied it quite a bit, which is how I came to learn about the communist subversion and the resulting rise of groups like the Birch Society.
Not to mention the Jim Crow Laws, which were put in place by Southern Democrats, and which the likes of keithjoy would have be blamed on conservatives/Republicans.
I have to wonder how Much Better Off this country would be if both those groups had not preyed on the grievances of black Americans in those days. How much of today's problems would Not exist if the communists had not fed the 'hate whitey/hate America' mindset, which the so-called black leadership today hangs onto so dearly under the Democratic party.
Gary: Understood. But, perhaps, wouldn't things have turned out a lot better for all concerned had America's minorities been treated fairly and decently ?
And I'm aware of the role of Democrats and Populists in putting Jim Crow laws in place. One thing that drew my father's people into the Republican Party almost as soon as they were naturalized was that it was the party of both Lincoln and business (how they made their living).